Jump to content
Welcome to InsanelyMac Forum

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

  • Announcements

    • Allan

      Forum Rules   04/13/2018

      Hello folks! As some things are being fixed, we'll keep you updated. Per hour the Forum Rules don't have a dedicated "Tab", so here is the place that we have our Rules back. New Users Lounge > [READ] - InsanelyMac Forum Rules - The InsanelyMac Staff Team. 
sportman

SSE2 and SSE3 information PLEASE READ

154 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

1st off:

 

*No one with less then SSE2 has any chance

 

*SSE3 is preferred and will run rosetta the fastest.

 

*SSE2 can run os x intel but with patches such as in coregraphics, there now are new patches that will allow rosetta to run.

 

If you need to find information on if you proccesor contains sse2 or sse3 please download CPU-Z from HERE

 

---thanks sportman :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I remember yearrrrrs ago, back in the days when x86's didn't have built-in math co-processors, there was (at least one) software-based math-coprocessor *emulator*, which loaded as a TSR under DOS. Sure, it was far slower than having a real 387 chip next to your 386, but it worked well enough to make apps which *required* a 387 think it was installed.

 

Is something similar to this this even remotely feasable, under OSX, for SSE3 instructions on a non-SSE3 capable cpu?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, I remember yearrrrrs ago, back in the days when x86's didn't have built-in math co-processors, there was (at least one) software-based math-coprocessor *emulator*, which loaded as a TSR under DOS.  Sure, it was far slower than having a real 387 chip next to your 386, but it worked well enough to make apps which *required* a 387 think it was installed.

 

Is something similar to this this even remotely feasable, under OSX, for SSE3 instructions on a non-SSE3 capable cpu?

gemu seems to be the route for this, though i've not tried it yet, but by all accounts its as slow if not slower than running osx in pearpc.

 

mind u next ver. of pearpc 0.4 is due soon and thats supposed to bring a load of new features and speed improvements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any progress with sse?

i made some progress on this, but i can only get the Darwin core up and no GUI, since i'm guessing the GUI engine calls the SSE2 instructions, therefore without some major recompile work or emulation then no hope. i'm hunting for a cheap SSE3 CPU & Mobo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, good to know that people are trying for sse. If it's just mathamatically not possible then what can we do? But it would be nice to have it running on sse. There's a LOT of athlon xp users out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1st off:

 

*No one with less then sse2 has any chance

 

*SSE3 is perferred and will run rosetta the fastest.

 

*SSE2 can run os x intel but with patches such as in coregraphics, there now are new patches that will allow rosetta to run.

 

If you need to find information on if you proccesor contains sse2 or sse3 please download CPU-Z from HERE

 

---thanks sportman :(

 

Is it possible to check for this within Linux?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

arg my overclocked barton 2500 with 1gb of corsair and raid array has more than enough power if only apple wasnt so {censored} retarded in encoding something explicitley for sse2 it's an extension no program let alone operating system should DEPEND on it's presence. but then again apple never intended it to run on anything but new intel hardware which is sad and a leaves out amd. AMD has some great technology but it doesnt have the resources intel does to push out the new designs and research smaller manufacturing processes, I read intel has perfected it's .45 process if only amd had the funds to pursue that then they could really give intel a run for its' money. Not that apple is a big fish anymore it's not a lot of bussiness really for intel but anyways the point of the whole rant is this blows I love my barton and apple should have kept their options open by compiling this so that sse2 and 3 COULD be used if they were there but so that it would not DEPEND on them. What if they do decide to liscense this out to pc's they'll loose bussiness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

your only real hope is to skin XP into OSX, i've played with RKLauncher and FlyaKiteOSX, and u know there very very good products, yeah yeah not the same, but hey us SSE pawpers have to get what we can.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SSE3 is an optional hardware feature on MacOS X for Intel and is not enabled by default on gcc-4.0. If SSE3 is turned on, the C preprocessor symbol __SSE3__ is defined.

 

 

--Source: Apple

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
arg my overclocked barton 2500 with 1gb of corsair and raid array has more than enough power if only apple wasnt so magical trevor retarded in encoding something explicitley for sse2 it's an extension no program let alone operating system should DEPEND on it's presence. but then again apple never intended it to run on anything but new intel hardware which is sad and a leaves out amd. AMD has some great technology but it doesnt have the resources intel does to push out the new designs and research smaller manufacturing processes, I read intel has perfected it's .45 process if only amd had the funds to pursue that then they could really give intel a run for its' money. Not that apple is a big fish anymore it's not a lot of bussiness really for intel but anyways the point of the whole rant is this blows I love my barton and apple should have kept their options open by compiling this so that sse2 and 3 COULD be used if they were there but so that it would not DEPEND on them. What if they do decide to liscense this out to pc's they'll loose bussiness.

 

So apple is redarded for making an os that you cant pirate? And theres no amd cpus with sse3? and apple somewhere has secret plans to use amd processors, without first changing their os to run on them? and apple really gives a rip if you can run a pirated version of their os on your barton, I think you should phone up apple support and complain. like common, their a hardware company (something that people need to be told over and over again) and buying other peoples hardware definantly doesnt help them. and just because sse3 is a extention doesnt be oses shouldnt be optimized for it, would you like everything to run in native 8086 mode, without any fpu extentions, incase i decide to install windows vista on my xt? next time think before ranting, apple doesnt plan on making a barton based powermac anytime in the near future, so why should they make an os that supports it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×