Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
41
User Zone / Re: anyone running local LLMs?
« Last post by atomicdog on July 20, 2026, 11:28:41 am »
I don't think NVIDIA supports Power anymore.
I have an NVIDIA A2 and I tried to get it working but the last supported CUDA version is very old.
I tried to get Claude Code to port it over to the newer one but it was so much different it would require a whole lot of work.
42
User Zone / anyone running local LLMs?
« Last post by power9mm on July 17, 2026, 01:11:31 pm »
Looking for advice on what hardware I should go with if I wanted to run a local llm on raptor hardware. Would an 8 core blackbird with a 48gb vram gpu be sufficient? or should I be considering one of the talos 2 options..? unsure how ROCm support is or if I should consider nvidia for the computer drives.
43
Applications and Porting / game - Arma cold war assault
« Last post by power9mm on July 16, 2026, 03:29:36 pm »
Looks like bohemia has fully open sourced the original ArmA, complete with linux x64 support and an OpenGL renderer, should compile easily enough for PPC64LE but I lack a current system to try it out myself, here's the link to the source code I'm sure someone here could have it running quick

https://github.com/BohemiaInteractive/CWR
44
AFAIK, RDNA4 should work, regarding the wiki.
Here is a ROCm on ppc64le.
Dunno how well it woks. Highly likely Scottcjn is AI.
Also Timothy offered support, but no response.

I wouldn't buy a POWER9 system today either.

A) too expensive
B) new systems should be coming out soon.
45
Any news on where we're at to use RDNA4 on Power? I think it'll take the usual trifecta: appropriate firmware, updated drivers, and, of course, a recent kernel...
I'm also wondering, I'm interested in using the PRO R9700 for LLMs whenever I'm back on ppc64le
46
tle has a fork of it with the JIT I wrote just before the deletion landed.
47
So what’s the best option now? Is there a specific version I should download, compile, and use moving forward?
48
Applications and Porting / Re: [DEV] JIT support for Firefox
« Last post by MPC7500 on July 04, 2026, 09:17:42 pm »
tle, are you already using Fable, or which model do you use?
49
Following up on my recent project of bootstrapping Void Linux on ppc64le, I decided to quantify the exact performance penalty we pay when using generic distribution binaries on our Talos II workstations.

I compiled Firefox 152 natively using both GCC and Clang (with and without LTO/PGO) and ran a rigorous Speedometer 3.1 benchmark against the standard Firefox 151 package provided by Fedora 42.

To eliminate DVFS noise, the CPU was strictly pinned to 2.8 GHz, and tests were run in an isolated E27 environment using --new-instance --private-window to avoid the unaccelerated paths of the standard safe mode.

The Build Times & Toolchain Limits

Clang: 43m 30.668s
Clang + LTO: 45m 32.136s
Gcc: 67m 05.885s
Gcc + LTO:  84m 28.716s

Note on PGO: I attempted PGO builds, but the current toolchain state on ppc64le (specifically regarding VSX) makes it a dead end. GCC instrumentation resulted in an Internal Compiler Error, and Clang took over 3 hours (185m real time) only to produce a crashing binary.

Performance Results (Speedometer 3.1)

FF151 / F42: 1.647; stdev = 0.018;
FF152 / GCC: 5.449; stdev = 0.086
FF152 / GCC+LTO: 5.518; stdev = 0.063;
FF152 / Clang: 5.478; stdev = 0.065;
FF152 / Clang+LTO: 5.779l stdev = 0.050.

Key Architectural Takeaways:

  • The VSX/JIT Effect: The native Clang+LTO build delivers a ~250% performance increase (a 3.5x multiplier) over the default Fedora 42 package. This heavily implies that standard distro builds are either running scalar code or heavily crippling the JS JIT compiler for stability.
  • LLVM Dominance: Clang not only builds significantly faster than GCC, but it also scales much better with LTO.
  • GCC UI Anomaly trimmed: During the tests, I noticed that regardless of LTO, the GCC-compiled binaries exhibit significant UI desynchronization (the "burger menu" lags about three cursor positions behind). The SpiderMonkey engine runs fine, but the interaction with system libraries (GTK/Cairo) is visibly degraded compared to the Clang build.
Has anyone else experienced similar UI latency with GCC-compiled GTK applications on POWER9, or is this strictly a Mozilla codebase quirk when compiled outside of LLVM?

The full raw data, generated charts, XBPS build templates, and the critical patch fixing VSX alignment issues in the Mozilla codebase are available in my public GitHub repository here: https://github.com/DKnoto/Firefox-Benchmarks

50
Good morning everyone

I would like to ask if anyone has managed to install grub boot-loader successfully for their Chimera installation. This is how I did it but upon restarting the boot-loader failed to load correct firmware:

Code: [Select]
# NOTES: This installation is done in libvirt VM (so no petitboot obviously)

# Download the ISO then boot it up under VM

$ cfdisk /dev/vda
choose `gpt`

select Free space -> choose [New] -> 16MB
select /dev/vda1 -> [Type] -> PowerPC PReP boot

select Free space -> [New] -> 1GB
select /dev/vda2 -> [Type] -> Linux filesystem

select Free space -> [New] -> 4GB
select /dev/vda3 -> [Type] -> Linux swap

select Free space -> [New] -> 45GB
select /dev/vda4 -> [Type] -> Linux filesystem

choose [Write] --> yes

choose [quit]

$ mkfs.ext4 /dev/vda2
$ mkswap /dev/vda3
$ mkfs.ext4 /dev/vda4
$ mount /dev/vda4 /mnt
$ mount -m /dev/vda2 /mnt/boot/
$ swapon /dev/vda3
$ chimera-bootstrap /mnt
$ chimra-chroot /mnt
$ apk add grub-powerpc-ieee1275
$ mkdir -p /boot/grub/
$ grub-install --target=powerpc-ieee1275 /dev/vda1
$ update-grub

$ exit
$ umount -R /mnt
$ reboot


Great thanks in advance

EDIT: I managed to fix the issue myself, I forgot to install linux kernel, that is `apk add linux-stable` step.  I documented the full installation at https://gist.github.com/runlevel5/ca4d531c8e90c133fc31c47f823c073d
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10