A2080 i.e. Vampire 500 V2 on an Amiga 2000

[biggun]

whereas in PPC, it would be something approximately like

Code: [Select]

lwz r1,4(r2) add r1,r3,r1 st r1,4(r2) which are three instructions .

Thomas is 100% correct.

A RISC CPU needs significant more instruction for the same amount of work in comparison to a CISC CPU.

[biggun]

Berkley RISC-I CPU outperformed every other single chip microprocessor in 1982. People talk about things that are good.

When a RISC CPU needs in avg 2 instruction to do the same work as the CISC CPU.
And the RISC CPU can execute 1 instruction per clock -
and the CISC CPU (like 68000) needs in average 8 clocks per instruction.

Then the RISC CPU is faster.. in avg by factor x4
This is your story of the 80th.

Now if the CISC CPU upgrades and does 4 instructions in a single cycle then the CISC CPU does the amount of work of 8 RISC instructions per cycle.
This means now the 68080 CISC CPU is many times faster then the RISC.

Very easy to understand.

[biggun]

RISC is faster to the market, cheaper to design, simpler to upgrade, simpler to upscale, or so it seemed.  That its design parameters - lower code density - would at some point work against it was not exactly expected.

Thomas is spot on here!

The main design goal of RISC CPUs was to be simpler and cheaper to do !
The main goal was NOT to have the fastest possible CPU - clock by clock.

A well tuned CISC is harder to develop than a RISC.
But a well tuned CISC is also faster than a RISC.

[biggun]

To clarify the open question:

Goal of the Apollo/Vampire card is _NOT_ to run PPC software.

Goal is to have a _very_ fast 68K system to run
AMIGA OS 3...
MAC OS 7,  MAC OS 8
ATARI TOS
AROS

[biggun]

So, once again, provide any basic benchmark that measures cpu or memory performance.

attached comparison 68060 versus Apollo 68080.
Result is very clear.

[biggun]

overclocked quite a lot from what I have seen, so what then?

Not sure what you ask for..

The max clockrate of the Apollo 68080 in the Vampire?
The max clockrate of the Apollo 68080 in an expensive FPGA?
The max clockrate of the Apollo 68080 implemented in an ASIC?

What is your question?

[biggun]

What is the speed of something that we will be able to buy and fit to an a500/a600/a1000/a1200/a2000/a3000/a4000/cdtv/cd32?

Here is the AIBB speed comparison of the cards that you can buy TODAY for A600 / A500  / A2000 / A1000

http://www.apollo-core.com/index.htm?page=performance

[biggun]

To prevent misunderstandings here some facts:

* Apollo 68080 support _ALL_ CPU instructions of the 68060 and 68040.
The instruction set of the Apollo 68080 is 100% supporting the 68k family.

* Zorro Cards run just fine with Apollo 68080.
We ran several cards in AMIGA 2000.

* We also assume that Zorro 3 cards will run just fine. As we have no Apollo Card for A4000 yet, we can not prove this today - but there is no reason why Zorro 3 card should not just run fine.

* Apollo 68080 is not GPL but you can perfectly legal combine it with GPL VHDL in the same FPGA.
The legal requirement for instantiating several FPGA designs in the same FPGA is that each design is an separate entity for which its license then is valid.