Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga community support ideas => Topic started by: gizz72 on March 11, 2005, 03:14:22 AM
-
Greetings,
Why not build a better motherboard that can make you switch between CPU's or a special slot that can manage to carry a wide variety of standard CPU's.
For example, I bought this 'motherboard x' and bought an AMD cpu and a G4 processor. The special 'adaptor' that bundles with it is compatible or chageable to accept different variety of CPU's sizes and shapes.
In terms of Firmware, easy, you have a CD/DVD disk full of *offcial firmware ready for programming onto PROM.
Now here's what I like about this idea. This mother board has a firmware that can accept Amiga One or classic firmwares, C-one firmwares, Mac firmwares and other PC firmwares your heart desires!
* If I want an IMac G5 clone, yes it's possible. All you need is the MacOS installers from version 1 to X if you like. :-D
* If I want a real Amiga, user can write on chip a firm ware that can have ROM version 35.xx to 38.xx and can boot like the real thing! no need for Emulation!
* same with a C64 and so on and so forth... Feasible, right? Also, if it's cheap to produce. The price of that motherboard would be cheap too. I'd buy that motherboard!
Now tell me if this idea is feasible, would this be a next step in computing? Would it be fast enough? Who knows how many heads will turn? Would we,users, still struggle which CPU to use on different machine, which is better the-32bit-64bit-128bit, when it can fit allfor testing purposes too)? Who knows? Maybe such a motherboard already exists? I just can't find it in google yet. :-P
Just my ideas. Thanks for your thoughts. :-D
Regards,
GiZz72
-
I don't think it's feasable. Are you honestly saying that you'd open your computer, install a CPU, flash the BIOS, swap hard disks, etc. every time you want to use a different OS? It'd be more realistic to desing a single CPU so powerful that it could emulate the other CPUs at full speed.
-
Greetings,
adolescent wrote:
I don't think it's feasable. Are you honestly saying that you'd open your computer, install a CPU, flash the BIOS, swap hard disks, etc. every time you want to use a different OS? It'd be more realistic to desing a single CPU so powerful that it could emulate the other CPUs at full speed.
Yes and no. I know it's a hassel to some, doing all those things from time to time, I find that quite fun sometimes, but if I want an AMD64bit cpu later over my G5 now, I'd probably just swap hard drives(if I already have an OS installed), change CPUs and flash update it. Unless the there's already a software that can emulate a G4\5 faster or better, maybe not. Thanks.
regards,
GiZz72
-
The biggest problem with this idea is that none of these processors use the same bus interface so you'd need interface logic dedicated to each processor the board supports. This wouldn't be too much of a problem if you were planning on supporting only old processors (like the 68000) as they tend to have relatively simple busses. With modern processors it's much messier (especially now that some chips have onboard memory controllers).
This is not to say that it's impossible, just a real pain in the butt.
-
It would be simpler and cheaper just to stick two motherboards in one case.
-
Was I the only one that thought of passive PCI-backplanes when I read the first post? Each cpu on it´s own pci-card, but pci is slow.
The question is why anyone would want to swap between diffrent cpus?
-
Greetings,
Dan wrote:
The question is why anyone would want to swap between diffrent cpus?
I was only pointing out, if I can swap between CPU's it's a lot compatible to switch between OS's too. Not unless some developers would improve on their Virtual Machines, methinks it's a lot safer to be compatible 100%.
(http://www.amiga.org/images/subject/icon34.gif) & (http://www.amiga.org/images/subject/icon40.gif) = (http://www.amiga.org/images/subject/icon37.gif)
Regards,
GiZz72
-
gizz72 wrote:
Greetings,
Dan wrote:
The question is why anyone would want to swap between diffrent cpus?
I was only pointing out, if I can swap between CPU's it's a lot compatible to switch between OS's too. Not unless some developers would improve on their Virtual Machines, methinks it's a lot safer to be compatible 100%.
(http://www.amiga.org/images/subject/icon34.gif) & (http://www.amiga.org/images/subject/icon40.gif) = (http://www.amiga.org/images/subject/icon37.gif)
Regards,
GiZz72
No point really, just select a good CPU and then run emualtors.
-
Hi
There is an old multicomputer standard by Ziatech / Intel
There is a Panda Computer design 10 years ago and Deskstation company.
http://www.byte.com/art/9510/sec6/art7.htm
11 years ago, I use YARC PowerPC 601 SMP cards inside ordinary Dell Pentium I PC with TAOS, a pre-cursor of Intent. Amiga DE is based on Intent.
-
why not built a computer WITHOUT mobo?
-
Greetings,
@Speel
They'll prolly call that the AIR Mobo! The first PC without a Mobo. I recall long ago students of my High School batch assembled for the school fair a bunch of resistors and IC to create their very own video game. Didn't see it work though. Just wonder what happened to them. (http://www.amiga.org/images/subject/icon23.gif)
@Asian1
That's the article! I think that's what I'm talking about! Thanks, Asian1! (http://www.amiga.org/images/subject/icon14.gif)
Regards
GiZz72
-
>Replacing CPU opening case.
Hi
I also remember a strange old Tandon PC with CPU + memory module that can be replaced without opening the case. AFAIK the only available CPU is Intel 286, 386, (or 486?).
On several old PC, the vendor put 486 CPU socket at the bottom side of PCB. The user can open a small trap door at the bottom of the case and replace the CPU.
Stratus, and Compaq Fault Tolerant Systems (Himalaya) enable user to replace CPU modules without turning off the entire system.
>Different bus.
Perhaps you can use CompactPCI (HP, Ziatech), VME or Infiniband (12 Gbps) bus.
>Without motherboard
Perhaps you can use a complete System On Chip.
-
As someone else already pointed out, single-board-computers and passive backplanes. Perhaps we'll see such things in PCI-Express forms soon.
Or an update to the old Amiga bridgeboard idea, perhaps just a modern x86 single-board-computer PCI card in an AmigaOne.
For things like C=64, software emulation is quite suitable these days. If you want to nag the C=1 guys into a PCI form-factor go ahead, but I don't know if that would fit with whatever their plans are. Maybe a Catweasle MK5 with more than just the SID chips? :)
There's other things out there that look cool to me at least, though to change CPU platforms in them you'd have to swap CPU cards, which may nto be what you're looking for.
-
>PCI card
Hi
Perhaps you can use Slotserver or similar cards:
http://www.14south.com/products/products.shtml
-
The new CELL cpu maybe your answer. It will run multiple os's at the same time. I know it will run linux but haven't heard if it wiil do windows/mac. This is a chip jointly develpoed by Ibm, Sony, and toshiba. First product out of the box with it will be PS3. If it can do windows then everything will change. Like ps3 games ported to desktops. Linux then has a strong software base to be real competition to windows. Ought to be fun to watch anyway.
BTW it's not the motherboard that is important it's the cpu. The motherboard is just the supporting stuff you need for the cpu. So you should ask what is the mother of all CPU's? :-? :-?
-
gizz72 wrote:
Greetings,
@Speel
They'll prolly call that the AIR Mobo! The first PC without a Mobo. I recall long ago students of my High School batch assembled for the school fair a bunch of resistors and IC to create their very own video game. Didn't see it work though. Just wonder what happened to them. (http://www.amiga.org/images/subject/icon23.gif)
Heh, my dad made such a computer 20 years ago :-)
development-wise it's a very logical thing to do; per part testing is easy, and replacing when something's defect is very easy, and of course, the upgrade-ability is not to be underestimated.
-
boglo wrote:
The new CELL cpu maybe your answer. It will run multiple os's at the same time.
This is a... weird extrapolation, at best. There's nothing about the hardware itself that supports it any more or less than a more conventional dual-core ("SMP on a chip") design, however my expectation is that the stream processors will probably run some sort of specialized "OS" (that won't look much like an OS, more like a bare copy of Elate at best, and now you know one of my stranger theories that probably won't pan out) to coordinate them and make life easier for developers. For all I know, the "ring topology" of the bus may mean that even that is unneeded overkill.
I know it will run linux but haven't heard if it wiil do windows/mac. This is a chip jointly develpoed by Ibm, Sony, and toshiba. First product out of the box with it will be PS3.
You'd kind of hope for Linux. IBM/Sony/Toshiba is right. PS3 is right (and a good question is how much of an OS, and what kind, the PS3 will ship with in-box or in-ROM at all).
Sony and Apple have been rubbing shoulders very visibly recently, but latest news suggests this may be for backing Blu-Ray in the new VHS/Beta wars (Blu-Ray on PS3 and Macintosh, HD-DVD possibly likely to overtake the cheap Chinese video player market, but I've lost track of what Microsoft and Intel and the big x86 vendors favor where, so it's not as clearcut a war; everyone seems to think Blu-Ray might be the 'nicer' medium for random-access data, so it may be that Blu-Ray becomes the next floppy replacement and something DVD-branded stays popular for canned video)...
If it can do windows then everything will change. Like ps3 games ported to desktops. Linux then has a strong software base to be real competition to windows. Ought to be fun to watch anyway.
This part appears to make no sense, to be honest.
Microsoft has IBM cooking something for XBox2, but last I checked, the take of the Britsites seemed accurate, and this revolves around using "PowerPC technology" to implement a 'proprietary-enough' Microsoft instruction set, as part of a "Well, why not, we have billions of dollars and no room left to grow" scheme to wrest control of the market from AMD and Intel. In MS fashion, this revolves around vector units or something that could be broadly licensable -- so now your MS tax would come in the CPUs themselves -- but it remains to be seen if it will catch on. And it still doesn't automatically imply 'Windows-software-will-run-on-it,' especially without 'paying twice' (first in the price of the CPU for the units, then for your Windows license, assuming a port of something called Windows exists).
The XBox2 will certainly run a port of something Windowsly, but you'd still need the exact same CPU arch (or everything targeting the .NET virtual machine) to run the stuff elsewhere.
BTW it's not the motherboard that is important it's the cpu. The motherboard is just the supporting stuff you need for the cpu. So you should ask what is the mother of all CPU's? :-? :-?
*bong noises* :-P Nah, really, the reason we have 'motherboards' is that system tech has become a lot more "Amiga-like," with the same limitations -- getting a crapload of signals back and forth from CPU to memory and GPU and disk controller and gigabit network fast enough requires a lot of wires, and a lot of care in design. PCI-E solves a lot of this, as does Intel's new "FB-DIMM" spec for memory, but guess what -- both of those will either end up having their clocks bumped fairly rapidly, or more parallelism induced (think of what happened to SCSI -- Fast, Fast-Wide, Ultra, Ultra-Wide...).
Because many parts end up being "matched" to a particular level of CPU, there's not a lot of money in solving this problem; it's "too cheap" to just make a motherboard, and, when Moore's curve has been followed enough, drag that level of integration down into a "System-on-Chip" (which you'll surely see more of now that we can cram more transistors in at Moore's rate, but can't make individual ones switch faster so easily; integrating more 'motherboard' functions can make parallelism more convenient, as you see with AMD64 NUMA and such).
But otherwise, let's face it, this "motherboardless computer" already exists, in the form of Mini-ITX boards and smaller. Yes, those are motherboards, but did you look at what some of those old 'swap the 286 for a 486' machines put on the card, even then? Come a bus like PCI-E, which can be fanned after the fact (or USB, or Firewire, already existing), and you've got the equivalent of a backplane system, even if it happens to be strewn all over your desk. This is, in fact, better than a backplane for a home user, because it doesn't all have to live in a rack, and you can put, y'know, the printer or external drive somewhere where you can reach the paper or the blinkenlights.
In supercomputer and blade applications... Yeah, the current level of integration can seem a bit wasteful, especially when you look at these clusters built with COTS parts and one power supply and disk per CPU. (How much fossil fuel are we burning to crunch SETI?) However, unless you've got a better idea than I do, the solution is probably miniaturization and "better use of Moore," rather than trying to devise purely-custom 50-CPU boards (for today's CPUs) that will be obsolete by the time you've finished routing the traces.
-
asian1 wrote:
>PCI card
Hi
Perhaps you can use Slotserver or similar cards:
http://www.14south.com/products/products.shtml
Those will do it, if you want a simple cluster, at least. For more deterministic communication between the cards, you might want to take a look at allll the industrial stuff using the "VME" bus or "CompactPCI." And don't forget the PC-104 (and now PCI-104) arrangements used on certain scene hardware, though the general PC industry is sticking by USB and Ethernet at least until we see more of PCI-E.
Edit: Yaargh, I'm redundant, missed the previous post mentioning those. But yeah, that's the stuff, while IIRC Intel has pitched an Acorn-like "personal backplane" setup as a possibility with PCI-E.
-
passive backplan-ish variant.....would be a nifty piece of hardware IMHO
Would they call it the Amoeba, Amoeba 1, Amoeba 5000??
:-P