Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's  (Read 6541 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline JimDrew

  • Lifetime Member
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jun 2012
  • Posts: 241
    • Show only replies by JimDrew
Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #14 on: August 18, 2013, 06:43:50 PM »
If you are going to make a new CPU, don't make an 060... it has horrible issues that you have to deal with, making a LOT of software either partially or fully incompatible with it.  I would much prefer a 100MHz+ 68040.  No compatibility issues really, and a long tested and proven CPU.

I had to write a LOT of 68060 specific code and patch the crap out of the Mac OS to get it to work at all on the 060 (there was never a 060 Mac, and the OS was never going to be 060 friendly without a major re-write).  In the end, the overall speed for most everything end up being slower than a 33MHz 040.

If you're doing things that are static (ray trace and number crunching), the 060 is probably fine.  But, I hate that thing.  Give me an 040 any day!
 

Offline Xanxi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2005
  • Posts: 897
    • Show only replies by Xanxi
Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #15 on: August 18, 2013, 06:46:39 PM »
Quote from: ElPolloDiabl;745118


I would settle for a 50mhz 060 model with working FPU. I could afford to pay $200 for one (CPU only) plus some more for kickstarter.





If you can afford to pay so much, i would certainly sell one from my stock to you :D

Seriously, a working full 060 should be much less than 50 USD (usually a bit more for rev6).

If Freescale want to make new one, i hope that would cost no more per CPU.
10 Classic Amiga Computers so far: I have too many computers!!
 

Offline matthey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2007
  • Posts: 1294
    • Show only replies by matthey
Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #16 on: August 18, 2013, 06:52:15 PM »
Quote from: nicholas;745147
I notice they sell the mysterious MC68060FE133.

Has anyone ever been able to confirm that these are genuine parts?


Yes. They were tried in the Natami 060 board. They work but lack FPU and/or MMU.

Quote from: nicholas;745157
Freescale wouldn't even entertain the notion of a new production run unless a few million dollars worth of guaranteed orders were involved and as they own the IP no one else could make them without buying a licence and then we are back to the millions of dollars problem again.


And no one is likely to want a large number of the 68060 in it's current state (except the U.S. military). It needs some modern enhancements to be appealing today. It's a great processor but it's a low clock speed, no memory controller, small caches, etc.
 

Offline Linde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Mar 2004
  • Posts: 457
    • Show only replies by Linde
    • http://hata.zor.org/
Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #17 on: August 18, 2013, 07:03:26 PM »
Quote from: ChaosLord;745127
There is no 68060 JIT for iphones because Steve Jobs personally banned it.


Is there any credible source that can confirm this?
 

Offline AJCopland

Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #18 on: August 18, 2013, 07:14:19 PM »
Quote from: Linde;745165
Is there any credible source that can confirm this?


There's no JIT for Apps on iPhone, don't think it's allowed on Android, Blackberry or Windows Phone 8. The underlying App execution system does usually use a JIT engine but you can't embed your own to run LUA/Python/etc within your own Apps.

That information might be old as I haven't involved in mobile development for a while. That's the basic gist of why you can't have a for of JIT for emulators etc.
Be Positive towards the Amiga community!
 

Offline matthey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2007
  • Posts: 1294
    • Show only replies by matthey
Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #19 on: August 18, 2013, 07:30:00 PM »
Quote from: JimDrew;745161
If you are going to make a new CPU, don't make an 060... it has horrible issues that you have to deal with, making a LOT of software either partially or fully incompatible with it.  I would much prefer a 100MHz+ 68040.  No compatibility issues really, and a long tested and proven CPU.


The Rev 6 68060 is very stable and all know bugs are fixed. It runs very cool compared to the 68040 and is a much better design. Both CPU designs made mistakes though. The 68040 dropped the FINT/FINTRZ FPU instruction which is very important for FPU support and the 68060 dropped the 64 bit versions of integer instructions with MULS/MULU being very important.

Quote from: JimDrew;745161

I had to write a LOT of 68060 specific code and patch the crap out of the Mac OS to get it to work at all on the 060 (there was never a 060 Mac, and the OS was never going to be 060 friendly without a major re-write).  In the end, the overall speed for most everything end up being slower than a 33MHz 040.


Apple tried to make the MacOS 68040 compatible but they also tried to keep it from being 68060 compatible, especially after a 68060 Amiga became the fastest Mac. Did you notice how the older MacOS 6-7.5 versions were more compatible with the 68060 than the later ones?

Quote from: JimDrew;745161

If you're doing things that are static (ray trace and number crunching), the 060 is probably fine.  But, I hate that thing.  Give me an 040 any day!


The 68060 is much more than a number crunching can't branch DSP. Branches and loops became much faster not that the 68040 was bad (the 68060 is good even compared to modern processors). You may have disabled the branch cache, turned off superscalar execution and used 1/2 I/D caches for maximum compatibility though. I would expect a 68060@50MHz to still run faster than a 68040@33MHz with all this disabled.
 

Offline ChaosLord

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2003
  • Posts: 2608
    • Show only replies by ChaosLord
    • http://totalchaoseng.dbv.pl/news.php
Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #20 on: August 18, 2013, 08:11:21 PM »
Quote from: Linde;745165
Is there any credible source that can confirm this?

If you get caught with a JIT you get banned from the Apple AppStore.

You can confirm it with thousands of ppl.  You can start by asking every single person who needs a JIT, such as emulator coders.

I'm a credible source and I confirmed it.

Its actually worse than "no JIT" it is/was "no scripting of any kind" and "no dynamically executed code".

Apple randomly makes up new rules and changes old ones all the time so I have no idea if these rules are still in effect or not.
Wanna try a wonderfull strategy game with lots of handdrawn anims,
Magic Spells and Monsters, Incredible playability and lastability,
English speech, etc. Total Chaos AGA
 

Offline ChaosLord

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2003
  • Posts: 2608
    • Show only replies by ChaosLord
    • http://totalchaoseng.dbv.pl/news.php
Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #21 on: August 18, 2013, 08:14:37 PM »
Quote from: JimDrew;745161
If you are going to make a new CPU, don't make an 060... it has horrible issues that you have to deal with, making a LOT of software either partially or fully incompatible with it.  I would much prefer a 100MHz+ 68040.  No compatibility issues really, and a long tested and proven CPU.

I had to write a LOT of 68060 specific code and patch the crap out of the Mac OS to get it to work at all on the 060 (there was never a 060 Mac, and the OS was never going to be 060 friendly without a major re-write).  In the end, the overall speed for most everything end up being slower than a 33MHz 040.

If you're doing things that are static (ray trace and number crunching), the 060 is probably fine.  But, I hate that thing.  Give me an 040 any day!

It is 2013 and you are still letting Apple brainwash you.  This makes me very sad. :(
Wanna try a wonderfull strategy game with lots of handdrawn anims,
Magic Spells and Monsters, Incredible playability and lastability,
English speech, etc. Total Chaos AGA
 

Offline Blizz1220

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jan 2013
  • Posts: 189
    • Show only replies by Blizz1220
Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #22 on: August 18, 2013, 08:22:48 PM »
Quote from: ChaosLord;745173
It is 2013 and you are still letting Apple brainwash you.  This makes me very sad. :(

:laugh1:

He does have a point though ... Making really fast new 68k cpu that would be pin compatible to 040 would get a lot of interest in Mac68K and Atari camps and who knows where else ...

060 wasn't used that much in computers ...

I don't think Freescale would go after you unless it causes them big financial damage and retro market is not what they consider a market at all ...

And I hope you're not _really_ dying ??? :confused:
 

Offline Ratte

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Sep 2006
  • Posts: 380
  • Country: de
    • Show only replies by Ratte
Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #23 on: August 18, 2013, 08:28:19 PM »
Quote from: ChaosLord;745173
It is 2013 and you are still letting Apple brainwash you.  This makes me very sad. :(


Jim started working on Fusionx86 long ago.
Codename: PCx :D



OS8 on 060 is running fine.
OS8.1 is very unstable ...

Are there any (unreleased) Fusion-Updates?
I like OS8 on my o6o/9o .. but 8.1 would be nice to have.
 

Offline Blizz1220

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jan 2013
  • Posts: 189
    • Show only replies by Blizz1220
Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #24 on: August 18, 2013, 09:00:39 PM »
One thing that always made me wonder about 040 was that frequency doubling inside the core ...

So if the externally 040 works at 25 Mhz it works at 50 Mhz internally which is probably why it gets so hot (that and the integrated FPU which NOBODY really needs :p) ...

Technology of chip production at that time was the reason they couldn't push it beyond that  but I think that if someone made them today they would run cold ?

Also , would it be possible instead of doubling the frequency inside the core to quadruple it or even go 8 x 16 x 32 x :biglaugh:
 

Offline JimDrew

  • Lifetime Member
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jun 2012
  • Posts: 241
    • Show only replies by JimDrew
Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #25 on: August 18, 2013, 09:56:52 PM »
Quote from: matthey;745168
Apple tried to make the MacOS 68040 compatible but they also tried to keep it from being 68060 compatible, especially after a 68060 Amiga became the fastest Mac. Did you notice how the older MacOS 6-7.5 versions were more compatible with the 68060 than the later ones?

There was no difference with OS8 in 060 compatibility.  The patching was pretty much the same.  Apple didn't "try" to make the Mac OS non-compatible with the 060.  There were several Mac accelerator companies chatting with me about patches needed to make the 060 work, and it was agreed by everyone that there was no deliberate act to make sure the 060 didn't work.  It just turned out that Apple did a lot things that killed the 060's expanded architecture.


Quote from: matthey;745168
The 68060 is much more than a number crunching can't branch DSP. Branches and loops became much faster not that the 68040 was bad (the 68060 is good even compared to modern processors). You may have disabled the branch cache, turned off superscalar execution and used 1/2 I/D caches for maximum compatibility though. I would expect a 68060@50MHz to still run faster than a 68040@33MHz with all this disabled.

Unfortunately, that was not the case.  The various Mac benchmarking programs showed only minor improvements in certain benchmarks with the 060.  SuperScalar always had to be off, and there was a limited amount of branch caching allowed in certain portions of the OS code, and the instruction and data caches were toggled off and on without anyone realizing it.  Surprisingly, memory functions were quite a bit slower with the 060.  We could compare the 040 speed vs. 060 speed using the same Phase 5 setup, just swapping the CPU card.  So, the memory was the same.

Keep in mind that the FPU was the Mac's biggest asset for the OS.  This is why you didn't see many LC (or any EC) CPUs going into Macs.  The MMU was needed of course for virtual memory.   The FPU was used by EVERYTHING in the OS!  The position of where to draw a pixel on the display was calculated by the FPU, not the CPU because it was faster to do it this way.  When Joe and I re-wrote Apple's PACK4 and PACK5 in full assembly (like everything else we did), we actually broke most current benchmark programs in the FPU tests and we made the Mac insanely fast - to the point where production studios like Amblin Entertainment were using Amigas with my Mac emulation to run Avid video editing suites because that setup would run circles around real Macs... and they could also use Lightwave for rendering too.

Apple didn't "brainwash" me.  I reverse engineered their entire OS and custom hardware.  I know how their stuff worked better than anyone.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2013, 10:10:15 PM by JimDrew »
 

Offline Acill

Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #26 on: August 18, 2013, 10:11:07 PM »
I am a tech at Intel in Arizona and work on a series of tool sets in the fab that produces modern CPUs. I can tell you 100% without a doubt that you will not get a FAB to produce a small run of chips. For one thing the wafers in use now are 12" and the old 8" wafers are hard to come by and not cheap. The lithography tools that produce the die are million dollar tools alone and are no longer in use to produce the chip. You would have to get a new set of die made and those are hundreds of thousands for a complete set to make a chip. The man power to run the tool sets, the routes for automation and the cutters, packagers and assembly is all out of production. This would all have to be set back up again and thats not going to happen for a small run.

Just buy a used one, its the best your ever going to get. Get creative in looking for them. The AMiga is far from the only thing that used an 060. LOTS of older embedded systems used them. Heck while I was in the Navy I found a ton of old single board computers that had 040 and 060 chips in them. If you look, you will find them.

Some examples:
http://mediaserver.voxtechnologies.com/FileCache/BVME6000.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_Single_Board_Computers

http://www.cpuboards.com/01b005-03

Also here is a nice set of auctions for some single bare processors.
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odkw=motorola+VME&_osacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=p2045573.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.Xmotorola+MC68060&_nkw=motorola+MC68060&_sacat=0
« Last Edit: August 18, 2013, 10:29:21 PM by Acill »
Proud Retired Navy Chief!

A4000T - CSPPC - Mediator
Powerbook G4 15", 17"
Powermac G5 2GHZ
AmigaOne X5000
Need Amiga recap or other services in the US? Visit my website at http://www.acill.com and take a look or on facebook at http://facebook.com/acillclassics
 

Offline Blizz1220

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jan 2013
  • Posts: 189
    • Show only replies by Blizz1220
Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #27 on: August 18, 2013, 10:27:27 PM »
Quote from: Acill;745187
I am a tech at Intel in Arizona and work on a series of tool sets in the fab that produces modern CPUs. I can tell you 100% without a doubt that you will not get a FAB to produce a small run of chips. For one thing the wafers in use now are 12" and the old 8" wafers are hard to come by and not cheap. The lithography tools that produce the die are million dollar tools alone and are no longer in use to produce the chip. You would have to get a new set of die made and those are hundreds of thousands for a complete set to make a chip. The man power to run the tool sets, the routes for automation and the cutters, packagers and assembly is all out of production. This would all have to be set back up again and thats not going to happen for a small run.

Just buy a used one, its the best your ever going to get. Get creative in looking for them. The AMiga is far from the only thing that used an 060. LOTS of older embedded systems used them. Heck while I was in the Navy I found a ton of old single board computers that had 040 and 060 chips in them. If you look, you will find them.

I was thinking more like using FPGA instead of a real chip and making it pin compatible by soldering it to a small PCB with 040 pins ...

I think it would still cost hundreds of thousand but if you got interest from say 5000 people on kickstarter (so only Amiga project would not do here , it would have to be Mac and Atari too) you could probably make it for something around 100-200 $ per cpu ...
 

Offline Linde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Mar 2004
  • Posts: 457
    • Show only replies by Linde
    • http://hata.zor.org/
Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #28 on: August 18, 2013, 10:38:53 PM »
Quote from: ChaosLord;745172
If you get caught with a JIT you get banned from the Apple AppStore.

You can confirm it with thousands of ppl.  You can start by asking every single person who needs a JIT, such as emulator coders.

I'm not contesting any of this. The specific part I wanted you to confirm is that "Steve Jobs personally banned" JITs.

Quote from: ChaosLord;745172
I'm a credible source and I confirmed it.

No, man, you talk from the wrong end of your body a lot. :)

I
Quote from: ChaosLord;745172
ts actually worse than "no JIT" it is/was "no scripting of any kind" and "no dynamically executed code".

Apple randomly makes up new rules and changes old ones all the time so I have no idea if these rules are still in effect or not.

You may run scripting engines that execute arbitrary code. Not natively, though, so probably no JIT.
 

Offline Blizz1220

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jan 2013
  • Posts: 189
    • Show only replies by Blizz1220
Re: I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's
« Reply #29 from previous page: August 18, 2013, 10:43:56 PM »
Quote from: ChaosLord;745127

Another possibility is a bounty or kickstarter to make an ARM JIT to run Motorola bytecodes.  You should be able to get 300Mhz 060 speed (without MMU) on a wide variety of cheap ARM cpus.

There is no 68060 JIT for iphones because Steve Jobs personally banned it.

But everyone is allowed to code 68060 JIT for ARM cpus for 10 other devices.

There are multiple 1.0+ Ghz ARM cpu computers (usually with 2-4 cores) in the $99.00 range typically with 1GB+ of RAM.
(

I looked into that ... Better option than ARM would be x86 compatible tiny passive cooling single core boards ...

http://www.via.com.tw/en/resources/pressroom/pressrelease.jsp?press_release_no=1547

It's 1.8 Ghz and has 1 Gb and is cheaper than Raspberry Pi on EBay ... (EDIT : Still in production for a price of 250$)

Making FPGA card with Amiga chipset and combining it with this would give you *fast* Amiga ... :hammer:
« Last Edit: August 18, 2013, 10:57:16 PM by Blizz1220 »