I would/wouldn't like a production run of 060's

[Blizz1220]

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:

[ElPolloDiabl]

If there is still a supply left then that is good enough.

As you add more clock speed the performance increases become less. So that means redesign of the CPU and more cost.
There will be a heap of modern software you will want to run that requires at least 1Ghz.

FPGA has none of the prohibitive cost in designing a cpu.

[psxphill]

I'm not contesting any of this. The specific part I wanted you to confirm is that "Steve Jobs personally banned" JITs.
 
 
No, man, you talk from the wrong end of your body a lot.
 
I
You may run scripting engines that execute arbitrary code. Not natively, though, so probably no JIT.

It's unlikely Steve Jobs had any hand in the decision.
 
For security you can't execute any code that is generated at run time, which pretty much stops a JIT in it's tracks. I believe the only scripting language you're allowed to use is javascript and the script has to be deployed from the app store.

[XDelusion]

100Mhz or more, then I'd have interest.

[bbond007]

make it a dual 060 for A1200 and quad 060 for big box

Actually, on the more serious side, a 1260 with built in SATA or even a replacement Blizzard SCSI daughter board with SATA. Maybe integrated USB controller as well.

[NovaCoder]

Freescale wouldn't restart 060 production, never going to happen I'm afraid.

I think the only possible future for new accelerators for Classic's is FPGA.   It's unlikely that anybody will implement an 040/060 as an FPGA but it looks like we'll soon have the a fully compatible 020/030 option.    If this design could be clocked much higher than a real 020 and have faster memory access then it might actually be able to perform almost fast as a real 060 when running Classic 68k software.   It might even be possible to add some 040/060 instructions to the 020 core in the future to enable it to run some 060 software.

The other option is for some to make an unpopulated board which would be nice but I don't see it happening

It's a shame really, if you applied Jen's ACA design to an 060 you would have a seriously fast Amiga.   Something with a 105Mhz clock speed, 512MB SDRAM and boosted cache read/write would be awesome.    The ATARI boys managed it with their CT 060 but for some reason nobody has done this for Amiga Classics.   I think the closest we have to a 'modern' 060 Amiga board is the FPGA arcade daughter board.

[matthey]

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.

The 68060 speed would drop to less than half with superscalar off. The CPU would be scalar with all the limitations of superscalar. Turning branch caching off makes the branching performance about the same as the 040. The 040 does outperform the 060 working in memory and has a larger cache fetch. This allows larger instructions but the 68060 can handle mixed instructions well, is faster with more complex addressing modes and is faster at shifting and multiplying. The 040 also has the 64 bit integer instructions and optimizations for bit field instructions in registers that would help it. The 060 is a clear winner with the FPU and has a clock speed advantage. It probably comes down to the code for the MAC. Code that is optimized for an 040 is not going to be optimal in an 060. I don't know if optimizing code for an 060 with superscalar disabled and many of the caches turned off would even be possible. It would be quite handicapped but still faster than a 68030 (the 68060 resembles in some ways a superscalar 030).

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.

The 040 FPU runs in parallel to the integer units but is still quite slow compared to integer. It's not very easy to go back and forth between the FPU and integer either with the lack of FINT/FINTRZ and no fp<-> unsigned integer. I'm kind of surprised you were using the FPU for the display. Are you sure it wasn't the MMU? There are drivers for Fusion/Shapeshifter that are faster with the MMU and the way the MAC renders the screen.

I think the only possible future for new accelerators for Classic's is FPGA.   It's unlikely that anybody will implement an 040/060 as an FPGA but it looks like we'll soon have the a fully compatible 020/030 option.    If this design could be clocked much higher than a real 020 and have faster memory access then it might actually be able to perform almost fast as a real 060 when running Classic 68k software.   It might even be possible to add some 040/060 instructions to the 020 core in the future to enable it to run some 060 software.

Remember the crazy fpga hardware I was talking about the other day with a 150MHz enhanced 68k in fpga soon and a possible 500MHz+ 68k CPU in fpga in about a year? It is possible but I don't want any "announcements" or vapor ware claims. There may be some interesting reading on http://www.amigacoding.de/ if you haven't been over there recently. I have seen the I/O expansion board early schematic .

[nicholas]

Remember the crazy fpga hardware I was talking about the other day with a 150MHz enhanced 68k in fpga soon and a possible 500MHz+ 68k CPU in fpga in about a year? It is possible but I don't want any "announcements" or vapor ware claims. There may be some interesting reading on http://www.amigacoding.de/ if you haven't been over there recently. I have seen the I/O expansion board early schematic .

In the form of accelerator cards for existing Amigas or complete systems like FPGA Arcade/MiST/Minimig?

[matthey]

In the form of accelerator cards for existing Amigas or complete systems like FPGA Arcade/MiST/Minimig?

Sort of complete system. It uses standard "commodity" fpga boards with a custom I/O expansion board (for common Amiga joystick, keyboard, mouse ports and such but also SATA/PCIe/HDMIsh etc).

[Cosmos]

The ATARI boys managed it with their CT 060 but for some reason nobody has done this for Amiga Classics.   I think the closest we have to a 'modern' 060 Amiga board is the FPGA arcade daughter board.

And a new board was planned using two 68060 :
http://rodolphe.czuba.free.fr/Phenix/overview.htm

[ElPolloDiabl]

@Cosmos
There is no mention of Amiga compatibility. Was it to run emulated? 68k Linux would have ran on it.

[Cosmos]

Read better : was for the Atari world...

[psxphill]

I think the only possible future for new accelerators for Classic's is FPGA.

I think it's less likely to happen than freescale producing 060's again.
 
As FPGA's get more powerful the benefit of shoehorning one into an old Amiga as just a processor upgrade makes less and less sense. Someone could make a motherboard that fitted an old Amiga case, but even that has disadvantages.

[Fransexy_]

I think it's less likely to happen than freescale producing 060's again.
 
As FPGA's get more powerful the benefit of shoehorning one into an old Amiga as just a processor upgrade makes less and less sense. Someone could make a motherboard that fitted an old Amiga case, but even that has disadvantages.

Where have you been the last months? in a cave?

http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=65653

[psxphill]

Where have you been the last months? in a cave?
 
http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=65653

The thread is about a 68060, not a partially emulated 68020. Come back when the Vampire 600 can beat a 80mhz 68060. I haven't got anything against that project, it's just not what we're discussing.

[AJCopland]

The thread is about a 68060, not a partially emulated 68020. Come back when the Vampire 600 can beat a 80mhz 68060. I haven't got anything against that project, it's just not what we're discussing.

And that thread is about an accelerator board with an FPGA that plugs into an A600 which can be flashed without whatever CPU you like. It's already been shown running at pretty high clockspeed and it's perfectly answer the quesiton of whether or not someone will ever make and FPAG based accelerator board.