Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: Jethro_Tull on October 26, 2007, 01:31:24 PM
-
Having read in the news how the lucky few with an accelerated Amiga will be finally enjoying OS4, a crazy idea came to mind. Maybe I'm just stating the obvious, and just dreaming up something which is technically impossible, but wouldn't a Minimig with a PowerPC processor offer an an affordable and readily available platform for OS4 classic?
Hyperion apparently cannot port OS4 to any other platform (be it SAM440, Effika or a PPC MacMini) due to the current court litigations, which won't be resolved anytime soon. But selling OS4 for Classic Amigas is seemingly not a problem. So why not emulate the existing Classic Amigas with a powerPC accelerator and run OS4 for classics unmodified? Obviously the Minimig would need to be revised with the addition of AGA emulation, an additional PowerPC CPU, additional RAM and addtional logic in the FPGA to emulate a Blizzard or CyberStorm accelerator.
Not a trivial task by any means, but thanks to Dennis and his forward looking generosity, we already have the building blocks. And if Dennis managed to create from scratch an Amiga emulator in about a year, I beleive other talented individuals in this community might be able to pull off a PowerPC based AGA emulator in a similar timeframe.
In my opinion, having the community actively work on such a solution is always better then simply sitting still waiting for the current quagmire to settle. If PowerPC MiniMig is indeed possible, it would offer a win-win solution both for Hyperion (who would obviously sell many more copies of OS4) and to Amiga hobbyists (who will be able to run OS4 without spending a fortune while relying on old hardware)
Jethro Tull
-
Interesting idea. Probably wouldn't count as a classic Amiga as far as the license goes.
Here's a prediction: I bet Piru will say it's impossible, pointless, too much effort, or all 3.
________
Raptor 700r (http://www.yamaha-tech.com/wiki/Yamaha_Raptor_700R)
-
The MiniMig's nowhere near that capability at this time. You could, at best, use an A500's accelerator, and I don't think anyone has made a PPC card for the A500.
-
Hi Downix. My idea was first upgrade the MiniMig to the capabilities of an A1200, by adding AGA emulation. Just as Dennis replicated all the internal busses in the FPGA, the same could be done for the PPC Accelerator. The A1200's expansion bus and the Blizzard's PPC interfaces should all be implemented inside the FPGA. I didn't mean to plug a real PPC into the Minimig but merely to emulate one. Using an FPGA with an integrated PPC (such as the Xilinx Virtex) might be one possible solution.
Having read your various posts on the Minimig, you're obviously pretty qualified to judge whether such a solution is viable, what kind of development work it involves and what components would be best for the job! Your feedback might indeed show us how in practice this might be possible!
-
Whether it counts as a classic dosen't really matter, as long as it can run an off the shelf, original copy of OS4! The PowerPC-Minimig can be sold without OS4 and Kickstart, which the buyer would then obtain from Hyperion and Cloanto respectively. In time, it might even be possible to emulate other machines or use it as a general small form factor board!
-
Jethro_Tull wrote:
Whether it counts as a classic dosen't really matter, as long as it can run an off the shelf, original copy of OS4! The PowerPC-Minimig can be sold without OS4 and Kickstart, which the buyer would then obtain from Hyperion and Cloanto respectively. In time, it might even be possible to emulate other machines or use it as a general small form factor board!
So your idea is to make this address and register compatible with an A1200/BPPC or A4000/CSPPC. I didn't pick up on that. That would probably bring up other problems though, such as sourcing 603/604 processors.
________
Ford Granada (North America) Picture (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Ford_Granada_(North_America))
-
I beleive we need to source processors which are merely PPC compatible, not perfect copies of the 603 or 604e. Also, we probably don't need to emulate the Blizzard PPC accelerator perfectly, but just enough to run OS4, which at face value seems easier then emulating an entire Amiga, down the the chipset timing and all other nuisances.
While Dennis had to emulate an OCS Amiga perfectly in order to run the vast reportoire of Amiga games, this time we simply need to emulate a Blizzard just enough to run OS4 reliably. Since OS4 runs on various other platfroms with a wide variety of processors (A1, MicroA1, CybertSorm, Blizzard etc) it is probably a lot more forgiving as regards emulation then many Amiga games and hardware hitting programs. Indeed, emulating the general setup of the Blizzard PPC might be enough to get OS4 going!
Anyone here who has intimate knowledge of how the Blizzard PPC works may help! Maybe explain how the GAL which interfaces the processors with the Amiga and RAM can be reverse engineered if need be? Remember, the 68K series processors is not used by OS4, so it's just neeeded to boot the Minimig and pass control to the PPC.
When Dennis announced his Minimig project on this site, I was one of the many sceptics who thought it was impossible to recreate such a complex machine as the Amiga, but I was gladly proven wrong, as increadible as this looked. By comparison, the task of emulating a Blizzard PPC just enough to run OS4 seems definitly possible!
-
We need to source processors which are merely compatible, not perfect copies. Also, we just need to emulate the Blizzard PPC accelerator just enough to run OS4, which at face value seems easier then emulating perfectly an entire Amiga, down the the chipset timing.
I read something recently about G5 processors not being suitable for BlizzardPPC emulation, something to do with it being 64 bit maybe. I don't know if the same applies to G3/G4/Freescale CPUs.
While Dennis had the to emulate an A500 perfectly in order to run the vast reportoire if Amiga games, which depended upon the MiniMig behaving EXACTLY like an A500, this time we simply need to emulate a Blizzard just enough to run OS4 reliably. I beleive, that since OS4 runs on a various platfroms (A1, MicroA1, CybertSorm, Blizzard etc) it is a lot more forgiving then most Amiga games and other hardware hitting programs. Indeed, emulating the general setup of the Blizzard PPC might be enough to get OS4 going!
How precisely you need to emulate depends on OS4. I would expect it to have some checks to prevent it from running on a Mac or PearPC. Remember that the A1 has a licensed ROM that is checked. Also, OS4 for Classic requires a 68K CPU for it's first boot.
________
Vapir No2 (http://www.vaporshop.com/no2-vaporizer.html)
-
Jethro_Tull wrote:
Hi Downix. My idea was first upgrade the MiniMig to the capabilities of an A1200, by adding AGA emulation. Just as Dennis replicated all the internal busses in the FPGA, the same could be done for the PPC Accelerator. The A1200's expansion bus and the Blizzard's PPC interfaces should all be implemented inside the FPGA. I didn't mean to plug a real PPC into the Minimig but merely to emulate one. Using an FPGA with an integrated PPC (such as the Xilinx Virtex) might be one possible solution.
Having read your various posts on the Minimig, you're obviously pretty qualified to judge whether such a solution is viable, what kind of development work it involves and what components would be best for the job! Your feedback might indeed show us how in practice this might be possible!
Using a Virtex would work, but be expensive. Also, I don't think anyone beyond bPlan knows the details of how the accelerators actually worked. I could theorize, but there's no guarantee that some minor feature won't cause OS4 to crash and burn.
But, it is possible. Just very expensive for minimal gain.
-
Why is the gain minimal? Having a relativly inexpensive open platform for OS4 is definitly not a minimal gain! I'm sure it did not appear a minimal gain for Dennis to replicate the cheapest, most widely available and least powerfull Amiga in an FPGA, but he went ahead and did it. And as they say, the rest is history!
Really, the alternative to the PowerPC-Minimig is either shell out a small fortune for old used hardware, buy a used discontinued A1 for a similarly high price or hope the current legal issues are resolved and wait for Hyperion to port OS4 to the SAM440. None of the options sound better then having an open hardware platform for the existing, unmodified OS4 in my books!
-
Really, the alternative is either shell out a small fortune for used hardware, buy a fragile and discontinued A1 or hope the current legal issues are resolved and wait for Hyperion to port OS4 to the SAM440. None of the options sound better then having an open hardware platform for existing, unmodified OS4 in my books!
Surely the easiest solution would be a piece of software similiar to Mac-on-Linux. Then you could run it on existing Mac hardware.
________
STARCRAFT II REPLAYS (http://screplays.com/replays)
-
Indeed a software emulator which relies on a real CPU would also be an ideal solution! MacMini Amithlon anyone? it seems ACube already had some working prototype up and running. Maybe they could team up with Cloanto (they're both Italian after all) and release AmigaPPC Forever OS4, what a mouthfull!
Again, I'm asking the technical guys here what are the chances of using open source PPC virtualisation software as the basis to run OS4 on PPC Macs, such as the Mac Mini? Although in the long run we'd still be stuck to buying second hand hardware to run OS4, at least it's readily available, cheaper and vastly more powefull then either the A1 or PPC Accelerators. It also runs MacOS X, which must be the best OS known to man, excluding OS4 of course!
-
Jethro_Tull wrote:
Indeed a software emulator which relies on a real CPU would also be an ideal solution!
Technically speaking, MoL is a "virtual machine", not an emulator.
it seems ACube already had some working prototype up and running. Maybe they could team up with Cloanto (they're both Italian after all) and release AmigaPPC Forever OS4, what a mouthfull!
I think ACube actually got OS4 running on a Mac mini, which brings us back to the licensing issues. As for Cloanto, I think they just packaged WinUAE and OS3.9 together, as far as I know they haven't done any emulation coding.
MoL is open source, I think that would be the best place to start.
________
Xxx Tube (http://www.fucktube.com/)
-
Thanks, I stand corrected on calling virtualisation an emulator. However, if OS4 Classic and the Amiga virtualisation software are sold seperatly, wouldn't that beat the licensing issues? After all, OS4 Classic is sold to run on classic hardware, no harm done from from Hyperion's part! As for the Amiga virtualisaton software, it could be sold seperatly, without any of Amiga Inc's precious IP included, thus avoiding their wrath and sidestepping any licensing issues. Cloanto, would simply supply the legal Kickstart files if they're needed to run OS4.
-
Jethro_Tull wrote:
However, if OS4 Classic and the Amiga virtualisation software are sold seperatly, wouldn't that beat the licensing issues?
That depends on the contract between Hyperion and AInc.
After all, OS4 is intended to run on classic hardware, no harm done from from Hyperion's part. As for the Amiga virtualisaton software, it could be sold seperatly, without any of Amiga Inc's precious IP included, thus avoiding their wrath and sidestepping any licensing issues. Cloanto, would simply supply the legal Kickstart files if they're needed to run OS4.
Again, it depends on the existing contract. I'm 100% certain that AInc wouldn't just accept the situation. An independent, open-source VM would be harder to pursue in the courts though.
________
SUZUKI X-90 (http://www.suzuki-tech.com/wiki/Suzuki_X-90)
-
What a fantastics breath of fresh air!!!
I am certain this maybe the next step forward..
I would think that as accelerators got faster the new
MACMINI could keep up with the technology and keep us on the BOING BALL!!!!!!
Joe..
-
AndrewBell wrote:
Interesting idea. Probably wouldn't count as a classic Amiga as far as the license goes.
Here's a prediction: I bet Piru will say it's impossible, pointless, too much effort, or all 3.
It wouldn't matter about the license, as it's not an OEM version. If you managed to adapt the MiniMig design to add a PowerPC, you could just buy a copy of OS4 for the classic and use it. AFAIK, you won't need to prove that you have a classic Amiga to buy it.
One issue would be getting a PowerPC chip that's compatible to one of the existing ones that Amiga OS4 runs on.
Hans
Hans
-
This is the sort of thing I'm dreaming of, or at least a Minimig with a slot for an 040 or 060 which can be ordered off Ebay for pennies. Then of course it would need at least 128MB of Fast RAM and I'd say I'd be pretty happy. I think Scala, DigiBooster, OctaMED, and what ever else should be pretty happy in that enviroment.
Of course PPC would be icing on the cake.
-
@downix,
I don't think anyone has made a PPC card for the A500.
there was one displayed at a Amiga show somewhere at some point. I remember seeing a picture of it. I dont know if it was real or if it ever worked or not.
-
Jethro_Tull wrote:
Why is the gain minimal? Having a relativly inexpensive open platform for OS4 is definitly not a minimal gain!
Relatively inexpensive is very, relative. Relatively inexpensive compared to a POWER6 CPU or SPARC64 CPU, sure. But compared to the Ekifa, it's expensive for the performance you'd be getting. The development board is approx $900 per-unit. Production, you'd still be looking at easily twice the cost of the MiniMig.
-
Hi,
The 680XX family is way expensive. By the same price of a 68060, you could get a bunch of PPCs... The numbers below came from Freescale´s site:
MC68EC060RC50 (cheapest) - $102.09
MC68060RC60 (really expensive dude) - $524.99
MC68EC040FE20A (cheapest) - $61.51
MC68040RC40A (expensive dude) - $309.30
While a PPC system on a chip comes from...
SPC5200CVR400BR2 (most expensive) - $19.71
Quite nice for 760 MIPS and OS4 possibility. We just need AGA in a FPGA to be really nice ! :-D
-
I think that adding a PPC to the minimig would be a deviation of the roadplan. But do not fear, I bet that AmigaOS 4 will be ported to the efika, efika2, sam440 and PowerPC macintosh. How can I be so sure? Because the only reason to release AmigaOS 4 for the amiga is to test Ainc, if they cannot prevent Hyperion from doing it they will sell it for the other platforms. Doing only a release for the few active PPC equipped amiga computers would provide little sales. But selling it for other platforms can bring a steady flow of cash. Then is also the posibility that support for it would be added to winuae. But a PPC powered minimig is not the roadmap IMO, coldfire is much better (and cheaper, the 5207 is less than $6 USD :-p )
-
This idea isn't impossible and has already been discussed in the original MiniMig thread but it is much harder to do than the MiniMig v1.x
There were lots of reasons but look at the efforts of people to make new PPC accelerators for the A1200/A4000 that have come to nothing.
Having put that minor downer on the idea I do think it will happen eventually but your idea of making MiniMig into an AGA capable machine is quite an endeavour in itself as it requires redesigning the MiniMig to use a differet cpu and 32bit data and address buses etc, as well as probably changing to a different type of ram... oh and that minor matter or rewriting the OCS chipset to be AGA capable.
Like I say, good idea, think it'll happen but its gonna take time. Dennis is an electrical engineer, most of us that are coming up with these ideas are from other fields of expertise! So its taking a little while to learn any of thise stuff.
@AndrewBell
Piru's opinions are his own, but you'd be better off listening to him since he knows more about the Amiga and developing software for it than almost anyone on these boards. His sometimes rather negative seeming attitude isn't really that, he'd probably love it if you turned around with the aforementioned PPC MiniMig design totally open sourced and with a working demo board, but he's quite familiar with how difficult these things are.
Its rather like someone whos just discovered a computer programming language like basic and writtent heir first hello world program turning around and saying: "right, so how do I make Doom3"
Andy
-
I wish people would give up on the Idea of coldfire. It just cant be made to work at a decent speed with re-compiling software for it. If you are going to do that why bother, just port to X86
-
JJ wrote:
I wish people would give up on the Idea of coldfire. It just cant be made to work at a decent speed without re-compiling software for it. If you are going to do that why bother, just port to X86
I am glad you ask, the answer is quite simple. To recompile a 68k native program for coldfire requires a minimum effort, while doing the same for a x86 platform is a quite painful endeavour. If you do not believe me look at the amount of aminet programs ported to work in the x86 AROS. But once AROS is backported to the 68k platform you can bet a coldfire version can be released with minimum effort; then emulating amiga games in a coldfire machine would become a lot easier and applications would run like a breeze.
-
What about EFIKA?
-
Piru's opinions are his own, but you'd be better off listening to him since he knows more about the Amiga and developing software for it than almost anyone on these boards. His sometimes rather negative seeming attitude isn't really that, he'd probably love it if you turned around with the aforementioned PPC MiniMig design totally open sourced and with a working demo board, but he's quite familiar with how difficult these things are.
First off, reread the thread and you'll see that I was/am sceptical about the idea of a PPC Minimig.
Secondly, my remark about Piru related to his "contribution" in another Minimig thread. His remarks were abrupt and unhelpful, and basically boiled down to him not wanting people to waste time on something he considered pointless. I would go as far as to call it trolling. I'm touched by his concern, but he doesn't dictate how I spend my free time.
________
Toyota Stout Specifications (http://www.toyota-wiki.com/wiki/Toyota_Stout)
-
AeroMan wrote:
Hi,
The 680XX family is way expensive. By the same price of a 68060, you could get a bunch of PPCs... The numbers below came from Freescale´s site:
MC68EC060RC50 (cheapest) - $102.09
MC68060RC60 (really expensive dude) - $524.99
MC68EC040FE20A (cheapest) - $61.51
MC68040RC40A (expensive dude) - $309.30
While a PPC system on a chip comes from...
SPC5200CVR400BR2 (most expensive) - $19.71
Quite nice for 760 MIPS and OS4 possibility. We just need AGA in a FPGA to be really nice ! :-D
Hrm? The 68k I just priced was $24.94, the 200Mhz MCF547x.
-
im hoping that once os4 classic ships its gonna get into the hands of the usual ingenious amiga coders and theyll patch it to boot on efika, peg, and any other ppc hardware out there i would certainly pay a bounty for that or register the said software. I guess the ppl capable of doing it just need to see what hardware its banging on to boot an dummy the responses
-
LawlessPPC wrote:
im hoping that once os4 classic ships its gonna get into the hands of the usual ingenious amiga coders and theyll patch it to boot on efika, peg, and any other ppc hardware out there
To do that you'd probably be better off with the A1 version. OS4 Classic boots from 68k first, loads the new kickstart modules, switches off the 68k and reboots on PPC. It may be possible to skip the first boot phase, but you'll still be left with a MAJOR problem. OS4 Classic doesn't have drivers for SATA, RADEON video cards etc.
________
ZB50 (http://www.honda-wiki.org/wiki/Honda_ZB50)
-
and there was me having a nice dream and you go and spoil it never mind ill start dreaming about grex support then instead so i can run it
-
Minimig doesn't count as a "Classic Amiga", so it won't solve the hostage situation with Amiga Inc.
And it is good that Minimig isn't a "Classic Amiga", because Amiga Inc would otherwise jump in and say that Minimig is their property.
-
...... but there is no way you could BUY an A1 version of OS4 .....
..... mind you same might also turn out true for the "classic" versioon :roll:
-
@Jethro_Tull
This would work in theory, however as others have already pointed out the obvious problem is emulating the CS PPC or BPPC hardware in detail. This wouldn't be easy.
You'd also need very 603 / 604 compatible CPU for the rig, even at the supervisor level (while the user level side of various 32bit PowerPC ISAs are pretty much identical, the supervisor side varies quite a lot). That's because the OS bangs the CPU supervisor mode directly, and it would need to run the unmodified OS (to avoid breaching the license which bans disassembly and decompilation).
-
????
Are you my brother?
-
AndrewBell wrote:
Jethro_Tull wrote:
Whether it counts as a classic dosen't really matter, as long as it can run an off the shelf, original copy of OS4! The PowerPC-Minimig can be sold without OS4 and Kickstart, which the buyer would then obtain from Hyperion and Cloanto respectively. In time, it might even be possible to emulate other machines or use it as a general small form factor board!
So your idea is to make this address and register compatible with an A1200/BPPC or A4000/CSPPC. I didn't pick up on that. That would probably bring up other problems though, such as sourcing 603/604 processors.
???
Are you my brother?
-
I did not sign any contract relinquishing my right to patch a program to run on a newer model of CPU. I am free to patch my AmigaOS as I see fit.
-
JosephC wrote:
I did not sign any contract relinquishing my right to patch a program to run on a newer model of CPU. I am free to patch my AmigaOS as I see fit.
Go and read the license agreement that appears during AOS install before you say that. I've never read it myself, but most commercial software imposes terms and conditions that you agree to by installing, or sometimes even opening the package.
________
Montana Medical Marijuana Dispensary (http://montana.dispensaries.org/)
-
Eclipse wrote:
????
Are you my brother?
Who are you asking?
________
Vaporizers (http://vaporizers.net/)
-
Kronos wrote:
...... but there is no way you could BUY an A1 version of OS4 .....
You can't buy it, but you can find it on the P2P networks.
________
FORD TORINO TALLADEGA (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Ford_Torino_Talladega)
-
downix wrote:
Hrm? The 68k I just priced was $24.94, the 200Mhz MCF547x.
Yeah, but MCF547x is a ColdFire. There are some differences. It is a optimized chip, but not 100% compatible.
-
AeroMan wrote:
downix wrote:
The 68k I just priced was $24.94, the 200Mhz MCF547x.
MCF547x is a ColdFire. There are some differences. It is a optimized chip, but not 100% compatible.
We know, but if the XC3S400 in the minimig is substituted by a XC3S500E there is enough space to use a software 68k core. Then the PIC18LF252 might be substituted by the MCF547x, giving in the short run access to USB and ethernet and in the long run it could be enabled as the main cpu (when AROS is backported to the 68k amiga platform).
-
EFIKA II with built in PowerVR.
-
mrmkl wrote:
Minimig doesn't count as a "Classic Amiga", so it won't solve the hostage situation with Amiga Inc.
And it is good that Minimig isn't a "Classic Amiga", because Amiga Inc would otherwise jump in and say that Minimig is their property.
Unlike the A1 version, the clasic version is not OEM, so you can just buy it, without having to buy the hardware. Once you've got it, who's going to stop you using it in whatever way you wish?
BTW, isn't it absurd that we have to go to such lengths to run our preferred OS? I really wonder why ACube couldn't secure a license for OS4. Bill McEwen stated at shows prior to it coming out that he was working with them; the court documents suggest that ACube just suddenly walked away from the table and partnered with Hyperion. Maybe they felt like they weren't getting anywhere. Writing up an agreement and signing it shouldn't take months, let alone years.
Hans
-
Paradox wrote:
EFIKA II with built in PowerVR.
I have no inside info source, but I can bet that next year when Freescale releases the coldfire v5 there will be a model with bult-in PowerVR graphics and some kind of ac97 or IHD audio codec.
Why can I be so sure? Because the market these chips is geared towards is the high end car market, that is the reason for the creation of the MPC5121e (inside the soon to be release Efika II) and it makes sense that they add such capabilities to their coldfire line of procesors.
-
Why are people drolling over chips for low end embedded systems?
-
Here comes a thought:
Minimig is an OCS machine, like the A500,right? An A2000 is almost the very same machine as an A500.
But there is a 2060 accelerator for it, and better than that: exists a "PPC evaluation board" for it.
So here come the idea: create a minimig with both 68k AND PPC CPUs! Exactly like those from A2000.
Upgrade the ROM to 3.1 and you'll have an Amiga-like machine with PPC.
Ready to run OS4, if you want.
-
rkauer wrote:
Here comes a thought:
So here come the idea: create a minimig with both 68k AND PPC CPUs! Exactly like those from A2000.
Interesting idea, would be easy to port Minimig to something like:
http://www.digilentinc.com/Products/Detail.cfm?Prod=FX12
or
http://www.xilinx.com/ml403
The Virtex4 FX chips have one (or more) embedded PPC blocks which could theoretically be employed to run OS4,
though my knowledge of the PPC is minimal.
I'm playing with porting Minimig to the ML403 (which I have on of here) at the moment using the 68k core from the Suska project (which still needs some work).
I'd be keen to try out Tobiflex's 68k core code as well if/when he releases it :-)
red
-
The Virtex4 FX chips have one (or more) embedded PPC blocks which could theoretically be employed to run OS4,
The Virtex4 uses PowerPC 405 core.
Piru pointed out that you need 603/604 compatible CPU.
At a guess the 405 would not be compatible enough.
As far as I know OS4 has never been targeted to 405.
-
...Obviously the Minimig would need to be revised with the addition of AGA...
Why would it need AGA to run OS4?
OS4 is best run on non-AGA graphics hardware. I think it would be better to implement RTG. Or use a PPC SoC with integrated graphics. I couldn't see OS4 relying on AGA before the RTG graphics drivers kicked in.
-
nBit7 wrote:
The Virtex4 FX chips have one (or more) embedded PPC blocks which could theoretically be employed to run OS4,
The Virtex4 uses PowerPC 405 core.
Piru pointed out that you need 603/604 compatible CPU.
At a guess the 405 would not be compatible enough.
As far as I know OS4 has never been targeted to 405.
It would work with a non-classic version of AOS 4, it just wouldn't be available for sale, currently.
-
nBit7 wrote:
...Obviously the Minimig would need to be revised with the addition of AGA...
Why would it need AGA to run OS4?
OS4 is best run on non-AGA graphics hardware. I think it would be better to implement RTG. Or use a PPC SoC with integrated graphics. I couldn't see OS4 relying on AGA before the RTG graphics drivers kicked in.
The Classic version of AmigaOS 4 uses the custom chips but it doesn't require AGA. It works on an A3000 as well. The MiniMig would have to be reconfigured for the A3000's 32-bit version of the Enhanced Chipset.
-
Here's a prediction: I bet Piru will say it's impossible, pointless, too much effort, or all 3.
Hahaha he is a buzzkill sometimes!
-
Okay, c'mon fellas... Let's assume that OS4 will materialise (:-?)
For those in 'the know' (ie: they have the expertise and time/resources available) I have a couple of questions:
1: Is it possible to create a PPC-based version of the Minimig?
2: How long would it take to redesign the 1.1 minimig to be PPC?
3: Is anyone willing to do it?
Cheers,
Mike.
-
mingle wrote:
Okay, c'mon fellas... Let's assume that OS4 will materialise (:-?)
For those in 'the know' (ie: they have the expertise and time/resources available) I have a couple of questions:
1: Is it possible to create a PPC-based version of the Minimig?
theoretically
2: How long would it take to redesign the 1.1 minimig to be PPC?
for all of the time and effort,my guess would be 4-5 man years of effort
3: Is anyone willing to do it?
Cheers,
Mike.
I'm not, I'd sooner go Coldfire or with a CPU that has a future like SPARC or ARM.
-
1: Is it possible to create a PPC-based version of the Minimig?
Yes. Not hard at all. Making it behave like a Blizzard PPC or CSPPC; not so easy but possible.
If Hyperion end up winning the lawsuit. Then I think they would be amenable to the idea of supporting a PPC minimig.
2: How long would it take to redesign the 1.1 minimig to be PPC?
Depends on the implementation. If the implementation didn't need to imitate a classic PPC solution then hardware wise a few months. Otherwise maybe a year.
3: Is anyone willing to do it?
I am if it doesn't require imitating a classic solution like Blizzard. Also no AGA, instead modern graphics, USB, Ethernet.
-
3: Is anyone willing to do it?
I am if it doesn't require imitating a classic solution like Blizzard. Also no AGA, instead modern graphics, USB, Ethernet.[/quote]
Then how is it a MiniMig? Would it not be better to make a custom PowerPC motherboard... oh wait, almost forgot, no source of Northbridges.
-
downix wrote:
3: Is anyone willing to do it?
I am if it doesn't require imitating a classic solution like Blizzard. Also no AGA, instead modern graphics, USB, Ethernet.
Then how is it a MiniMig? Would it not be better to make a custom PowerPC motherboard... oh wait, almost forgot, no source of Northbridges.[/quote]
It would be a OS4 machine with native support for classic.
-
nBit7 wrote:
downix wrote:
3: Is anyone willing to do it?
I am if it doesn't require imitating a classic solution like Blizzard. Also no AGA, instead modern graphics, USB, Ethernet.
Then how is it a MiniMig? Would it not be better to make a custom PowerPC motherboard... oh wait, almost forgot, no source of Northbridges.
It would be a OS4 machine with native support for classic.[/quote]
You'd still need a northbridge better than anything ever seen in an AmigaONE or Pegasos to get modern graphics.
-
You'd still need a northbridge better than anything ever seen in an AmigaONE or Pegasos to get modern graphics.
Could use a PowerPC SoC with embeded graphics.
OR
More powerful FPGA. I think it is safe to assume that northbrides are prototyped in FPGA. OK you wouldn't be able to achieve the same clock speeds as a custom ASIC for the same design. But with a good design optimized for the FPGA you get transfer rates well above any commercially available ASIC.
-
We need a small cheap PPC mobo to run OS4 when it starts being sold.
the latest A1200 200mhz PPC card went on ebay for 310GBP!
Why cant someone make a nice NANO-ITX SoC based 400mhz or dual core e300/600 for alot less maybe with PowerVR GPU built in so all you have to do is add RAM and Storage and buy OS4! all for under 300GBP!!!
Its better to have loads small cheap mobos that people can use then swap everyyer when a new one comes out instead of build a massive ATX 2ghz amiga which are to expensive and by the time they come out new thing hve come along so everybody want something else.
plus Soc based PPC chips are getting better and better everyday so there no need for a big box expensive amiga.
Regards
-
Paradox wrote:
We need a small cheap PPC mobo to run OS4 when it starts being sold.
the latest A1200 200mhz PPC card went on ebay for 310GBP!
Why cant someone make a nice NANO-ITX SoC based 400mhz or dual core e300/600 for alot less maybe with PowerVR GPU built in so all you have to do is add RAM and Storage and buy OS4! all for under 300GBP!!!
Its better to have loads small cheap mobos that people can use then swap everyyer when a new one comes out instead of build a massive ATX 2ghz amiga which are to expensive and by the time they come out new thing hve come along so everybody want something else.
plus Soc based PPC chips are getting better and better everyday so there no need for a big box expensive amiga.
Regards
http://www.genesippc.com Ekifa2 meets your needs.
-
downix wrote:
http://www.genesippc.com Ekifa2 meets your needs.
Genesi rejected (http://www.jschoenfeld.com/news/news120_e.htm) the idea of sending Jens Shoenfeld an Efika so he could produce his CloneA ECS-compatible graphics chips on a PCI card. Why would they do any differently for the MiniMig?
I think the integrated FPGA on the SAM 440ep would do the job for backward compatibility using CloneA or MiniMig as the gate layout.
-
Yep, the rejected the idea of sending Jens a free board (no suprise after all the Geneis-bashing and blackmailing we've seen from jens in the past years), they have course done nothing that would stop the idea to be made a reality.
Jens is free to just buy an Efika at Vesalia, and go from there on ....
Mind you I still think it'd be rather stupid way of solving the symptons instead of curing the cause, but thats just me ;-)
-
Genesi rejected the idea of sending Jens Shoenfeld an Efika so he could produce his CloneA ECS-compatible graphics chips on a PCI card.
Since when do you have to ask permission to a company to create a PCI board for their computer? If they really wanted what would stop them from doing it? If they are not going to create a product just because genesi refused to give a free Efika to Individual computers then I think that is childish, specialy since for many months the Efika was available for $99 USD. If they wanted genesi to finance the creation of the card and they were not interested then individual computers has no right to say "bad genesi, bad genesi".
-
nonsence..
what would be the point in using a pci card on the efika that was a clone of aga 020 040 etc?
No point unless it was standalone clone.
Leave this 3.x stuff for classic amigas or uae etc.
OS4 and MOS run on PPC.
Plus it would take up the only one PCI slot on the Efika5K2 unless you had bridges.
Theres just no need for an PCI amiga card.
Regards.
-
Yes it does hmm it sounds great!
Gimme Efika II!
have a look! (http://bbrv.blogspot.com/2007/08/efika2-4u.html)
The chip (http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MPC512X)
Maybe the same price as last time too about 199USD! then could come down to 99USD like last time!
-
what would be the point in using a pci card on the efika that was a clone of aga 020 040 etc?
Better compatibility than E-UAE maybe? More accurate emulation with less CPU usage perhaps.
No point unless it was standalone clone.
Really? What about reducing the number of PC cases, keyboards and mice? Thats just one reason I think might justify it.
Leave this 3.x stuff for classic amigas or uae etc.
Why?
OS4 and MOS run on PPC.
No sh*t, Sherlock. The thread is about getting OS4 classic running on new hardware because demand outstrips supply. Well done on completely missing the point.
Plus it would take up the only one PCI slot on the Efika5K2 unless you had bridges.
Bollocks. 2 and 3 slot PCI riser cards are easy to find.
Theres just no need for an PCI amiga card.
Again, utter bollocks. People have been trying to make an Amiga on PCI for a decade. There must be some need.
________
Torneo (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Ford_Torneo)
-
(E)UAE isn't designed to take real Amiga-chips, otherwise such a version would have been available for Amigas (with 060 or PPC). Changing that would require a major overhaul, and wether such a version would be more compatible than the normal SW-only version is more than questionable.
Putting such a card into an EFIKA is even more pointless, as it can take only 1 PCI card, and an Amiga without GFX-card doesn't really cut anymore (ask anone who is running a BPPC without one).
An Minimig/Clone-A in a joystick may be fun, one with fast 68k might be a nice tinkering toy, one with GFX-card AND AGA might even proove usefull to some, but an PPC-Amiga with just AGA is a pain in the a...
-
Interesting, A-Cube Systems is advertising OS4.
http://www.acube-systems.com/eng/software.php
http://www.acube-systems.com/eng/images/advertOS4Classic.jpg
Their SAM440EP board is a bit pricey and a possible OS4 PowerPC target. The Lattice LFXP6 FPGA on Sam440EP may be able to hold a modified version of MiniMIG core logic & a soft 68K core if a daughtercard (at SAM440EP FPGA expansion header) for the SAM440EP is built to provide the MiniMIG core some SDRAM and I/O in order to provide A500 level classic compatible mode.
:-)
-
(E)UAE isn't designed to take real Amiga-chips, otherwise such a version would have been available for Amigas (with 060 or PPC). Changing that would require a major overhaul, and wether such a version would be more compatible than the normal SW-only version is more than questionable.
It isn't possible, full stop. The same is true with VirtualPC on Windows, and MoL on Linux.
Putting such a card into an EFIKA is even more pointless, as it can take only 1 PCI card, and an Amiga without GFX-card doesn't really cut anymore (ask anone who is running a BPPC without one).
Then use something like this:
http://www.mini-itx.com/store/?c=8#p1902
An Minimig/Clone-A in a joystick may be fun, one with fast 68k might be a nice tinkering toy, one with GFX-card AND AGA might even proove usefull to some, but an PPC-Amiga with just AGA is a pain in the a...
Says you. Other people may be happy with PPC/AGA.
________
PLYMOUTH ROAD RUNNER (http://www.dodge-wiki.com/wiki/Plymouth_Road_Runner)
-
jkonstan wrote:
Interesting, A-Cube Systems is advertising OS4.
Well spotted, they've only been advertising it for a few months. Maybe this is connected with their announcement of OS4 pricing.
Their SAM440EP board is a bit pricey and a possible OS4 PowerPC target.
No, really? And I thought the SAM used UBOOT for some other reason. Hmmm, that would explain the strategic partnership with Hyperion that was announced earlier in the year.
________
Ford v-8 specifications (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Ford_V-8)
-
@Andrew Bell
What isn't posible (you somewhat lost me here)....
But please understand that VirtualPC and MOL run SW designed to run on varying HW, while most AGA-SW (games that is) don't just expect the chipset to be at one fixed address, no they alos often make some very direct assumption on the timing between CPU and chipset, something that is easier to emulate when both parts are done in one piece of compared to one being SW, and the other being emulated-pseudo-HW.
Oh, and would you please name one piece of SW that demands both PPC AND AGA ?
-
@Kronos
Name one piece of software that demands both PPC and ECS?
-
What isn't posible (you somewhat lost me here)....
Your point about (E)UAE on an Amiga making use of the Amiga chipset to aid emulation. That's what isn't possible.
I mentioned MoL and VPC to illustrate how other emulators/VMs are equally restricted.
Oh, and would you please name one piece of SW that demands both PPC AND AGA ?
Why? I never said there was any software like that, did I? My point was that you were wrong when you stated that "an PPC-Amiga with just AGA is a pain in the a...". Some people still run Workbench on AGA, so they would benefit from the increased speed of PPC.
________
BUY NO2 VAPORIZER (http://www.vaporshop.com/no2-vaporizer.html)
-
Propraly the same that require PPC and AGA ?? :crazy:
-
Kronos wrote:
Propraly the same that require PPC and AGA ?? :crazy:
Read back a bit. This notion about software that needs PPC and AGA came from your mind, not mine.
________
Anemia advice (http://www.health-forums.org/anemia/)
-
Some people still run Workbench on AGA, so they would benefit from the increased speed of PPC.
Bottleneck on those machines is not CPU but AGA. You get awesome boost if you dont use slow AGA at all but render gfx on the PPC instead.
That is, AGA is equally slow on 68020 and PPC but gfx on BVision runs faster on PPC than on any 68k.
-
AndrewBell wrote:
Kronos wrote:
Propraly the same that require PPC and AGA ?? :crazy:
Read back a bit. This notion about software that needs PPC and AGA came from your mind, not mine.
Without that notion then this thread is pointless, as it is discussing a PPC w/ AGA or ECS based MiniMig, and without that AGA or ECS, you just have a Pegasos, EKiFA, AOne, Sam440, or something similar.
-
downix wrote:
AndrewBell wrote:
Kronos wrote:
Propraly the same that require PPC and AGA ?? :crazy:
Read back a bit. This notion about software that needs PPC and AGA came from your mind, not mine.
Without that notion then this thread is pointless, as it is discussing a PPC w/ AGA or ECS based MiniMig, and without that AGA or ECS, you just have a Pegasos, EKiFA, AOne, Sam440, or something similar.
Do you even know what the post that you quoted is about? Even if you've read it fully, it's clear that you haven't understood it.
________
Design Host (http://hostndesign.com)
-
Doh, and there I was thinking I made my point clear enough....
A combination of a PPC with an Amiga-chipset(OCS,ECS,AGA even if it was AAA) but without a semi-modern GFX-card is pointless, as there is absolutly no SW that would demand such an setup.
-
Doh, and there I was thinking I made my point clear enough....
Yes, Doh indeed. You didn't make it clear, far from it.
A combination of a PPC with an Amiga-chipset(OCS,ECS,AGA even if it was AAA) but without a semi-modern GFX-card is pointless, as there is absolutly no SW that would demand such an setup.
Even if it isn't demanded, you can run OS4 on AGA. Besides that, look at the bigger picture. Clone-A and Minimig, if available on PCI cards, offer Amiga graphics facilities to modern, fast CPUs. They still have features that are not present on modern 3D accelerated gfx cards, such as sprites, collision detection, playfields, hardware scrolling etc. Jens has even talked about extending the capabilities of the chipset.
Forget software that exists. OS4 is about the future. I'd like to see a return to some older game styles: vertical and horizontal scrollers, platforms games that don't use 3D because they have to.
________
MEDICAL MARIJUANA (http://dispensaries.org/)
-
Thanks to everyone for your posts, this thread has certainly swelled rapidly! To make myself clear, let me reiterate that the main aim of adding Blizzard PPC support for the Minimig is to run Classic OS4 unmodified. Just to allow everyone to run OS4 easily, without resorting to scavenging for old and expensive hardware.
It's easy to get carried away and conjure plans of complete new PPC boards, but the current situation is that even though such boards already exist, OS4 does not run on them. And personally, what I'd like is to get cheap, readily available hardware in Amiga users' hands capable of running the existing OS4.
Without wanting to sound like a troll, I firmly believe if Dennis had asked the Amiga community's opinion and views before starting out on the MiniMig, he would've been either discouraged or disenchanted by the pervasive negative atmosphere of this community, and he wouldn't have even started on his project! Without pointing any fingers (hey, I called him a fraud myself!) everyone's finding fault with each others' ideas, and it's simply depressing. Fortunatly, Dennis started posting when the MiniMig was virtually ready, and gave this veritable ace in preserving the Amiga in our hands. Now, are we going to build positively on this or just trample over it with our over sized egos and remain empty handed as usual, at the mercy of any organization who'd fancy taking us Amiga users for a ride?
As AndrewBell pointed out, another solution might be virtualisation on an existing PPC platform, namely the Apple Mac. Software development is certainly less time consuming and a more widespread skill then hardware development. So Andrew's idea is certainly more viable in the short term. On the other hand, adding Blizzard PPC emulation to the MiniMig would provide an affordable open platform for the current OS4, and also provide Classic Amiga support to run games and other hardware hitting software. In other words, a new Amiga which is truly compatible with old software, and truly carries on the Amiga name, not an anonymous PPC board which has to run UAE just like an ordinary PC to be Amiga compatible!
While I wouldn't dare minimizing the task, maybe simply reverse engineering the Blizzard libraries and probing the A1200 expansion bus would yield enough clues for the emulation. After all, how did Hyperion and the MorphOS team port their respective operating system to run on these boards without intimate knowledge of their workings. Indeed, Hyperion could (maybe unofficially) land a helping hand in the development of the PPC Minimig, since it would obviously be in their interest!
Some community members over here (Crom00) beleive that the existing MiniMig can be mass produced at low cost, and are actively working on the idea. So how much a minimal PPC processor, additional RAM and maybe an additional FPGA would add to the total cost? Certainly not enough to make it more expensive then the SAM440 or the now defunct A1, and cheaper to what Blizzard PPC cards are being sold for!
Look at this thread, I've proposed an idea, which although it might be impossible to realize, is still an idea in my opinion worth discussing. I've asked for technically minded members to reply with how this could be done in practice, and what has this thread turned into? Pointless bickering over who said what, who misunderstood what and who misquoted who. For Pete's sake, grow up and move on! If this is really what the current Amiga community has to offer, well, draw your own conclusions folks.
Maybe even if we get our hands dirty, and try to build the PPC MiniMig, it won't work out, and maybe a technical, legal or commercial hurdle will prove insurmountable at the end. But when the years go by, and Amiga Inc, ACK or someone else comes round peddling their latest vapor ware and empty promises to this battered, betrayed community yet again, we might hold our heads high and claim we at least tried to develop real, independent hardware to keep the Amiga alive, rather then swallow each and every lie and hope foolishly ad infinitum
Thanks to anyone reading through this long rant!
Cheerio; Jethro Tull
-
Exactly mate.
Theres no point in making clone of old 68k Amigas unless you use it for os3.x or retro gaming like the minimig.
We need to move on with PPC and make nice little cheep boards that we can sell once year and upgrade.
No that OS4 for classic soon released we can concerntrate on this as our main objective.
Maybe yes if there was an old 68k amiga clone compatable with 1200 PPC card then what would be the point when there not being mde anymore?
I think we would need more PPC cards than 1200 motherboards etc.
This is why we need no 68k and just a small PPC mobo to use, if you have got 1200/3000/4000 with PPC then great also.
Regards
-
Wow,
I must say that Jethro Tull's "book" ;-) below is just amazing. I agree with him in every point.
There is another thing also that I think is important. We are talking about AGA compatibility using FPGAs. Those are reconfigurable chips. This means we can have AGA if we download the right stuff on then, but if we need something faster, we can write a better graphics display and download it. With FPGAs we are not stuck with physical AGA all the time, you can change it on the fly.
Using a MPC5200 (I just loved this chip.. :-D ) we also get AC97 audio, which means we could use the audio part the FPGA to be part of graphics stuff when reconfigured. I'm pretty sure it would be no match for a top of the line PC Graphics board, but if you really want one of these, all you need is PCI or AGP.
A nice FPGA, a MPC5200, RAM, a codec, and some glue logic would make a very small board at a nice price. It could even be portable if we connect it to a LCD.
-
Minimig is an OCS machine, like the A500,right? An A2000 is almost the very same machine as an A500.
But there is a 2060 accelerator for it, and better than that: exists a "PPC evaluation board" for it.
So here come the idea: create a minimig with both 68k AND PPC CPUs! Exactly like those from A2000.
This is the best solution as far as I can see. The changes needed to the Minimig side would be smaller than trying to emulate A1200 hardware. Probably need a more powerful FPGA so that you could add the correct upgrade interface for the card (ZorroII?) as well as a more modern interface type for further upgrades.
However, there are a few problems with taking the A2000 route...
1. Finding the original expansion hardware to reverse engineer.
2. Preparing yourself to pay extortionate amounts to whomever owns the hardware.
3. Putting in the hard graft and copying the device (using FPGAs or otherwise).
4. Once hardware emulation complete, fixing the bugs in the original device (check out this site: http://s.guillard.free.fr/GForce/GVP-m.htm).
Having said all that I think it's the best chance that the Amiga community has for taking control of the hardware situation for OS4. Check out these links to see what cool stuff this upgrade could bring:
http://8bit.dk/pepe/a2000ppc.html
http://eab.abime.net/showpost.php?p=362602&postcount=6
:-D
-
I think this all point in one direction documentation..
So anyone sitting on information on AGA or PPC or for that part any amiga hardware docs. Upload it, so that projects like minimig etc.. may take of.
Whichever direction this takes it sure will need documentation. So might aswell start now to collect information while doing the planning for future boards.
As for PPC accelerator reverse engineering. I think that it might be possible from existing software, CPU docs and pcb board layout. Figure out at least a working re-implementation.
-
freqmax wrote:
I think this all point in one direction documentation..
So anyone sitting on information on AGA or PPC or for that part any amiga hardware docs. Upload it, so that projects like minimig etc.. may take of.
That is a great idea freqmax. I am currently in the process of searching the internet for as much information on the A2060 (my preferred solution) as I can, and I'll upload whatever I get here.
I do have a question for the hardware heads out there. There seem to be two accelerator boards for A2000 with the same name (GVP-m A2060 and Phase5 A2060). The GVP one seems to be an 68k expansion while the Phase5 board is a PPC one. My question is this: Would a Minimig running with an 060 accelerator be fast enough for OS4?
In any case, here is the first bit of documentation I've found, for the TekMagic A2000-060/040 accelerators (same model as the GVP A2060 AFAIK):
http://www.gregdonner.org/gvp4060/TekMagic040-060.pdf
It is a user manual, but has some useful technical information too.
-
@HenryCase
You are mixing specs of different accelerators:
-one accelerator is the Blizzard2060, it's a 680x0 accelerator with *no* ppc
-a developer edition powerUp PPC board exists that you can plug into a 040/060 socket of CyberstormMK2 or Blizzard2060. It includes a 680x0 cpu and a slow 603e
Now once that's clear, remember that:
-OS4 is PPC *only*. It won't run on 680x0
-A developer edition powerUp PPC board may or may not work with OS4, but that's not confirmed.
-OS4 lacks drivers for the Blizzard2060 onboard SCSI, so it won't be able to boot from it. It may work with catweasel or any other *PIO driven* IDE/SCSI card.
-
@freqmax
There's documentation about AGA in various places:
http://www.mways.co.uk/amiga/howtocode/text/aga.php (http://www.mways.co.uk/amiga/howtocode/text/aga.php)
http://aminet.net/package/docs/help/aga_guide (http://aminet.net/package/docs/help/aga_guide)
http://aminet.net/package/docs/misc/agamanual (http://aminet.net/package/docs/misc/agamanual)
Also E-UAE/WinUAE (http://www.winuae.net) include a lot of code to support AGA.
As there's people interested on the MiniMig due to the retro factor and may not be so interested in a super PPC amiga, I would advise starting with things you would need also on 680x0 systems:
-More ram. 32MB at least, although I don't think 32MB is enough for OS4. I would try to include 128MB. It doesn't matter if it's not used ATM with a 68000. Anything bigger than a 68000 will be able to take advantage of it.
-Gayle IDE interface (it's well documented on WinUAE)
-68020 (at least). You are going to emulate a Blizzard/Cyberstorm PPC and OS4 official CD requires OS3.x to load the bootmodules. 68LC060/75 are usually cheap, but may be more complex to interface.
-a 5v A500 compatible cpu slot. Or even better, A1200 compatible.
-AGA. Not strictly needed, but very nice.
-CirrusLogic/Virge emulation. I think some emulators like QEmu/Bochs emulate a CirrusLogic. It would have to be compatible enough to be able to use Picasso96 drivers with it. That would require at least a 020 to work as P96 requires 020 at least.
-
MiniMig + PowerPC = [Sam | Efika 2]
:-?
-
Don't think a 5V slot is really needed. New hw will likely either by HDL code or 3,3V components. 5V will be a real pain.
People could build a software emulation that is split into modules just like chips on a bus in the real thing. That can later be translated into HDL to help with misc reverse engineering (like Gayle interface).
-
@freqmax:
The problem is that AFAIK there are no 3.3v versions of other 680x0 chips that aren't 68000, 68040 -there's a special version of 040- and 68060. So unless you include a more advanced cpu, a 5v slot interface would be definitely interesting for the first tests. You could connect a BlizzardPPC and check out if OS4/MOS work with MiniMig, later you could integrate a 020 or 060 +PPC for the minimig.
BTW, AFAIK Dennis splited the code of each chip in different files. I guess that Gayle IDE interface shouldn't be too hard to implement. First versions could use the MMC card with a hardfile and later ones for more advanced MiniMigs could have a real IDE interface
-
pixie wrote:
MiniMig + PowerPC = [Sam | Efika 2]
:-?
Sam 440ep, yes. It has an FPGA built in.
Efika 2, probably not as you'd need an external board to add AGA or 32-bit ECS (A3000-style).
-
I heard somewhere i down the road that EFIKA 2 was also getting an FPGA, at least one its versions
-
SamuraiCrow wrote:
downix wrote:
http://www.genesippc.com Ekifa2 meets your needs.
Genesi rejected (http://www.jschoenfeld.com/news/news120_e.htm) the idea of sending Jens Shoenfeld an Efika so he could produce his CloneA ECS-compatible graphics chips on a PCI card. Why would they do any differently for the MiniMig?
I think the integrated FPGA on the SAM 440ep would do the job for backward compatibility using CloneA or MiniMig as the gate layout.
If EFIKA 2 goes as planned at that stage it would already have one FPGA CPU, it wouldn't need another on PCI... But there's nothing stopping Jen from making money on EFIKA hardware,,,
-
Downix, Kronos, Piru...I'm just amazed at how you post in these threads, and really...are amazingly patient with those who know less than you, and...you talk to them without really damaging their feelings overmuch.
I couldn't do it, I'd flame them in a half second.
But anyway...to the original point, of developing something that could emulate a sufficient environment to run the boxed OS 4 for classic Amigas.
I think there is little point. I understand the desire...but OS 4 will only seem important until you have it in your hands, and then your realize it didn't move the platform much.
Then you start itching for OS 5, or a modern browser, or flash, or java, or .mono or .net, or a decent game even.
OS 4 just isn't the answer. Neither is Coldfire. I don't care if it runs the equivalent of a 500mhz 68060...that is still dog slow.
OS 4 is still out of date, and behind the times, and nearly useless.
talk about being a party pooper...but thats not what this post is about.
I can handle AGA in emulation in UAE....all we need for a new amiga is the best of the old Amiga IP and ideas, wrapped in a completely modern motherboard and OS.
I would buy one, if someone could sell them and keep them in stock. Everytime I check back with genesi, they either aren't really stocking the product, or MorphOS is coming any day now.
The last time I had a pegasos...well other than it didn't seem to work, I couldn't get a CD to go with it.
Modern system. OS with dev. tools. Available to buy...all parts included.
Oh, now look who's being the dreamer....sorry for the rant.
-
Crumb wrote:
The problem is that AFAIK there are no 3.3v versions of other 680x0 chips that aren't 68000, 68040 -there's a special version of 040- and 68060. So unless you include a more advanced cpu, a 5v slot interface would be definitely interesting for the first tests. You could connect a BlizzardPPC and check out if OS4/MOS work with MiniMig, later you could integrate a 020 or 060 +PPC for the minimig.
Has anyone here tried running some of the other 68k chips at 3.3v ?
Anyone with a Blizzard 040 game to try it with the CPU voltage set to 3.3v (060 postion), and see if it works reliably?
I don't have such a board, else I'd try it myself.
If so, 68040's can be bought very cheaply at:
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/Motorola-32-bit-Microprocessor-P-N-XC68LC040FE33B_W0QQitemZ160114591305
to experiment with.
Digi-key lists some of the HC series 68K chips as being 3.3V tolerant, though this is at odds with the Motorola docs.
Red
-
Crumb wrote:
@HenryCase
You are mixing specs of different accelerators:
-one accelerator is the Blizzard2060, it's a 680x0 accelerator with *no* ppc
-a developer edition powerUp PPC board exists that you can plug into a 040/060 socket of CyberstormMK2 or Blizzard2060. It includes a 680x0 cpu and a slow 603e
Now once that's clear, remember that:
-OS4 is PPC *only*. It won't run on 680x0
-A developer edition powerUp PPC board may or may not work with OS4, but that's not confirmed.
-OS4 lacks drivers for the Blizzard2060 onboard SCSI, so it won't be able to boot from it. It may work with catweasel or any other *PIO driven* IDE/SCSI card.
Crumb, thank you for your very helpful reply to my question (on a random note, your current post count stands at 777, how cool is that!).
So as far as I can see it, the Blizzard2060 accelerator isn't guaranteed to work with OS4 but at the same time, there's a possibility (with the developer board plugin). Once OS4 Classic is released we'll have a clearer view on this.
From a purely hypothethical standpoint, if the hardware and drivers of the Blizzard2060 (in their current state) were to be released under an open source licence, so that the Amiga community could develop the technology for their own needs, would that provide a good starting point for a PowerPC MiniMig? This open source approach would speed up development of SCSI drivers as well as sorting out the seemingly unfinished nature of the PPC support.
One thing that worries me, you say that the developer PowerUp PPC board includes a slow 603e chip? How slow are we talking here? I mean it's all well and good if we get a Minimig capable of running OS4 but I'd be looking for a responsive OS, not just an impressive technical achievement. If the PowerUp PPC plugin was also made open source is there anything in the architecture that would stop a more powerful chip being used? I'm thinking pin compatibility, etc...
-
MarkTime wrote:
OS 4 is still out of date, and behind the times, and nearly useless.
I agree that it isn't the most modern OS out there, but it's the newest stable platform we have (excluding AROS which is impressive but still WIP).
MarkTime wrote:
Modern system. OS with dev. tools. Available to buy...all parts included.
Oh, now look who's being the dreamer....sorry for the rant.
This topic is about making the best community led h/w. When I saw the specs for the top of the range ACK machine I was very impressed but the fact of the matter is that h/w is not with us. Neither is any other h/w that really gets me excited on the high tech side of things (of course you may see this differently: Efika, SAM, etc...).
The Minimig is one of the best things to happen to the Amiga community in recent years simply because it offers an opportunity for the community to take control of their platform whilst events outside of our control conspire against us.
Anyway, it's good to be a dreamer, no harm done by your rant. :-D
-
MarkTime wrote:
Downix, Kronos, Piru...I'm just amazed at how you post in these threads, and really...are amazingly patient with those who know less than you, and...you talk to them without really damaging their feelings overmuch.
I couldn't do it, I'd flame them in a half second.
I used to be that way. Then I took 3 years off
But anyway...to the original point, of developing something that could emulate a sufficient environment to run the boxed OS 4 for classic Amigas.
I think there is little point. I understand the desire...but OS 4 will only seem important until you have it in your hands, and then your realize it didn't move the platform much.
Then you start itching for OS 5, or a modern browser, or flash, or java, or .mono or .net, or a decent game even.
OS 4 just isn't the answer. Neither is Coldfire. I don't care if it runs the equivalent of a 500mhz 68060...that is still dog slow.
OS 4 is still out of date, and behind the times, and nearly useless.
talk about being a party pooper...but thats not what this post is about.
I can handle AGA in emulation in UAE....all we need for a new amiga is the best of the old Amiga IP and ideas, wrapped in a completely modern motherboard and OS.
I would buy one, if someone could sell them and keep them in stock. Everytime I check back with genesi, they either aren't really stocking the product, or MorphOS is coming any day now.
The last time I had a pegasos...well other than it didn't seem to work, I couldn't get a CD to go with it.
Modern system. OS with dev. tools. Available to buy...all parts included.
Oh, now look who's being the dreamer....sorry for the rant.
Technically OS4 can offer this, but it, like MorphOS, are tied to what I view in the long term as a dead end. The excitement of the MiniMig is that it eliminates the corporate control, but PowerPC itself gives you the same thing. Once someone recreates the 68000 in verilog (which I heard a few people state that they were trying), it comes down to just minor peripheral components, which can be substituted without penalty.
I don't see a future for our platform until we stop trying to do something just because Apple does it, which remains the only reason we went to PowerPC in the first place.
In 1997, I was a heavy promoter of us going to MIPS, due to cost and the fact that we could license the chip architecture, and roll our own CPU's should a vendor try and cut us off at the knees. Nowadays, the market has changed, and for such a migration, SPARC, ARM or SuperH would be my recommendation (in that order) for the same reasons. I never could get licensing terms from MIPS, which saddens me. However, I have the source to SPARC already, and even modified it for my own purposes.
I say, run the classic AmigaOS in a sandbox, much like OS X runs the classic MacOS, and build a new platform. But, the time to market scares away everyone, and nobody seems willing to take the risk.
-
@downix:
The reason for Minimig is that the hardware is dying physicaly. And there is no new ones made.
Software emulation won't give cycle accurency that demos & games need.
As for CPUs, ARM is trigger happy litigator. I would be careful about being dependent on them.
-
freqmax wrote:
@downix:
The reason for Minimig is that the hardware is dying physicaly. And there is no new ones made.
Software emulation won't give cycle accurency that demos & games need.
As for CPUs, ARM is trigger happy litigator. I would be careful about being dependent on them.
Agreed, hence why SPARC is my preferred choise.
-
@MarkTime
I would agree with you if Ainc or any big computer manufacturer would come up with this projects. But if you look closely these come from little (dare I say tiny?) companies or from the community. You have to start with something and with minimig and AROS you do not have to worry about stupid CEOs driving the platform towards a cliff. So you can dream for an ideal comeback or you can be part of these projects the community is building. If you think they amount to nothing, go tell that to linus torvalds if you dare :-P
-
downix wrote:
I say, run the classic AmigaOS in a sandbox, much like OS X runs the classic MacOS, and build a new platform. But, the time to market scares away everyone, and nobody seems willing to take the risk.
That's exactly what Hyperion want to do (or should I say, the OS 4 dev team). Even if they use a similar API, based on the same principles, they have to break compatibility in order to implement things like memory protection and multiprocessing.
Hans
-
Hans_ wrote:
downix wrote:
I say, run the classic AmigaOS in a sandbox, much like OS X runs the classic MacOS, and build a new platform. But, the time to market scares away everyone, and nobody seems willing to take the risk.
That's exactly what Hyperion want to do (or should I say, the OS 4 dev team). Even if they use a similar API, based on the same principles, they have to break compatibility in order to implement things like memory protection and multiprocessing.
Hans
Indeed. My main worry is in hardware, namely the complete lack of forward thinking. You either have purists that insist on sticking to Mot (PPC or Coldfire or m68k), or genericists that want to go x86 (equally a dead-end in my view). I truely want the community to tell these corporate morons to shove off and carve our own path, independent of corporate overlords dictating the direction we can go in. That's why I'm heavily for licenseable CPU architectures.
Hard to believe we're on the same side now, eh? 8)
-
freqmax wrote:
@downix:
The reason for Minimig is that the hardware is dying physicaly. And there is no new ones made.
Software emulation won't give cycle accurency that demos & games need.
As for CPUs, ARM is trigger happy litigator. I would be careful about being dependent on them.
Hardware doesn't provide an advantage when it comes to cycle exact emulation, all hardware can do is provide a speedup. If you can't model something accurately in software, hardware certainly can't come to the rescue as the model has to come first.
-
THIS (http://amiga.resource.cx/photos/a2060,A2060) the A2060 we're talking about?
*edit*.. no it's not... got this from BBOAH though.
CE: Blizzard 2604
Connects To: CPU Fast Slot (A2000)
DUAL Processor: 060@50Mhz and PPC604e@180Mhz or 200Mhz
FPU: Internal for both processors
MMU: Internal for both processors
Max Ram: 128MB
Ram Type: 4 x 72pin SIMM sockets.
An accelerator which was designed to plug into the CPU Fast Slot of the A2000. Unfortunately this card never got past the prototype stage and so it was never released to the public. Since Phase 5 went bust, DCE bought the rights to all their designs but it is unlikely that they will ever release this card. There exists PowerPC cards for other models of Amigas such as the Cyberstorm 604e PPC and the Blizzard 603e PPC. The idea is that the PowerPC can be used to run software which supports it, much faster than any 68k processor can, with the 68k providing compatibility with existing 68k Amiga software. There is a surprisingly large amount of PowerPC software for the Amiga, and even alternative PowerPC operating systems such as Linux which would run on this card (had it been released). The card also includes a SCSI-3 Ultrawide (68pin) controller and an expansion port for the Cybervision PPC graphics card.
This card wasn't released by Phase 5, even though they did design it. It may be released by DCE.
-
@HenyCase
Don't know, what it is with you and the PPC-developer-board, but there were probraly only a dozen or so ever made, and I know of only 2 in the hands of community memebers.
The Blizzard2060 is also in short supply ( :cry: why oh why did I sell mine :cry: ), so thats a no go.
@Skyraker
Bringing the Blizzard2604 to market (if it was ever finished that is) is just as "easy" as bringing back the CS-PPC and BPPC ..... you know, non-ROHS compatible out-of-production components to be mounted in very expensive production-methods
:roll:
-
That's why I'm heavily for licenseable CPU architectures.
That sounds expensive :S One thing is certain, we need to focus in what can be achieved versus what might be cool/right/visionary but is not feasible in the near future to be done by the community. Yeah I know I should follow my own advice ^^;
-
little wrote:
That's why I'm heavily for licenseable CPU architectures.
That sounds expensive :S One thing is certain, we need to focus in what can be achieved versus what might be cool/right/visionary but is not feasible in the near future to be done by the community. Yeah I know I should follow my own advice ^^;
http://www.sparc.org $100 licensing fee.
http://www.srisc.com/?s1 64-bit performance SPARC core design, GPL'd, free.
Doesn't seem much more expensive than the FPGA MiniMig to start with.
-
Doesn't seem much more expensive than the FPGA MiniMig to start with.
Oh, but there is "more than meets the eye". Using a non-standard 64 bit core in the minimig FPGA brings any immediate benefits?
------------------------------------------------
Lets break it down what sparc has to offer.
Pros
- Good CPU architecture
- Not compatible with 68k
Cons
- Non standard. Most programmers are not interested in learning another CPU architecture (most are familiar with one only).
- No simple retail option to implement a non-FPGA version.
- Low speeds (unless you get a very expensive FPGA or mass produce it, in which case it becomes expensive).
------------------------------------------------
Not lets see the freescale 68k
Pros
- Well known architecture, many programmers and hardware engineers are familiar with it. Software cores are highly feasible.
- Compatible with motorola 68k line.
Cons
- Expensive hardware. Only the 68000 is cheap, price increases quite a bit for later versions. I am speaking about retail prices, if somebody can get it used at a lower price or even free does not guarantee everybody can get those prices.
- Low speeds
------------------------------------------------
Now lets see coldfire
Pros
- Easy to implement architecture. Partially compatible with 68k, just better.
- Cheap
- Embedded. Some versions include usb, ethernet & pci right on the chip.
Cons.
- Low speeds. Higher than 68k, on par with geode but still less than current procesors.
------------------------------------------------
Now lets see PPC
Pros
- Well known architecture
- Cheap
- Embedded.
Cons
- Not compatible with 68k
- Low speeds. better than coldfire,but still far from current speeds.
------------------------------------------------
Now lets see x86
Pros
- Well known architecture
- Fast
- Cheap
Cons
- Not comatible with 68k
- Needs lots of external support chips.
-
little wrote:
Doesn't seem much more expensive than the FPGA MiniMig to start with.
Oh, but there is "more than meets the eye". Using a non-standard 64 bit core in the minimig FPGA brings any immediate benefits?
------------------------------------------------
Lets break it down what sparc has to offer.
Pros
- Good CPU architecture
- Not compatible with 68k
Let's add one, guaranteed source through licensing. If you license the arch, no "cutting off at the knees" by vendor lockout[/quote]
Cons
- Non standard. Most programmers are not interested in learning another CPU architecture (most are familiar with one only).
- No simple retail option to implement a non-FPGA version.
- Low speeds (unless you get a very expensive FPGA or mass produce it, in which case it becomes expensive).
[/quote]mass production is not as expensive as it once was.
------------------------------------------------
Not lets see the freescale 68k
Pros
- Well known architecture, many programmers and hardware engineers are familiar with it. Software cores are highly feasible.
- Compatible with motorola 68k line.
Cons
- Expensive hardware. Only the 68000 is cheap, price increases quite a bit for later versions. I am speaking about retail prices, if somebody can get it used at a lower price or even free does not guarantee everybody can get those prices.
- Low speeds
------------------------------------------------
Now lets see coldfire
Pros
- Easy to implement architecture. Partially compatible with 68k, just better.
- Cheap
- Embedded. Some versions include usb, ethernet & pci right on the chip.
Cons.
- Low speeds. Higher than 68k, on par with geode but still less than current procesors.
------------------------------------------------
Now lets see PPC
Pros
- Well known architecture
- Cheap
- Embedded.
Cons
- Not compatible with 68k
- Low speeds. better than coldfire,but still far from current speeds.
------------------------------------------------
Now lets see x86
Pros
- Well known architecture
- Fast
- Cheap
Cons
- Not comatible with 68k
- Needs lots of external support chips.
And the issue with all of the bottom ones is, vendor lockout. Motorola unable to supply the chip? You're up the creek. Can't find a northbridge, up the creek because you can't license the CPU bus in order to have one made. Intel doesn't supply you with docs fast enough, you are locked into older generations while your competition surges forward.
No solution is a perfect one, but I would sooner dedicate myself to being able to stand on our own two feet than being locked into some corporate overlords whim.
-
Skyraker wrote:
An accelerator which was designed to plug into the CPU Fast Slot of the A2000. Unfortunately this card never got past the prototype stage and so it was never released to the public. Since Phase 5 went bust, DCE bought the rights to all their designs but it is unlikely that they will ever release this card.
Thank you for your post on the Blizzard2060 Skyraker, very informative. I didn't realise DCE bought the rights to the designs, I thought bPlan may own it.
Going to investigate further now.
-
There's precedent for trying out other architectures too. We've always been able to run hardware emulators in amigas since the early days with PC286 support. Does anyone remember the Alpha 21164 CPU which the Siamese team were trying to build a machine around? :-D
First and foremost the MiniMig v1.x is an A500/A600 emulation machine. It doesn't have to stay that way and ideas like this are really great to see even if they are hard to do.
Andy
-
Kronos wrote:
@HenyCase
Don't know, what it is with you and the PPC-developer-board, but there were probraly only a dozen or so ever made, and I know of only 2 in the hands of community memebers.
The Blizzard2060 is also in short supply ( :cry: why oh why did I sell mine :cry: ), so thats a no go.
@Skyraker
Bringing the Blizzard2604 to market (if it was ever finished that is) is just as "easy" as bringing back the CS-PPC and BPPC ..... you know, non-ROHS compatible out-of-production components to be mounted in very expensive production-methods
:roll:
Kronos, please let me explain my plan, as this will hopefully help you see why the Blizzard 2060 might not be the dead end you describe it as.
Clearly the hardware as it stands now is not suitable, for the following reasons:
1. As you state, there aren't enough of them around.
2. The hardware, whilst almost fully developed, doesn't exist in a finished state.
To get around these issues, I have been trying to contact the patent owners to see if we can come to an agreement about releasing the technology to the Amiga community (i.e. open sourcing the h/w and software in its existing state). Considering how close to complete the h/w is, and the fact that it runs OS 3.9 pretty well I think it would be a great way to have an affordable OS4 machine in the hands of the community.
Open source the hardware you say, are you mad? Well, if you don't ask, you don't get. Certainly the current h/w owners don't have a viable use for the tech, I am hopeful I can come to some agreement. I e-mailed bPlan thinking that they may hold the payments (got a reply too, still early days mind), but I'll contact DCE too after Skyraker told me they hold the rights. Not promising anything, which is why I kept this secret before.
Hope that explains my madness! :-D
-
downix wrote:
Let's add one (feature about sparc), guaranteed source through licensing. If you license the arch, no "cutting off at the knees" by vendor lockout
Now that you mention it, Coldfire CPUs have the same advantage since 2006 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freescale_ColdFire)
mass production is not as expensive as it once was.
Yet mass producing the minimig and indepently mass producing a CPU would duplicate costs, which for a project such as this at this point in time (and the near future) is a big no-no.
[/quote]And the issue with all of the bottom ones is, vendor lockout. Motorola unable to supply the chip? You're up the creek.[/quote]
I think CPUs produced by freescale (except the ARM) are open to licensing, so I think what you really tried to say "Intel"
Can't find a northbridge, up the creek
Let's then not forget some Coldfire and PPC CPUs have the northbridge and southbridge built into it.
Intel doesn't supply you with docs fast enough, you are locked into older generations while your competition surges forward.
I do not think the minimig (be it v2, v3, etc.) will need to get the fastest intel cpus, as a matter of fact it is quite unlikely since Intel cpus are good for software emulation due to the high speeds they attain, but I do not think somebody has seriously thought they can be in the future part of the minimig.
No solution is a perfect one, but I would sooner dedicate myself to being able to stand on our own two feet than being locked into some corporate overlords whim.
ATM the only CPU overlord is Intel, AMD is heavily wounded (I believe apple will buy them when the time is right), Motorola left the scene and created Freescale to make some a little profit and everybody else has hardly any market share.
-
downix wrote:
Indeed. My main worry is in hardware, namely the complete lack of forward thinking. You either have purists that insist on sticking to Mot (PPC or Coldfire or m68k), or genericists that want to go x86 (equally a dead-end in my view). I truely want the community to tell these corporate morons to shove off and carve our own path, independent of corporate overlords dictating the direction we can go in. That's why I'm heavily for licenseable CPU architectures.
AFAIK, PowerPC is licenseable as well. IBM and Freescale own it (I think that IBM may have more say), AMCC and PASemi are licensed to use it, as is Xilinx, for their Virtex-4 FPGAs. I have no idea what the licensing costs are.
In the end, the actual CPU won't matter too much. The old OS will be sandboxed either way. So long as we make the jump to 64-bit, it's all good. However, a 64-bit PowerPC CPU would make the transition easier as there's no emulator to write. Forget buying PowerPC chips from Freescale; there are other vendors with better implementations.
Hans
-
So long as we make the jump to 64-bit, it's all good.
Slowdown, that is far away into the future.
However, a 64-bit PowerPC CPU would make the transition easier as there's no emulator to write.
If you say so because AmigaOS 4 is to be released any minute now, think again. Hyperion cannot do any upgrades to the operative system and they are in litigation with Ainc and whoever becomes the winner might not support a community created amiga platform. I think we are better of with AROS, which is open source (like the minimig) and therefore there are no litigation hassles/company CEOs to worry about.
Forget buying PowerPC chips from Freescale; there are other vendors with better implementations.
The keyword is not better, the keyword is cheaper
-
Hans_ wrote:
AFAIK, PowerPC is licenseable as well. IBM and Freescale own it (I think that IBM may have more say), AMCC and PASemi are licensed to use it, as is Xilinx, for their Virtex-4 FPGAs. I have no idea what the licensing costs are.
In the end, the actual CPU won't matter too much. The old OS will be sandboxed either way. So long as we make the jump to 64-bit, it's all good. However, a 64-bit PowerPC CPU would make the transition easier as there's no emulator to write. Forget buying PowerPC chips from Freescale; there are other vendors with better implementations.
Hans
And still no northbridges nor ones with integrated modern northbridges. I looked into licensing the PowerPC, with no luck. I also looked at Coldfire licensing, no go. You can make a clone, as some folk have done, but if you're doing that, might as well clone the 68k directly.
At this time, SPARC remains the best choice, in my opinion, for a next-generation platform.
-
AJCopland wrote:
Does anyone remember the Alpha 21164 CPU which the Siamese team were trying to build a machine around? :-D
I don't remember this, sounds interesting. Got a link?
Hans_ wrote:
However, a 64-bit PowerPC CPU would make the transition easier as there's no emulator to write.
Can you please explain what you mean when you say there is no emulator to write? Is it because OS4 already runs off PPC, or are you talking about running 68K native code on the chip? Not trying to be rude, just looking for a bit more information.
downix wrote:
I don't see a future for our platform until we stop trying to do something just because Apple does it, which remains the only reason we went to PowerPC in the first place.
Back in the day, going to PPC rather than another architecture probably was in part decided because it was an easier sell, due to the fact that people looking for a new Amiga could easily imagine the speed increase given by Mac-like architecture. The fact the chips were mass produced in large quantities probably helped too (from a price point of view).
Without trying to be too much of a purist, Amiga to me, hardware wise, is always going to be linked to the custom chips. That is what was special about the system architecture the first time around. Even if we used x86 architecture for the main CPU we could expand on its capabilities with more chips. That isn't to say that the CPU choice isn't important though, we should be looking for the most elegant h/w solution possible.
downix wrote:
SPARC, ARM or SuperH would be my recommendation (in that order)
Reading your other posts downix, I do like the sound of SPARC. I know it's not the correct measurement of speed, but what's the fastest SPARC CPU out there clock cycles wise? This looks awesome...http://www.sparc.org/news/07aug7.01.html
SuperH sounds pretty good too (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SuperH). What would be the advantages/disadvantages of this architecture compared with the other ones examined in this thread?
-
@downix:
motorola/x86/etc.. whichever way I think the point is to take the best
technology below the price bar for most people and apply it in a clever way.
That's what commodore did. Any m68k/PPC is plain nostalgia or for embedded
development not cutting edge.
Even if you don't like non-free cpus they may work as a temporary solution
in the meantime to let one concentrate on other issues.
@Skyraker:
What kind of PPC/Amiga software was made?, is it up to par with currently
available software packages today?
What hardware requirements are needed?, just a PPC cpu or more?
@Kronos:
I think you point to a serious issue. Original pcb designs use through hole
and non-RoHS. And thus any component that will match right off is likely to be
expensive in production and not legal to sell in EU nor will supply likely to
be available. So.. 3.3V and FPGA ;)
@AJCopland/HenryCase:
You point in an interesting direction. Alpha 21164 etc.. why not make our own
cpu design that is optimized for speedy FPGA implementation. Let's not stare us
blind on current cpu architectures (sparc,m68k,ppc,etc..) but make our own
rules. And any ASIC solution later on will for sure be able to handle any
FPGA quirks.
@HenryCase:
Don't wake the patent bear :-)
Amiga was not only the custom chips, but also how things were wired together
on a system level. And software to go with it that was efficient.
-
HenryCase wrote:
downix wrote:
SPARC, ARM or SuperH would be my recommendation (in that order)
Reading your other posts downix, I do like the sound of SPARC. I know it's not the correct measurement of speed, but what's the fastest SPARC CPU out there clock cycles wise? This looks awesome...http://www.sparc.org/news/07aug7.01.html
SuperH sounds pretty good too (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SuperH). What would be the advantages/disadvantages of this architecture compared with the other ones examined in this thread?
The T2 is technically the fastest SPARC but it does it through massive parallellism. 16 ALU's is a lot of horsepower, blowing away even the best Xeon or Opteron on the market. However, core-wise, the Fuji SPARC64 IV is actually the fastest. However, the SPARC64 IV does not allow for the parallellism that the T2 does, so it comes down to how parallell your operations are. Massively threaded, the T2 is the fastest. Single operations, the SPARC64 IV is. Also, unlike the x86, SPARC is designed around the concept of load-balancing co-processors, able to remove tasks from the system bus, not overloading the CPU with dumb tasks which will bog it down. Can't avoid that in x86 architecture easily, I've tried.
SuperH is a very good mix of technology, coming in dead between the MIPS and ARM for performance/scalability. I still have not gotten good information about licensing, but it seems approachable.
-
freqmax wrote:
@downix:
motorola/x86/etc.. whichever way I think the point is to take the best
technology below the price bar for most people and apply it in a clever way.
That's what commodore did. Any m68k/PPC is plain nostalgia or for embedded
development not cutting edge.
Even if you don't like non-free cpus they may work as a temporary solution
in the meantime to let one concentrate on other issues.
Even for price/performance, m68k, coldfire and PPC are below the curve. You'd still do better with a MIPS or ARM CPU anyday.
But you have to start on the hardware first, else you don't have a leg to stand on. The best software is worthless without a machine to run it on.
-
@downix:
"remove tasks from the system bus, not overloading the CPU with dumb tasks which will bog it down. Can't avoid that in x86 architecture easily, I've tried."
Could you explain in more detail ..?
As for hardware my point was that one can build hardware and use a off the shelf cpu. And build software for that solution. Later on one can replace the cpu, because most code is high level and not assembler. Thus the only needed replacement is the compiler.
Allowing people to iron out other issues in the meantime. Parallel development would be enabled this way.
-
freqmax wrote:
@downix:
"remove tasks from the system bus, not overloading the CPU with dumb tasks which will bog it down. Can't avoid that in x86 architecture easily, I've tried."
Could you explain in more detail ..?
As for hardware my point was that one can build hardware and use a off the shelf cpu. And build software for that solution. Later on one can replace the cpu, because most code is high level and not assembler. Thus the only needed replacement is the compiler.
Well, basically it comes down to how a system handles OPS. In the m68k's case, it only utilized the memory bus in such a way that a) you could add registers to the setup without having to remap the whole bloody thing, and b) you could have a parallel set of instructions being fed to another processor. In the Amiga's case, the Copper was being fed those instructions. In the old Sun 680x0-based machines, it utilized a series of I/O co-processors which handled networking, disk tasks, and other low-level tasks. Sun, when they decided on making their own CPU's, kept this capability, allowing for their new SPARC CPU to "drop-in" hardware-wise with their older m68k's. PowerPC however is based on a CPU-centric design, the IBM POWER, whereby all register maps, OPS, etc have to be handled by the central processor, same as Intel's 8086, the ancient ancestor of modern day PC's. It makes sense for a mainframe, which does not have heavy IO tasks beyond the disk access. Other companies that also used the m68k, such as HP and SGI, wound up with similar solutions to the SPARC, the PA-RISC and MIPS respectfully, and also are designed to allow for co-processing with a minimal amount of glue logic and OS overhead.
Think on it for a minute. Every time you make a call to that GPU within your desktop, the instruction first has to go to the Intel or AMD CPU, which then goes "a ha, this isn't mine, it goes to device 0, just a moment." Adds a lot of overhead to the design. And yes, this is overly simplistic, but the general concept is the same.
Incidentally, SPARC's do allow for off-the-shelf CPU's. Sun and Fujitsu both supply SPARC CPU's to 3rd party vendors, ranging anywhere from the 650Mhz UltraSPARC IIi to the SPARC64 IV.
-
HenryCase wrote:
Hans_ wrote:
However, a 64-bit PowerPC CPU would make the transition easier as there's no emulator to write.
Can you please explain what you mean when you say there is no emulator to write? Is it because OS4 already runs off PPC, or are you talking about running 68K native code on the chip? Not trying to be rude, just looking for a bit more information.
Amiga OS 4.0 is PowerPC (32-bit), so running it in a sandbox on a 64-bit PowerPC means that you don't need to write an emulator for Amiga OS 4.0 programs to run in. Switch to a different CPU, and you need to write an emulator on top of writing the sandbox.
Hans
-
I think a custom CPU core or an efficient but little know CPU are a dead end in itself. Either you are a trailblazer or a follower, you cannot be both. If the people in this project are so sure to make something so good they will set a trend, attract programmers and have long lasting weight in the market then go ahead. If the idea is to use what at this moment seems cutting edge from other companies remember it becomes old tech in six month old. Like in the example downmix gives, MIPS was the best choice at the time and Sony used it and made a trend because the PSX was a trailblazer. Nowadays MIPS is barely a memory and for quite some time sony has not used that architecture in anything new.
-
little wrote:
I think a custom CPU core or an efficient but little know CPU are a dead end in itself. Either you are a trailblazer or a follower, you cannot be both. If the people in this project are so sure to make something so good they will set a trend, attract programmers and have long lasting weight in the market then go ahead. If the idea is to use what at this moment seems cutting edge from other companies remember it becomes old tech in six month old. Like in the example downix gives, MIPS was the best choice at the time and Sony used it and made a trend because the PSX was a trailblazer. Nowadays MIPS is barely a memory and for quite some time sony has not used that architecture in anything new.
That eliminates Coldfire and m68k right there. Right now, SPARC, ARM and a case could even be made for PowerPC as the have-to-have CPU's. And as of right now, SPARC remains the best for the budget, and now offers the fastest CPU on the market for parallel tasks, the new UltraSPARC T2. Incidentally, Sony still uses the MIPS CPU in their PSP handheld.
-
freqmax wrote:
@HenryCase:
Don't wake the patent bear
Amiga was not only the custom chips, but also how things were wired together
on a system level. And software to go with it that was efficient.
The patent bear has already been woken, I e-mailed DCE earlier tonight. I'm only asking for information at the moment. In any case, Yogi is my lawyer, and he's smarter than the average bear. :roll: :-D
I agree that the whole system needs to be well thought through, but thought I'd mention the custom chip thing just in case we forgot that was an important part of the identity of Amiga hardware. Maybe we should think about DSP options too, like the final Commodore Amiga h/w designs (i.e. the ones that never made it).
downix wrote:
*Lots about SPARC*
Downix, the more you say about SPARC, the more I can see it as the absolute best solution we have for moving the Amiga platform forward. If a version of AmigaOS or AROS could be made for it (even without support for the multithreading at first), then it would be a brilliant step in the right direction. The parallel processing part would take a long time to implement, but would be worth it in the end. Are SPARC CPUs expensive?
downix wrote:
SuperH is a very good mix of technology, coming in dead between the MIPS and ARM for performance/scalability. I still have not gotten good information about licensing, but it seems approachable.
I see. Well, certainly a good alternative to SPARC, but I prefer the sound of SPARC.
freqmax wrote:
As for hardware my point was that one can build hardware and use a off the shelf cpu. And build software for that solution. Later on one can replace the cpu, because most code is high level and not assembler. Thus the only needed replacement is the compiler.
Allowing people to iron out other issues in the meantime. Parallel development would be enabled this way.
Freqmax, you make the changing of CPU architecture seem a little trivial here. Even if all newly written programs are run through the OS rather than directly from the h/w (so you would only need to recompile them), you would still need to rewrite the OS if you moved to a new processor architecture. If the Amiga does change processor architecture, it should be made as a long term decision.
Hans_ wrote:
Amiga OS 4.0 is PowerPC (32-bit), so running it in a sandbox on a 64-bit PowerPC means that you don't need to write an emulator for Amiga OS 4.0 programs to run in. Switch to a different CPU, and you need to write an emulator on top of writing the sandbox.
Thanks for answering my question Hans, I did suspect that is what you meant but I'd rather ask a dumb question than stay ignorant.
-
HenryCase wrote:
freqmax wrote:
@HenryCase:
Don't wake the patent bear
Amiga was not only the custom chips, but also how things were wired together
on a system level. And software to go with it that was efficient.
The patent bear has already been woken, I e-mailed DCE earlier tonight. I'm only asking for information at the moment. In any case, Yogi is my lawyer, and he's smarter than the average bear. :roll: :-D
I agree that the whole system needs to be well thought through, but thought I'd mention the custom chip thing just in case we forgot that was an important part of the identity of Amiga hardware. Maybe we should think about DSP options too, like the final Commodore Amiga h/w designs (i.e. the ones that never made it).
downix wrote:
*Lots about SPARC*
Downix, the more you say about SPARC, the more I can see it as the absolute best solution we have for moving the Amiga platform forward. If a version of AmigaOS or AROS could be made for it (even without support for the multithreading at first), then it would be a brilliant step in the right direction. The parallel processing part would take a long time to implement, but would be worth it in the end. Are SPARC CPUs expensive?
A basic entry-level can be had for less than $20, a server-grade unit for over $1000. I picked up my UltraSPARC IIi system for $50 used, and while it lacks the multithreading support of the T1, it is a good development platform.
-
With regards to the Amiga Inc classic hardware legal issue.
I thought that Amiga Inc never acquired the rights to classic Amiga 'hardware' from gateway.
If this is the case than Amiga Inc can't go after anyone making classic clones of the hardware. So long as the name AMIGA that they do have rights to is not used. And also the ROM code.
-
downix wrote:
A basic entry-level can be had for less than $20, a server-grade unit for over $1000. I picked up my UltraSPARC IIi system for $50 used, and while it lacks the multithreading support of the T1, it is a good development platform.
:-o
That. Is. Unbelievable.
Seriously, if making the switch was an easy process, this would be the architecture I'd pick. I'm sure there are other equally impressive CPU architectures out there, but SPARC has the right price, power, availability and suitability for next-gen Amigas.
However, in reality I would rather Amiga Inc didn't touch it, simply because they can't seem to get anything out to sell us. Let them finish that ACK design and get it out to us, then we should be in discussion with them about the future. Unless AROS could be made to run on SPARC architecture, then we'd really be in business. :-D
-
HenryCase wrote:
downix wrote:
A basic entry-level can be had for less than $20, a server-grade unit for over $1000. I picked up my UltraSPARC IIi system for $50 used, and while it lacks the multithreading support of the T1, it is a good development platform.
:-o
That. Is. Unbelievable.
Seriously, if making the switch was an easy process, this would be the architecture I'd pick. I'm sure there are other equally impressive CPU architectures out there, but SPARC has the right price, power, availability and suitability for next-gen Amigas.
However, in reality I would rather Amiga Inc didn't touch it, simply because they can't seem to get anything out to sell us. Let them finish that ACK design and get it out to us, then we should be in discussion with them about the future. Unless AROS could be made to run on SPARC architecture, then we'd really be in business. :-D
It already runs hosted. Getting it native should not be too difficult now that AROS handles 64-bit.
But yes, forget AInc, let us focus on a corporate-legacy free future. 8)
*edit*
here's an example of the machine I just bought:
Here's one (http://cgi.ebay.com/Sun-Ultra-10-Computer-333MHz-UltraSparc-III-256MB-CD_W0QQitemZ270180198116QQihZ017QQcategoryZ140076QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem)
They're not highly prized as far as Sun's go, due to the CPU-driven IDE bus which does hurt system performance, but for a development machine, it's a solid 64-bit SPARC. Incidentally, it's CPU is a IIi, not a III.
Another collection (http://cgi.ebay.com/Lot-of-3-Sun-Ultra-60-360MHz-448MB-RAM-Workstation-NR_W0QQitemZ290174751151QQihZ019QQcategoryZ20328QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem)
And another one... (http://cgi.ebay.com/Sun-Ultra-10-440MHz-CPU-512MB-9-1Gb-Workstation_W0QQitemZ270179613129QQihZ017QQcategoryZ20328QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem)
Not bad for 5 minutes on ebay. I just type in Sun Ultra and here they are.
-
little wrote:
Nowadays MIPS is barely a memory and for quite some time sony has not used that architecture in anything new.
...except for the PSP which is MIPS32 based with matrix/vector co-processing hardware. Oh and the PS2. Mips is quite a nice architecture to work with actually. Not the best but nice and simple to get used to I found.
Andy
EDIT: darned typos...
-
AJCopland wrote:
little wrote:
Nowadays MIPS is barely a memory and for quite some time sony has not used that architecture in anything new.
...except for the PSP which is MIPS32 based with matrix/vector co-processing hardware. Oh and the PS2. Mips is quite a nice architecture to work with actually. Not the best but nice and simple to get used to I found.
Andy
EDIT: darned typos...
The original PS3 had a MIPS chip in there as well IIRC. Not as the main CPU, mind you, but in a peripheral fashion.
-
The launch versions of Japanese and US PS3s, but not the European and UK, ones had something in there. It was either the MIPS cpu or the EE, not sure which. Either way somethings in there much like the IOP in the PS2 to provide hardware based backwards compatibility.
Unlike the IOP though you can't write code for it using the Sony APIs so it can't be used to offload anything. Shame really as the IOP was very handy for that kind of offloading work.
Andy
downix wrote:
The original PS3 had a MIPS chip in there as well IIRC. Not as the main CPU, mind you, but in a peripheral fashion.
-
[AROS...]
It already runs hosted. Getting it native should not be too difficult now that AROS handles 64-bit.
AROS runs hosted on SPARC??? are you sure? The PPC port took some work to leave it at the same level than x86. Now that AROS runs on various CPUs and the 64bit port is improving, a SPARC port would probably be easier. I know some code was written to support SPARC, but AFAIK it doesn't run on SPARC yet.
Anyway feel free to prove me wrong... I wouldn't mind watching a screenshot of AROS running hosted on your SPARC machine :-)
-
Speaking of Patents... i'm sure I read recently that Gateway are about to be bought out / taken over.
I'll go find out some more.
** Bloody interesting thread btw **
*Edit* Gateway now belongs to Acer. Can we have our patents back please?
-
@Skyraker:
They seem to sit on the patents until they rot :-)
@downix:
"add registers to the setup without having to remap" what do you mean by remap?
How does these custom "cpus" know when to run or halt?
-
freqmax wrote:
@downix:
"add registers to the setup without having to remap" what do you mean by remap?
How does these custom "cpus" know when to run or halt?
Well, if I insert a bank of registers, it has to fit somewhere into the memory map of the system. But, 8086 dictates a lot about where you are allowed to map these banks into a system, how many you can have, the size, etc. To work around it is a headache.
And typically custom co-processors are started by the main CPU, and flag when they're finished through an interrupt. But, in some cases, they can keep going, fetching the next set of work without needing CPU guidence, through a dedicated co-processing element such as a dedicated "stack-start" register, or other methods. Lots of ways you can do it.
and @Crumb
Just looks like AROS on Linux, but I can grab a shot for you in a bit once I recompile it.
-
A basic (SPARC CPU) entry-level can be had for less than $20
What about giving the name of this CPU so a real comparision between this and other CPUs in the same price level can be achieved?
BTW, The PSP is basically a scaled down version of the PS2, which was launched in 2000, in computer years that is a lifetime ago :-P
-
Speaking of PS3.. a Cell cpu wouldn't be too bad :-D
@downix:
What do you mean by "bank of registers" ..?
In the case of Amiga (or even Sun). The co-cpus are started by the main cpu and then continue until told to stop?, or do they start at system boot directly (like the main cpu) ..?
-
little wrote:
A basic (SPARC CPU) entry-level can be had for less than $20
What about giving the name of this CPU so a real comparision between this and other CPUs in the same price level can be achieved?
BTW, The PSP is basically a scaled down version of the PS2, which was launched in 2000, in computer years that is a lifetime ago :-P
That would be the one I mentioned earlier, the S1. It's a bit too new for real detail on specs, but as the core is similar to the UltraSPARC II, I'd compare it to that. Which does mean that it's performance is comparable with, say an AMD Athlon 800Mhz, but while consuming 1/5th the wattage. A lot faster than the SoC PowerPC's we're currently looking at.
In addition, there is also the MicroSPARC, which retails for $15, but it is a 32-bit SPARC, not a 64-bit, so not a very good comparison. Also the PicoSPARC, same issue. The Geisler LeonSPARC can also be had for this price, but again, 32-bits. The S1 and II are the two entry-level 64-bit CPU's at this time. I don't know Sun's pricing on the II atm.
-
@downix:
What do you mean by "bank of registers" ..?
In the case of Amiga (or even Sun). The co-cpus are started by the main cpu and then continue until told to stop?, or do they start at system boot directly (like the main cpu) ..?
Well, in some setups (like the Amigas) registers can be mapped just like memory, so I typically call them the same way I would a memory bank.
And no, the CPU starts to co-pro (hence why it's a co-pro and not a full processor). How it starts them depends on the CPU and co-pro. In the Amiga's case, the CPU just had to write the starting address to the coppers control register, and that started it running.
-
Hmmm getting a headache trying to follow this thread, apologies if this has been addressed elsewhere...
I think, it's a "game of two halves", we need to boil it down to
i)What is the minimum Amiga specific hardware necessary to act as a classic "bootloader"?
ii) What is the minimum Amiga specific hardware necessary to run it after it's gone over to PPC mode? i.e. how necessary are custom chips at this point?
Because it seems like a whole lot easier ballgame if minimig hardware would not have to integrate with the PPC hardware beyond being able to hand over and bootstrap it.
So, problems of integration with the host machine may be simplified if the host machine does not have to have access to any of the custom hardware on a minimig board.
So, if all that's really necessary to run the PPC part is gfx we have drivers for, sound we have drivers for, standardish ATA interface, standardish network card- then we don't need much in the way of hardware emulated classic hardware.
So, if we rethink the minimig on PCI proposition as mostly an independant machine on a card, that does not integrate with the host machine beyond resetting it and bootstrapping it with the PPC code, then it might be an easier task.
Then we could use PPC/PCI boards, with a minimig to boot them, and that's all it needs to do.
IF we do need some classic hardware to run in PPC mode, a seperate implementation of it in FCPGA accessible only from the host side could be the answer. It could be derived from minimig, but it would essentially be functionally independant from the minimig bootloader part. It's a dirty solution, one and a half amigas on a PCI card, but if it will work....
I don't see why though, even if you have the minimig as a bootloader that you couldn't have it independantly functional as a classic mode machine solely for old games and such, with only the 680x0 CPU on board and the emulated chipset available for use. (i.e. the rest of the PPC machine's hardware is unavailable) but hopefully sharing compatible drives.
You'd have a kind of dual boot machine, one option would boot to classic, just the minimig and a classic 68k OS, the other option would be to use it to bootload OS4 on the PPC hardware.
So break it down into, i) what the 68K bootloader side needs to "see" for it to work, implement it in minimig. ii)what the PPC side needs to "see" for it to work, implement it with Amiga compatible PCI cards and if necessary FPGA emulation.
It would seem that i and ii would not have to be fully integrated. You'd lose compatibility with stuff that was written to co-process on PPC from a 68k OS though, but it sounds like it wouldn't work on OS4 anyway. But if you have that requirement you already have a PPC accelerator and don't need this hardware, and probably won't want to run 0S4 on it if you're dependant on that functionality.
Anyhoo, those are my crazy mixed up thoughts on it FWIW...
-
On-topic.
I thought there were still 603e and 604e based cores used in PowerPC cpus from Freescale. They might have been tweaked somewhat for process shrinks and cost reductions but they may well be fully compatible with all of the PowerUP and Warp stuff that exists.
If we're willing to settle for a lower end part at about 400Mhz or so then an MPC5200 would probably suit our needs.
The only problem with all of this seems to be the cost. All of the PPC board that i've seen being touted by people are really damned expensive because they use 10 layer board and incorporate everything including the kitchen sink!
So the real question is: Is it possible to do a basic PPC board with soldered on (DDR?) SD-RAM, the FGPA (500k gates+) and the MiniMigs current connectors for less than £200?
Or would it make more sense for us all to increase AmigaKits sales a little and order the Efika whilst turning the MiniMig into a PCI card for it?
Opinions on a postcard please :-D
Sorry for wandering a little off-topic everyone but:
little wrote:
BTW, The PSP is basically a scaled down version of the PS2, which was launched in 2000, in computer years that is a lifetime ago :-P
This is a myth that was caused by Sony stating that the performance of the PSP lay somewhere between a PSone and a PS2. The three of them are markedly different architectures and don't even use the same versions of the MIPS cpus.
They're all MIPS but different variants and with very different co-processors. I know this because I've worked on three multi-platform titles that all covered the PSP and PS2 ;-)
Andy
-
AJCopland wrote:
So the real question is: Is it possible to do a basic PPC board with soldered on (DDR?) SD-RAM, the FGPA (500k gates+) and the MiniMigs current connectors for less than £200?
Andy
Not realistically, no.
-
downix wrote:
Not realistically, no.
:lol: well its good to get that out of the way at least! How come though? I realise that the examples I'm thinking of are commercial ones like the LinkStation or some set-top boxes, I guess they have ecomony of scale on their side.
How about the boards for PPC then? Is it feasible for us to do homebrew boards with only two layers that support a PPC chip or are they going to require more as a minimum? I ask since it gets more expensive for people to make N-layer boards doesn't it and anymore than two is instantly outside the scope of etching our own.
-
AJCopland wrote:
downix wrote:
Not realistically, no.
:lol: well its good to get that out of the way at least! How come though? I realise that the examples I'm thinking of are commercial ones like the LinkStation or some set-top boxes, I guess they have ecomony of scale on their side.
How about the boards for PPC then? Is it feasible for us to do homebrew boards with only two layers that support a PPC chip or are they going to require more as a minimum? I ask since it gets more expensive for people to make N-layer boards doesn't it and anymore than two is instantly outside the scope of etching our own.
The sheer number of pins and the short distances that they can run makes 2-layers very difficult to manage. The best solution would be to buy a chip with a PPC core already included, but they start at over $800 in volume. We're in between a rock and a hard place here, sadly. I would sooner recommend sticking it out with the original 68000 and keeping the price reasonable than take such a risk at this time.
-
No way to do a 2 layer board, but i think that using a embedded chip like the MPC5200 could allow to use less layers. Four or six, maybe. It is something to analyze.
Why use soldered DDRs ? Put a cheap PC memory slot
-
AeroMan wrote:
Why use soldered DDRs ? Put a cheap PC memory slot
People have mentioned before that it makes EMI and timing of signal on the board harder to deal with. Don't know how much harder but I was thinking of the Keep It Simple Stupid motto :-D
Andy
-
DDR is an electrical pain. An sdram slot maybe. But DDR, nope.
A single TSSOP-54 chip can offer 64 MByte. Many Amigas didn't even get close. So it better be worth the obstacle with sockets & long nights with oscilloscope and {beep}ing.
Many things are possible, if you are willing to spend the right amount of money.
-
freqmax wrote:
DDR is an electrical pain. An sdram slot maybe. But DDR, nope.
Many things are possible, if you are willing to spend the right amount of money.
I agree with you. soldered chips are simpler, but the pain with the memory will be related to track lenght, in trying to avoid signal reflections, not exactly the connector itself. Soldered chips will be more reliable, for sure.
There is still another problem: the PPC is a BGA, which is a pain to solder. I can always ask my boss to pass some boards in the company's oven :-D
-
Actually some people have started to use bread toasters instead of pizza ovens to rewflow solder. And Minimig fits..
So it might just be doable, but you have no way of verifying solders without x-ray.
-
Actually some people have started to use bread toasters instead of pizza ovens to rewflow solder. And Minimig fits..
So it might just be doable, but you have no way of verifying solders without x-ray.
toaster. I haven't head of that one. I guess it would work. But you would need a good temp control. You would probably be better just using a regular ovenand getting a temp sensor.
Don't really need a x-ray. If you get the solder paste correct you only need to see the outside few rows of balls. You can get cameras that look down the small gap. Thats how its done by the smaller outfits.
-
No way to do a 2 layer board, but i think that using a embedded chip like the MPC5200 could allow to use less layers. Four or six, maybe. It is something to analyze.
4,6,8 layers really is not an issue. The minimig PCBs , can't generally be produced at home. More layers don't add that much cost these days. In fact it is often cheaper (at least in higher volumes) because you can make the board smaller.
If you start looking at DDR, then it is near impossible to do in less that 4layers.
-
downix wrote:
Not bad for 5 minutes on ebay. I just type in Sun Ultra and here they are.
I searched on eBay just like you described, plenty of cheap SPARC hardware. It's looking good.
Skyraker wrote:
Speaking of Patents... i'm sure I read recently that Gateway are about to be bought out / taken over.
I'll go find out some more.
** Bloody interesting thread btw **
*Edit* Gateway now belongs to Acer. Can we have our patents back please?
Do you know which Amiga patents Acer owns? Have AInc ever tried to obtain these patents?
downix wrote:
Just looks like AROS on Linux, but I can grab a shot for you in a bit once I recompile it.
That's a very good point, anything that will run Linux can run AROS hosted. This means we are free to choose whatever hardware we want for AROS as Linux runs on pretty much everything.
This topic seems to have split a little between OS4 solutions and AROS solutions. Ideally I'd like h/w that can run both, and as AROS runs everywhere hosted (and native given enough development time) we need to focus on OS4 h/w (that was the subject in the original post).
RW222 wrote:
You'd have a kind of dual boot machine, one option would boot to classic, just the minimig and a classic 68k OS, the other option would be to use it to bootload OS4 on the PPC hardware.
I'm sorry, I don't see the benefit of the dual booting you describe. If you can run both alongside each other (like the PPC accelerator solutions) for increased processing capability, why limit yourself? Is it just because it is easier to implement?
AJCopland wrote:
Or would it make more sense for us all to increase AmigaKits sales a little and order the Efika whilst turning the MiniMig into a PCI card for it?
That does sound like an elegant solution, but surely it would require a rewrite of OS4 (thus negating the benefits)?
Also, whatever solution we come up with should be something the Amiga community can do. Since OS4 is currently locked down in legal stuff with new hardware support looking a long way off, we need to look at getting OS4 running on new hardware without requiring a complete rewrite of the software. To me it seems we have two possible solutions to do this:
1. Reverse engineer the authorization system used by AmigaOne, put this on a chip, develop new PPC hardware around it (possibly illegal).
2. Develop new PPC compatible acceleration cards that can be used with a modified MiniMig.
If anyone can see another solution to this (OS4 emulator maybe?) please let us know.
nBit7 wrote:
No way to do a 2 layer board, but i think that using a embedded chip like the MPC5200 could allow to use less layers. Four or six, maybe. It is something to analyze.
4,6,8 layers really is not an issue. The minimig PCBs , can't generally be produced at home. More layers don't add that much cost these days. In fact it is often cheaper (at least in higher volumes) because you can make the board smaller.
If you start looking at DDR, then it is near impossible to do in less that 4layers.
Just out of interest, how do multiple layer PCBs get made? Is there a homebrew way of producing this type of board? Also, does anyone know how many layers the PCBs for the old Amiga PPC accelerators used (CSPPC for example, but any information on the other boards also very welcome)? Thanks.
-
OS4 is PowerPC based; thus, a PowerPC solution is best practical option. A mobileGT MGT5200 from freescale would need a 6 layer PCB for the BGA at which point a Spartan3e in BGA form might as well be used. DDR soldered onto the PCB is possible if you have enough experience with DDR and SI simulation tool available. The BGAs would require a reflow oven of some sort to fabricate the PCB. A simplier/easier step would be to use off the shelf the EFIKA MGT5200 board and build a PCI MiniMIG card for use with EFIKA with a Spartan3e, some DDR/SDRAM, a VGA output, PS2 connectors (mouse/keyboard), Joystick ports, serial port, IDE, etc ...
:-)
-
Could this be useful for designing a PPC based Minimig:
http://www.techonline.com/learning/webinar/199203327
We could copy the Minimig architecture within a PPC chip for 68k apps and have PPC instructions for OS4 on the same chip. Or have I got this completely wrong?
-
jkonstan wrote:
OS4 is PowerPC based; thus, a PowerPC solution is best practical option.
OS4 is just OS 3.1 ported to PowerPC, so I understand, I'm sure folk with more know-how can be more clear on this. But, being that, there is no practical reason for locking it onto PowerPC. Infact, I'd almost say it would be smarter to keep the OS on m68k and use a fast JIT emulator to bring it to other CPU's, a la Amithlon.
-
Again, need some feedback on whether this would be suitable...
http://www.xilinx.com/products/silicon_solutions/fpgas/virtex/virtex4/capabilities/powerpc.htm
If it is though, the Virtex-4 may be a good solution, especially considering the price, speed and expandability of the architecture:
Price: Depends on chip used. For example, the 'XC4VLX25-10FFG668C' is 253.20USD from Digikey:
http://parts.digikey.com/1/parts/586328-ic-fpga-virtex4-24k-668fbga-xc4vlx2510ffg668c.html
If this seems too much (Spartan-3 is 25.45USD from Digikey, though you wouldn't need both chips for a PPC MiniMig), think about the prices being paid for Amiga PPC accelerators now.
Speed: 700MHz max. Plenty fast enough for Amiga users needs at the moment.
Expandability: In-built Auxiliary Processor Unit (APU) supports hardware accelerators. Since the platform would be open, we would have a system that could support our needs for a long time.
This Virtex-4 development board is rather pricey (not that I know what the average price of such a device is) at 995GBP, but does include some decent features, including built in Spartan-3 FPGA (may be optional), which would speed up the development of a PPC MiniMig:
http://www.enterpoint.co.uk/moelbryn/broaddown4.html
Any thoughts?
-
Been doing a bit of research into PowerPC architecture, initially to see if this Virtex-4 option is worthwhile pursuing. As far as I can tell, all PowerPC chips are compatible with each other, so the PowerPC 405 core(s) in the Virtex-4 should be able to handle all the calls made to it. The only tricky part would be to reverse engineer the control electronics from a PPC accelerator board so that we don't have to write new drivers (this might not work, in fact it might be easier just to write new drivers).
I came across a few pieces of useful information during my internet search. Firstly, found out about how PowerPC came about, how PowerPC and Power architecture are linked but not compatible. Check out this Power architecture family tree:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:POWERhistoryfamilydiagram.png
Found the PowerPC 405 user manual, which will be useful should anyone decide to use the Virtex-4 solution:
http://www-01.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/A07CE56994E69BFE0025731C005C9BFE/$file/ppc405S_um_01_pub.pdf
Finally, read the last paragraph of the first post here:
http://www.power.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=712
Free SPARC and MIPS clones of PPC chips exist! Tried to find them, no luck so far, but I would imagine it's a cheaper solution than the Virtex-4 one. If we made our own SPARC or MIPS core we could even integrate the MiniMig (complete with 68K CPU processes) into one chip capable of running OS4, given enough time.
-
HenryCase wrote:
Finally, read the last paragraph of the first post here:
http://www.power.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=712
Free SPARC and MIPS clones of PPC chips exist! Tried to find them, no luck so far, but I would imagine it's a cheaper solution than the Virtex-4 one. If we made our own SPARC or MIPS core we could even integrate the MiniMig (complete with 68K CPU processes) into one chip capable of running OS4, given enough time.
No, that's not what he said. He said that free clones of SPARC and MIPS CPU's exist. You can find both on the opencores.org website. SPARC is an open standard, Sun even released the code to their high-end UltraSPARC T1. MIPS, however, is not, and true clones are liable for lawsuit due to patents. Same with PowerPC.
-
downix wrote:
No, that's not what he said. He said that free clones of SPARC and MIPS CPU's exist. You can find both on the opencores.org website. SPARC is an open standard, Sun even released the code to their high-end UltraSPARC T1. MIPS, however, is not, and true clones are liable for lawsuit due to patents. Same with PowerPC.
Damn. Well, thanks for clearing this up for me downix.
Slightly OT, I was looking around the opencores.org website yesterday, came across this device:
http://www.opencores.org/projects.cgi/web/usbhostslave/overview
If the 68k core is integrated into the MiniMig FPGA, freeing up enough I/O capacity, this seems like a cheap way of adding the much requested USB functionality to the MiniMig. Of course we'd have to write our own drivers for it.
Incidentally, wouldn't there be legal repercussions if the 68k chip was emulated in FPGA form? And could we be sued by the A500 custom chip patent holders (I doubt OCS is open source)?
-
HenryCase wrote:
downix wrote:
No, that's not what he said. He said that free clones of SPARC and MIPS CPU's exist. You can find both on the opencores.org website. SPARC is an open standard, Sun even released the code to their high-end UltraSPARC T1. MIPS, however, is not, and true clones are liable for lawsuit due to patents. Same with PowerPC.
Damn. Well, thanks for clearing this up for me downix.
Slightly OT, I was looking around the opencores.org website yesterday, came across this device:
http://www.opencores.org/projects.cgi/web/usbhostslave/overview
If the 68k core is integrated into the MiniMig FPGA, freeing up enough I/O capacity, this seems like a cheap way of adding the much requested USB functionality to the MiniMig. Of course we'd have to write our own drivers for it.
Incidentally, wouldn't there be legal repercussions if the 68k chip was emulated in FPGA form? And could we be sued by the A500 custom chip patent holders (I doubt OCS is open source)?
Unless you have a beefy CPU (like a 25Mhz 68030) then USB would still bog you down. Now, that being said, if you could expand the MiniMig's RAM, you could add an embedded controller for it, and handle it like a firewire for data transfers, and like PS/2 for mouse/keyboard, but then you'd need a bigger FPGA. I've used that core in a few projects, never had an issue with it.
The OCS patents expired a few years back.
-
AndrewBell wrote:
JosephC wrote:
I did not sign any contract relinquishing my right to patch a program to run on a newer model of CPU. I am free to patch my AmigaOS as I see fit.
Go and read the license agreement that appears during AOS install before you say that. I've never read it myself, but most commercial software imposes terms and conditions that you agree to by installing, or sometimes even opening the package.
You don't have to agree to anything by installing. It's not worth worrying about unless Amiga Inc manage to get all EULAs accepted as valid in a court of law.
-
AndrewBell wrote:
Even if it isn't demanded, you can run OS4 on AGA. Besides that, look at the bigger picture. Clone-A and Minimig, if available on PCI cards, offer Amiga graphics facilities to modern, fast CPUs. They still have features that are not present on modern 3D accelerated gfx cards, such as sprites, collision detection, playfields, hardware scrolling etc. Jens has even talked about extending the capabilities of the chipset.
Surely all of these things can be reproduced on modern hardware? Sprites can be done in hardware, certainly. Scrolling can be done with texture mapping, and would be at least as fast as the Amiga's hardware scrolling, surely.
-
mdwh2 wrote:
AndrewBell wrote:
Even if it isn't demanded, you can run OS4 on AGA. Besides that, look at the bigger picture. Clone-A and Minimig, if available on PCI cards, offer Amiga graphics facilities to modern, fast CPUs. They still have features that are not present on modern 3D accelerated gfx cards, such as sprites, collision detection, playfields, hardware scrolling etc. Jens has even talked about extending the capabilities of the chipset.
Surely all of these things can be reproduced on modern hardware? Sprites can be done in hardware, certainly. Scrolling can be done with texture mapping, and would be at least as fast as the Amiga's hardware scrolling, surely.
if you brute force it, maybe. But remember, it takes a multi-Ghz CPU to emulate a cycle-inaccurate version of the chipset as/is. To make it a true clone, you'd be pushing multiple multi-core CPU's just to handle the chipset.
The Amiga's blitter alone is incredibly difficult to copy in simulation. It's design is more akin to an ancient Crey than it is to traditional hardware, resulting in a huge overhead to make it accurate. When you look at the cost, a pair of $1400 CPU's or a $35 FPGA... which is the cost efficient method?
-
downix wrote:
mdwh2 wrote:
AndrewBell wrote:
Even if it isn't demanded, you can run OS4 on AGA. Besides that, look at the bigger picture. Clone-A and Minimig, if available on PCI cards, offer Amiga graphics facilities to modern, fast CPUs. They still have features that are not present on modern 3D accelerated gfx cards, such as sprites, collision detection, playfields, hardware scrolling etc. Jens has even talked about extending the capabilities of the chipset.
Surely all of these things can be reproduced on modern hardware? Sprites can be done in hardware, certainly. Scrolling can be done with texture mapping, and would be at least as fast as the Amiga's hardware scrolling, surely.
if you brute force it, maybe. But remember, it takes a multi-Ghz CPU to emulate a cycle-inaccurate version of the chipset as/is. To make it a true clone, you'd be pushing multiple multi-core CPU's just to handle the chipset.
The Amiga's blitter alone is incredibly difficult to copy in simulation. It's design is more akin to an ancient Crey than it is to traditional hardware, resulting in a huge overhead to make it accurate. When you look at the cost, a pair of $1400 CPU's or a $35 FPGA... which is the cost efficient method?
It's difficult to reproduce the exact same behaviour (as UAE shows), so sure, if you want to run Amiga games, an FPGA may be better than emulating on standard hardware.
But I was talking about whether modern hardware have these same features. By saying "Minimig, if available on PCI cards, offer Amiga graphics facilities to modern, fast CPUs. They still have features that are not present on modern 3D accelerated gfx cards", I was reading that as suggesting this would offer something to PC users? Or did he just mean in the context of running old Amiga games?
-
But I was talking about whether modern hardware have these same features. By saying "Minimig, if available on PCI cards, offer Amiga graphics facilities to modern, fast CPUs. They still have features that are not present on modern 3D accelerated gfx cards", I was reading that as suggesting this would offer something to PC users? Or did he just mean in the context of running old Amiga games?
Modern graphics boards are way more powerful than AGA was. AGA had some features that are not reproduced today, like many modes on the same screen, sprites and dual playfields, but these features are nice to memory limited systems. Sprites are quite useless today, as 2d games are rare, and they can be reproduced.
I think PCs could use some Amiga like techniques, like screens. They can simulate this using modern hardware (why Aros doesn't have this ? Or am I having problems to find it :-D )
I Would like also to have genlocking stuff in modern gfx cards. That was really cool stuff !
-
downix wrote:
jkonstan wrote:
OS4 is PowerPC based; thus, a PowerPC solution is best practical option.
OS4 is just OS 3.1 ported to PowerPC, so I understand, I'm sure folk with more know-how can be more clear on this. But, being that, there is no practical reason for locking it onto PowerPC. Infact, I'd almost say it would be smarter to keep the OS on m68k and use a fast JIT emulator to bring it to other CPU's, a la Amithlon.
Having seen the AmigaOS 4 SDK, I can tell you that you are 100% wrong on OS 4 being a direct port of 3.1 . You have to use a bunch of macros just to be able to compile the old pre-OS4 source codes on it due to some extensive changes in the Exec.library functionality. Most of Exec.library was scrapped in favor of new functionality.
As for locking it onto PowerPC, the only part of OS4 that is "locked in" is the Petunia JIT compiler. If OS4 could be ported to LLVM or some other JIT compiler then there would be no need for any sort of "lock in".
-
Been having some more thoughts on how to do this Minimig+PPC solution for new OS4 h/w. I'm trying to work out the different ways Amigas were able to be upgraded with fast co-processors. Considering the Minimig is currently A500 compatible (mostly), I have focused on the A500/A2000 solutions. I have a few questions:
1. Which one of the custom chips in the A500 controlled access to the side expansion slot?
2. On the A2000, what chip was mainly responsible for control of the CPU fast slot (as far as I can tell it is likely to be either the Buster, Paula or Gary OCS chips)?
3. How did the A2000 handle having so many expansion slots at once? Did it have a chip that switched between Zorro slots for instance, or were all devices running simultaneously?
4. Of all the connectors/ports/sockets found on this list (http://www.amiga-hardware.com/connlist.cgi), which is likely to be the easiest to implement (not counting the connections the Minimig already has)?
The question that is causing most confusion for me is question 3. The A500 side expansion slot is 86pin, the A2000 CPU Fast Slot is 86pin, and I can't find a OCS chip that has enough pins to deal with either (Buster OCS is 50pin, Paula OCS is 48pin and Gary OCS is 48pin). How was it done? How do PCs do it (something to do with the Northbridge/Southbridge combo AFAIK)?
Thanks in advance.
-
HenryCase wrote:
Been having some more thoughts on how to do this Minimig+PPC solution for new OS4 h/w. I'm trying to work out the different ways Amigas were able to be upgraded with fast co-processors. Considering the Minimig is currently A500 compatible (mostly), I have focused on the A500/A2000 solutions. I have a few questions:
1. Which one of the custom chips in the A500 controlled access to the side expansion slot?
CPU-driven only. I've been working on a modified MiniMig to give it a similar expantion capability
2. On the A2000, what chip was mainly responsible for control of the CPU fast slot (as far as I can tell it is likely to be either the Buster, Paula or Gary OCS chips)?
CPU, again
3. How did the A2000 handle having so many expansion slots at once? Did it have a chip that switched between Zorro slots for instance, or were all devices running simultaneously?
they were running simul, but switched access to the memory bus. Buster drove these
4. Of all the connectors/ports/sockets found on this list (http://www.amiga-hardware.com/connlist.cgi), which is likely to be the easiest to implement (not counting the connections the Minimig already has)?
A500 CPU-style slot
The question that is causing most confusion for me is question 3. The A500 side expansion slot is 86pin, the A2000 CPU Fast Slot is 86pin, and I can't find a OCS chip that has enough pins to deal with either (Buster OCS is 50pin, Paula OCS is 48pin and Gary OCS is 48pin). How was it done? How do PCs do it (something to do with the Northbridge/Southbridge combo AFAIK)?
Thanks in advance.
The CPU slots were just that, CPU slots. They were directly off of the main CPU bus.
-
Thanks for your reply downix, helpful as always.
I'm glad to hear you're working on a modified Minimig that gives it A500-like expansion capability. It would be a great leap forward for the future of the Minimig if this can be achieved.
So the CPU drives the main CPU bus, makes sense. However, I still don't quite understand how it was done. The A500 used a 68000 processor, most of which are 64pin (there are some 68pin variants out there). How did a 64pin chip interface with a 86pin expansion slot? Seems to me that the only way would be to send the information in serial rather than parallel. If the information was sent serially, how many pins of the CPU did the expansion slot need for communication?
Thanks again.
-
If you can find the schematics which were in the original a500 manual you'll see that there's more than just data and address going through that connector but things like power, ground, clock (as in bus clock not the time) etc as well. Can't remember what else off the top of my head.
Not every pin of a 68k was mapped directly too the connector only the relevant parts basically.
-
AJCopland wrote:
If you can find the schematics which were in the original a500 manual you'll see that there's more than just data and address going through that connector but things like power, ground, clock (as in bus clock not the time) etc as well. Can't remember what else off the top of my head.
Not every pin of a 68k was mapped directly too the connector only the relevant parts basically.
Thanks for the info AJCopland.
Don't remember seeing those schematics in the manuals that came with my A500, but it has been a while since I looked through them. I take it the schematic I'm looking for is in the User's Manual rather than the Amiga Basic one? Or am I looking for something like this...
http://www.amiga-stuff.com/images/A500SystemSchematics.gif
-
HenryCase wrote:
Thanks for your reply downix, helpful as always.
I'm glad to hear you're working on a modified Minimig that gives it A500-like expansion capability. It would be a great leap forward for the future of the Minimig if this can be achieved.
So the CPU drives the main CPU bus, makes sense. However, I still don't quite understand how it was done. The A500 used a 68000 processor, most of which are 64pin (there are some 68pin variants out there). How did a 64pin chip interface with a 86pin expansion slot? Seems to me that the only way would be to send the information in serial rather than parallel. If the information was sent serially, how many pins of the CPU did the expansion slot need for communication?
Thanks again.
Power, some timing signals.
I made an adaptor once, for instance, that put a thin PSU into a side expantion, getting rid of my brick. You can power the whole board through the slot if you so desired. But it's still pretty much just direct access to the CPU bus.
My own design, mind you, is technically the same bus, but at 3.3v rather than 5v. That way you could add 5v should you desire using a basic adaptor, or use more modern 3.3v peripherals instead.
-
Yeah you could find those or alternatively I could give you this link to the a500schema.zip (http://project64.c64.org/hw/a500schem.zip) I found earlier :-D
Which shows you a whole buncha schematics and the one called scanp9.jpg is the one you want. If you do some googling I think you should be able to find more info about them names used etc.
Andy
-
@AJCopland
Went away to find the schematics, didn't realize you had posted them. Tried to download from that link, for some reason the files would open. Anyway, managed to find the Amiga 500 schematics elsewhere online:
http://machina.amigahellas.gr/stuff/A500schem.zip
In fact the site has schematics for A2000, A3000, A1060 and A590 as well:
http://machina.amigahellas.gr/amiga.html
Looking at page 9 of the A500 schematics I can see the Expansion P1A/P1B socket, which I assume is what you were referring to. Picture is here:
http://img45.imageshack.us/img45/4619/expansionzo0.jpg
Did a bit of work to analyze it. Didn't get very far, quite difficult to see the text, here's what I got:
1----------2 GND----BR----GND
3----------4 GND----BR----POW
5----------6 UN----BR----POW
7----------8 UN----------POW
9----------10 UN----------POW
11----------12 UN----------GND(CONFIG)
13----------14 GND----------_CCKQ
15----------16 CDAC----------_CCK
17----------18 _OVA----------XADY
19----------20 _INT2----------UN
21----------22 A(X)----------_INT6
23----------24 A(X)----------A(X)
25----------26 GND----------A(X)
27----------28 A(X)----------A(X)
29----------30 A(X)----------A(X)
31----------32 _FC(X)----------A(X)
33----------34 _FC(X)----------A(X)
35----------36 _FC(X)----------A(X)
37----------38 GND----------A(X)
39----------40 A(X)----------_IPL(X)
41----------42 A(X)----------_IPL(X)
43----------44 A(X)----------_IPL(X)
45----------46 A(X)----------_BEEA
47----------48 A(X)----------_VPA
49----------50 GND----------E
51----------52 _VMA----------A(X)
53----------54 _RST----------A(X)
55----------56 _HLT----------A(X)
57----------58 A(X)----------A(X)
59----------60 A(X)----------_BR
61----------62 GND----------_BGACK
63----------64 D(X)----------_BG
65----------66 D(X)----------_DTACK
67----------68 D(X)----------A_W
69----------70 D(X)----------_LDS
71----------72 D(X)----------_VDS
73----------74 GND----------_AS
75----------76 D(X)----------D(X)
77----------78 D(X)----------D(X)
79----------80 D(X)----------D(X)
81----------82 D(X)----------D(X)
83----------84 D(X)----------D(X)
85----------86 GND----------D(X)
Key:
GND - Ground
UN - Unused
BR - Bridged connection
CDAC - ?
_OVA - ?
_INT2 - Found on 8520
A(X) - Found on HN62402 (DMA?).Also found on 8520, Gary, Agnus and 68000.
_FC(X) - Found on 68000 CPU
_VMA - ?
_RST - ?
_HLT - ?
D(X) - Found on HN62402 (DMA?). Also found on 8520, Gary, Agnus and 68000.
POW - Power
GND (CONFIG) - My guess would be for self-testing h/w plugged into the expansion port
_CCKQ - Found on Agnus/Gary
_CCK - Found on Agnus/Gary
XADY - ?
_INT6 - ?
_IPL(X) - Found on Paula
_BEEA - Found on 68000 CPU
_VPA - ?
E - Found on 68000 CPU
_BR - ?
_BGACK - Found on 68000 CPU
_BG - ?
_DTACK - Found on 68000 CPU
A_W - ?
_LDS - ?
_VDS - ?
_AS - ?
Is the HN62402 the DMA controller? Are the A(X)/D(X) lines a central bus lines linking chips together? If anyone noticed spelling mistakes, please let me know.
downix:
I made an adaptor once, for instance, that put a thin PSU into a side expantion, getting rid of my brick. You can power the whole board through the slot if you so desired. But it's still pretty much just direct access to the CPU bus.
My own design, mind you, is technically the same bus, but at 3.3v rather than 5v. That way you could add 5v should you desire using a basic adaptor, or use more modern 3.3v peripherals instead.
Sounds pretty cool downix. I'm looking forward to the time I can design my own hardware. With the whole 3.3v/5v thing, I heard certain FPGAs run on 3.3v but are 5v tolerant, so that they can still run on a 5v supply. Would that be useful for the Minimig (i.e switching between 3.3v expansion cards and 5v expansion cards)?