Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: guest7146 on April 10, 2010, 07:53:12 PM
-
Since the last thread on this was polluted with rubbish and eventually shut down before we could finish talking about it, I thought I'd continue here. Given that the main culprit for the "rubbish" seems to have been banned, I guess there's no risk of a repeat problem here...
So anyway...
I had a look at the datasheets for the 603e and the 604e to see if there was any truth behind the idea that they use different size busses.
It turns out that there is some truth to it - the 603e used on the BPPC is set for a 32-bit data bus while the 604e has a 64-bit data bus. As it happens, the 603e can utilise a 64-bit data bus as well, which makes it compatible with the 604e in that respect, but on the 603e it's selectable (32-bit or 64-bit) and on the 604e it is not (64-bit only). So the problem is not so much with the processors themselves, as with the design of the BPPC. If the BPPC had been designed to use a 64-bit data bus then the problem would likely not exist.
I don't think it would be possible to complete a modification that would allow the 604e to work on the BPPC, unfortunately. We could design a new memory controller to go on there, but the PCB tracking will be set up for a 32-bit wide data bus so without a complete redesign of the BPPC board itself, my guess is we're stuck with the data bus we've got. And a redesign of the BPPC is just not going to happen!
The only remaining option I can think of is to design a modification that would accept the 64-bit data bus as input, and then present it to the BPPC board as a 32-bit word. The controller would have to wait for the first 32-bit half to be processed, and then present the second half. Would this work? Hmmmm.... I don't know! It certainly wouldn't be a trivial thing to design. So, I think the 604e upgrade is dead in the water unfortunately :(
Apple Hammer
-
Are there any pin compatible members of the PPC family that offer greater speed then the ones found on the blizzard? Or even simply ones that don't require honking great heatsinks on (comparatively)?
-
I'm not sure about that yet. I have read that Freescale actually continued development of the 603e core and used it to develop a processor called the PowerQUICC II Pro (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerQUICC#PowerQUICC_II_Pro). They called the core an e300, which was an enhanced version of the 603e. Speeds were up to 667MHz!!! :)
Is it compatible??
Don't know yet. But I suspect not.
Apple Hammer
-
That is a pretty neat thought. If the BPPC had be designed to use the 64-bit bus of the 603, we could have had 64-bit Amigas at the time.
-
Ummmm.... yeah sort of. It depends what you call a "64-bit" machine. A true 64-bit machine would utilize a 64-bit instruction set, which the 603e doesn't have. There was a PowerPC620 though and that had a 64-bit instruction set! :)
Of course, the Cyberstorms had 604's didn't they? So they must be using a 64-bit data bus.
Apple Hammer
-
That is a pretty neat thought. If the BPPC had be designed to use the 64-bit bus of the 603, we could have had 64-bit Amigas at the time.
Well, that's not what is meant by a 64-bit architecture. A 64-bit machine is generally understood to have 64-bit registers, particularly for address calculation.
What we would have had is faster memory access. Although, I think L2 cache would have made more of a difference than widening the bus.
-
What I'd really like to see is a CyberstormPPC running at 350MHz or faster :)
-
Since the last thread on this was polluted with rubbish and eventually shut down before we could finish talking about it, I thought I'd continue here. Given that the main culprit for the "rubbish" seems to have been banned, I guess there's no risk of a repeat problem here...
Until they let him return. He has already been banned from here at least once before for the same childish behavior and foul language.
I don't think it would be possible to complete a modification that would allow the 604e to work on the BPPC, unfortunately. We could design a new memory controller to go on there, but the PCB tracking will be set up for a 32-bit wide data bus so without a complete redesign of the BPPC board itself, my guess is we're stuck with the data bus we've got. And a redesign of the BPPC is just not going to happen!
The only remaining option I can think of is to design a modification that would accept the 64-bit data bus as input, and then present it to the BPPC board as a 32-bit word. The controller would have to wait for the first 32-bit half to be processed, and then present the second half. Would this work? Hmmmm.... I don't know! It certainly wouldn't be a trivial thing to design. So, I think the 604e upgrade is dead in the water unfortunately :(
Apple Hammer
I don't own a Blizzard PPC card, but I do own two Cyberstorm PPC accelerator cards for A3000-A4000 and would like to upgrade one or both of them with new, faster 604e PPC chips to run at 350mhz or faster. At that speed they should be close to the performance of a SAM440, or EFIKA.
If the Cyberstorm PPC cards could also be modified to accept more than 128mb of RAM, like 256mb, or 512mb, it would breath new life into those old Classic Amiga computers.
What was the fastest speed the 604e was released at without overclocking it? Mine are both 233mhz PPC's which was the fastest available from Phase5.
Edit: @Akiko, great minds think alike (and sometimes type at the same time) :lol:
-
The fast slot can not address more than 128 megs of ram. That is why there is a 128mb limit on the A3000/4000 machines. Not sure if any type of software/hardware mods would eliminate that since I dont know the acutal reason for the limitation. Amikit will have that new Z3 ram board for sale soon.
Also it seem that Amiga OS classic can't deal with more than 512 megs of ram in any senario. Again, not sure if that is a hardware limitation as well, could be a Z3 bus issue as well.
I have a Cyberstorm MK3 that was a PPC card that was repaired and made a 060 card only. I wonder why the PPC side dies? Can they ever be made PPC again?
-
128Mb limitation: not enough address lines to decode more than 128Mb (or 4 x 32Mb).
Using a system like the Blizzard PPC (which accept 2x 128Mb SIMM sticks) will ease the things a lot. Then you can use four 128Mb SIMM sticks on the CyberStorm, but the firmware needs revision and some solder to the SIMM holders. Two more address lines and the (now needed) multiplexer to resolve the addresses.
-
For multiplexing, would a line from the Amiga MB to the fast slot card have to be added?
-
Just noticed the other thread has been deleted.
What happened? Who got banned and why?
Never a dull moment on here ;)
-
Just noticed the other thread has been deleted.
What happened? Who got banned and why?
Never a dull moment on here ;)
Let us just say he was posting in a thread where a person was asking for help, and instead of providing his knowledge he didn't want to share it, and then it all got a bit heated from there and headed downhill fast.
I am sure he'll be back but hopefully as a much nicer member of the amiga community where the idea of the forums is to help each other out, talk about ideas with the Amiga, our past and future.
We want newcomers to be welcomed in the community and show what makes the Amiga still alive and special today. I certainly thank everyone here for their help with what they've helpd me with my Amiga 1200 rack computer.
-
Let us just say he was posting in a thread where a person was asking for help, and instead of providing his knowledge he didn't want to share it,
I'd be disappointed if that was given ANY weight in why he got banned. Is no different to ex-Amiga developers refusing to help the community be releasing source-code to their commercially-dead software eg p96, Ibrowse, Miami.
-
I'd be disappointed if that was given ANY weight in why he got banned. Is no different to ex-Amiga developers refusing to help the community be releasing source-code to their commercially-dead software eg p96, Ibrowse, Miami.
I think it was more than that, you selectively quoted and did not quote "it then got pretty heated and went down hill fast", so please don't just quote a part of what I typed and try to use that as an excuse for the poor behavour that followed in that thread, it was inexcusable to be honest. Anyway let's move forward and talk on topic.
My personal opinion is I think our energy and money be spent on the clones for speed, reliability and new hardware.
-
Also it seem that Amiga OS classic can't deal with more than 512 megs of ram in any senario. Again, not sure if that is a hardware limitation as well, could be a Z3 bus issue as well.
With Amithlon AmigaOS can address 800Meg. With UAE you can assign even more (have used up to 1.5Gig myself). Granted they're emulators so there may be some sort of workaround involved, but I'd be inclined to think if there's typically a roof smaller than what a 32bit system can theoretically address (4GB) it's what Amithlon is hitting.
Anyone know for sure how much RAM os3.x can address?? (disregarding hardware limitations). Not really important, but I'd be interested to find out.
p.s. Sorry for being off topic.
-
I think it has to do with expansion.library and reserved space for Z3 addressing, autconfig etc etc..
The thread on a1k.org on the new ZorRam expansion says 512 megs is the max they can get working including chip and onboard fast ram.
http://www.a1k.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21012&page=4
Here is the thread they talk on a1k.org that links to amiga.org about regarding the memory limitation.
http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=37755&highlight=expansion.library&page=2
-
What was the fastest speed the 604e was released at without overclocking it? Mine are both 233mhz PPC's which was the fastest available from Phase5.
I think 350MHz was the fastest available processor. If you google you'll find reference to a 400MHz unit but from what I can tell this was just two 200MHz 604e processors.
So it looks to me like 350MHz is the fastest 604e processor you could get hold of. Still, a significant increase over 233MHz! And perhaps it could be overclocked slightly ;-)
Apple Hammer
-
A 350MHz 604e, with 64-bit bus and an L2 cache would make for a nice classic upgrade :)
Seriously though, I can't see any of that working with the existing accelerator designs.
-
I know the G3 was derives from the 603e. Perhaps it would be possible to use a G3 as a direct replacement for the 603e on a Blizzard? Then we could have an A1200 at speeds exceeding 1Ghz which is enough for modern apps.
-
@Lando
Engineering concerns aside, the problem with ramping up the speeds that far is that the memory bus is going to be left so far behind. Suppose you managed to get a stable 80MHz memory bus (which would require some pretty rare SIMMs, given they need to be 5v). You'd need a 13x multiplier to hit 1GHz. Without L2 cache, that's really going to bite.
-
I think it was more than that, you selectively quoted and did not quote "it then got pretty heated and went down hill fast", so please don't just quote a part of what I typed and try to use that as an excuse for the poor behavour that followed in that thread, it was inexcusable to be honest.
No-one is OBLIGATED to help anyone. If someone got banned for that, than thats disgraceful. If they got banned for something more than that, thats different.
-
A 350MHz 604e, with 64-bit bus and an L2 cache would make for a nice classic upgrade :)
Seriously though, I can't see any of that working with the existing accelerator designs.
It's more plausible that it could work the Cyberstorm accelerators. But I think you're right, it's definitely not going to work with the Blizzard designs. This is because the Blizzard designs are restricted to a 32-bit wide bus. I fail to see why they designed it this way, given that they already used a 64-bit design with the Cyberstorm. The only thing I can think of is that space limitations on the Blizzard PCB prevented them from routing a 64-bit databus, so they had to resort to a 32-bit bus instead. I'm not sure how many layers the Blizzard board actually is.
Space restrictions will have been less of a problem on the Cyberstorm boards because they didn't need to fit inside a trapdoor.
No-one is OBLIGATED to help anyone. If someone got banned for that, than thats disgraceful. If they got banned for something more than that, thats different.
Maybe it was a mistake for me to restart this thread, after all. All people want to do is discuss the merits of the events that occurred on the old thread!
Apple Hammer
-
No-one is OBLIGATED to help anyone. If someone got banned for that, than thats disgraceful. If they got banned for something more than that, thats different.
Quite so.
The poster in question was challenged on his attitude (he wasn't just not not helping, but stating that although he knew the answer he wasn't going to tell on the basis that it might give some kind of competitive advantage for some supposed future project or some such). He then went all Vesuvius and got b& for delivering possibly some of the most childish and obnoxious behaviour I've ever been witness to on here (including my own, so you know damn well how far down it must have been).
-
It's more plausible that it could work the Cyberstorm accelerators. But I think you're right, it's definitely not going to work with the Blizzard designs. This is because the Blizzard designs are restricted to a 32-bit wide bus. I fail to see why they designed it this way, given that they already used a 64-bit design with the Cyberstorm. The only thing I can think of is that space limitations on the Blizzard PCB prevented them from routing a 64-bit databus, so they had to resort to a 32-bit bus instead. I'm not sure how many layers the Blizzard board actually is.
Space restrictions will have been less of a problem on the Cyberstorm boards because they didn't need to fit inside a trapdoor.
If I were to guess I'd say as a cost saving measure as much as space saving - those cards were hideously expensive as it was, not to mention complex.
Maybe it was a mistake for me to restart this thread, after all. All people want to do is discuss the merits of the events that occurred on the old thread!
Apple Hammer
Not at all sir, getting it out in the clear in a calm, pleasant manner is a valuable and useful thing. Tbh I think it's all done with at this point anyway.
-
If I were to guess I'd say as a cost saving measure as much as space saving - those cards were hideously expensive as it was, not to mention complex.
Yeah, the dual CPU design can't have been simple to pull off. I wouldn't be surprised if that was part of the reason behind getting rid of the L2 cache. I really can't see the 68040/60 + 603/604 playing nicely with L2 present. It was bad enough with just the L1 caches and associated context-switch management.
When Phase5 announced the Blizzard G4, I was prepared to sell any non critical organ to get one. Alas, it never materialised.
-
When Phase5 announced the Blizzard G4, I was prepared to sell any non critical organ to get one. Alas, it never materialised.
NON-critical? You, sir, lack dedication. :laughing:
-
When Phase5 announced the Blizzard G4, I was prepared to sell any non critical organ to get one. Alas, it never materialised.
...along with the SharkPPC, which has also never materalised. I was disappointed about that. The impression I had from Elbox's website was that the design was pretty much finished, and that all they were waiting for was OS4.0 to be completed.
Such a shame when things like this happen. I still hold hope that Elbox can release the Shark, but I feel it's doubtful that we'll ever see it.
Apple Hammer
-
NON-critical? You, sir, lack dedication. :laughing:
Well, I thought about it, but I didn't think the card would do me any good if I were dead...
-
...along with the SharkPPC, which has also never materalised. I was disappointed about that. The impression I had from Elbox's website was that the design was pretty much finished, and that all they were waiting for was OS4.0 to be completed.
Such a shame when things like this happen. I still hold hope that Elbox can release the Shark, but I feel it's doubtful that we'll ever see it.
Apple Hammer
The impression I got was that it was complete, but never intended to run OS4. As far as I could see, it was a Sonnet Crescendo card with a different heat sink.
-
http://www.nutts.demon.co.uk/cyberg3.html
Take a read :)
-
http://www.nutts.demon.co.uk/cyberg3.html
Take a read :)
Reading that made me sad. I would have loved to have seen that come to fruition.
-
:)
Maybe in the near future :cool:
Reading that made me sad. I would have loved to have seen that come to fruition.
-
:)
Maybe in the near future :cool:
Can I make my preorder then? :laugh1:
-
Is that the card where people preordered, but ended up losing their money because phase 5 went bankrupt?
-
Can I make my preorder then? :laugh1:
You are third in line :)
-
Is that the card where people preordered, but ended up losing their money because phase 5 went bankrupt?
No
-
You are third in line :)
But honestly, would that be ever possible?
-
But honestly, would that be ever possible?
Specification says: "yes, but..."
What will be in reality: well, there is only one way to know the answer.
I would like to know this answer and I'm planning this since few months already.
Can be the same story as 604e on Blizzard PPC...
-
"Reading that made me sad. I would have loved to have seen that come to fruition. "
Me too, history would have been different. Today it's probably better to focus energy on future machines, would still love to have one in my A4000 though:)
-
Specification says: "yes, but..."
What will be in reality: well, there is only one way to know the answer.
I would like to know this answer and I'm planning this since few months already.
Can be the same story as 604e on Blizzard PPC...
Are you talking about the upgrading existing card or make a brand new one?
-
Are you talking about the upgrading existing card or make a brand new one?
I can do upgrade only. New board development is a HUGE taks and requires a lot of resources and $$$$$$$$$$$$$ :)
I don't have them.
-
I think 350MHz was the fastest available processor. If you google you'll find reference to a 400MHz unit but from what I can tell this was just two 200MHz 604e processors.
So it looks to me like 350MHz is the fastest 604e processor you could get hold of. Still, a significant increase over 233MHz! And perhaps it could be overclocked slightly ;-)
Apple Hammer
are you sure thats the fastest.
i bet you i can make you edit your posting by uploading a photo.
i have two of them here in my hand awaiting a Cyberstorm PPC and i guarantee it to work.
-
are you sure thats the fastest.
i bet you i can make you edit your posting by uploading a photo.
i have two of them here in my hand awaiting a Cyberstorm PPC and i guarantee it to work.
Show me a photo and ill belive ;)
-
From Wikipedia:
The PowerPC 604ev, 604r or "Mach 5" was introduced in August 1997 and was essentially a 604e fabricated by IBM and Motorola with a newer process, reaching higher speeds with a lower energy consumption. The die was 47 mm2 small manufactured on a 0.25 µm CMOS process with five levels of interconnect, and drew 6W at 250 MHz. It operated at speeds between 250 and 400 MHz and supported a memory bus up to 100 MHz.
-
From Wikipedia:
thats alot better,but is it the fastest possible processor that can be solder direct onto the Cyberstorm?
answer to be posted
-
I'm interested in buying a super charged CSPPC :)
-
are you sure thats the fastest.
No, I'm not absolutely sure. That's why I opened my reply with "I think".
i bet you i can make you edit your posting by uploading a photo.
Again, I was not stating a fact. I was merely discussing the processors and it is my understanding that 350MHz was the fastest 604e you could get. If you have information that says there was a faster one then... well that's fine I stand to be corrected. Please upload the photo!
i have two of them here in my hand awaiting a Cyberstorm PPC and i guarantee it to work.
I hope there's a static wrist strap connected to that hand ;-)
Apple Hammer
-
are you sure thats the fastest.
i bet you i can make you edit your posting by uploading a photo.
i have two of them here in my hand awaiting a Cyberstorm PPC and i guarantee it to work.
Sure 350MHz is not the fastest:
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/_q_oHfEAZ9qKTAczyhV6_w?feat=directlink
And 375MHz is also not the fastest :)
-
Cool!
So... what is the fastest?
Apple Hammer
-
Cool!
So... what is the fastest?
Apple Hammer
400MHz is the fastest 604e family member ever produced.
-
But wasn't the form factor changed?
-
are all of you sure 400Mhz is the fastest processor that may work in a Cyberstorm.
i know of one other *possible* processor that *may possibly* work and it`s not 400Mhz
-
He then went all Vesuvius and got b& for delivering possibly some of the most childish and obnoxious behaviour I've ever been witness to on here (including my own, so you know damn well how far down it must have been).
:roflmao:
That last part gets to me, Alan, 'cos most of the time, your "childish" comments have me spitting up pop and laughing my a$$ off! :lol:
-
But wasn't the form factor changed?
You're also not taking into account the fact that later embedded processors are direct descendents of the 603 and 604. IIRC the cpu in the Sam is based largely on the 603.
It may well be that there is some obscure part number floating around out there that is pin compatible with the 604 (and 603 for that matter).
-
@Methuselas
I always try for funny if I can, simply because I find it gets the message across to the wider audience much more effectively then playing it cold.
tldr; I do it for the lulz. :D
-
are all of you sure 400Mhz is the fastest processor that may work in a Cyberstorm.
i know of one other *possible* processor that *may possibly* work and it`s not 400Mhz
We both know that the fastest processor which *can* work in Cyberstorm is 1,1GHz (no mistake here) :)
I've been told that 1,2GHz version was also produced, but cannot find the source of information now...
So the facts:
1) 604e@400MHz (604e@400MHz) (overclocked form 375MHz)
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/3btFzg1vyTUc_tLczJLvyg?feat=directlink
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/SnwjCOxLRgDo3AeSQa9eoQ?feat=directlink
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvMPRAzAWZg
2) G3@500MHz (G3@500MHz)
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/BaiqXNvqJEf-5rjAMStT9Q?feat=directlink
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/NcaOynGolSrT6Qw9EG215Q?feat=directlink
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0h_V_HLWp7o
Running on MAC, but as everyone can see if the software/hardware can handle 604e it will handle G3 and G4 CPU as well.
This is my plan for next 2-3 months (unfortunately I can spend only 2-3hours/week for my hoby due to overload with "family activities" :afro:
And yes; all job I'm doing for Amiga things is done in my basement :)
Take care!
-
i have the same 750 processor board as you,i did have the 604e board as well but i can`t find it.
if you can replace and solder a 360 BGA to a 255 BGA on a Cyberstorm i will call you LORD OF THE BGA.
you will become MASTER of the BGA and will be ranked higher than me,and if you can do it i will be on my knees.
but im also very skilled in BGA,i install them in almost manual mode just for fun and to keep my skill level up.
-
you will become MASTER of the BGA and will be ranked higher than me,and if you can do it i will be on my knees.
Come on Stacho, we want to see that ;)
-
Come on Stacho, we want to see that ;)
see what,me get on my knees. i will be crying for a week that someone here can out class me.
-
Come on Stacho, we want to see that ;)
What, delshay on his knees, crying in adultation before the BGA MASTER ? I'm not sure I want to see that... :lol:
-
im just wondering why was the 604e attached to a Blizzard card and not the Cyberstorm?
i know he has a Cyberstorm with a non working PPC side.
?????
soldering to the Blizzard card is not to difficult due to the space around the BGA area,can`t say the same for a Cyberstorm.
-
if you can replace and solder a 360 BGA to a 255 BGA on a Cyberstorm i will call you LORD OF THE BGA.
you will become MASTER of the BGA and will be ranked higher than me,and if you can do it i will be on my knees.
@delshay,
I don't know you and you don't know me but be sure that last thing I want is to compete with you.:)
I've started all this upgrade story becuase I was forced to buy 10pcs of MC68060RC50 from China to have them at resonable price in Poland.
But I need only 1 for my newly purchased CSPPC 040...
So I had to do something with remaining 9...
So I offered upgrade service to Polish Amiga Users.
Before that I was happy with WarpEngine for 6years :afro:
So for me all this stuff is just good fun. And I'm RISKING only MINE hardware for prototype.
If other people wants the same upgrade; well, why not?
I have some knowledge, skills and equipment, money.
But lack of time :(:(:(
And I'm not LORD OF THE BGA and I don't want to be :roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:
But there is ZIF socket which can be used for PPC CPU (if someone wants/must have "Frankenstein board", I know one of such CSPPC board where ZIF is only the solution) :)
I will be happy with 604e@400MHz (604e@400MHz).
So cool down, relax, drink beer or two :drink::drink:
If you have done something and you are proud of that - well, show us!
-
(http://jungle.net/tone/bga.jpg)
Lord of the BGA gets all the chicks!
-
(http://jungle.net/tone/bga.jpg)
Lord of the BGA gets all the chicks!
:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:
-
(http://jungle.net/tone/bga.jpg)
Lord of the BGA gets all the chicks!
:)
-
@stachu100,
Figure out how to upgrade the CyberStorm PPC cards to 604e/350-400mhz and 68060/75-100mhz with both running stable, not too hot and with full compatibility for all Amiga software and I will gladly pay you to do the same upgrade on my CyberStorm PPC
-
(http://jungle.net/tone/bga.jpg)
Lord of the BGA gets all the chicks!
:roflmao::roflmao:
-
as requested
http://www.amiga.org/gallery/index.php?n=3224
please do not add any comment at the above link as it will be deleted soon...thanks
-
@stachu100,
Figure out how to upgrade the CyberStorm PPC cards to 604e/350-400mhz and 68060/75-100mhz with both running stable, not too hot and with full compatibility for all Amiga software and I will gladly pay you to do the same upgrade on my CyberStorm PPC
Something like this?
http://picasaweb.google.com/stacho100/CyberstormPPC06066MHzPPC400MHz#
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2Xg7wEvd5c
:)
060 can be overclocked up to 75MHz under the conditions that RAM is very good.
Higher frequencies are not possible to work stable as onboard logic chips are overclocked from initial 50MHz, so 100MHz is not possible for sure.