Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: jorkany on August 15, 2011, 02:33:38 PM
-
On another forum a discussion came up regarding personal mini-space shuttles, and if the X1000 would be the best computer to control them. With the closure of NASA's Shuttle Program, personal mini-space shuttles are of course on the way. The infrastructure to build, fuel, launch and maintain these mini-space shuttles is mostly in place and not much of a development concern - the real issue is, what type of computer is best suited to control them?
Clearly, systems running Unix aren't the best choice. The special needs of controlling a personal mini-space shuttle require the Power of X, and although Unix does have an "X" in it, it's not the first letter. No other computer today has X as the first letter, unless you count the Xbox but that's just a console and would just make the whole experience feel like a watered-down FPS.
Windows? No X.
Linux? Last letter.
OS X? Although "X" comprises 2/3 of the name, it's still the last letter which means NOT ENOUGH EMPHASIS ON X.
Even if someone decided to try and pull the rug out from under the X1000 by naming their computer something like "XComp 2000", they still won't have as much "X": Xena. Xorro. Xtc.
So what do you think? With personal mini-space shuttles just around the corner, do you think that the X1000 is the best choice for controlling them?
-
I think this should be a poll, but I can not deny the logic. I can easily think of a computer with more relation to X
-
Best as in worst you mean? The c64dx has had a lot more time to be tested. Plus it actually exists.
-
To protect this fragile market they should rename A-Eon to X-Eon.
Amiga One X1000 - have you had your X today?
-
I think the logical answer is QNX.
http://www.qnx.com/
It's micro-kernal architecture is very efficient and fast and the stability level is amazing. It's not used for controlling nuclear power plants because it crashes. It's used because it never crashes.
I like to think the AmigaOS would have become like QNX if it had continued.
-
"Houston, we have a problem. The deployment satellite software has just overwritten the memory allocated of the life support program. How we do from here?"
-
Remember that picture of the lifeforms on Mars we had? Well it seems the only copy was in the RAM disk.....
X-Eon AmigaxOne X1000 now with more X!
"Houston, we have a problem. The deployment satellite software has just overwritten the memory allocated of the life support program. How we do from here?"
-
Windows? No X.
Linux? Last letter.
OS X? Although "X" comprises 2/3 of the name, it's still the last letter which means NOT ENOUGH EMPHASIS ON X.
So what do you think? With personal mini-space shuttles just around the corner, do you think that the X1000 is the best choice for controlling them?
Clearly not a job for a classic amiga, it's first only designation letter was an "A" and that is about as far away from an X as you can possibly get.
I say we send an XTerm(inal) and do it all remotely.
-
With the closure of NASA's Shuttle Program, ... With personal mini-space shuttles just around the corner, do you think that the X1000 is the best choice for controlling them?
Well, the price of the thing sure fits NASA's grandiose spending budget model, that's for sure.
Who knows, could perhaps even turn out that NASA will be the only one affording it! :p
-
Yeah right lets take a processor thats slower than 4 year old pcs, an operating system with no memory protection, and a worse web browser than I have on my cell phone and use it for mission critical control applications.
-
A cell phone for a controller on a rocket would be cool to see.
Maybe we will have ultra light space craft some day.
-
Yeah right lets take a processor thats slower than 4 year old pcs, an operating system with no memory protection, and a worse web browser than I have on my cell phone and use it for mission critical control applications.
You don't need a lot of processing power for a space shuttle, you need to be able to multi task properly and a web browser is pretty irrelevant. An IBM AP101 could do the job, well 5 of them to be safe, gotta have back-ups.
The biggest problem I've had with my personal space shuttle has not been the computer system anyway. It's been trying to find enough space to store the high-altitude zeppelin I launch it from.
Steam-shuttles, the only way to fly.
-
Yeah right lets take a processor thats slower than 4 year old pcs, an operating system with no memory protection, and a worse web browser than I have on my cell phone and use it for mission critical control applications.
Although the subject matter of the thread is clearly entertainment, you seemingly haven't heard that almost all mission critical systems, particularly on spacefaring hardware is way, way lower spec than anything you'd get in a consumer device, right?
What matters for these applications is robustness rather than speed. For example, the Mars rovers use PPC based processors that run at only ~33MHz that were made when desktop machines were in the high hundreds. However, unlike your current 2-4GHz processor, these devices will withstand radiation levels that would literally kill you within minutes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_RAD6000
So, as it happens, the PPC architecture is already familiar territory for this sort of application.
-
Although the subject matter of the thread is clearly entertainment, you seemingly haven't heard that almost all mission critical systems, particularly on spacefaring hardware is way, way lower spec than anything you'd get in a consumer device, right?
What matters for these applications is robustness rather than speed. For example, the Mars rovers use PPC based processors that run at only ~33MHz that were made when desktop machines were in the high hundreds. However, unlike your current 2-4GHz processor, these devices will withstand radiation levels that would literally kill you within minutes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_RAD6000
So, as it happens, the PPC architecture is already familiar territory for this sort of application.
It says 20Mhz and not 33Mhz depending on what link you look at.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_embedded_computer_systems_on_board_the_Mars_rovers
Anyway I'm guessing robustness is only a part of it. They would also be interested in power conservation over performance as they rely on power from the sun to charge their batteries.
-
@HaywirePC
The 1.8GHZ dual core PA6T should be equal to a C2Duo at 3Ghz. WHy? PPC executes more data per cycle than x86 due to its smaller pipelines. And unless you have a smart phone, most Amiga Browsers way outclass your typical mobile web browser. More on this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megahertz_myth
And as Karlos said clock rate and CPU power is irrelevant to Aviation and Space applications. For instance, the F-14 Tomcat used i386 and i486 CPUs in the F-14D variant, and that was in use until 2006. And the F-22 Raptor I believe uses a 604e derived CPU. Game consoles are also a good example. The Gamecube used a 400mhz CPU when CPU power in desktop PCs was 1-2.5 Ghz in range, yet it runs many games a PC never could? It has to do with application entirely.
-
It says 20Mhz and not 33Mhz depending on what link you look at.
The RAD6000 was rated at up to 33MHz, that's not to say it's used at that speed in all applications.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_embedded_computer_systems_on_board_the_Mars_rovers
Anyway I'm guessing robustness is only a part of it.
Power usage is also a factor, but radiation hardening is a big deal for circuitry that is going to be used outside the atmosphere / magnetosphere of Earth. It only takes one high energy cosmic particle to pass through your processor substrate to flip the state of one or more bits in a register / memory cell etc.
-
What do they use for radiation shielding for circuitry? Lead?
But anyways heat may be another concern. In a vacuum there is no air to cool a CPU, and the higher a CPU's clock rate versus a lower clock rate, the more cooling is needed for the higher clock.
-
The 1.8GHZ dual core PA6T should be equal to a C2Duo at 3Ghz. WHy? PPC executes more data per cycle than x86.
I wouldn't be so sure about that. Modern x86 hardware is pretty damned good at the old instructions-per-cycle count. The Core2 is no slouch.
-
What do they use for radiation shielding for circuitry? Lead?
Nope, that would be too heavy. The key to radiation hardening is to use larger process sizes. Although it makes your transistors bigger and therefore increasing the chance of a particle hit, it decreases the effective amount of charge that particle can dump into the silicon comprising your transistor, thus reducing the chance of a bit flip. Basically, the smaller your components, the more vulnerable they are to the damaging effects of ionization. The second thing you need to do is harden the chip circuitry itself, eg putting ECC on everything.
But anyways heat may be another concern. In a vacuum there is no air to cool a CPU, and the higher a CPU's clock rate versus a lower clock rate, the more cooling is needed for the higher clock.
Well, without air, the CPU still cools. There's thermal contact with the circuit board and furthermore, radiative heat loss. However, low power 33MHz parts don't get that warm. For devices like the Mars Rover, they actually have to put electrical heaters in the control unit to ensure it doesn't freeze, since your average Martian night is bitterly cold.
-
I wouldn't be so sure about that. Modern x86 hardware is pretty damned good at the old instructions-per-cycle count. The Core2 is no slouch.
Well on a dual G5 1.8 versus a C2D Mini 2.4 I can definitely beat it playing UT2004 in terms of Framerate at a given setting. Also, Doom 3 and photoshop do better against it , but then again the Mini doesn't have an impressive GFX card.
PPC seemed to always be ahead of any Netburst CPUs and the 604e did very well versus a Pentium Pro
-
Hi,
@Karlos,
"these devices will withstand radiation levels that would literally kill you within minutes:"
Hey Karlos, could you check that out and do a timing survey, so we would really know how much time would go by before you expire.
Uhhhh! on second thought, don't do that, I wouldn't have any one to bust, send Kesa instead.
smerf
-
Naw, I have a few people I know on here but wont say their names that I would volunteer, Kesa is pretty much harmless but I have some traitors and trolls in mind.
-
Hi,
@Karlos,
"these devices will withstand radiation levels that would literally kill you within minutes:"
Hey Karlos, could you check that out and do a timing survey, so we would really know how much time would go by before you expire.
Uhhhh! on second thought, don't do that, I wouldn't have any one to bust, send Kesa instead.
smerf
Naw, I have a few people I know on here but wont say their names that I would volunteer, Kesa is pretty much harmless but I have some traitors and trolls in mind.
:(
-
Naw, I have a few people I know on here but wont say their names that I would volunteer, Kesa is pretty much harmless but I have some traitors and trolls in mind.
The Purge is coming...
-
Yeah it is if I ever can bait the trolls into getting banned (dont worry nobody here is on my list :p)
@Kesa
You've been harmless, because the worst you do is post when drunk.
-
What do they use for radiation shielding for circuitry? Lead?
But anyways heat may be another concern. In a vacuum there is no air to cool a CPU, and the higher a CPU's clock rate versus a lower clock rate, the more cooling is needed for the higher clock.
Plasticized gold foil is used in radiation shielding, you would be hard pressed to find anything better. As for cooling, electromagnetic radiation will move quite freely through a vacuum (otherwise we would get no heat from the sun).
-
Enjoying the education on hardened circuits, Karlos. Never really thought much about it, did some reading and it's all very interesting.
-
PPC seemed to always be ahead of any Netburst CPUs and the 604e did very well versus a Pentium Pro
Intel up to p4 and Intel after p4 may as well be two different companies.
PPC may have been competitive in performance back in the pentium pro days, but it's not competitive now. Which isn't necessarily a problem of course, performance is only one reason you choose a processor.
p4 was designed to run at high clock speeds with no regard to actual performance, the same as the new ppc chips that are in the PS3/360.
If your benchmarks are true then it's probably not the cpu execution speed that is the limiting factor in the intel mac mini.
-
The 1.8GHZ dual core PA6T should be equal to a C2Duo at 3Ghz. WHy? PPC executes more data per cycle than x86 due to its smaller pipelines.
PPC requires more instructions to do its job. Everyone can create winning benchmarks.
-
What matters for these applications is robustness rather than speed. For example, the Mars rovers use PPC based processors that run at only ~33MHz that were made when desktop machines were in the high hundreds. However, unlike your current 2-4GHz processor, these devices will withstand radiation levels that would literally kill you within minutes
Military Spec, I *knew* it! Well I'm sure the PA6 is that, since it was used by the military, so that shouldn't be a problem. And since the Xorro and Xena are XuperDuper, it should be clear that the X1000 is up for the job!
-
Military Spec, I *knew* it! Well I'm sure the PA6 is that, since it was used by the military, so that shouldn't be a problem. And since the Xorro and Xena are XuperDuper, it should be clear that the X1000 is up for the job!
Idiot. You missed the obvious. It's not military spec, it's NASA Spec!
Too bad Doomys not here...
Ahhh, i can just imagine the fantasies i can create while using my new X1000: "It's got a NASA Spec Xena chip ..." :rolleyes:
-
Well on a dual G5 1.8 versus a C2D Mini 2.4 I can definitely beat it playing UT2004 in terms of Framerate at a given setting. Also, Doom 3 and photoshop do better against it , but then again the Mini doesn't have an impressive GFX card.
PPC seemed to always be ahead of any Netburst CPUs and the 604e did very well versus a Pentium Pro
Were the computers running an equivalent graphic card?. if not, then it's nonsense to compare. BTW, the ppc code of doom3 is crap compared to the original x86 optimized code, so no matter how you look at it, it always will run better on x86.
-
BTW, the ppc code of doom3 is crap compared to the original x86 optimized code, so no matter how you look at it, it always will run better on x86.
Really? That's disappointing to hear, Carmack used to be a pretty vocal advocate of PPC Mac gaming. At least that can be addressed once the source is opened.
-
Strange how my day job get's discussed on an amiga site :) I am working in a design services group and mainly do projects for ESA.
The key to radiation hardening is to use larger process sizes. Although it makes your transistors bigger and therefore increasing the chance of a particle hit, it decreases the effective amount of charge that particle can dump into the silicon comprising your transistor, thus reducing the chance of a bit flip. Basically, the smaller your components, the more vulnerable they are to the damaging effects of ionization. The second thing you need to do is harden the chip circuitry itself, eg putting ECC on everything.
That's only half of the story. You are talking about so-called 'single events', e.g. one particle that disrupt the logic in the circuit. It is true that larger process nodes are less sensitive for single events due to higher capacitive loads reducing the effects of a particle. But still you need to design for single events for example in the 0.18um node I am mostly using. ECC on the memories you already mentioned. For the registers, there are designs with redundancy built in so that if a particle impacts on one side of the register the other redundant side takes cares that the state of the register is not changed.
Also filters can be applied so that a signal is only taken if it lasts for a certain time. Effects caused by particle impacts only last for a certain time and they will be filtered out in this way.
Another technique is triple redundancy. e.g. you put each logic function three times on the chip and when one path gives another result than the other two paths, you discard the former.
Another technique is using silicon-on-insulator (SOI) where transistors are actually put on top of an isolator (actually AMD 65nm and 40nm is SOI) and not made in the bulk silicon wafer itself. This reduces significantly the volume where the particles interact with the transistors and often removing most of the single events.
Another aspect of radhad design is total ionizing dose (TID). Particles that impact on a chip can cause particles be trapped in the isolating materials of a chip. This will cause the performance of the transistors to drift with the TID put on a chip. And here the bigger technology nodes are more sensitive as the gate oxides are thicker. Smaller nodes have thinner oxides (only few nm) almost removing the TID effect on the transistors.
The biggest reason space agencies are conservative about technology nodes is that it takes a lot of testing and money to qualify a certain node for space applications and thus designers stick to already qualified processes.
hope this was interesting,
Staf.