Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Hardware Issues and discussion => Topic started by: Lurch on December 03, 2012, 11:53:19 PM
-
ACA 1230 @ 42Mhz 64MB = 9.36 Mips
ACA 1231 @ 42Mhz 64MB = 9.98 Mips
ACA 1232 @ 33Mhz 128MB = 7.89 Mips
Eyeing up a ACA 1230 ATM but think for 9 euro more I can pickup a ACA 1232 (non MMU). Which is fin as the ACA 1230 doesn't have an MMU ;-)
Just wanting to know of other people out there and what they've experience in real everyday use?
-
Great cards, very fast for an 030.
This is my card in real everyday use.
ACA 1230 @56Mhz (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1ab50oK_yc)
;)
-
Thanks for the reply Nova, have been checking out a few youtube clips of yours :-)
Very impressed with what a 68030. KInd of got me started into looking for an ACA card.
Have eliminated the ACA 1232.. just weighing up between the ACA 1230 and 1231... 1231 seems to have the edge but not much in it :-)
-
Guessing nobody wants to part with their 56Mhz version, 12+ Mips seems nice :-) I can see me using the A1200 daily with a faster card. Missed out on a 68040, and the 68060's are out of my price range but for an all round card an ACA card will be great :-)
Hehehe
-
25Mhz 040 = 25 MIPS
50Mhz 060 = over 100 MIPS
I did the math and got an 060 but even a basic bottom of the line 040 beats 030 by a wide margin.
-
25Mhz 040 = 25 MIPS
That's crazy numbers. Would be ample for what I need. However finding a 68040 is the fun part.
Was looking at a 68060 card on amibay for $500 USD, but don't want to spend that much. Was thinking half that :-)
Unless I sell my Indi ECS which I no longer need. then I could go a little higher :-)
-
ACA 1231 it is, now the wait for it turn up.
-
ACA 630 @ 25mhz but can't remember what that is in Mips.
kind of sad because I don't have that card anymore.
-
25Mhz 040 = 25 MIPS
50Mhz 060 = over 100 MIPS
I did the math and got an 060 but even a basic bottom of the line 040 beats 030 by a wide margin.
my 50mhz 060 only gets 65.31 in SysSpeed & 38.51 in SysInfo... maybe you are thinking 80mhz 060 or some super fast prototype ACA 1260 :)
-
ACA 630 @ 25mhz but can't remember what that is in Mips.
kind of sad because I don't have that card anymore.
I think it's about 7Mips stock, I overclocked mine to 40mhz and got 9.37Mips :D
Sold it though and got an ACA620EC as it wasn't seeing much use, that gets 3.47Mips :)
-
Yeah it was a stock card. I was considering trying to clock it but I figured I wouldn't attempt it lol.
-
Bought a ACA 1231/42, just have to wait for it's arrival. Appears to be the best value.
Not sure why Amigakit isn't selling them so went through Vesalia. Looked at the ACA 1232, more RAM but slower.
Interesting to see some actual benchmarks being posted. Took some digging to find information about the ACA 1230.
I noticed with the ACA 1230 it has a removable CPU (without soldering), that could be interesting ;-)
-
It would have been nice, to have a socket for a FPU.
-
my 50mhz 060 only gets 65.31 in SysSpeed & 38.51 in SysInfo... maybe you are thinking 80mhz 060 or some super fast prototype ACA 1260 :)
Those programs do not report the correct MIPS for 060. They lie. Forget about them.
Its dead easy to write a program that runs at 149 MIPS on 50Mhz 060.
The 060 has 2 integer cores so that is 100 MIPS right there. Plus all predicted branches happen magically for free. So that is 150 MIPS.
An 80Mhz 060 runs at 240 MIPS.
-
Those programs do not report the correct MIPS for 060. They lie. Forget about them.
Its dead easy to write a program that runs at 149 MIPS on 50Mhz 060.
The 060 has 2 integer cores so that is 100 MIPS right there. Plus all predicted branches happen magically for free. So that is 150 MIPS.
An 80Mhz 060 runs at 240 MIPS.
wikipedia SAYS:
Performance ~88 Mips @ 66 MHz
~110 Mips @ 75 MHz
~36 MFlops @ 66 MHz
-
wikipedia SAYS:
Performance ~88 Mips @ 66 MHz
~110 Mips @ 75 MHz
~36 MFlops @ 66 MHz
FYI: Wikipedia lied. But at least they had the decency to make up some new numbers. :lol:
Wikipedia also says that Wikipedia is never to be considered a reliable source of information and cannot be treated as an authority on any subject whatsoever.
-
FYI: Wikipedia lied. But at least they had the decency to make up some new numbers. :lol:
Wikipedia also says that Wikipedia is never to be considered a reliable source of information and cannot be treated as an authority on any subject whatsoever.
ChaosLord, if I pay you $60 dollars can you mail me a copy of Total Chaos in a CD with the LATEST VERSION EVER POSSIBLE and registered?
-
FYI: Wikipedia lied. But at least they had the decency to make up some new numbers. :lol:
Wikipedia also says that Wikipedia is never to be considered a reliable source of information and cannot be treated as an authority on any subject whatsoever.
According to:
http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MC68060
"The MC68EC060 offers superscalar integer performance of over 110 MIPS at 75 MHz".
In Motorola tests the secondary operand execution pipeline was used in 50% to 60% of instruction pairs.
Branch prediction isn't free when it takes the branch. It doesn't have a horrible penalty for flushing the pipeline when it guesses right, but it still counts as an instruction. Motorola claim over 90% success rate.
You can't get over 160mips at 80mhz and to even achieve that your code would have to fit into the 8k of cache, not do any moves from or to memory, it would have to perfectly predict every branch & your code would have to be very specialised to utilise both execution units on every instruction.
-
FYI: Wikipedia lied. But at least they had the decency to make up some new numbers. :lol:
Wikipedia also says that Wikipedia is never to be considered a reliable source of information and cannot be treated as an authority on any subject whatsoever.
wikipedia SAYS:
Performance ~88 Mips @ 66 MHz
~110 Mips @ 75 MHz
~36 MFlops @ 66 MHz
my SysSpeed seems to be pretty close based on those wikepedia #s
I would project mine should be between 67 - 73 mips based the 66 and 75mhz numbers. 65 seems pretty close considering OS overhead which is few %
here is the math:
(88 * 50) / 66 = 66.67 mips (projected 50 mhz based on 66mhz)
(88 * 75) / 66 = 100 mips (projected 75 mhz based on 66mhz)
(110 * 50) / 75 = 73.33 mips (projected 50mhz based on 75mhz)
it seems like their 75mhz score may even be a little high
-
"The MC68EC060 offers superscalar integer performance of over 110 MIPS at 75 MHz".
Ok, that is true. Here is another true statement:
"The MC68EC060 offers superscalar integer performance of over 3 MIPS at 75 MHz".
Branch prediction isn't free when it takes the branch.
Maybe you are mixing up the 040 or something.
On the 060 a correctly predicted branch is free when it takes the branch.
Another way of saying it is:
Correctly predicted taken branches take 0 cycles to execute.
Another way of saying it is:
Branch-folding.
Another way of saying it is:
Awesome!
You can't get over 160mips at 80mhz
Yes you can get 240 MIPS at 80Mhz. It doesn't require black magic or sacrificing virgins or carving pumpkins or anything.
and to even achieve that your code would have to fit into the 8k of cache,
That is not hard at all. 8K is a huge amount of code for a single loop. This isn't an Intel or PPC processor.
All Amiga MIPS testers I have ever seen, even the fake ones, fit into less than 256 bytes or 0.25k.
not do any moves from or to memory,
Of course you can do moves to and/or from memory. The 060 has this magical box called "The L1 Cache" which caches all reads and writes for spectacular performance. L1 Cache is massively more powerful than L2 or L3 caches which I guess is what is confusing you.
MIPS tests do not test memory speed anyway so it does not even matter. All a MIPS test does is measure CPU speed. Use a memory tester to measure memory speed.
it would have to perfectly predict every branch
That is not hard to do in a timing test loop.
I have looked at the code for various timing tests on the Amiga that were written long before 060 existed and all their branches end up as correctly predicted as taken. In other words the 060 came out later and did all their branches at 0 cycles per branch.
& your code would have to be very specialised to utilise both execution units on every instruction.
All MIPS tests are "very specialised" to start out with so this statement doesn't mean a whole lot.
I mean you can write code ON PURPOSE not to dual-execute as that so-called Amiga MIPS tester proggy does.
Or you can use your brain and write code that does dual-execute.
If a MIPS-tester can't dual-execute then it isn't testing your CPU. Your 2nd core could be completely broken and you would never know, because that pretend fake MIPS tester wasn't actually testing the 2nd core.
-
The 060 has 2 integer cores so that is 100 MIPS right there.
Not all instructions are 1 cycle and not all of them can run in parallel. So yes, in theory you can get 100MIPS, but in real use you don't.
-
Of course you can do moves to and/or from memory. The 060 has this magical box called "The L1 Cache" which caches all reads and writes for spectacular performance.
Yes, if you only happen to be reading from cache, but once you get a cache miss the whole memorybus stalls for a number of cycles.
If a MIPS-tester can't dual-execute then it isn't testing your CPU. Your 2nd core could be completely broken and you would never know, because that pretend fake MIPS tester wasn't actually testing the 2nd core.
There's not two cores as such, there is the primary and the secondary pipeline. And some of the instructions can only run in the primary pipeline, and even block other instructions from executing in the secondary pipeline.