Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Hardware Issues and discussion => Topic started by: Oldsmobile_Mike on December 24, 2012, 05:29:38 AM
-
Looking for budget upgrades for my A500. Those 68010's from China & Hong Kong that show up on ebay all the time... $5 bucks for a 5% speed increase, seems worth it to me, right? And it would give me an excuse to open the thing up and clean it, LOL.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/MOTOROLA-MC68010P10-CDIP-64-Microcontroller-Microprocessor-/261044738389?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3cc77a9955
This would work on an Amiga, right? Or should I just save my $5 for a Starbucks latte? ;-)
-
Looking for budget upgrades for my A500. Those 68010's from China & Hong Kong that show up on ebay all the time... $5 bucks for a 5% speed increase, seems worth it to me, right?
Certain programs will run a lot more than 5% faster. Certain special programs that make good use of loop mode will run 50% to 100% faster.
There was a famous old cracktro that was massively faster on 68010 than 68000. Around double the framerate.
But remember that any old illegally coded games that use MOVE SR, instruction will crash on 68010. (Maybe this is not a problem with WHDLoad, dunno).
-
68010 - 98% of what you run will not be any faster.
Works great for WHDLoad, but only really useful as some games need it for the quit key to work. But as I've found that's only a small handful.
Playing games from disk, 9 out of 10 games work.
This isn't based on googling this is based on what I've found using one :-)
There are patches on amibay for stubborn disk based games if you really need it.
Overall, they're cheap so might as well. But if you're looking for a speed boost then you'll be let down.
I'd get a 68020 turbo card instead.
-
Actually all programs will run faster on 68010 than 68000. The question is only "Will he notice that it went faster?". Many times the answer will be no. But sometimes the answer will be yes.
Its only $5.00 so its really no big deal at all to get 5 of them and go round upgrading all the A500s and A2000s in sight. :)
If he wanted to spend money he could get one of those vxl 030 cards (or similar) then he would have a 25Mhz 68030 with 16MB fastram. It would be a lot faster than a silly 68010 and he would have the fastram to run a lot more software and games. But I assume it would cost $100.00 for something like that. He clearly does not love his miggy enough to spend $100.00 on her. So for him the 68010 seems like a nice choice.
68010 has LOOP MODE. This a 6-byte L1 instruction cache that ONLY works with a few instructions. Yes they are the most common instructions so u do get value with LOOP MODE.
68030 has a LOOP MODE that works with everything. And instead of working on only tiny 6-byte loops its works on all loops of 256 bytes or smaller. So its a big upgrade from 68010.
68030 also has a 256 byte L1 DataCache which is a giant improvement over silly 68010.
68030 also has a Barrel-shifter so all shifts are massively faster.
68030 also performs multiplications and divisions massively faster than 68010.
68030 also performs all instructions at double speed of 68010. 68010 takes 4 cycles to perform simple instructions. Those same exact instructions complete in only 2 cycles on 68030. So a 7Mhz 68030 is always 2x as fast as a 7Mhz 68010.
The slowest 68030 you can buy is 25Mhz so you get another 3x speedboost for a total of 600% speed improvement over 68010.
-
Have a 14Mhz 68030 currently in my A500 ;-)
Anyway even with 512kb 32bit fast RAM the 500 speeds up no end.
-
I'd get a 68020 turbo card instead.
Hen's teeth, sir, hen's teeth! ;-)
It took me 9 years to find this A500, hopefully it'll be fewer than 9 more that I'll be able to find a better processor for it ($100 for a 68030? Dreaming!), so for now the '010 will give me something to play around with, at least! ;-) Thanks!
-
($100 for a 68030? Dreaming!)
There are thousands of them out there. Its just that they are laying in ppl's closets and ppl don't realize there are ppl like you that want to buy them. If u could get lucky u could get one for free from someone who is going to throw it in the trash.
-
Hen's teeth, sir, hen's teeth! ;-)
It took me 9 years to find this A500, hopefully it'll be fewer than 9 more that I'll be able to find a better processor for it ($100 for a 68030? Dreaming!), so for now the '010 will give me something to play around with, at least! ;-) Thanks!
Agreed really hard to find, and when you do come across one people what a fortune. Struggled for a couple of years trying to find something. Even on amibay.
Managed to get a damaged card and then get it repaired by Amigakit so was under $80 NZD all up.
But even then it can be flakey, being really old hardware. So was going to go the aca 500 route but wasn't released when it was meant to be. Was going to be my xmas present.
So bought a 1200 and an ACA card and haven't looked back. Well until I broke it, but hopefully amigakit will be able to help out again.
this might be of interest
http://www.ebay.de/itm/Hurricane-500-68020-68000-Commodore-Amiga-2000-500-CPU-Turbo-accelerator-/200868945482?pt=Klassische_Computer&hash=item2ec4b8de4a
-
This also looks interesting :-)
http://www.ebay.de/itm/Amiga-500-Turbokarte-mit-7-14-MHz-und-echtem-Motorola-68000-/150968228944?pt=Klassische_Computer&hash=item2326685c50
Theres a hack on amibay that does the samething
As a side note I have a VXL*30 but no RAM module for it so it might as well be a 68000. Not really selling anything until next year though, xmas/new years to contend with first.
-
@ChaosLord, What about the differences between 68010 and 68020 ?
-
Google is your friend..
Improvements over 68010
The 68020 added many improvements to the 68010 including a 32-bit arithmetic logic unit (ALU), external data bus and address bus, and new instructions and addressing modes. The 68020 (and 68030) had a proper three-stage pipeline. Though 68010 had a "loop mode", which sped loops through what was effectively a tiny instruction cache, it had only two memory location and was thus little used. The 68020 replaced this with a proper instruction cache of 256 bytes, the first 68k series processor to feature true onboard cache memory.
The previous 68000 and 68010 processors could only access word (16 bit) and longword (32 bit) data if it were word-aligned (located at an address that is evenly divisible by 2). The 68020 had no alignment restrictions on data access. However, unaligned longword accesses were often much slower than aligned accesses.
-
Beware of one thing:
although most things run fine with an 010, one thing that doesn't is the Rob Northern copy protection scheme. Hence forget about running games like Populous unless they're cracked.
-
@ChaosLord, What about the differences between 68010 and 68020 ?
68020 is exactly the same as 68030 with its datacache chopped off.
Without any datacache the speed of the processor gets crippled.
Its better to get a proper 68030.
Only reason to get an 020 is if it was free, or $5.00
-
Beware of one thing:
although most things run fine with an 010, one thing that doesn't is the Rob Northern copy protection scheme. Hence forget about running games like Populous unless they're cracked.
Thanks! For $5 I figured it was worth a shot, now to wait for the loooong shipping before it gets here. Do you think this type of game would work if I had a hard drive and could run it through WHDLoad (with the 68010)?
Regarding the "Hurricane" accelerator posted about above, I don't read German but the best I could gather it looks like it requires a RAM daughterboard, same as the VXL. What is it with people selling these accelerators without their RAM boards? Argh! Is there ever going to be something like an ACA500 produced? I see a few mentions of it, but can't find any specific details with my google-fu. ;-)
-
WHDload removes the copy protection so it will work fine that way. You just can't boot the disk
-
Is there ever going to be something like an ACA500 produced?
I'm waiting for the Zeus68k to be on the market. See http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=65047
Then I'm buying,
Robert Bernardo
Fresno Commodore User Group
http://videocam.net.au/fcug
-
68020 is exactly the same as 68030 with its datacache chopped off.
That's not exactly the case. The 68030 can be clocked higher. Probably the highest clocked 68020 accelerator you'll find is a 28 Mhz one.
Without any datacache the speed of the processor gets crippled.
Of course, but not that much.
Its better to get a proper 68030.
A 68020 based accelerator is perfectly fine, because you'll still see a great performance enhancement, simply because the instructions run faster from the instruction cache, and the higher clock speed.
The 68020 could be a nice and cheap alternative to the 68030.
-
Of course, but not that much.
move.l (A0),D0 ; Speed zooms on 030 but 020 has no datacache so it has to sit around all day waiting for the RAM to cough up the data.
Those sorts of instructions happen all the time.
A 68020 based accelerator is perfectly fine, because you'll still see a great performance enhancement, simply because the instructions run faster from the instruction cache, and the higher clock speed.
The 68020 could be a nice and cheap alternative to the 68030.
A 68020 is a 68030 that is missing its tiny 256 byte datacache. So there is no logical reason for it to be cheaper. It costs the same amount of money to make an 020 as an 030 for decades.
But if someone wants to sell him an old used cheap one for $5.00 with onboard ram then sure its a good deal then. :) I would even go as high as $7.00 or $8.00 possibly.
-
move.l (A0),D0 ; Speed zooms on 030 but 020 has no datacache so it has to sit around all day waiting for the RAM to cough up the data.
Those sorts of instructions happen all the time.
Only when the data has already been cached though, otherwise it's just as slow. It's only got 256 bytes of data cache & most software will have a larger working set than that.
There is no doubt that a 68030 is better than a 68020, but in an a500 it might be a bit of a waste. I had a 28mhz 68000 accelerator for the a500 and that was pretty good.
-
For 3D gaming the 030 is better than 020. For example the framerate in Stunt Car Racer is better. Amiga has hundreds of 3D games that benefit from every ounce of faster CPU power.
256 bytes datacache is tiny, puny and pathetic but its still infinity times better than 0 bytes datacache on 000, 010, 020.
Of course the copyback datacache on 040 and 060 is massively better than the primitive write-thru cache on 030 but the OP would have to spend actual $$$ to get one of those.
-
A 68020 is a 68030 that is missing its tiny 256 byte datacache. So there is no logical reason for it to be cheaper. It costs the same amount of money to make an 020 as an 030 for decades.
You're forgetting that '030s can be clocked twice as high as '020s ;)
But if someone wants to sell him an old used cheap one for $5.00 with onboard ram then sure its a good deal then. :) I would even go as high as $7.00 or $8.00 possibly.
You know that's not going to happen. A 28 Mhz '020 accelerator is worth MUCH more than that, and is actually a fine accelerator.
Only when the data has already been cached though, otherwise it's just as slow. It's only got 256 bytes of data cache & most software will have a larger working set than that.
Indeed.
For 3D gaming the 030 is better than 020. For example the framerate in Stunt Car Racer is better. Amiga has hundreds of 3D games that benefit from every ounce of faster CPU power.
Undoubtedly, but I don't think the frame rate is much higher on an '030 that's clocked the same. Seeing how '020 accelerators used to be cheaper than '030s, they're still not bad.
256 bytes datacache is tiny, puny and pathetic but its still infinity times better than 0 bytes datacache on 000, 010, 020.
It's indeed way too small. Too small to be of much use in many situations, and lack of such a small data cache isn't infinitely worse than having one. It would be different if it was, say, 4K.
-
Isn't 030 also a process shrink ? So it's able to clock much higher. Maybe also cooler and uses less power ?
-
The 030 isn't the same as the 020, though they are, from a user mode, more or less equivalent. Along with the datacache, the full 68030 also has an MMU on the die, which no 68020 has.
-
The 030 isn't the same as the 020, though they are, from a user mode, more or less equivalent. Along with the datacache, the full 68030 also has an MMU on the die, which no 68020 has.
Good point. I was thinking from a "writing code perspective".
The MMU is good for debugging, filing bug reports and running emulators like those awesome Mac emulators.
Its a shame that Motorola went to all that trouble to make us an MMU and then so many ppl refuse to buy it / use it.
-
Don't forget the primary use of an MMU - to allow virtual to physical mapping of memory and all it implies.
-
If Amiga had made use of an MMU then we could have somewhat less risk of bad things happening when running software.
Otoh, virtual memory tend to increase the number of clock cycles per instructions asfair?
-
If Amiga had made use of an MMU
Amiga does make use of MMU.
then we could have somewhat less risk of bad things happening when running software.
We have that when you run MuGardianAngel.
-
Along with the datacache, the full 68030 also has an MMU on the die, which no 68020 has.
No, but it's 68851 compatible. So a 68020 + 68851 is equivalent. The 68030 works out quicker when using an MMU though because of that. The 68030 also supports a faster bus than the 68020 and it can be clocked faster.
All these variables make the 68020 vs 68030 comparison much more complicated than saying the 68030 is better than a 68020.
The quickest 68030 board could make a huge difference over the quickest 68020 board. But at what cost? A bad 68030 design compared to a good 68020 design might make it hard to justify spending more on a 68030. So unless you have two boards in front of you and can quantify the difference in performance then it's a pointless discussion.
Personal circumstances also play a part. Will you use the MMU & will the software you want to run benefit from the data cache.
-
All software benefits from datacache.
-
All software benefits from datacache.
Not all software. For some, it's an absolute poison ;)
-
All these variables make the 68020 vs 68030 comparison much more complicated than saying the 68030 is better than a 68020.
That was sort of my point, really. It's not a trivial comparison when you are judging from a price/performance ratio. A full 030 is clearly faster than a 68020 + external MMU, but if you don't need the latter, then clock for clock, the 030 isn't much faster except in those cases where the current working set can be effectively cached. That's tricky to gauge, because the 68030's data cache is minuscule.
Personal circumstances also play a part. Will you use the MMU & will the software you want to run benefit from the data cache.
To put everything in perspective, if you are going from a vanilla 7MHz 68000 to, for example, a 14MHz 020 with Fast RAM, the difference is going to be readily noticeable and only gets better as you scale up the clock.
Of course, if you can find one that works and can afford the likely stratospheric price, absolutely nothing will trump the Progressive Perhipherals PP040-500/33MHz for raw A500 acceleration. Shame the RAM can't be expanded, but you can't have everything ;)