Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: ElPolloDiabl on November 11, 2014, 01:31:44 AM
-
Replacement Parts.
An FPGA based add-on that replaces most of the legacy chips.
More USB and USB based add-ons
More Zorro or CPU slot based add-ons
Tower upgrades.
None.
-
Accelerator card, need more power!
-
I'd love to see a modern '040 or '060-based A2000 accelerator, with SCSI+IDE and 128MB of RAM. I won't hold my breath. ;)
-
Replacement parts some chips are very difficult to source especially Amber and LSI1024-60LJ.
-
Myself, I'd be most interested in:
Accelerators, especially for A4000, CDTV, and A2000
CDTV upgrades (especially RAM, PROM upgrade, usb)
-
I'd buy an FGPA accelerator but it would have to be faster and have more memory than my Blizzy 1260 :)
An IdeFix Express Mrk2 with SATA might be tempting if Jens every finishes it!
Not really interested in much else, and I don't think USB is really that useful on an A1200.
Sound cards are cool but again, not quite so useful on an A1200 (due to clock-port bandwidth and lack of space).
If I had an A3000 then I'd be interested in CPU/HD/GFX/SFX/USB upgrades :)
-
Mixing Zorro and CPU slot in one vote is a mistake IMHO.
I'm not really interested in Zorro, but a 4000/3000 060 (or faster) card with RAM and storage (fast DMA IDE or even better SATA) would be a quick sale.
Run PCI directly from it through a cable to replace the Mediator Zorro/PCI bridge card and I'd definitely be buying at least one. That wouldn't be limited to ZorroIII speeds and could finally do DMA properly.
Hell, I'd be up for a decked out A2000 060 card before I'd buy more Zorro. That might make my stack of A2000s useful again.
Going lower than a severely overclocked 040 would be of very limited use in the big boxes though. I'll supply my own 060 if I needed to.
I don't know why I posted in a wish list thread, but there it is. lol
-
I thought because of the scarcity of 68k chips there wouldn't be any point having an accelerator option.
Someone should do a diy version.
-
The top 4 on the list really. But I could only choose one item. :(
Putting a classic in a tower is so 2000 now.
-
Not sure...
..if I need anything for my classic...
-
Mixing Zorro and CPU slot in one vote is a mistake IMHO.
I'm not really interested in Zorro, but a 4000/3000 060 (or faster) card with RAM and storage (fast DMA IDE or even better SATA) would be a quick sale.
Run PCI directly from it through a cable to replace the Mediator Zorro/PCI bridge card and I'd definitely be buying at least one. That wouldn't be limited to ZorroIII speeds and could finally do DMA properly.
This sounds real good. Add a fast bus with fast memory and I'll buy 2!
-
I would like an FPGA based accelerator card to buy *hint* *hint*
-
FPGA board! What else? Most recent FPGAs can match or beat a 68k anyway so who needs an accelerator board separately?
-
A new accelerator for A1200 (and even A4000) that features a socket for 060 (or a 060), fastest possible ppc for AmigaOS4.1, RTG and SATA
-
I'd like to see some sort of super upgrade board, probably for the CPU slot. It would have one really big or maybe two smaller FPGAs. These would replace a 68060 CPU- or if better for software compatibility, implement a really fast 32bit 68K. There would also be a boatload of fastram. The FPGAs would also hold a RTG display, 16bit sound, ethernet, and IDE or SATA interface. .... easy, eh? ;-)
-
I would like an FPGA based accelerator card to buy *hint* *hint*
Yes thats what we all want.
-
Am I the only one who would want '040/'060 compatibility, and not just "a really fast 68000"? Oh well, nice to dream, anyway! ;)
-
I'd buy an FGPA accelerator but it would have to be faster and have more memory than my Blizzy 1260 :)
An IdeFix Express Mrk2 with SATA might be tempting if Jens every finishes it!
Not really interested in much else, and I don't think USB is really that useful on an A1200.
Sound cards are cool but again, not quite so useful on an A1200 (due to clock-port bandwidth and lack of space).
If I had an A3000 then I'd be interested in CPU/HD/GFX/SFX/USB upgrades :)
What the A1200 needs is an FPGA accelerator that includes USB and onboard AHI compatible sound, as well as SATA. :) The A1200 case is a tight squeeze for sure, and the clockport does have a tendency to suck. Why not offload a lot of that overhead onto one modern board? Again, just wishing here.
* Edit - Also RTG!
-
Something that would turn my CD32 into a nice little WHDload system greatly appeals to me. If it had a fast FPGA 68k core and RGB + HDMI out it would be superb.
-
Id love to get my hands on a cpu expansion to my a500 and the cdtv.
it would have to be a 030 @50mhz onboard ram, 32/64mb id be happy. and of course it had to include onboard ide with CF socket. two sockets even, just for fun.
Id also like to get my hands on a modern day 2060 equivalent expansion for the a2000.
but i be happy and settle with a budda flash ide card for my a500 and one for my a2000
-
Hi really really want some kind of adapter to make the brilliant mp3 mas player fit my equally brilliant Amiga 600,best wishes Brian.:laughing:
-
Hi really really want some kind of adapter to make the brilliant mp3 mas player fit my equally brilliant Amiga 600.
http://kipper2k.com/amigaforsale/
A600 Mouse/Joystick Extender. Bottom of the page.
-
An FPGA based add-on that replaces most of the legacy chips.
I like this idea the most. I know its popular to want an accelerator but we need a solid base to put it on. The original chips are not going to last forever. Having a big engine does no good if the wheels fall off the car and you can't replace them.
That's the way I see it.
-
An FPGA based add-on that replaces most of the legacy chips.
I like this idea the most. I know its popular to want an accelerator but we need a solid base to put it on. The original chips are not going to last forever. Having a big engine does no good if the wheels fall off the car and you can't replace them.
That's the way I see it.
I don't really have trouble finding chips myself, but finding an 060 card with a storage controller for a big box Amiga takes luck and a second mortgage.
Chipsets wouldn't be a bad thing though.
-
How about a completely finished Natami, or FPGA Arcade Replay board with 68060 CPU, USB, Ethernet & more RAM daughter board, or a stand alone Apollo FPGA based Amiga clone with 400MHz+ 680x0 speed, improved AGA and Picasso96 graphics, greater than 2mb of Chip RAM, USB, Ethernet, SATA2, or 3 controller and 4gb Fast RAM?
In other words, a completely modern Amiga clone using FPGA technology that is at least 10 times faster than any real Motorola 680x0 CPU and has all of the modern ports, controllers and interfaces that we need to move forward, plus new programming tools that make it easy to create new Amiga content and applications/games. Not asking for much, just want it all! :)
-
How about a completely finished Natami, or FPGA Arcade Replay board with 68060 CPU
That's available real soon now. It is still 2010, right?
I'm kidding, TAKE MY MONEY!
-
That's available real soon now. It is still 2010, right?
Just 2 more weeks!
How about a completely finished Natami, or FPGA Arcade Replay board with 68060 CPU, USB, Ethernet & more RAM daughter board, or a stand alone Apollo FPGA based Amiga clone with 400MHz+ 680x0 speed, improved AGA and Picasso96 graphics, greater than 2mb of Chip RAM, USB, Ethernet, SATA2, or 3 controller and 4gb Fast RAM?
In other words, a completely modern Amiga clone using FPGA technology that is at least 10 times faster than any real Motorola 680x0 CPU and has all of the modern ports, controllers and interfaces that we need to move forward, plus new programming tools that make it easy to create new Amiga content and applications/games. Not asking for much, just want it all! :)
An Amiga 68k fpga CPU won't be hitting 400MHz any time soon. An fpga that fast would cost thousands by itself. An affordable Cyclone V with the Apollo/Phoenix CPU can do 100MHz or a little more and a superscalar 2 integer unit Apollo CPU should be 2x to 4x as fast at integer than the 68060. That's still pretty powerful as the 68060 is no slouch. I would expect it to be faster than some older ARM processors with clock speeds approaching 400MHz. I hear you on the Natami and would love to see a comeback of a higher spec complete Amiga motherboard.
-
That Natami went bust is a crying shame. It would've probably been the one bit of truly "new" Amiga hardware I seriously would've spent money on. :(
-
Old Amiga new insides.
-
Old Amiga new insides.
Would be kind of nice to have a fully Amiga compatible system built around a fast 68060 (FPGA or otherwise) that was completely compatible with existing expansions.
But of course at a reasonable price. If for no other reason that the systems are getting old. Then again, I've had many other x86 based stuff just randomly die on me, yet my A4000 is still running awesome (once I had the caps replaced).
slaapliedje
-
Someone is doing an Amiga 500 replacement motherboard. He is stalled though due to lack of funds.
http://www.bigbookofamigahardware.com/bboah/product.aspx?id=1971 (http://www.bigbookofamigahardware.com/bboah/product.aspx?id=1971)
-
A new accelerator for A1200 (and even A4000) that features a socket for 060 (or a 060), fastest possible ppc for AmigaOS4.1, RTG and SATA
+1
-
Someone is doing an Amiga 500 replacement motherboard. He is stalled though due to lack of funds.
http://www.bigbookofamigahardware.com/bboah/product.aspx?id=1971
Nice! I think someone did one for the A1000 as well, though it wasn't a full replacement, I think you had to get the chips yourself, if I recall correctly.
I think it'd be sweet if we could get a massive 'build your own Amiga kit.' like they used to do with the computer kits back in the 60s-70s.
It'd also be nice if someone would build a faster/better AGA. Maybe one that is tweaked to be able to fully use fast ram.
slaapliedje
-
Nice! I think someone did one for the A1000 as well, though it wasn't a full replacement, I think you had to get the chips yourself, if I recall correctly.
I think it'd be sweet if we could get a massive 'build your own Amiga kit.' like they used to do with the computer kits back in the 60s-70s.
The GBA board. Basically used A3000 chips in a drop-in A1000 form factor motherboard.
http://www.gb97816.homepage.t-online.de/a1kboard.htm
I'd love a "build your own Amiga" kit! :)
-
Just 2 more weeks!
An Amiga 68k fpga CPU won't be hitting 400MHz any time soon. An fpga that fast would cost thousands by itself. An affordable Cyclone V with the Apollo/Phoenix CPU can do 100MHz or a little more and a superscalar 2 integer unit Apollo CPU should be 2x to 4x as fast at integer than the 68060. That's still pretty powerful as the 68060 is no slouch.
With speed like that you could really make use of a nice fast bus and memory.
-
http://kipper2k.com/amigaforsale/
A600 Mouse/Joystick Extender. Bottom of the page.
Hi thanks ever so much just what I was looking for best wishes Brian
-
I would buy the Natami hehe ;)
-
An Amiga 68k fpga CPU won't be hitting 400MHz any time soon. An fpga that fast would cost thousands by itself. An affordable Cyclone V with the Apollo/Phoenix CPU can do 100MHz or a little more and a superscalar 2 integer unit Apollo CPU should be 2x to 4x as fast at integer than the 68060. That's still pretty powerful as the 68060 is no slouch. I would expect it to be faster than some older ARM processors with clock speeds approaching 400MHz. I hear you on the Natami and would love to see a comeback of a higher spec complete Amiga motherboard.
I was only quoting the screen shots showing the Apollo FPGA accelerator already running at speeds equal to a Motorola 68000 running at 400MHz or more, not that the FPGA itself was running at that speed. That is a skewed test result and probably (if it is even accurate) only shows one part of the functions of a Motorola 68000 CPU, not all functions running at a speed equal to 400MHz. Only the Apollo Team members working on the FPGA soft-core design can explain the test results they are getting. I don't know all the details, or how stable the soft-core design is at the speed they were running it at to achieve those "SysSpeed" number (or was it some other speed testing software for the Amiga they were using, besides "SysSpeed"?).
If the Apollo Team is able to include all of the most used instructions from the 68020 CPU or higher (68060?) and get it to run even just 2 times faster than a real Motorola 68060 @ 100MHz, it will be a huge accomplishment. It is my hope that someone will release an FPGA based accelerator for several Commodore Amiga models, that will not only provide a fast CPU, but also improved AGA performance, RTG using Picasso96, and a whole complement of modern interfaces/ports, like USB2 or 3, SATA & IDE, plus tons of Fast RAM and a faster bus to connect it all together.
Stand alone replacement motherboards that improve upon every aspect of the original Amigas would be the best alternative, so there would not be any bottle-necks to contend with and more of the platform could be upgraded & improved (just like the goals of the Natami board, but revised and designed for lower cost with newer components than the last Natami board designed). It seems that most users agree that the idea and goals of the Natami were very desirable and if it had ever been finished, it would likely have sold in large quantities, if the price could have been kept below $1,500 US dollars and all of the features completed and working. With advances in FPGA speed and lower costs for bigger & faster chips, it should only be a matter of time before someone is successful in producing a motherboard that provides all the features of the Natami and more.
It would not be hard to get myself to go backward, away from the current NG Amiga platforms, and toward a faster and better Amiga 68k clone that could remain close to 100% backward compatible with all of the existing Amiga software. A huge increase in the performance of all parts of an Amiga 68k system should allow the creation of new software which would be capable of making web browsing on such a system just as fast and comfortable as most current mainstream OSes and platforms.
I just like the idea of pushing the original Amiga design further than anyone thought possible 10 years ago. Pushing it to the point where it becomes usable as an everyday platform again, not that it would replace the need for most of us to continue using a Windows, Mac, or Linux system for some tasks, but if it could at least do web browsing at close to modern speeds and functionality, and leave the door open for the possibility of new 68k software for word processing and image manipulation that at least half as fast and full featured as mainstream alternatives, I would use that upgraded Amiga clone for most of my computing needs. A "Super-AGA" implementation does not make much objective sense, compared to modern video card performance and features, but that doesn't stop me from wanting to see some kind of "Super-AGA" created and maintained, for many reasons.
-
I was only quoting the screen shots showing the Apollo FPGA accelerator already running at speeds equal to a Motorola 68000 running at 400MHz or more, not that the FPGA itself was running at that speed. That is a skewed test result and probably (if it is even accurate) only shows one part of the functions of a Motorola 68000 CPU, not all functions running at a speed equal to 400MHz. Only the Apollo Team members working on the FPGA soft-core design can explain the test results they are getting. I don't know all the details, or how stable the soft-core design is at the speed they were running it at to achieve those "SysSpeed" number (or was it some other speed testing software for the Amiga they were using, besides "SysSpeed"?).
If the Apollo Team is able to include all of the most used instructions from the 68020 CPU or higher (68060?) and get it to run even just 2 times faster than a real Motorola 68060 @ 100MHz, it will be a huge accomplishment. It is my hope that someone will release an FPGA based accelerator for several Commodore Amiga models, that will not only provide a fast CPU, but also improved AGA performance, RTG using Picasso96, and a whole complement of modern interfaces/ports, like USB2 or 3, SATA & IDE, plus tons of Fast RAM and a faster bus to connect it all together.
Stand alone replacement motherboards that improve upon every aspect of the original Amigas would be the best alternative, so there would not be any bottle-necks to contend with and more of the platform could be upgraded & improved (just like the goals of the Natami board, but revised and designed for lower cost with newer components than the last Natami board designed). It seems that most users agree that the idea and goals of the Natami were very desirable and if it had ever been finished, it would likely have sold in large quantities, if the price could have been kept below $1,500 US dollars and all of the features completed and working. With advances in FPGA speed and lower costs for bigger & faster chips, it should only be a matter of time before someone is successful in producing a motherboard that provides all the features of the Natami and more.
It would not be hard to get myself to go backward, away from the current NG Amiga platforms, and toward a faster and better Amiga 68k clone that could remain close to 100% backward compatible with all of the existing Amiga software. A huge increase in the performance of all parts of an Amiga 68k system should allow the creation of new software which would be capable of making web browsing on such a system just as fast and comfortable as most current mainstream OSes and platforms.
I just like the idea of pushing the original Amiga design further than anyone thought possible 10 years ago. Pushing it to the point where it becomes usable as an everyday platform again, not that it would replace the need for most of us to continue using a Windows, Mac, or Linux system for some tasks, but if it could at least do web browsing at close to modern speeds and functionality, and leave the door open for the possibility of new 68k software for word processing and image manipulation that at least half as fast and full featured as mainstream alternatives, I would use that upgraded Amiga clone for most of my computing needs. A "Super-AGA" implementation does not make much objective sense, compared to modern video card performance and features, but that doesn't stop me from wanting to see some kind of "Super-AGA" created and maintained, for many reasons.
The 400MHz figure was from a multi thousands of dollars Arria devboard. The Cyclone 5 can hit 120 MHz or so.
As for a standalone board, Thomas Hirsch is still on speaking terms with Gunnar so the Natami may yet come.
-
To be more serious, most of all I want (when it comes to 68k) an FPGA board with an AGA core and a 060 CPU!!
But, I would buy a MinMig+ with AGA or an FPGA Arcade with AGA, or maybe both ;)
-
The 400MHz figure was from a multi thousands of dollars Arria devboard. The Cyclone 5 can hit 120 MHz or so.
As for a standalone board, Thomas Hirsch is still on speaking terms with Gunnar so the Natami may yet come.
Thanks for clearing up my mistake. I did not realize that the 400MHz result was not from the board(s) the team is working on producing as accelerators for many Amiga computer models.
This changes my perception of what can be accomplished with the yet to be released accelerator boards, from being a "Game Changing" amount of performance increase, to simply a incremental performance step increase, above what is already available using old 68020, or 68030 CPU's, but not the 40MHz to 50MHz 68040 & 68060 CPU's.
How does a FPGA soft-core running at an equivalent of a 68000 @ 120MHz compare to a real 68060 CPU running at 50MHz to 100MHz (which seems to be the fastest I remember any of the real 68060 chips being over-clocked to)? I would assume that the FPGA soft-core 680x0 @ 120MHz would provide less performance than a real 68060 @ 50MHz, let alone an over-clocked 060 @ 100MHz.
Combining the fast soft-core design on a new motherboard with faster RAM & a faster local bus to all of the other components, plus the addition of on board USB, Ethernet & a SATA controller, will further increase over-all performance, but I think I will go back to dreaming of my FPGA Arcade Replay with the 68060 daughter board, as my preferred 68k Amiga clone.
With my perception of what is currently being worked on corrected, I think that more useful progress for 68k users could be made by improvements to the AGA chipset, instead of putting so much work into 680x0 soft-core designs. At least until the performance and price of FPGA chips improves significantly, to allow the soft-core designs to exceed 68060 performance at a cost of only a couple hundred dollars. Until that happens, I think that improvements to the AGA chipset performance and features (including higher resolutions and color depth choices, as well as the ability to access greater than 2mb of Chip RAM), by using FPGA chips, would be a better use of the talented FPGA programmers in our community. Just my personal opinion, as the FPGA programmers will continue to work on what ever THEY think is most important.
FPGA accelerators will be nice, specially if they also include features like USB and/or Ethernet and additional RAM with faster bus speeds, but if they provide less performance than existing 68040 & 68060 accelerators, the new accelerators will be less impressive than I had first hoped. Users who already have an 060 accelerator for their Commodore Amiga computers, probably also have a Deneb for USB and an Ethernet Zorro card, plus additional Fast RAM, so they will not replace a faster accelerator for a slower one. The people who will want an Apollo FPGA accelerator are A500, CDTV, A600, (A1000 if it will fit) and some A2000 owners. CD32 owners are desperate for a new accelerator design, but I don't know if the Apollo team will be able to shrink their design down enough to fit inside of the CD32, or if they can find the right connectors to make it work in a CD32.
Shame on you Gunnar for fooling me with that 400MHz test result and getting me all hyped up for something we won't see available for sale to most Amiga users for another 2 to 5 years (specifically an FPGA accelerator that can provide 400MHz performance).
-
I'd love to see a modern '040 or '060-based A2000 accelerator, with SCSI+IDE and 128MB of RAM. I won't hold my breath. ;)
Never going to happen unless its FPGA because those cpus are cost prohibitive.
-
I think that improvements to the AGA chipset performance and features (including higher resolutions and color depth choices, as well as the ability to access greater than 2mb of Chip RAM), by using FPGA chips
Out of curiosity, how would this work? I know this is basically how the IndivisionECS works, by replacing Denise with an FPGA (and from what I understand, the ECS model is actually more advanced than the IndivisionAGA, since the ECS can operate without the Denise chip entirely)... but since most AGA chips are SMD, are you proposing something like a "super IndivisionAGA", that would graft onto the top of the AGA chips, hijack their signals, and enhance them? Or something entirely different, that might fit in the video slot of big box Amiga's? Just trying to wrap my brain around how this might work. ;)
-
Never going to happen unless its FPGA because those cpus are cost prohibitive.
Yeah, yeah. Thanks for shattering my dreams. :roflmao:
-
Out of curiosity, how would this work? I know this is basically how the IndivisionECS works, by replacing Denise with an FPGA (and from what I understand, the ECS model is actually more advanced than the IndivisionAGA, since the ECS can operate without the Denise chip entirely)... but since most AGA chips are SMD, are you proposing something like a "super IndivisionAGA", that would graft onto the top of the AGA chips, hijack their signals, and enhance them? Or something entirely different, that might fit in the video slot of big box Amiga's? Just trying to wrap my brain around how this might work. ;)
Yes, I think that Jens has learned enough about how to replace signals from the original Amiga Custom chipset and several programmers have toyed with improvements to the AGA video output (either in working demonstrations, or in theory), to make such a device possible for all Amiga models, as well as new stand alone FPGA systems. Ideally, it would be developed for all models, with some being clip-on style, and others could be designed for the big box video slot.
-
Thanks for clearing up my mistake. I did not realize that the 400MHz result was not from the board(s) the team is working on producing as accelerators for many Amiga computer models.
This changes my perception of what can be accomplished with the yet to be released accelerator boards, from being a "Game Changing" amount of performance increase, to simply a incremental performance step increase, above what is already available using old 68020, or 68030 CPU's, but not the 40MHz to 50MHz 68040 & 68060 CPU's.
How does a FPGA soft-core running at an equivalent of a 68000 @ 120MHz compare to a real 68060 CPU running at 50MHz to 100MHz (which seems to be the fastest I remember any of the real 68060 chips being over-clocked to)? I would assume that the FPGA soft-core 680x0 @ 120MHz would provide less performance than a real 68060 @ 50MHz, let alone an over-clocked 060 @ 100MHz.
Combining the fast soft-core design on a new motherboard with faster RAM & a faster local bus to all of the other components, plus the addition of on board USB, Ethernet & a SATA controller, will further increase over-all performance, but I think I will go back to dreaming of my FPGA Arcade Replay with the 68060 daughter board, as my preferred 68k Amiga clone.
With my perception of what is currently being worked on corrected, I think that more useful progress for 68k users could be made by improvements to the AGA chipset, instead of putting so much work into 680x0 soft-core designs. At least until the performance and price of FPGA chips improves significantly, to allow the soft-core designs to exceed 68060 performance at a cost of only a couple hundred dollars. Until that happens, I think that improvements to the AGA chipset performance and features (including higher resolutions and color depth choices, as well as the ability to access greater than 2mb of Chip RAM), by using FPGA chips, would be a better use of the talented FPGA programmers in our community. Just my personal opinion, as the FPGA programmers will continue to work on what ever THEY think is most important.
FPGA accelerators will be nice, specially if they also include features like USB and/or Ethernet and additional RAM with faster bus speeds, but if they provide less performance than existing 68040 & 68060 accelerators, the new accelerators will be less impressive than I had first hoped. Users who already have an 060 accelerator for their Commodore Amiga computers, probably also have a Deneb for USB and an Ethernet Zorro card, plus additional Fast RAM, so they will not replace a faster accelerator for a slower one. The people who will want an Apollo FPGA accelerator are A500, CDTV, A600, (A1000 if it will fit) and some A2000 owners. CD32 owners are desperate for a new accelerator design, but I don't know if the Apollo team will be able to shrink their design down enough to fit inside of the CD32, or if they can find the right connectors to make it work in a CD32.
Shame on you Gunnar for fooling me with that 400MHz test result and getting me all hyped up for something we won't see available for sale to most Amiga users for another 2 to 5 years (specifically an FPGA accelerator that can provide 400MHz performance).
The tests on the Apollo core website are all done on the same Arria board. The efficiency of the Apollo core is very good.
A 120 MHz board will be faster than an overclock on a 68060 board by more than 20% and cost less as well.
::edit::
Also, a 400 MHz Raspberry Pi is not likely to be faster than this board except for OpenGL ES based 3D acceleration and even then, softcore add-ons are expected to come out for a budget-minded price after the initial release. The hi-def AGA++ core, for example will address all 128 Megs of board memory as Chip RAM. Can you tell me why a mere AGA chipset clone would be better?
-
would be nice if a-eon would get on board and try to push through a amiga fpga-clone so the amiga community could have also more choices and also we dont forget the classic amiga.
-
would be nice if a-eon would get on board and try to push through a amiga fpga-clone so the amiga community could have also more choices and also we dont forget the classic amiga.
Now that brings to mind a new model specific replacement Motherboard with modern features added.
Now that would be too cool!
Chris
-
The tests on the Apollo core website are all done on the same Arria board. The efficiency of the Apollo core is very good.
If you are talking about the performance benchmarks here:
http://www.apollo-core.com/index.htm?page=performance
Then the fpga is a Stratix which is significantly faster and more expensive than the Arria. Some of the Arria fpgas are borderline affordable but generally the Cyclone series gives better bang for the buck and there are sizes that are large enough for everything an Amiga would need.
All the benchmarks here:
http://www.apollo-core.com/bringup/
show results for Majsta's accelerator with a tiny Cyclone II fpga. Some of the benchmark MHz numbers given are calculated by performance (some benchmark programs are not accurate).
A 120 MHz board will be faster than an overclock on a 68060 board by more than 20% and cost less as well.
You must be referring to the new sandwich accelerator with larger fpga. Yes, Phoenix in it should be better at integer performance than a 68060. Phoenix in Majsta's accelerator is probably more equivalent in performance to a 68040 at 120-160MHz. It's going to perform better with old 68000-68040 code than the 68060 which needs optimizations to fully take advantage of superscalar execution. Phoenix is handicapped severely by the small Cyclone II but it still approaches the integer performance of a 68060@50MHz and no doubt outperforms it in some areas.
would be nice if a-eon would get on board and try to push through a amiga fpga-clone so the amiga community could have also more choices and also we dont forget the classic amiga.
If A-Eon had invested $1 million in Natami and burning an ASIC based on the Phoenix fpga CPU core, the 68k wouldn't be the slow poke anymore. I bet an ASIC could outperform a SAM 440 while being compatible with most of the old 68k software. It's interesting that the problems with SMP (exec/ables.i macros) are more likely solvable in an fpga (or Phoenix+Amiga ASIC) than with a PPC based AmigaOS. It wouldn't be too difficult to add multi-threading and/or more cores (the hardware side but the software side could be tricky) with Phoenix. A lot of Amiga users like the 68k with compatibility and won't abandon it.
-
The hi-def AGA++ core, for example will address all 128 Megs of board memory as Chip RAM. Can you tell me why a mere AGA chipset clone would be better?
Who asked for "a mere AGA chipset clone"? I brought up the topic of an improved AGA chipset clone, the so called SAGA, or Super AGA, chipset that some developers have worked on since the early days of the Natami project (perhaps before that, I don't know), because I thought that it would be more beneficial to have programmers work on completing and perfecting a new SAGA standard that would allow higher resolution and color depth software applications and games to be created for Amiga computers and clones equipped with a device which provides SAGA features. My preference to have programmers work on SAGA instead of the soft-core 68k, was based only on my misunderstanding that a soft-core 68k CPU would only be faster than a real 68060 when loaded into an FPGA that costs thousands of dollars each.
I keep getting bounced back and forth by one side or the other, when one side says that the actual performance of the (relatively cheap) FPGA based accelerator boards will provide performance slower than a real 68060, while the other side comes back with statements that the bench mark test results are from the FPGA to be used in the accelerator, not some bigger, faster, FPGA that costs thousands of dollars to purchase.
At this point in time, I don't know what is real and what is fantasy, so I guess I will just wait until an actual product is available for purchase. I had hoped that work on the design and firmware would be finished and production of the accelerator boards would have begun, so assembly and testing could begin, followed by sales to customers shortly afterwards.
-
My preference to have programmers work on SAGA instead of the soft-core 68k, was based only on my misunderstanding that a soft-core 68k CPU would only be faster than a real 68060 when loaded into an FPGA that costs thousands of dollars each.
I keep getting bounced back and forth by one side or the other, when one side says that the actual performance of the (relatively cheap) FPGA based accelerator boards will provide performance slower than a real 68060, while the other side comes back with statements that the bench mark test results are from the FPGA to be used in the accelerator, not some bigger, faster, FPGA that costs thousands of dollars to purchase.
A medium to large Cyclone V fpga that would be adequate for fpga 68k CPU+FPU+Amiga SAGA custom chips is <$50. The Phoenix sandwich accelerator mates with a standard Cyclone V fpga board that costs $50 (although the Cyclone V is small and doesn't have room for a full FPU). An Altera mid-range Arria fpga starts at about $50 and goes up in price from there. An Altera high-end Stratix fpga starts at several hundred dollars and goes up to thousands of dollars.
At this point in time, I don't know what is real and what is fantasy, so I guess I will just wait until an actual product is available for purchase. I had hoped that work on the design and firmware would be finished and production of the accelerator boards would have begun, so assembly and testing could begin, followed by sales to customers shortly afterwards.
Majsta's Amiga 600 fpga based accelerator is for sale now. Most people are still using the TG68 in it but there are people testing the Phoenix fpga CPU. I believe Majsta is planning a little larger Cyclone III fpga based Amiga 500 accelerator and the Apollo Team is working on a more universal Amiga 500, 1000, 2000, CDTV based sandwich accelerator. I don't know which of the latter accelerators will be available first or when.
-
Fpga accelerator for A1200, even if "only" matching performance of a 040/060, including faster than motherboard clock port(s). Sign me up for 2 of those:)
-
Graphics card for Zorro slot.
-
Graphics card for Zorro slot.
How about gfx card for CPU slot without the Zorro bottleneck?
-
The 400MHz figure was from a multi thousands of dollars Arria devboard. The Cyclone 5 can hit 120 MHz or so.
SAM, you talk about two different thinks.
Dave was talking about a Sysinfo Screenshot which measured the Speed as the same as a 68000@350 MHz
And this result was actually done the $90 Vampire card.
Of course the Vampire is just an entry level card.
The Phoenix card we test right now - is about twice as strong.
E.g it would score like a 700 MHz 68000.
The high end card you refer to SAM would again result in twice the score.
So getting a performance equally to an 68000 over a giga herz is really possible.
Sam, what you mean were the benchmark results where our 68K did blow the PowerPC out of the water.
These scores were actually done on a high end FPGA card.
But these are not the scores Dave is talking about.
Dave I think you were talking about Sysinfo and AIBB numbers right?
These scores were done on the low priced Vampire.
-
I
If A-Eon had invested $1 million in Natami and burning an ASIC based on the Phoenix fpga CPU core, the 68k wouldn't be the slow poke anymore. I bet an ASIC could outperform a SAM 440 while being compatible with most of the old 68k software.
You do not need an ASIC to come in SAM performance.
Aven a quite small FPGA can outrun SAM in many benchmarks.
You also not even need a million for to build an ASIC.
-
Thanks for clearing up my mistake. I did not realize that the 400MHz result was not from the board(s) the team is working on producing as accelerators for many Amiga computer models.
Guys please don't confuse Dave here.
The results you mean were from the low cost Vampire board $90.
The results form the also cheap Cyclone board are aboput twice as good.
This changes my perception of what can be accomplished with the yet to be released accelerator boards, from being a "Game Changing" amount of performance increase, to simply a incremental performance step increase, above what is already available using old 68020, or 68030 CPU's, but not the 40MHz to 50MHz 68040 & 68060 CPU's.
A $90 Vampire has about the speed of a 50-100 MHz 68060
A low priced Cyclone5 CPU upgrade we work can reach a performance
roughly compareable to a 200-300 MHz 68060 systems.
You can not easily say this in 1 number as every benchmakr is different.
How does a FPGA soft-core running at an equivalent of a 68000 @ 120MHz compare to a real 68060 CPU running at 50MHz to 100MHz (which seems to be the fastest I remember any of the real 68060 chips being over-clocked to)? I would assume that the FPGA soft-core 680x0 @ 120MHz would provide less performance than a real 68060 @ 50MHz, let alone an over-clocked 060 @ 100MHz.
The $90 Vampire outruns an 68060@50MHz in most benhmarks .
The $90 Vampire beats an 68060@100 MHz in some benchmarks.
The Cyclone 5 systems is about 2-3 times stronger.
A high priced FPGA can again be a couple times stronger.
-
The Phoenix card we test right now - is about twice as strong.
E.g it would score like a 700 MHz 68000.
.
When will we see a stand-alone unit. ?
-
When will we see a stand-alone unit. ?
Our roadmap is:
*Vampire release (600/500)
*Phoenix CPU card release (500/1000/2000)
*Phoenix CPU card releases (1200/3000/4000)
* Standalone system
-
Our roadmap is:
*Vampire release (600/500)
*Phoenix CPU card release (500/1000/2000)
*Phoenix CPU card releases (1200/3000/4000)
* Standalone system
So standalone system will be released somewhere around 2017.. ?
-
So standalone system will be released somewhere around 2017.. ?
Haha, it's a trap! Never give a specific date otherwise people will hold you to it and roast you over a flame in public forums if you miss it. Or in other words, "Two more weeks!" ;)
-
Haha, it's a trap! Never give a specific date otherwise people will hold you to it and roast you over a flame in public forums if you miss it. Or in other words, "Two more weeks!" ;)
haha but we have been waiting for something to happen since 1994!!!.
-
Am I the only one who would want '040/'060 compatibility, and not just "a really fast 68000"? Oh well, nice to dream, anyway! ;)
Hell NO! I am right there with you. This '030 I have is OK, but I would love an '060.....
-
Our roadmap is:
*Vampire release (600/500)
*Phoenix CPU card release (500/1000/2000)
*Phoenix CPU card releases (1200/3000/4000)
* Standalone system
Where does my CDTV and/or CD32 Phoenix accelerator fit into your roadmap? :laughing:
Thanks for clearing up my confusion Gunnar!
I was getting dizzy jumping on and then off and then back on, the bandwagon of supporters who want a super fast Amiga 680x0 accelerator and/or clone stand alone system. Are additional instructions from the 68020, 030, 040, & 060 being added to the 68000 Soft-Core design, so it will eventually be able to run AmigaOS3.9?
Is the Cyclone5 FPGA the chip that you are planning on using for the Phoenix accelerators? How much does the Cyclone5 cost per chip and how much more expensive will the Phoenix accelerators be than the $90 Vampire boards (or is the $90 just the cost of the FPGA on the Vampire board)?
If only the FPGA technology had been available 10 years ago at cheap prices, maybe the whole switch to PPC would never have happened (but it probably would not have changed anything actually).
It will be very interesting over the next few years, to see what software will be back ported from MorphOS and/or AmigaOS4.x to AmigaOS3.x when 68k Amiga computers suddenly have 2 to 4 times more power and speed than ever before.
-
Are additional instructions from the 68020, 030, 040, & 060 being added to the 68000 Soft-Core design, so it will eventually be able to run AmigaOS3.9?
Sure.
Running Picasso 96 and all software is the plan.
Is the Cyclone5 FPGA the chip that you are planning on using for the Phoenix accelerators?
You use the future time form?
The accelerators are there already.
Here is a picture of them:
http://www.apollo-core.com/bringup/A500v5_phoenixCPU.jpg
How much does the Cyclone5 cost per chip and how much more expensive will the Phoenix accelerators be than the $90 Vampire boards (or is the $90 just the cost of the FPGA on the Vampire board)?
The Vampire is sold for Euro 90 total.
The Phoenix card is not sold yet.
The Phoenix card will probably be sold for 250. We have to see what warrant, reseller etc will put on top of the prodcution cost.
when 68k Amiga computers suddenly have 2 to 4 times more power and speed than ever before.
I'm happy when I have the CPU power to good view AVIs on my Amiga.
The CPU power is hard to "measure" with a single number
as a CPU can have hundreds of different instructions and performance can vary in some areas.
In some areas the Phoenix-68K core already outruns Gigaherz PowerPC or Gigaherz Pentium 3 systems.
I doubt that the revival of the 68K will make a big change but its at least exciting and fun to use them.
-
1. A CPU add-on based upon a 68030 FPGA running at >200mhz. Rather than the Natami Project's approach of adding more and more features to a brand new core, simplify the project by attempting to mock-up a bog standard 68030. Run the 68030 at as high a mhz as supported by the FPGA. As newer and faster FPGAs are released, roll out new CPU expansion cards. This business model would likely be a boon for the classic Amiga community; classic Amigas would suddenly have a regular upgrade cycle again, one roughly tracking FPGA advances.
2. A new "Zorro IV" bus standard. Basically a new, high-clock FPGA buster chip. The chip is intended to reside on a new FPGA expansion card (see item 1). The physical "bus" is implemented via a cable connection to one or more "Zorro IV" cards residing in existing "Zorro II/III" slots. The "Zorro II/III" slots provide the power to the cards, the bus cable handles data transfer to the CPU, and the new "Zorro IV" busmaster chip handles high-clock busmastering. This approach would allow one to 1) add a high speed bus to existing legacy Amigas regardless of physical configuration; 2) re-use existing Zorro II/III slots; and 3) build upon the existing Zorro standard.
3. A new "Zorro IV" card standard. See item 2. The Zorro II/III card layout is reused. Details are provided to vendors on the components needed to draw power from the Zorro II/III slot, the components needed to interface with the Zorro IV cable, and the components needed to adjust the clock of the card on the fly to that of the of the "Zorro IV" cable.
4. A new "Zorro IV" retargetable graphics card. The higher "Zorro IV" bus speed would allow the use of more modern graphics chipsets.
5. A new "Zorro IV" network card. Again, the higher "Zorro IV" bus speed would allow higher network bandwidth connections.
The end of all this is to enable classic Amigas to surf the internet. A high clock CPU, high system bus speed, high resolution graphics, and high network throughput would in combination make classic systems far more usable for practical things (such as reading this site). A cable-based bus would allow old hardware to be reused whatever the physical configuration. An evolutionary reuse of technology such as the 86030, Zorro II/III sockets, retargetable graphics cards, buster, etc., would maintain legacy compatibility while truly expanding upon the Amiga's foundations.
-
The end of all this is to enable classic Amigas to surf the internet. A high clock CPU, high system bus speed, high resolution graphics, and high network throughput would in combination make classic systems far more usable for practical things (such as reading this site).
Hey now, I can read this site just fine on my A2000 (using the proxy). IMHO an updated web browser would go a long way to allow users of upgraded classic systems to browse the web. Sure, you're not going to get Flash on a classic system, but I'd pay good money even for an update to Ibrowse!
All the hardware in the world isn't going to help if there's no software to run on it, but you have some good ideas. :)
-
Hey now, I can read this site just fine on my A2000 (using the proxy). IMHO an updated web browser would go a long way to allow users of upgraded classic systems to browse the web. Sure, you're not going to get Flash on a classic system, but I'd pay good money even for an update to Ibrowse!
All the hardware in the world isn't going to help if there's no software to run on it, but you have some good ideas. :)
Or users. A lot of us Classic enthusiasts are starting to get a bit "long in the tooth". Perhaps we need some kind of "elixir of life" to keep the classic market alive?
I'd buy that... Just of my Amiga mind you.
-
I would pay more than €800 for an accelerator+rtg+sata for A1200 and 4000(t) that has the power to display 32bit 1080p and allows me to watch 1080p (or at least 720p) videos. (I can only afford one for my 4000T though :P)
I also would like to be able to play a game like Quake3 at 60fps. If it has a powerpc processor that can run OS4.1 that would be extra nice ;)
That's the only thing left I would like for my classic Amiga to make it totally future proof. I don't see it as a retro machine anyway. :)
The card doesn't need to have usb or ethernet (but maybe onboard sound) since they are satisfactory with Xsurf100 and RapidRoad.