A1200 accelerators

[Karlos]

@utri007

Are you sure the 060 you are comparing it against is set up correctly? A 68060 delivers about 1.7x the integer performance of the 040 at the same clockspeed (according to freescale) for most object code. What's more, the slowest 060 used in any amiga as far as I know is 50MHz.

The only time you should see an 060 running at a comparable speed to previous 68K processors is when there is a problem, eg: caches not enabled properly, superscalar mode switched off, frequent slow emulation traps for unimplemented instructions, Execbase/VBR/other resources located in Chip RAM, etc.

Otherwise, the 68060 should outperform the 040 quite conspicuously.

[Karlos]

@LaserBack

The compatibility woes you experienced with your 060 were probably down to the fact that apollo's 68060 library is not brilliant and furthermore you don't get anything remotely like CyberPatcher with it (Oxypatcher is great if you can get it though).

It's true that the 68060 introduced lots of stuff that causes headaches for very old software but then the 68040 isn't perfect in that regard either. For games, at least, WHDLoad mitigates this.

Trust me, even running 68040 optimized code, there is absolutely no way a 680040 at 40MHz approaces the speed of a properly tuned 68060 at 50MHz. And later mask 68060's can go a fair bit higher clockspeeds than that, provided the rest of your accelerator can keep up.

As far as suitability for a desktop 1200 goes, a good quality 68060 card (preferably using a later and cooler running 68060 revision) would be a lot better than an 040 board.

However, I'd say the Blizzard 1230 is a good choice if the guy doesn't want the speed but does want best all-round compatibility.