Fastest running CyberStorm Mk III?

[delshay]

Unfortunately, there's no way to solder an m68060 directly since the circuit board isn't through-pin - the socket is surface mounted. If you read the repair link, you'll see that they recommend building up the socket because there's no way to get underneath it.

If you think soldering the chip directly is a better idea, though, why would removal of the m68060 from the socket be a reason to support that? If the chip is soldered, then you can't swap it for any reason. If you have a socket, you just have to be very careful if you do swap it... but I don't have any reason whatsoever to ever change it since it's the latest / last mask.

there are other reasons why a socket should not be used which im not going into.but why do need a socket if you have the latest mask,what would be the reason to swap a 68060. how offten do their go faulty.

from my point of veiw 060 socket should be left for TESTING purpose only.

[delshay]

i do have a improvment for the socket but i don't recommend a socket as said before.

first check that the plastic housing is not too wide,try this on a non working 68060/68040 add strip of pins socket on all of the 68060/040 pins,if all ok then try below.  

when each row of pins (with plastic housing)as you are soldering along add a small amount of glue in between each row of  the plastic casing,this will add strength to the hole socket.

the glue should be added first before soldering in the pins.

care must be taken that glue must not come into contact with the pins above and below. if glue does show it can be cleaned before it drys,but here again care must be taken as glue can go down the pin hole which can block the path for the CPU. very strong glue must be used to hold the socket together.

if glue does show but is NOT IN CONTACT with the pins it can be left as it is to dry,as it can be clean after or just leave it as it is. (sometimes it's best to leave it alone if glue shows above the socket).

very little glue must also be used in between the row of plastic housing,if too much glue is used when it comes to doing the last few rows of pins you may find it not in alignment with the pads.

SO KEEP A EYE ALSO ON ALIGNMENT WITH THE PADS AS YOU GO ALONG.
 
alignment can be done by adding two two pins at each end (in other words four pin socket inserted at each end) this will hold the single row of pin in place. after it has dryed do the same to the next row and so on until socket is complete. the glue must be completely set in-order to start the next row of pins and don't forget to solder the pins in as you go along.

NOTE: to complete the socket it may take one to two days (depending on glue used).

all above has never being tested on surface mounted PCB

with all the advised iv given in this thread im going to say it for the last time. socket is not recommened for that PCB.

***ALL MODIFICATION AT YOUR OWN RISK***

[Castellen]

i do have a improvment for the socket but i don't recommend a socket as said before.

OK, that is a good suggestion.  Had considered something similar as well, but never took it further due to the time it would take and the handling of the glue.  Probably OK if you're working on your own equipment, but if you're doing this commercially then of course time is money.  The socket replacement costs enough as it is at the moment.

Still, it's worthy of more investigation to see what's realistically possible.  Will give it a try next time I've got some dead boards coming this way.

Granted that the individual pin sockets can cause more sideways stress on PCB pads if pins are pushed sideways, though I've never had an instance of pad or track damage in all the Cyberstorms I've worked on.  Never had a customer complaint or warranty claim on the repair work either.  Except when they decide to  overclock it and it kills the programmable logic, though that's hardly the fault of my work.

And yes, if I had my way there would be no IC socket on this board, or on many other pieces of equipment.  Unfortunately going back in time to convince Phase5 otherwise is out of the question unless you have a DeLorean and a flux capacitor handy :-P

[johnklos]

Thanks, the best statement so far.  I've lost track of the number of Cyberstorm boards I've repaired, only to get an Email back a few weeks later saying that the owner has overclocked it (against my advice) and the board no longer boots.  You don't get a second chance after you've killed the programmable logic, the images to program new ones are not available, so you can kiss your hardware goodbye.

I suppose I wasn't thinking that I could damage the programmable logic - I didn't realize that it depends on the m68060 clock. If the programmable logic is a limiting factor and can be damaged from overclocking, then I will not be trying to clock this any faster - as a matter of fact, I'm going to bring it down.

The logic chips get hot, but they don't burn my fingers now that I have a cooling fan running over them. Then again, they always got ridiculously hot on the CyberStorm PPC without any overclocking, so I thought that was normal.

75 MHz is more than fast enough. Thanks!

[delshay]

im not going to give any advice on overclocking,but here is a workbench screenshot of my overclocked Blizzard PPC and i don't have any problems whatsoever (this is the second fastest Blizzard card in the world)

http://www.amiga.org/gallery/index.php?n=3039

i also own the fastest

[matthey]

I suppose I wasn't thinking that I could damage the programmable logic - I didn't realize that it depends on the m68060 clock. If the programmable logic is a limiting factor and can be damaged from overclocking, then I will not be trying to clock this any faster - as a matter of fact, I'm going to bring it down.

...

75 MHz is more than fast enough. Thanks!

The right way to do the overclocking with the CSMK3 is to change the jumper and add a 2nd oscillator. This overclocks the 68060 only. This should be safe enough as this should be the way Phase5 would have supported faster 68060's. 75MHz is very fast considering the memory speeds up too and it was already faster than most other 68060 accelerators. Plus we have ultra wide SCSI. I wouldn't trade for an Apollo 68060@90MHz with half speed memory and broken SCSI. If I want a faster 68060, I'll wait for the Natami with 68060.

[delshay]

The right way to do the overclocking with the CSMK3 is to change the jumper and add a 2nd oscillator. This overclocks the 68060 only. This should be safe enough as this should be the way Phase5 would have supported faster 68060's. 75MHz is very fast considering the memory speeds up too and it was already faster than most other 68060 accelerators. Plus we have ultra wide SCSI. I wouldn't trade for an Apollo 68060@90MHz with half speed memory and broken SCSI. If I want a faster 68060, I'll wait for the Natami with 68060.

CYBERSTORM VS BLIZZARD


PPC 604 150 MHZ OS4

Speed test for FFT + iFFT: (float)
time needed 19449ms for 413696 samples, => .241165652871131x speed
@44100Hz/stereo
------------ (5840ms at 500 MHZ)
Speed test for FFT + iFFT: (integer)
time needed 16485ms for 413696 samples, => .28452718257904x speed
@44100Hz/stereo
------------ (4950ms at 500 MHZ)
Speed test for FFT + iFFT: (integer handopmized 68K ASM)
time needed 7108ms for 413696 samples, => .659880518913269x speed
@44100Hz/stereo
------------ (2134ms at 500 MHZ)

----------------------

Blizzard PPC 321Mhz 80.333Mhz bus. OS4.0

Speed test for FFT + iFFT: (float)
time needed 17928ms for 413696 samples, => .261626005172729x speed @44100Hz/stereo
(11566ms at 500MHZ)
Speed test for FFT + iFFT: (integer)
time needed 15377ms for 413696 samples, => .30502900481224x speed @44100Hz/stereo
(9920 ms at 500MHZ)
Speed test for FFT + iFFT: (integer handoptimized 68K ASM)
time needed 12774ms for 413696 samples, => .367185741662979x speed @44100Hz/stereo
(8221 ms at 500MHZ)
-------------------------------------------------------------


***  any photo/benchmark of your apollo @90Mhz? ***

[Damion]

@matthey

Changing only the CPU oscillator is still overclocking the programmable logic, which seems to be a really bad idea on the MK-III/CSPPC cards - I've heard it from a few people as well, one guy had his clocked at a mere 66 MHz before it failed. The Cypress chips on the card are rated at a maximum of 125 MHz, so (big conjecture here) if stock they are already running at an internal clock of 100 MHz, a 75 MHz CPU/bus clock would put them at 150 MHz internal clock - obviously a huge gamble.

The Apollo is definitely a step down from the MK-III, I know I would want a Z3 SCSI card if I had one. It performs well though, memory benchmarks at 40 MHz being roughly equal to an MK-III at 50 MHz. If something goes wrong, chances are it's only the CPU and not the irreplaceable logic that's fried. It would be slower, but enabling the divider on the Cyberstorm cards would be much safer (I looked at the details but technically it's simply over my head, no idea if it's even a possibility outside of the MK-II).

Anyway, I'm starting to wonder if there's something other than just the clockrate that kills the logic when the cards are overclocked. I checked the datasheets for the chips on my TekMagic before bumping it up to 64 MHz, installed a Rev 6 CPU, put heatsinks on the FPGAs "just in case" and lots of extra cooling around the card. I have had ZERO issues whatsoever that could be traced back to the overclock. However, I have to admit Castellen has me a little spooked - I think I'm going to put it back to 50 MHz, simply enjoy it as it is and save the overclocking for the (easily replaced) PC hardware.

[delshay]

Blizzard PPC card but may apply to Cyberstorm PPC/Mk III card

**depending on settings** anything over 64Mhz can damage the card. i discovered this many years ago.

the problem has been fixed on my cards which also has a hack which allows me to have a FPU on the A1200 motherboard,without me having to remove it. so when the Blizzard PPC card is disable by holding down the 2 key the 020/FPU on the A1200 motherboard comes active

anyway cards overclocked over 64Mhz you will know if you have a problem,as you will get many lock-ups,BUT IT CAN GO WITHOUT WARNING.

one of the fault is that memory and PCI will stop working,but the 68k processor may continue to work (depending on type of card). SCSI may also stop working (i did not check this part)

so care must be taken when overclocking over 64Mhz bus.

[HammerD]

Blizzard PPC card but may apply to Cyberstorm PPC/Mk III card

**depending on settings** anything over 64Mhz can damage the card. i discovered this many years ago.

the problem has been fixed on my cards which also has a hack which allows me to have a FPU on the A1200 motherboard,without me having to remove it. so when the Blizzard PPC card is disable by holding down the 2 key the 020/FPU on the A1200 motherboard comes active

anyway cards overclocked over 64Mhz you will know if you have a problem,as you will get many lock-ups,BUT IT CAN GO WITHOUT WARNING.

one of the fault is that memory and PCI will stop working,but the 68k processor may continue to work (depending on type of card). SCSI may also stop working (i did not check this part)

so care must be taken when overclocking over 64Mhz bus.

I've had a Cyberstorm MK3 overclocked to 66.7MHz for years and it's been 100% stable.  I had it modified at National Amiga (I believe they changed the oscillator and jumper)....maybe I got lucky?  But the card is rock solid.  I believe it's a 60MHz 060 on the card, but I forget.  Heatsink gets in the way

Is there a way to tell the 060 MASK/revision in software?

[unusedunused]

if here are users with overclocked 68k cards, i like to see how fast then SDL games at 640*480* 16 bit resolution can run.

I upload a defendguin with framerate display

it work on default in window.but for fastest speed it should start from shell with the defendguin -f

this work in fullscreen

Here is the link for download, can copy to ram and run.note music should stay off

http://www.daten-transport.de/?id=nfvHR9gTPYGw

[johnklos]

I've had a Cyberstorm MK3 overclocked to 66.7MHz for years and it's been 100% stable.  I had it modified at National Amiga (I believe they changed the oscillator and jumper)....maybe I got lucky?  But the card is rock solid.  I believe it's a 60MHz 060 on the card, but I forget.  Heatsink gets in the way

Is there a way to tell the 060 MASK/revision in software?

You could boot a NetBSD kernel - it'll tell you the revision of the chip which will indicate the mask.

[johnklos]

Blizzard PPC card but may apply to Cyberstorm PPC/Mk III card

**depending on settings** anything over 64Mhz can damage the card. i discovered this many years ago.

You're being too general. I'd love to hear what you did to fix your Blizzard, but I doubt it has anything to do with the Cyberstorm, since it's obvious that 66 MHz is perfectly safe since the memory bus of the PowerPC 604e is running at 66 MHz.

[Damion]

Is there a way to tell the 060 MASK/revision in software?

Scout, WhichAmiga, and the CPU command that comes in the Phase5 archive all give the revision number.

[delshay]

so it`s back to benchmark.

[matthey]

if here are users with overclocked 68k cards, i like to see how fast then SDL games at 640*480* 16 bit resolution can run.

I upload a defendguin with framerate display

it work on default in window.but for fastest speed it should start from shell with the defendguin -f

this work in fullscreen

Here is the link for download, can copy to ram and run.note music should stay off

http://www.daten-transport.de/?id=nfvHR9gTPYGw

I got 20fps most of the time. It flashed a higher or lower fps from time to time but it wasn't displayed long enough to read it. I had AWeb & Genesis going in the background and my memory was probably pretty well fragmented. I decompressed to ram and did a lot of compiles and disassembles first. The speed seamed fast and responsive but the gfx were messed up. The foreground objects were multi-colored. The background was fine.