Blizzard PPC604e upgrade discussion

[guest7146]

Since the last thread on this was polluted with rubbish and eventually shut down before we could finish talking about it, I thought I'd continue here.  Given that the main culprit for the "rubbish" seems to have been banned, I guess there's no risk of a repeat problem here...

So anyway...

I had a look at the datasheets for the 603e and the 604e to see if there was any truth behind the idea that they use different size busses.

It turns out that there is some truth to it - the 603e used on the BPPC is set for a 32-bit data bus while the 604e has a 64-bit data bus.  As it happens, the 603e can utilise a 64-bit data bus as well, which makes it compatible with the 604e in that respect, but on the 603e it's selectable (32-bit or 64-bit) and on the 604e it is not (64-bit only).  So the problem is not so much with the processors themselves, as with the design of the BPPC.  If the BPPC had been designed to use a 64-bit data bus then the problem would likely not exist.

I don't think it would be possible to complete a modification that would allow the 604e to work on the BPPC, unfortunately.  We could design a new memory controller to go on there, but the PCB tracking will be set up for a 32-bit wide data bus so without a complete redesign of the BPPC board itself, my guess is we're stuck with the data bus we've got.  And a redesign of the BPPC is just not going to happen!

The only remaining option I can think of is to design a modification that would accept the 64-bit data bus as input, and then present it to the BPPC board as a 32-bit word.  The controller would have to wait for the first 32-bit half to be processed, and then present the second half.  Would this work? Hmmmm....  I don't know! It certainly wouldn't be a trivial thing to design.  So, I think the 604e upgrade is dead in the water unfortunately

Apple Hammer

[the_leander]

Are there any pin compatible members of the PPC family that offer greater speed then the ones found on the blizzard? Or even simply ones that don't require honking great heatsinks on (comparatively)?

[guest7146]

I'm not sure about that yet.  I have read that Freescale actually continued development of the 603e core and used it to develop a processor called the  PowerQUICC II Pro.  They called the core an e300, which was an enhanced version of the 603e.  Speeds were up to 667MHz!!!

Is it compatible??

Don't know yet.  But I suspect not.

Apple Hammer

[LoadWB]

That is a pretty neat thought.  If the BPPC had be designed to use the 64-bit bus of the 603, we could have had 64-bit Amigas at the time.

[guest7146]

Ummmm.... yeah sort of.  It depends what you call a "64-bit" machine.  A true 64-bit machine would utilize a 64-bit instruction set, which the 603e doesn't have.  There was a PowerPC620 though and that had a 64-bit instruction set!

Of course, the Cyberstorms had 604's didn't they? So they must be using a 64-bit data bus.

Apple Hammer

[Karlos]

That is a pretty neat thought.  If the BPPC had be designed to use the 64-bit bus of the 603, we could have had 64-bit Amigas at the time.

Well, that's not what is meant by a 64-bit architecture. A 64-bit machine is generally understood to have 64-bit registers, particularly for address calculation.

What we would have had is faster memory access. Although, I think L2 cache would have made more of a difference than widening the bus.

[Akiko]

What I'd really like to see is a CyberstormPPC running at 350MHz or faster

[amigadave]

Since the last thread on this was polluted with rubbish and eventually shut down before we could finish talking about it, I thought I'd continue here.  Given that the main culprit for the "rubbish" seems to have been banned, I guess there's no risk of a repeat problem here...

Until they let him return.  He has already been banned from here at least once before for the same childish behavior and foul language.

I don't think it would be possible to complete a modification that would allow the 604e to work on the BPPC, unfortunately.  We could design a new memory controller to go on there, but the PCB tracking will be set up for a 32-bit wide data bus so without a complete redesign of the BPPC board itself, my guess is we're stuck with the data bus we've got.  And a redesign of the BPPC is just not going to happen!

The only remaining option I can think of is to design a modification that would accept the 64-bit data bus as input, and then present it to the BPPC board as a 32-bit word.  The controller would have to wait for the first 32-bit half to be processed, and then present the second half.  Would this work? Hmmmm....  I don't know! It certainly wouldn't be a trivial thing to design.  So, I think the 604e upgrade is dead in the water unfortunately

Apple Hammer

I don't own a Blizzard PPC card, but I do own two Cyberstorm PPC accelerator cards for A3000-A4000 and would like to upgrade one or both of them with new, faster 604e PPC chips to run at 350mhz or faster.  At that speed they should be close to the performance of a SAM440, or EFIKA.

If the Cyberstorm PPC cards could also be modified to accept more than 128mb of RAM, like 256mb, or 512mb, it would breath new life into those old Classic Amiga computers.

What was the fastest speed the 604e was released at without overclocking it?  Mine are both 233mhz PPC's which was the fastest available from Phase5.


Edit:  @Akiko,   great minds think alike (and sometimes type at the same time) :lol:

[omnicron10]

The fast slot can not address more than 128 megs of ram.  That is why there is a 128mb limit on the A3000/4000 machines.  Not sure if any type of software/hardware mods would eliminate that since I dont know the acutal reason for the limitation.  Amikit will have that new Z3 ram board for sale soon.  

Also it seem that Amiga OS classic can't deal with more than 512 megs of ram in any senario.  Again, not sure if that is a hardware limitation as well, could be a Z3 bus issue as well.

I have a Cyberstorm MK3 that was a PPC card that was repaired and made a 060 card only.   I wonder why the PPC side dies?  Can they ever be made PPC again?

[rkauer]

128Mb limitation: not enough address lines to decode more than 128Mb (or 4 x 32Mb).

 Using a system like the Blizzard PPC (which accept 2x 128Mb SIMM sticks) will ease the things a lot. Then you can use four 128Mb SIMM sticks on the CyberStorm, but the firmware needs revision and some solder to the SIMM holders. Two more address lines and the (now needed) multiplexer to resolve the addresses.

[omnicron10]

For multiplexing, would a line from the Amiga MB to the fast slot card have to be added?

[Tension]

Just noticed the other thread has been deleted.

What happened? Who got banned and why?

Never a dull moment on here

[tasmanian guy]

Just noticed the other thread has been deleted.
 
What happened? Who got banned and why?
 
Never a dull moment on here

Let us just say he was posting in a thread where a person was asking for help, and instead of providing his knowledge he didn't want to share it, and then it all got a bit heated from there and headed downhill fast.
 
I am sure he'll be back but hopefully as a much nicer member of the amiga community where the idea of the forums is to help each other out, talk about ideas with the Amiga, our past and future.
 
We want newcomers to be welcomed in the community and show what makes the Amiga still alive and special today.  I certainly thank everyone here for their help with what they've helpd me with my Amiga 1200 rack computer.

[stefcep2]

Let us just say he was posting in a thread where a person was asking for help, and instead of providing his knowledge he didn't want to share it,

I'd be disappointed if that was given ANY weight in why he got banned.  Is no different to ex-Amiga developers refusing to help the community be releasing source-code to their commercially-dead software eg p96, Ibrowse, Miami.

[tasmanian guy]

I'd be disappointed if that was given ANY weight in why he got banned. Is no different to ex-Amiga developers refusing to help the community be releasing source-code to their commercially-dead software eg p96, Ibrowse, Miami.

I think it was more than that, you selectively quoted and did not quote "it then got pretty heated and went down hill fast", so please don't just quote a part of what I typed and try to use that as an excuse for the poor behavour that followed in that thread, it was inexcusable to be honest.  Anyway let's move forward and talk on topic.
 
My personal opinion is I think our energy and money be spent on the clones for speed, reliability and new hardware.