View Single Post
Old 20 April 2010, 16:37   #25
Mathias
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexh View Post
Push home that applications will have to be recompiled, re-assembled and possibly re-written to get any speed advantage on the Coldfire platform.
Another advantage is that a ColdFire is 25,- Euros each, availaible in high quantities, got several controllers on chip (DDR, PCI, MMU, …) and that it has a future. A single 060 is $450 ordering directly at Freescale at the moment.
Well, recompiling applications will lead to full speed execution at 266MHz - thatīs true. But be sure that we are producing a computer which will be able to execute all native Atari applications at a reasonable speed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexh View Post
Push home that while high compatibility with Falcon hardware is the goal it will be a long time coming, if it is at all possible with the first generation FPGA boards.
Did you read anywhere that we promise 100% Falcon compatibility in the next weeks? No, of course it is a "long term aim". We always promised compatibility better than the Hades and usage of every clean GEM application. And of course it will not be possible for every Falcon application, especialy when they require exact timings of the 16MHz 030. But we based our design at the Falcon, and will include the DSP as sonn as it is ready etc.


Quote:
Originally Posted by alexh View Post
Honesty at this level and my attitude will change.
It will at least change when you see the first working machine

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexh View Post
Phrases like "make an Atari Falcon clone with nearly full compatibility to an original Falcon" IMO is just not realistic in a short enough timespan using today's FPGA technology at a price point that will be viable.

It is a very good goal, but should include emphasis this is a long term goal for the underlying HDL cores. That compatibility of this type will take many man years.
As said above, the Suska development is going on for years now!

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexh View Post
I say the same to you: do not make the public believe in unrealistic things.
I respect if you think it is not possible. But please use terms, that make clear that it is your opinion, not a fact. Look, for example, we had a complete boarddesign, before we showed up again in April last year. We did not start again by telling "we plan to do something" we started with "here it is". So I am not sure why you are thinking how you think.
I understand that the 68k <-> CF instruction issue is delicate, aspecially as Coldfusion and Dragon failed. Maybe you should read the Microapl page for some basic techiques http://www.microapl.co.uk/Porting/Co...technotes.html And even if the CF68KLib is not optimized (doesnīt know V4e at all, ...) Didier got good resoults 3 years ago. So please follow our development this year.
 
 
Page generated in 0.06489 seconds with 9 queries