English Amiga Board


Go Back   English Amiga Board > News

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 09 February 2016, 18:58   #781
voyager
The show must go on.
voyager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Alkmaar Nederland
Posts: 237
Send a message via MSN to voyager
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1time View Post
I do think that this card also is using a FPGA as the Vampire does. With that said. Updates to the core is a key factor for success. This is a awesome board that could give some nice features to my A500. And the price is actually not that bad compared to other boards that will give you half the feature and speed.

nope 68SEC000 @ max 50mhz
voyager is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
Old 10 February 2016, 16:06   #782
1time
Amiga Lover

1time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Stockholm / Sweden
Age: 40
Posts: 565
I tought it was a FPGA that simulates a 68000. But i could be wrong..

Last edited by 1time; 10 February 2016 at 16:15.
1time is offline  
Old 10 February 2016, 17:10   #783
demolition
Unregistered User
demolition's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Copenhagen / DK
Age: 37
Posts: 3,384
Nope genuine, but overclocked, 68000 on this one (68SEC000 is Freescale 100% compatible version which comes in versions up to 20 MHz) which is why it is not really directly comparable to the Vampire or other FPGA solutions which will not have the same compatibility.
demolition is offline  
Old 10 February 2016, 20:23   #784
1time
Amiga Lover

1time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Stockholm / Sweden
Age: 40
Posts: 565
Got it. Thanks for explaining.
1time is offline  
Old 11 February 2016, 00:58   #785
eXeler0
Registered User

eXeler0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Sweden
Age: 43
Posts: 1,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by demolition View Post
Nope genuine, but overclocked, 68000 on this one (68SEC000 is Freescale 100% compatible version which comes in versions up to 20 MHz) which is why it is not really directly comparable to the Vampire or other FPGA solutions which will not have the same compatibility.
FPGA can achieve sufficiently good compatibility, wouldn't generalize and say it can't be as good as the real thing. If you wanted to, you could do an exact replica of the 68000, including bugs
Anyway, overclocked CPU designs from the 70's aren't the future IMO.
This project sounded interesting until the Vampire showed up. I'm pretty certain that the Vampire 500 v2 will reach the market before this one does.
(And remember.. the Vampire is a 150 product...)
eXeler0 is offline  
Old 11 February 2016, 01:06   #786
Adrian Browne
Jackie Chan
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ireland
Age: 40
Posts: 652
Yeah, the vampire might have just killed this project. An a500 vampire board is imminent.
Adrian Browne is offline  
Old 11 February 2016, 01:06   #787
dJOS
Registered User

dJOS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 856
Quote:
Originally Posted by eXeler0 View Post
FPGA can achieve sufficiently good compatibility, wouldn't generalize and say it can't be as good as the real thing. If you wanted to, you could do an exact replica of the 68000, including bugs
Anyway, overclocked CPU designs from the 70's aren't the future IMO.
This project sounded interesting until the Vampire showed up. I'm pretty certain that the Vampire 500 v2 will reach the market before this one does.
(And remember.. the Vampire is a €150 product...)
FPGA is to CPU's what EPROMS are to ROM's - there's nothing stopping them from being better in every-way than the original and re-programmable too!
dJOS is offline  
Old 11 February 2016, 01:07   #788
dJOS
Registered User

dJOS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 856
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian Browne View Post
Yeah, the vampire might have just killed this project. An a500 vampire board is imminent.
I want an a1200 Vampire!!!
dJOS is offline  
Old 11 February 2016, 10:57   #789
demolition
Unregistered User
demolition's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Copenhagen / DK
Age: 37
Posts: 3,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by eXeler0 View Post
FPGA can achieve sufficiently good compatibility
It can approach 100% compatibility and if you have the original chip schematics (or high res scans of the die) it can be made 100%, but it obviously cannot be more compatible than the original. So if you require 100%, then the original is the obvious choice also since an FPGA version could probably not be clocked much higher than 50 MHz anyway.

FPGA based products are the future in retro-computing, but as I said, there is also always a market for the originals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eXeler0 View Post
Anyway, overclocked CPU designs from the 70's aren't the future IMO.
Amiga's aren't the future IMO. It's a relic from the past that we are clinging on to. The V2 is a massive upgrade but performance-wise it won't move the Amiga past year 2000.
demolition is offline  
Old 11 February 2016, 12:49   #790
britelite
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Espoo / Finland
Posts: 271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian Browne View Post
Yeah, the vampire might have just killed this project. An a500 vampire board is imminent.
Fortunately, not everyone is interested in the Vampire. At least I would much rather get this board (of course depending on the price) than a possible A500 version of the Vampire.
britelite is offline  
Old 11 February 2016, 13:01   #791
eXeler0
Registered User

eXeler0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Sweden
Age: 43
Posts: 1,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by demolition View Post
It can approach 100% compatibility and if you have the original chip schematics (or high res scans of the die) it can be made 100%, but it obviously cannot be more compatible than the original. So if you require 100%, then the original is the obvious choice also since an FPGA version could probably not be clocked much higher than 50 MHz anyway.

FPGA based products are the future in retro-computing, but as I said, there is also always a market for the originals.


Amiga's aren't the future IMO. It's a relic from the past that we are clinging on to. The V2 is a massive upgrade but performance-wise it won't move the Amiga past year 2000.
Why are you quoting me on select parts ;-)
In the next sentence I clearly stated you could do an *exact replica* of the original CPU.
eXeler0 is offline  
Old 11 February 2016, 15:36   #792
grond
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 385
Quote:
Originally Posted by demolition View Post
It can approach 100% compatibility and if you have the original chip schematics (or high res scans of the die) it can be made 100%, but it obviously cannot be more compatible than the original.
Oh yes, it can. There was no 680x0 compatible with all other 680x0. The 68000 is the least compatible of them all as it cannot execute 68020+ code. The 68010 put some instructions into supervisor mode that on the 68000 were user mode instructions => incompatible. The 020 added loads of stuff (including an FPU) and an instruction cache => no more self-modifying code, incompatible. The 040 dropped some of the 020/882 instructions again and added some new => incompatible. The 060 dropped even more instructions => incompatible.

Now the vampire on the other hand has transparent caches. If you modify code, the dcache will notify the icache and the code in the icache will mark the relevant code as "dirty". Self-modifying code is no problem => more compatible than any other 020+. The vampire has ALL instructions of ALL 68000 and 68020 and thus is more compatible than 040 and 060. You don't need an 040.library or 060.library to use the vampire CPU.
grond is offline  
Old 11 February 2016, 16:04   #793
Rotzloeffel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Wolfach / Germany
Posts: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian Browne View Post
Does the Vampire board make this card somewhat irrelevant?
I am actually Betatesting the Zeuss68k, but I have no idea of the Funktions of the vampire..... Zeuss for example can do a lot of additional things

you can store several different kickroms in the card
An ActionReplay MKIII is included
you can configure your RAM-Settings for any need
you can save several Profiles in the Card
You have a very fast IDE-Port for an CF-Card for example
You have a Clock-Port
You can set the speed as fast as you want or need
You can change the speed on-the-fly

So I think, you can not compare the Zeuss with the Vampire one by one these are different concepts...
Rotzloeffel is offline  
Old 11 February 2016, 16:32   #794
demolition
Unregistered User
demolition's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Copenhagen / DK
Age: 37
Posts: 3,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by grond View Post
There was no 680x0 compatible with all other 680x0. The 68000 is the least compatible of them all as it cannot execute 68020+ code.
When talking about compatibility, of course it should be specified what it is relative to. What I meant was compatibility with plain 68000 code like most games. Of course 020, 030 etc. has their own compatibility issues like self-modifying code. The Apollo core could be more compatible with plain 68000 code than 030 and 040, but hardly as compatible as a real, but overclocked 68000. Nothing can be more compatible than the reference.

If the reference is Amiga software as a whole where some parts are software written for 68000, other parts are 020+ code etc., then perhaps the Apollo core could be generally more compatible if it resolves some of the compatibility issues between 68k versions.

It might end up becoming a price issue whether there would still be a market for something like the Zeus68k. People who just want to play WHDLoad games does not need something as fancy as the Vampire so if they could save some money, the Zeus68k might be all they need. Also, I think the Zeus68k works with the Indivision? That could also be a deciding factor as long as something similar is not available for the Vampire.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eXeler0 View Post
Why are you quoting me on select parts ;-)
In the next sentence I clearly stated you could do an *exact replica* of the original CPU.
Yes it is possible, but I don't think it will happen since it is very tedious work to make sure something is 100% identical instead of just 99.9%. And why would you want to if you can use genuine 68000 CPUs running at 50 MHz? People with a reconfigurable FPGA CPU-core will probably rather have a 040/060 style CPU like the Apollo if it can achieve good compatibility with 000/020 code. But of course it would still be nice to have a 100% true 68000 core as well and be able to switch between the cores, either through reflashing or perhaps some other switching mechanism if the FPGA has space for both cores simultaneously.

Anyone know if the 68000 has been 100% reverse-engineered on a transistor level (and not just empirically)? I know the 6502 has, but it is also much simpler.

Last edited by demolition; 11 February 2016 at 16:58.
demolition is offline  
Old 11 February 2016, 18:20   #795
IanP
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Bristol/UK
Posts: 121
An overclocked CPU may exhibit unexpected behaviour if clocked too fast. Overclocking can leading to timing issues or increase the heat generated by the CPU which can lead to instability. So an overclocked CPU may be more code compatible but is not necessarily as system compatible as another CPU of a different type in the same family. I'm talking in general here and not specifically about the Zeus68k.
IanP is offline  
Old 11 February 2016, 20:17   #796
eXeler0
Registered User

eXeler0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Sweden
Age: 43
Posts: 1,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by britelite View Post
Fortunately, not everyone is interested in the Vampire. At least I would much rather get this board (of course depending on the price) than a possible A500 version of the Vampire.
Well, that's fine and all but considering there's already Kipper's FastMem board with CF card for a very good price at the low end of expansions and the Vampire at the high end, you have to admit that what's left in between, is a small niche market at best.
(I have a Blizzard Turbo Mem board with 14MHz CPU and 2MB RAM on one of my 500s and that's fine for most old games etc.. lack of IDE is handled by an GoTek drive...)

That being said, I actually wouldn't mind the Zeus in one of the other 500s if it was priced right. somehow, I don't think it will...
eXeler0 is offline  
Old 12 February 2016, 01:25   #797
Mohican
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Budapest / Hungary
Age: 43
Posts: 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rotzloeffel View Post
So I think, you can not compare the Zeuss with the Vampire one by one these are different concepts...
Absolutely agree with it. I'll buy both Two pearls for different use and feeling.
Mohican is offline  
Old 12 February 2016, 02:32   #798
deladrevoc
Not enough time

deladrevoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: England
Posts: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by britelite View Post
Fortunately, not everyone is interested in the Vampire. At least I would much rather get this board (of course depending on the price) than a possible A500 version of the Vampire.
+1

This card is being developed with much thought and care. I'm interested in the Vampire too, but the concept of the Zeus strikes the balance between progress and heritage

Glad to see this thread alive again!
deladrevoc is offline  
Old 12 February 2016, 11:34   #799
eXeler0
Registered User

eXeler0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Sweden
Age: 43
Posts: 1,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by deladrevoc View Post
+1

This card is being developed with much thought and care. I'm interested in the Vampire too, but the concept of the Zeus strikes the balance between progress and heritage

Glad to see this thread alive again!
I agree...its well thought out.... But how many will *actually* buy it if it's priced at say 250? (At that price you can get an expanded A1200, although I get it that the target audience might not want a 1200)..
What's the sweet-spot? 100 150? 200?
eXeler0 is offline  
Old 17 February 2016, 02:42   #800
deladrevoc
Not enough time

deladrevoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: England
Posts: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by eXeler0 View Post
I agree...its well thought out.... But how many will *actually* buy it if it's priced at say 250? (At that price you can get an expanded A1200, although I get it that the target audience might not want a 1200)..
What's the sweet-spot? 100 150? 200?
I suspect pricing may well go beyond a widely assumed/anticipated sweet spot. I went down the A1200 / 030 / CF route to own the all rounder (I'd recommend this to everyone too). I bought another A500 because it was my original machine, the one I regretted selling when I left home, the one that plays all the games I cherish. I see the Zeus as all the things I wanted back in the day as upgrades rolled into one.

I for one won't care if it's perceived as expensive, as long as it's compatible, reliable and awesome. I still want one
deladrevoc is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
was there ever a PowerPC accelerator for A500 1000 2000? boing_1000 request.Other 6 04 April 2014 08:12
WTB A500 accelerator or Microbotics: VXL RAM 32 lurch MarketPlace 0 14 June 2012 11:43
Internal IDE for A500(and possibly 1000/2000) coze Hardware mods 50 18 August 2010 11:20
Possible group buy: SOJ -> DIP 20 adapter PCBs for old accelerator RAM / A500 hacking Secret Vampire support.Hardware 5 21 February 2010 16:55
A1200 internal ram vs accelerator ram Foster support.Hardware 3 24 March 2008 15:43

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:58.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Page generated in 0.28295 seconds with 12 queries