English Amiga Board Amiga Lore


Go Back   English Amiga Board > Main > Amiga scene

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 14 July 2017, 13:53   #221
Sinphaltimus
Registered User

Sinphaltimus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Cresco, PA, USA
Age: 47
Posts: 668
Well, back to the Original topic (Question at hand) - I agree with some who said just do what you do/want on your Amiga normally.

That's what I plan to do.

I sold off my Amiga around 1996. At that time I had memory expansions and an accelerator that I can't recall which one. It was modded in to a PC case (A500) using an A1000 hacked KB. I had a digiView and MIDI interface and the 3D shutter glasses. I made music, animation and played with some game construction sets. And yes, of course I played games. I even had it in the internet for a brief time. Can anyone say MOSAIC? At least that what I think it was called.

I've had a huge break since then and about 6 years ago picked up a 512kchip/512k exp Amiga with GVO controller. The HDD began to fail so it got packed away again.

I brought it out recently when my TI-99/4a interest returned. I've been modding and expanding TIs since a little over a year ago, even writing and compiling Basic programs and games. When I discovered the SCSI2SD adaptor I quickly purchased one up and brought my Amiga back to life. upgraded it to full ECS and did the 1MB Chip hack. Unfortunately, besides gaming, I'm not have a great time with it. It's slower than I recall, not enough ram to really do any big projects, no internet or networking at all and I'm stuck on the video modulator RCA connection.

I got the vampire for the speed boost, additional ram and CF/SD card capabilities and I plan to put it into a PC case (my A500 case is falling apart due to age and being very brittle). I don't want to use 2 screens so I'm perfectly happy waiting for GOLDv3 to arrive before diving in completely.

I'm going to go back to what I love, music and animation and possibly more gaming since I never really enjoyed AGA games except for emulation which isn't quite the same thing for me. Sure I can do music and animation on the PC, but I enjoy the nostalgia and retro look and feel of working on real hardware.

I hope to enjoy the Amiga for many more years all over again and I think you will too. The Vampire is going to deliver higher performance than a stock machine, a lot of ram and higher resolution modern display for you. That's it. (maybe even ethernet as I hear that's being developed by another part of the team). It simply makes what you want to do with it more achievable over a stock system and "some" other accelerator options. I'm not going to get into the pros and cons of Vampire vs other accelerators vs an alternative future. other cards fell short for me personally in regards to all these things I need/want on a single board.

so like purchasing an Amiga was a personal choice for me back in the day, so is expanding it, customizing it and using it the way i want to. regardless of what the rest of the world does. I plan to share my adventure for anyone interested enough to read any topics i may post about it, because i so enjoy reading other peoples adventures and stories and projects.

So enjoy your Amiga for what it is. Cheers.
Sinphaltimus is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
Old 14 July 2017, 15:40   #222
grond
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolla View Post
Does it really? Various software use the FPU differently, and it's not as if all software that use FPU will use all the functionality of it. I cannot really think of any type of software that use _all_ functionality of an FPU, except test suits.
Again you make me wonder why you ask such a question. Do you really consider it something worthy of discussion that a processing unit has a lot of features and that in the end all features will have to be implemented by the soft-FPU to run all FPU-software? This is a given for any thinking person. And yes, there is still a lot lacking in the soft-FPU. It works for an increasing number of programs while others may still crash. Is it really necessary to mention this? If the soft-FPU were complete, it would already have been released to aminet. All this is so obvious that I cannot avoid believing that you feel the need to always point out the bad things about other people's work or about the Apollo project in particular. Unless you can give me convincing reasons for your statements, I will continue to consider your comments as being ill-motivated because I rule out the possibility of you being too stupid to understand.
Quote:
Oh no, I am so sorry I pointed that out, oh my gosh. Again you insinuate that I did it only to discredit the Apollo core? That is a pretty nutty conclusion.
I cannot see any other reason why discussing differences between two versions of a demo run and recorded several years apart would be of any relevance to a Vampire related thread. Tell me, why is it important to discuss about potential differences between the two versions? Why do you ask us to use the same version of the demo that was used in some YouTube-video we weren't even aware of when all we wanted to show is that the Vampire does run an AGA+FPU demo? I believe you are playing the innocent when being called at.
Quote:
but sadly also quite symptomatic for many those involved in the project - paranoia runs very high.
We have had all this bad-mouthing for several years now. It started with "it's impossible and hence faked" and has now degraded into "it's not compatible". What has been proven to work is ignored, what has not is constantly used against the project. You personally went from "it gurus the moment you start a program that expects an FPU" to "how can we know it runs all FPU software". I call this the detriment of doubt (that is supposed to be the opposite of the benefit of doubt). Yes, it is true that this mud-slinging has had an effect on the temper of people involved with the project. People are putting years of work and many hours of their spare time into this project. Being able to make something work is rewarding in itself. But some extrinsic motivation could perhaps help a little.
Quote:
You know very well that I cannot do that, despite having all the hardware.
But we are expected to watch all YouTube-videos to see whether they are based on the same binaries as we use for a test and then find that same binary and use that for a video because some texture differs? And all that because you want to see exactly how much slower the soft-FPU is because you can't be sure we didn't use faster code? Or why is it important to use the same binaries on two different hardwares for a comparison that we didn't do ourselves but some forum comment in this thread?
grond is offline  
Old 14 July 2017, 18:21   #223
Mr.Flibble
Registered User

Mr.Flibble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolla View Post
Gunnar is not working on FPU for current Vampire cards, he is way over in the next FPGA systems as far as FPU is concerned. There will not be any FPU implemented in Apollo Core for current Vampire cards.
The exact quote from Gunnar is this:

Quote:
To precise this:
APOLLO HardFPU is 100% identical to the 68060 FPU from instructions.
Its just not tuned for placement in Cyclone3 yet.
Mr.Flibble is offline  
Old 14 July 2017, 22:41   #224
Seiya
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Italy
Posts: 313
i wanted to try femu in winuae to see its development and a part some games/demos i very impressed.
Maybe it's better than software040 in MacOS or Franke387 on MS-DOS.

[ Show youtube player ]
Seiya is offline  
Old 15 July 2017, 01:05   #225
Djole501
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Prijedor
Posts: 29
Back, :P @ emufan

SoftFPU does allow some programs to run which were not running at all before, TVPaint is one such example. The speeds seems very acceptable. And like before with other Apollo core inspired projects, the benefit is not just for the Vampire users, but for the whole Amiga community.
Djole501 is offline  
Old 15 July 2017, 01:10   #226
gulliver
BoingBagged

 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The South of nowhere
Age: 39
Posts: 1,490
Can any of you post a link, or upoad to The Zone! this FPU emulator please?
gulliver is offline  
Old 15 July 2017, 01:22   #227
sean_skroht
Gimmemore Commodore

 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Australia
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolla View Post
Gunnar is not working on FPU for current Vampire cards, he is way over in the next FPGA systems as far as FPU is concerned. There will not be any FPU implemented in Apollo Core for current Vampire cards.
Are you sure? Have you been in contact with him about this? In the Apollo-Knowledge forum he states the following:

"APOLLO HardFPU is 100% identical to the 68060 FPU from instructions.
Its just not tuned for placement in Cyclone3 yet. "

The key word here is "yet", to me that seems like he IS working on it. Until he says otherwise I'm inclined to believe it is being worked on for current Vampire cards. Stop spreading misinformation.

Last edited by sean_skroht; 15 July 2017 at 08:27.
sean_skroht is offline  
Old 15 July 2017, 09:39   #228
grond
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 364
Sean, Gunnar is currently working on AGA, no FPU.
grond is offline  
Old 15 July 2017, 16:30   #229
sean_skroht
Gimmemore Commodore

 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Australia
Posts: 67
It doesn't matter whether he is actually working on the FPU at this very moment in time or not, that's not the point. The point is that the FPU will eventually be available for the current range of Vampires which is being disputed by some. What we have to do is wait and be patient. Now if you can find a post by Gunnar dated later than the 3rd of July (the date of the post quoted by Mr.Flibble and myself) where he categorically states that a hardFPU will NEVER be available for the CURRENT range of Vampire cards then I welcome to be stood corrected.
sean_skroht is offline  
Old 15 July 2017, 17:25   #230
matthey
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by sean_skroht View Post
It doesn't matter whether he is actually working on the FPU at this very moment in time or not, that's not the point. The point is that the FPU will eventually be available for the current range of Vampires which is being disputed by some. What we have to do is wait and be patient. Now if you can find a post by Gunnar dated later than the 3rd of July (the date of the post quoted by Mr.Flibble and myself) where he categorically states that a hardFPU will NEVER be available for the CURRENT range of Vampire cards then I welcome to be stood corrected.
"APOLLO HardFPU is 100% identical to the 68060 FPU from instructions. Its just not tuned for placement in Cyclone3 yet." implying "that the FPU will eventually be available for the current range of Vampires" is quite a stretch. Gunnar has also told potential customers to buy the Vampire only for what it offers today which may weakly imply that an FPU will never be available. If a customer needs a fast 68k compatible FPU, then it is more logical to assume that the Vampire will never get one.
matthey is offline  
Old 15 July 2017, 17:46   #231
sean_skroht
Gimmemore Commodore

 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Australia
Posts: 67
Prior to Gunnars post, Martin Soerensen writes:

Quote:
As Gunnar has written many times, the Apollo core does have an FPU already. It is just not identical to a 68060 FPU.
to which Gunnar replies:

Quote:
To precise this:
APOLLO HardFPU is 100% identical to the 68060 FPU from instructions.
Its just not tuned for placement in Cyclone3 yet.
Now to me this implies that one is available but needs to be refined before it can be placed inside the Cyclone3. Now unless someone has categorical proof that the current Vampire cards that do use a Cyclone3 FPGA will NEVER have a hardFPU EVER then we need to wait and see what happens rather than "assuming" that it will never get one.

Last edited by sean_skroht; 15 July 2017 at 17:54.
sean_skroht is offline  
Old 15 July 2017, 18:46   #232
matthey
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by sean_skroht View Post
Now to me this implies that one is available but needs to be refined before it can be placed inside the Cyclone3. Now unless someone has categorical proof that the current Vampire cards that do use a Cyclone3 FPGA will NEVER have a hardFPU EVER then we need to wait and see what happens rather than "assuming" that it will never get one.
I agree with everything you wrote in this post but not everything in your previous post. It is illogical to assume that the current Cyclone 3 based Vampire line will or will not receive a 68k compatible FPU. Gunnar himself probably doesn't know at this point. It is logical to work on the SAGA before the FPU if a standalone FPGA board is planned soon. I thought it was more logical to work on a 68k compatible FPU before the SIMD unit but hardware guys know best. I thought it would be better to upgrade the Vampire to a Cyclone 5 and reduce the number of hardware variations and FPGA models needing tuning but hardware guys know best. People with business knowledge could probably help their business but hardware guys know best .
matthey is offline  
Old 15 July 2017, 22:09   #233
wawa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: berlin/germany
Posts: 883
let me be just one placing another load of assumptions here:
gunnar&team do not know, what resources are left in their choice of c3 to hw speed up the fpu spo to say.

..they might choose bigger fpga od the same model for future, but
1. it would cause incompatibilities and complains with the current customers
2. im not sure if the chips are pin coherent

so, overall, its better to explicitely distinguish two generations of the product:
1. one, current&stable that convinced the public, as it was with vampire 1 for a600.
2. the future one: unified to avoid all kinds of unnecesary incompatibilities and support hell0 while it may sound brutal, cutting away their own foundations while they grow, i still consider it a reasonable progress policy, without unbearable sacrifices.
wawa is offline  
Old 16 July 2017, 00:45   #234
grelbfarlk
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 688
During the early days of getting the V600 or V500 working, I don't remember which, Majsta said he designed the board to be compatible with up to 80k LE chips. He might have said it would just be a matter of moving resistors or caps. Whether that option is on the current boards or not I couldn't tell you.
grelbfarlk is offline  
Old 16 July 2017, 01:41   #235
sean_skroht
Gimmemore Commodore

 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Australia
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by matthey View Post
I agree with everything you wrote in this post but not everything in your previous post. It is illogical to assume that the current Cyclone 3 based Vampire line will or will not receive a 68k compatible FPU. Gunnar himself probably doesn't know at this point. It is logical to work on the SAGA before the FPU if a standalone FPGA board is planned soon. I thought it was more logical to work on a 68k compatible FPU before the SIMD unit but hardware guys know best. I thought it would be better to upgrade the Vampire to a Cyclone 5 and reduce the number of hardware variations and FPGA models needing tuning but hardware guys know best. People with business knowledge could probably help their business but hardware guys know best .
Yeah fair enough. Some very good points. My responses came from the fact that some here were making sweeping statements about a hardFPU never happening in the current lineup. Just trying to encourage others not to be so dogmatic and keep an open mind about what might lie in the future. It may or may not happen but lets wait and see. In the meantime lets have fun with what we've got.
sean_skroht is offline  
Old 16 July 2017, 20:28   #236
matthey
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by wawa View Post
let me be just one placing another load of assumptions here:
gunnar&team do not know, what resources are left in their choice of c3 to hw speed up the fpu so to say.
I expect Gunnar knows exactly how many resources he has left but it is nearly impossible to completely fill an FPGA due to routing/placement issues. Few resources would help the performance of such a wide FPU ALU in an FPGA (not a problem for an ASIC) and we know how he likes to hyper-optimize for his "vision".

Quote:
Originally Posted by wawa View Post
so, overall, its better to explicitly distinguish two generations of the product:
There are already 2 generations as the original Vampire had a smaller FPGA which I believe is no longer upgraded. Customers see that the FPGA is easy to upgrade so expect updates but there is much work needed to prepare an update for each major FPGA variation. There are more major FPGA variations likely in the future which multiplies the amount of work needed and older variations are likely to become lower priority. Are customers going to be happy to upgrade to more powerful hardware or are they going to expect updates to existing hardware and resent not receiving updates?

Quote:
Originally Posted by grelbfarlk View Post
During the early days of getting the V600 or V500 working, I don't remember which, Majsta said he designed the board to be compatible with up to 80k LE chips. He might have said it would just be a matter of moving resistors or caps. Whether that option is on the current boards or not I couldn't tell you.
Majsta was probably talking about a larger Cyclone 3. The Cyclone 5 is much different internally (ALMs instead of LEs, built in memory controllers, etc.) but there may be variations with the same number of pins which are externally (physical and electrical) similar.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sean_skroht View Post
Yeah fair enough. Some very good points. My responses came from the fact that some here were making sweeping statements about a hardFPU never happening in the current lineup. Just trying to encourage others not to be so dogmatic and keep an open mind about what might lie in the future. It may or may not happen but lets wait and see. In the meantime lets have fun with what we've got.
To be fair, I probably should have busted kolla too. His frustration was easier to understand than your contrariness though.
matthey is offline  
Old 17 July 2017, 14:19   #237
OlafSch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Nuernberg
Posts: 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by matthey View Post
I agree with everything you wrote in this post but not everything in your previous post. It is illogical to assume that the current Cyclone 3 based Vampire line will or will not receive a 68k compatible FPU. Gunnar himself probably doesn't know at this point. It is logical to work on the SAGA before the FPU if a standalone FPGA board is planned soon. I thought it was more logical to work on a 68k compatible FPU before the SIMD unit but hardware guys know best. I thought it would be better to upgrade the Vampire to a Cyclone 5 and reduce the number of hardware variations and FPGA models needing tuning but hardware guys know best. People with business knowledge could probably help their business but hardware guys know best .
The standalone device always was the goal of the project, similar to what was planned on Natami. To get in a real chip would need plenty of money so it is far less risky to do it in FPGA where you can change something if needed. The standalone hardware already exists so SAGA obviously is more urgent than FPU. The used FPGAs were always compromises regarding price and performance. Might be that you would have done it different but it is the work of Gunnar and the team behind so it is their decision. If you would have had a real plan with real money than you could have talked to Gunnar, I do not think he would have refused to talk. But from what I saw you always said the team has to do this and that and then you would find investors. If you really are in business you should know that this is a little too vague to convince
OlafSch is offline  
Old 17 July 2017, 14:23   #238
OlafSch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Nuernberg
Posts: 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by sean_skroht View Post
Prior to Gunnars post, Martin Soerensen writes:



to which Gunnar replies:



Now to me this implies that one is available but needs to be refined before it can be placed inside the Cyclone3. Now unless someone has categorical proof that the current Vampire cards that do use a Cyclone3 FPGA will NEVER have a hardFPU EVER then we need to wait and see what happens rather than "assuming" that it will never get one.
People should not imply too much and buy or not buy what is currently available, not what they hope for or expect in future. From what I understand FPU is on to-do-list but because of the new standalone device not top-priority. Behind the project there are only few developers so people should not expect wonders
OlafSch is offline  
Old 17 July 2017, 21:36   #239
prowler
Global Moderator

prowler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sidcup, England
Posts: 10,203
Thread truncated and closed consequent upon it having gone off the rails far too often.
prowler 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
Vampire 1200 HanSolo support.Hardware 55 19 June 2017 10:15
Vampire x2 600 drusso66 support.Hardware 11 26 March 2017 10:18
Vampire 2 shipment 8bitbob Amiga scene 16 03 December 2016 11:30
Vampire II - Who is first? JackLeather support.Hardware 2 26 January 2016 13:56
Vampire game name Galder Looking for a game name ? 2 12 May 2014 22:53

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 18:37.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Page generated in 0.46246 seconds with 12 queries