[matthey]

Originally Posted by litwr

The special version is required for later and upgraded Amigas. A500 has no way to allocate timer or I missed something. BTW how to play old good A500 games with so fast hardware?

AmigaOS 3.1 is possible on a 500. The limitation may be the ancient AmigaOS you choose.

Many of the early Amiga games failed because they were poorly programmed. AmigaOS upgrades were more likely to cause problems than a faster CPU. There were some CPU changes which did cause problems like the VBR moving but an MMU can now map back to the original address. Caches can be turned off for compatibility which also slows the CPU. The timing of most Amiga games is based on the video timing so they run at the proper speed.

Originally Posted by litwr

Thanks. I used OldOpenLibrary function which maybe poor supported at later Amigas...

It should still work correctly even on the latest AmigaOS.

Originally Posted by litwr

My initial aim was to compare z80 and 6502. 65816 (SuperCPU) is very close to 6502. PC386 is close to PC286 but I ignored 486 systems. The faster systems (68040, 80486, ...) require other program because a lot of 8-bit systems can't handle more than 3000 digits.
68060 is very good. It is sad that it was used so seldom. However, IMHO, Intel made a bit better architecture. Motorola couldn't skip the spirit of dino-like VAX completely. If they supported and developed 6502 architecture then they most probably would be leaders of CPU today.

I disagree with you here. The x86 ISA is a mess. Updating an 8 bit processor to 16 bits is not a good idea. A 16 bit CPU is so much better than an 8 bit CPU (not true when moving from 16 bit CPU to 32 bit CPU). It was good to start over with something less crude. Motorola should have hired developers to make a highly optimized 6502 emulator for the 68000 (with free license) from the very beginning to make the transition easier.

The 68020 ISA introduced some complex (VAX/PDP-11 like) addressing modes which were challenging for those early processors. The 68060 solved the problem enough that they are not a bottleneck (used sparingly in normal code) and that is with limited transistors. Modern OoO processors where transistor counts matter little would not have a problem with these addressing modes. A modern 68k CPU would probably not clock as high as an x86_64 CPU but likely could be more powerful for the clock speed in single core performance.

Originally Posted by litwr

It is true today but the word Workbench was used for all these components at the 80s and early 90s. I am trying too preserve the spirit of the past.

It depends on if you want to use the colloquial (slang) term or the proper name.