[A1200] Apollo 1240/1260 and WHDLoad

[8bitbubsy]

Hello there,

I'm soon getting an Apollo 1240/40MHz, and after spending two years with a WHDLoad-unfriendly 030 acc (M1230XA) you can guess I'm used to hack the WHDLoad.prefs a lot.

So here's my questions today:
How is an Apollo 040/40MHz with WHDLoad? No need to use settings like NoAutoVec, NoMemReverse etc..? Any neat settings/tooltypes one should set with this card?
Also I'm going to upgrade it to 060/50MHz in the future, can this bring more problems to WHDLoad?

I know this is too early asking, but I really like to know things as early as possible.
Also this thread can be good for other people wondering the same.

[Fabie]

Originally Posted by 8bitbubsy

Hello there,

I'm soon getting an Apollo 1240/40MHz, and after spending two years with a WHDLoad-unfriendly 030 acc (M1230XA) you can guess I'm used to hack the WHDLoad.prefs a lot.

So here's my questions today:
How is an Apollo 040/40MHz with WHDLoad? No need to use settings like NoAutoVec, NoMemReverse etc..? Any neat settings/tooltypes one should set with this card?
Also I'm going to upgrade it to 060/50MHz in the future, can this bring more problems to WHDLoad?

I know this is too early asking, but I really like to know things as early as possible.
Also this thread can be good for other people wondering the same.

I had an apollo 1240/40mhz also I had tried an apollo 1260/50mhz for a cup of months
the 1240/40 it's really fast...30 mips (sysinfo) the 1260/50 a bit faster = 38mips.....anyways you will not notice difference in speed in both cards...unless you do a benchmark

you can get some problems with a few games..and some games will need the tooltype NOMMU or another tooltype
The 1240/40 is less problematic with games than the 1260 but the 1240 uses a fan and not fits very well on the normal A1200 case
both card are really fast ....both are a big step in speed at the cost of a incompatibilities with old software

anyways I recommend the A1240/40 ....cause is less problematic with games and you can overclock it up to 50 mhz using a 100mhz crystal and will be a bit faster than the 1260/50
A1240/50mhz overclocked = 40 mips

[8bitbubsy]

Is this true? Someone told me that an Apollo 1260/50MHz was twice as fast as an Apollo 1240/40MHz!
If this is true, then I won't upgrade it to 060 after all... More trouble, more risk in damaging it, less compatiblity...

Regarding the overclocking: This is the heatsink on my 1240/40... Do you think it cools it down enough when overclocked to 50Mhz?

Image: http://img1.jpegbay.com/gallery/000501063/2_f.jpg

[alexh]

Originally Posted by 8bitbubsy

Someone told me that an Apollo 1260/50MHz was twice as fast as an Apollo 1240/40MHz!

It is. Don't listen to Fabie. An A1260@80MHz is roughly 3x A1240@40MHz

An A1240@40 is rated at 28.8 MIPS and an Apollo A1260@50 is rated at 65.2 MIPS. Overclock to 80MHz and you'll get closer to 100 MIPS

His idea that a A1240@50 can be faster than an A1260@50 is just pure ARSE dribble Bigger caches and a Super Scalar architecture (multiple execution units) make it much much faster clock for clock.

His idea that an A1240 is more compatible with WHDload than an A1260 is even more rubbish. 040 CPU's are far more problematic due to WHDload developers mainly owning a mixture of 030 and 060 machines for testing.

[daxb]

There is no special general setting/Tooltype necessary for APollo 1240/40. Overclocking to 50MHz would maybe fail. At least here the card freezed after some minutes.

[8bitbubsy]

Ok. Then I'll upgrade it to 060 after all :P I have all the stuff needed already.

[alexh]

http://amiga.resource.cx/perf/sysspeed.html

[Fabie]

I don't want any discussion and this is my last post on this thread
but the 060/50 is twice faster than the 040/25mhz 19mips/38mips
the 060 always was compared with the 040 in the A4000 wich was 25mhz
but the 040 is a bit faster than the 060 working at idem clock


sysinfo results

040/25 = 19 mips
040/40 = 30 mips
060/50 = 38 mips
040/50 (OC) = 40 mips

also the 020 is faster than the 030 working at idem clock
***********

[Chain]

http://chain.3dgrafika.cz/100mhz/132mips.jpg

guess the frequency quiz

[MagerValp]

Originally Posted by Fabie

sysinfo results

Well there's your problem, SysInfo's benchmarking code is unreliable. It doesn't account for the 060's superscalar architecture and only shows about half of what it's capable of. Use SysSpeed instead.

[StingRay]

Well, according to Fabie, SysInfo is the most accurate benchmark program for the Amiga. I guess that explains a lot

[MagerValp]

Originally Posted by StingRay

Well, according to Fabie, SysInfo is the most accurate benchmark program for the Amiga. I guess that explains a lot

Yes, and it reports that an 040 is faster than an 060 at the same clock speed

Originally Posted by Fabie

the 060/50 mhz on sysinfo reports 38 mips
the 040/50 mhz on sysinfo reports 39 mips

[cosmicfrog]

cool I`l never have to upgrade my cpu ever then thanks Fabie hehehehehehehehhe

[Damion]

I've had very good luck with the Apollo 1260 and WHDLoad. Naturally there will be some incompatibilities, usually fixed with the "nocache" tooltype.

The few issues I've had don't seem Apollo specific as they also cause problems on my other '060 (and sometimes even '030) systems as well. Lionheart is a bit unstable on the '060, sadly.