donw@beaujolais (Don White) (04/16/88)
[ Oh no! A new monster! It's! ... It's! ..... It's the LINE BARFER!!!!!]
[HJGUGVO&TF:KJBN"KLJN"KJH{O*YU(*^*^%R^(%EYRCLJHB"KJH)OIU*&(*^&*)&^*&^T*]
Wouldn't it be nice if ALL the current Amy NTSC graphics modes were kept
as a SUBSET of the overall graphics capability? That way, it would still
be THE desktop video machine, AND it could service those Hi Res-ophiles!
(1000x800 grin, or 2000x2000 grin grin, or 1Meg x 1Meg grin of wooly
mammoth proportions)
Don White
Box 271177
Concord, CA.
94527-1177
richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) (04/20/88)
In article <549@zehntel.UUCP> donw@beaujolais (Don White) writes: >[ Oh no! A new monster! It's! ... It's! ..... It's the LINE BARFER!!!!!] >[HJGUGVO&TF:KJBN"KLJN"KJH{O*YU(*^*^%R^(%EYRCLJHB"KJH)OIU*&(*^&*)&^*&^T*] > > Wouldn't it be nice if ALL the current Amy NTSC graphics modes were kept > as a SUBSET of the overall graphics capability? That way, it would still > be THE desktop video machine, AND it could service those Hi Res-ophiles! > (1000x800 grin, or 2000x2000 grin grin, or 1Meg x 1Meg grin of wooly > mammoth proportions) The problem is, sport, that monitors in this range cost more than a used porsche. You really think you can sell a $2000 system that needs a $3000 monitor ? (1K x 1K Non-interlaced) As for 2000 x 2000, siggraph is coming up this summer, go there and look at the nice 2K by 2K monitors. Then ask the price. Make sure you have one of those nice shopping bag things they give away to catch your jaw as it drops off your face. -- Five tacos, one taco burger. Do you know where the American Dream is ? richard@gryphon.CTS.COM rutgers!marque!gryphon!richard
mike@ames.arpa (Mike Smithwick) (04/22/88)
["Washinton DC, too small to be a state, too large to be an asylum"] In article <3467@gryphon.CTS.COM> richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) writes: > >As for 2000 x 2000, siggraph is coming up this summer, go there >and look at the nice 2K by 2K monitors. Then ask the price. Make >sure you have one of those nice shopping bag things they give away >to catch your jaw as it drops off your face. > We just got a real nify monitor here, 2Kx2Kx8bits. Oh, it's 30" across. I've been trying to figure out if my amiga case could support 150 pounds, hmm, maybe with some reinforced styrene. . . Price you say?? Only 60 grand, a small price to pay for all that free radiation o-). -- *** mike (Cyberpunk in training) smithwick *** "After all, isn't our only real purpose in life merely to make the person next to us slightly more insane than we are?" - Me [disclaimer : nope, I don't work for NASA, I take full blame for my ideas]
yuan@uhccux.UUCP (Yuan Chang) (04/23/88)
In article <7685@ames.arpa- mike@ames.arc.nasa.gov.UUCP (Mike Smithwick) writes:
-["Washinton DC, too small to be a state, too large to be an asylum"]
-
-We just got a real nify monitor here, 2Kx2Kx8bits. Oh, it's 30" across.
-I've been trying to figure out if my amiga case could support 150 pounds,
-hmm, maybe with some reinforced styrene. . .
-
-Price you say?? Only 60 grand, a small price to pay for all that
-free radiation o-).
I remembered that there was this thing in InfoWorld a while
back about Atari's rumored 1024 x 1024 RGB which was going to sell for
less than $600. Whatever happened to it (gee I wondered 8) ???
--
Yuan Chang "What can go wrong, did"
UUCP: {ihnp4,uunet,ucbvax,dcdwest}!ucsd!nosc!uhccux!yuan
ARPA: uhccux!yuan@nosc.MIL "Wouldn't you like to
INTERNET: yuan@uhccux.UHCC.HAWAII.EDU be an _A_m_i_g_o_i_d too?!?"detert@lognet2.arpa (CMS David K. Detert) (11/09/88)
You beat me to the punch (and after I had already typed all that in too). Anyway, it's interesting sometimes to see what the messy DOS rags are syaing about us these days, even if only in the rumor sections. Dave CMSgt David K Detert ARPANet: detert<at>lognet2.arpa
wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) (11/10/88)
Anybody read the "notes from the filed" page in this week's Infoworld magazine? An interesting teaser is offered: "Amigas in every pot. ... On this "kinder, gentler" theme, a thousand points of light have been shining recently from Commodore - makers of the best-selling computer in Germany - indicating that the 68020-based Amiga 2500 and the 68030-based Amiga 3000 will be seen at Comdex. I like the 3000, which has a 19.4 MHz 68030, a 68882 floating-point chip, and an 80386 on the motherboard. The hermaphroditic machine comes with five Amiga slots, five AT slots, 2 megs of RAM expandable to 16, and compatibility with both Amiga and DOS software. The price is $5,200, with a megapixel color display and an 80-meg SCSI drive." Remember, this stuff is just rumor material. ..but it is fun to imagine what one could do with such a machine. I still remeber the almost-existed Commodore 900 which never got out of prototype, so I'm not going to start holding my breath until I can actually touch this one at my dealer. I wouldn't take the quoted price too seriously either. --Bill
Classic_-_Concepts@cup.portal.com (07/30/89)
An Amiga 3000.
Well, it will probably be 18 months too late, but I still want
my Ranger. Hallelujah, Commodore. I can't wait.
- LHboottrax@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Boot Trax) (08/04/89)
This may be a question that has been floating around the net for some time now but I still am wondering... Since the Amiga 300 has been floating around the drawing table for some time, is there a release date on that system? I remember when I bought my 2000 and I traded in my 1000 for it plus 1000 dollars, would and deals like that be floating around marketers heads now? anyways.. please reply through mail if you would, thanks.. Perry -- .--0----0----0----0----0----0----0----0----0----0----0----0----0----0----0--. ( Boot Trax ) 'Undermine their pompous authority, )
451061%UOTTAWA.bitnet@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca (Valentin Pepelea) (08/28/89)
Since so many people are raving about the fictional Amiga 3000, let me do
so too. What follows is my guesstimate of what is coming, from my knowledge
of the Amiga's architecture, random ramblings on the net and my shiny iron
ring.
Disclaimer: I did not have any contact with any of the Commodore Engineering
people, and in fact, all my mail to Dave Haynie has never been
replied to. :-( So take this for what it's worth.
It will have a 68030 running at 25 MHz along with a 68882 FFP running at other
speeds up to 33 MHz. (for now) Asynchronous design. Comes with standard 4 Megs
of 32-bit memory, expandable on board to 8 Megs. This is gonna be a real Unix
work station, so it'll a big hard drive, like 300 Megs. Perhaps optical like
on the previous NeXt. And a tape drive will be there too.
Graphics chips? Yup, like ususal. No extra features for now, but they will have
a 32-bit bus. No extra colours, no extra display modes. Just the usual ECS
features.
Monitor? The usual. The Moniterm A2024 will be demoed, but the classical
A1080 will do. No surprises here.
Slotimos? Heh, of course. The new Zorro III 32-bit slots. Five of them. But
these will be rather neat. They will actually be divided in two. The 16-bit
Zorro II card will still fit in, just like on the I*M AT machines.
Standard SCSI interface on board? Well, if SCSI can transfer 32 bits at a time,
yes. Otherwise a simple 2090 will plug into one of the Zorro III slots. That
will allow you to plug in an ESDI interface later on. Ethernet, slim, thick
and of course, obese. Though the new obese Ethernet plug will be names Super
Ethernet instead by one of the marketroids. :-)
Case? Nope, no computer-aided-software-engineering package included. :-)
Instead you'll get a nice tower case, shaped in the form of the United Nations
building in New York.
Availablility? December 89! Yup, its that close. Will come with OS 1.4 and
a virtual memory handler, though no memory protection will be provided. Oh
yes, I almost forgot to mention, it will also have Unix coming with it. V5.3,
no BSD extensions. X-Windows and a proprietary window manager included too.
Price? Heh. Only $7000. Cash, Visa and Master-Card accepted.
So, how close do I come to reality?
Valentin
_________________________________________________________________________
The godess of democracy? "The Name: Valentin Pepelea
tyrants may destroy a statue, Phonet: (613) 231-7476
but they cannot kill a god." Bitnet: 451061@Uottawa.bitnet
Usenet: Use cunyvm.cuny.edu gate
- Confucius Planet: 451061@acadvm1.UOttawa.CAhubey@pilot.njin.net (Hubey) (01/05/90)
Latest piece of news from Infoworld, Jan , 1990 in Robert X. Cringeley's column of rumors etc.. "....according to Commodore head honcho Irving Gould, who talked about it recently in New Zealand... According to Gould, the 25 MHz 68030 based machine will have Unix System V, Release 4 and the ABI (Applications Binary Interface) for the Motorola 68030, allowing it to run any 68030 ABI software. Other Commodore sources say that the unit will be price competetive, bundling a color monitor, 300-megabyte hard disk, and about 6 megabytes of RAM into a system priced at about $7,000." Can anyone enlighten us about the ABI ?? I seem to remember something similar to this but I thought it was about the MC88000 machines. mark -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- hubey@pilot.njin.net | hubey@apollo.montclair.edu | ...!rutgers!njin!hubey -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
BARRETT@owl.ecil.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) (03/11/90)
There have been many rumours flying around about the '3000 for a long time. The one thing that isn't rumour about it is that it will not be out for a while: at least another year at the earliest. I can say one thing about the Amiga 3000: it had better be powerful. Commodore has been dragging their feet so long with it that, if it isn't extremely powerful, it will be out-of-date the day it hits the market. There is just too much competition from IBM, Compaq, and Apple for Commodore to succeed in producing an under-powered machine after too-\ long a wait. By 'extemely powerful' I mean the following features: A 68040 running @ 25Mhz, 32-bit chipset running at the same speed, and a full-color resolution of at least 1280x800 non-interlaced. If Commodore does wait a full year before releasing this machine, it had better not use the 68030. By time this machine hits the market, it will be competing head-to-head with 68040 and 80486 machines, so it must also use a 68040 in order to be competitive.
riley@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Daniel S. Riley) (03/11/90)
In article <13479@baldrick.udel.EDU> BARRETT@owl.ecil.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) writes: > There have been many rumours flying around about the '3000 for a >long time. The one thing that isn't rumour about it is that it will >not be out for a while: at least another year at the earliest. Where do people get these "facts"? This is a rumour, and probably not even a true one. -Dan
usenet@cps3xx.UUCP (Usenet file owner) (03/11/90)
> There have been many rumours flying around about the '3000 for a >long time. The one thing that isn't rumour about it is that it will >not be out for a while: at least another year at the earliest. Even better, make a SPARC Amiga. Yeah I know everything would need to be recompiled and all that crap, but you can only go so far with 68000 based machines. It would be the second (that I know of at lesat) popular (if you consider AmigaOS popular) operating system for multiple architectures. Joe Porkka porkka@frith.egr.msu.edu
dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu (Dr. Mosh) (03/11/90)
In article <6857@cps3xx.UUCP> porkka@frith.UUCP (Joe Porkka) writes: > >Even better, make a SPARC Amiga. Yeah I know everything >would need to be recompiled and all that crap, but you can >only go so far with 68000 based machines. > Actually, the 68040 is faster than the current SPARCS used in the Sun 4/330 and 4/370(both 17 MIPS) and the 68040 is reported to do 20 MIPS. Plus the fact it has an on board FPU... -Dino Khoe -- ============================================================================= Dr. of Moshology | | | / \ /\ |/ Any system dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu | |---||____|| |\ can be New Mexico Tech Computer Science | | || | \/ | \ cracked...
root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Systems Staff) (03/12/90)
In article <3944@nmtsun.nmt.edu> dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu (Dr. Mosh) writes: >In article <6857@cps3xx.UUCP> porkka@frith.UUCP (Joe Porkka) writes: >Actually, the 68040 is faster than the current SPARCS used in the Sun >4/330 and 4/370(both 17 MIPS) and the 68040 is reported to do 20 MIPS. >Plus the fact it has an on board FPU... >-Dino Khoe Unqualified statements such as yours are meaningless. Which, exactly, 68040 system are you referring to? Are you talking compute, FP, I/O, multitasking performance? What application is the '040 beating the Sparc on? Aside from hype, that is ;-) "Reported to", at least to date, is what Motorola says the '040 will do running dhrystone (with some questionable, IMHO, string optimizations). I am not saying that the '040 isn't everything it is "reported" to be, just that one should not run around quoting markethype until the beast is seen and quantified by running standard benchmarks (eg SPECmarks) on a real system. >dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu | |---||____|| |\ can be >New Mexico Tech Computer Science | | || | \/ | \ cracked... Rick Spanbauer State U of NY/Stony Brook
dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu (Dr. Mosh) (03/12/90)
In article <6360@sbcs.sunysb.edu> root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Systems Staff) writes: > Unqualified statements such as yours are meaningless. Which, > exactly, 68040 system are you referring to? Are you talking compute, Meaningless?? I think you are missing the point here... The original question was whether to build an Amiga SPARC or 68040, based on pure processing performance, the 68040 IS Faster... > FP, I/O, multitasking performance? What application is the > '040 beating the Sparc on? Aside from hype, that is ;-) > "Reported to", at least to date, is what Motorola says the '040 And you don't think Motorola could meet their own "reported" performance in the FINAL stages of release? Have they ever NOT met their reported figures?? > will do running dhrystone (with some questionable, IMHO, string > optimizations). I am not saying that the '040 isn't everything > it is "reported" to be, just that one should not run around > quoting markethype until the beast is seen and quantified by > running standard benchmarks (eg SPECmarks) on a real system. > I think you are the one caught in this "markethype" thing... Do you actually think that Motorola would make empty claims as to it's processor against a SPARC? Maybe it might not run exactly 20 MIPS, but I'm sure they would insist that their processor be faster than the current SPARC's... I don't even think you know much about the 68040... if in fact it does run as "reported", it would in most aspects beat out a current SPARC... So why don't you think about it before you go knocking other's words... > > Rick Spanbauer > State U of NY/Stony Brook -Dino Khoe -- ============================================================================= Dr. of Moshology | | | / \ /\ |/ Any system dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu | |---||____|| |\ can be New Mexico Tech Computer Science | | || | \/ | \ cracked...
dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu (Dr. Mosh) (03/12/90)
I don't think you people are getting the point here... I'm not arguing about processor speed, we are trying to discuss what is best for the Amiga! Now can you realistically see Commodore producing a RISC Amiga??? -Dino Khoe -- ============================================================================= Dr. of Moshology | | | / \ /\ |/ Any system dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu | |---||____|| |\ can be New Mexico Tech Computer Science | | || | \/ | \ cracked...
swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) (03/13/90)
In article <6857@cps3xx.UUCP> porkka@frith.UUCP (Joe Porkka) writes: [...] >Even better, make a SPARC Amiga. Yeah I know everything >would need to be recompiled and all that crap, but you can >only go so far with 68000 based machines. [...] Well, however far that is, it appears to be at least as far as SPARC (using the same process). I have seen several claims lately that the new 68040 can outperform SPARC machines running at the same clock speeds. This of course is not authoritative, since the benchmarks haven't been released. However, I think it is premature to announce the death of the 680X0 family. -- --Steve ------------------------------------------------------------------------- {uunet,sun}!convex!swarren; swarren@convex.COM
grx1042@uoft02.utoledo.edu (Steve Snodgrass) (03/13/90)
In article <13479@baldrick.udel.EDU>, BARRETT@owl.ecil.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) writes: > I can say one thing about the Amiga 3000: it had better be powerful. > > By 'extemely powerful' I mean the following features: > A 68040 running @ 25Mhz, 32-bit chipset running at the same speed, > and a full-color resolution of at least 1280x800 non-interlaced. If > Commodore does wait a full year before releasing this machine, it had > better not use the 68030. By time this machine hits the market, it > will be competing head-to-head with 68040 and 80486 machines, so it > must also use a 68040 in order to be competitive. I agree with most of this reasoning, but don't count on that kind of standard resolution. Extremely high-res color means big bucks & big RAM. A quick calculation shows that a 1280 x 800 screen with only 4096 colors (12 planes) occupies 1.5 Megs for a single still image. The A3000 had better have a 32 bit chipset though. If they don't redesign that, the whole thing is probably a waste of time. That's one bottleneck that needs to be eliminated. /\=======================================================================/\ \/ Reality: Steve Snodgrass |"Volts embodied intent, and Amps were the \/ /\ -^-^- Cyberspace -^-^- | runners who carried out those intentions, /\ \/ GRX1042@uoft02.utoledo.edu| against the Ohms." -Gregory Benford, ToL \/ /\ GRX1042@uoft02.BITNET | Sleep is a luxury, spare time a myth. -me /\ \/ uoft02::GRX1042 (DECnet) | Recumbent Amigas - the only way to hack. \/
root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Systems Staff) (03/13/90)
In article <3951@nmtsun.nmt.edu> dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu (Dr. Mosh) writes: >In article <6360@sbcs.sunysb.edu> root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Systems Staff) writes: > >> Unqualified statements such as yours are meaningless. Which, >> exactly, 68040 system are you referring to? Are you talking compute, > >Meaningless?? I think you are missing the point here... The original >question was whether to build an Amiga SPARC or 68040, based on pure >processing performance, the 68040 IS Faster... ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Faster than *what*? A Sparc clocked at equivalent rate? Faster than a 33 mHz Sparc? What exactly are you saying? That a 1994 80 mHz '040 is faster than a 1989 20 mHz Sparcstation-1? You are making a statement without qualifying it, thus it is meaningless. Motorola claims the '040 to have an CPI that is roughly the same as some current RISC chips, so that would indicate for some applications, at the same clock speed and using '040 instructions that are pipelined, it *might* (if Motorola marketspeak is roughly true) run same speed as current Sparc. >And you don't think Motorola could meet their own "reported" performance >in the FINAL stages of release? Have they ever NOT met their reported >figures?? Yes, they can meet their "reported" performance if they only state it to be 20 mips. Without qualifying how they measure a MIP then it could be 20 mips of NOP or 20 MIPS of FP in the extremes. >I think you are the one caught in this "markethype" thing... Do you actually >think that Motorola would make empty claims as to it's processor against a >SPARC? Maybe it might not run exactly 20 MIPS, but I'm sure they would insist >that their processor be faster than the current SPARC's... I don't even think >you know much about the 68040... if in fact it does run as "reported", it would >in most aspects beat out a current SPARC... So why don't you think about it >before you go knocking other's words... Oh, you mean faster than the Soulborne machine? Seriously, you haven't been around that long if you think every statement a company makes, especially about performance, is always met. Again, comparing a machine that exists (Soulborne, SS-1, other Sparc) against a machine that isn't released is ridiculous and unfair. Until there is a 68040 that can be SPECMark'ed by someone other than Motorola, then the '040 clocks 0 mips in my book. >> Rick Spanbauer >> State U of NY/Stony Brook >-Dino Khoe >dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu | |---||____|| |\ can be
phil@ingr.com (Phil Johnson) (03/14/90)
In article <3952@nmtsun.nmt.edu> dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu (Dr. Mosh) writes: > >I don't think you people are getting the point here... I'm not arguing about >processor speed, we are trying to discuss what is best for the Amiga! Now >can you realistically see Commodore producing a RISC Amiga??? > If Commodore were to decide to produce a RISC-based system they would be better served by choosing the Motorola 88000 rather than the SPARC. The software support that is in place through 88OPEN makes it the processor of choice over the SPARC. Also, the MIPS and MFLOPS mean relatively little once you wrap an operating system and application software around a processor. Non- application based benchmarks are useless in determining the performance of a system. -- Philip E. Johnson UUCP: usenet!ingr!phil MY words, VOICE: (205) 730-8112 MY opinion!
rar@auc.UUCP (Rodney Ricks) (03/14/90)
I don't have the BYTE article here with me that gives the information, so I'm going by memory. In article <6398@sbcs.sunysb.edu> root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Systems Staff) writes: >In article <3951@nmtsun.nmt.edu> dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu (Dr. Mosh) writes: >>In article <6360@sbcs.sunysb.edu> root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Systems Staff) writes: >> >>> Unqualified statements such as yours are meaningless. Which, >>> exactly, 68040 system are you referring to? Are you talking compute, >> >>Meaningless?? I think you are missing the point here... The original >>question was whether to build an Amiga SPARC or 68040, based on pure >>processing performance, the 68040 IS Faster... > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > Faster than *what*? A Sparc clocked at equivalent rate? From what I remember of the article, the 68040 is faster than a SPARC of the SAME clock rate (25 MHz). >>And you don't think Motorola could meet their own "reported" performance >>in the FINAL stages of release? Have they ever NOT met their reported >>figures?? > > Yes, they can meet their "reported" performance if they only > state it to be 20 mips. Without qualifying how they measure > a MIP then it could be 20 mips of NOP or 20 MIPS of FP in the > extremes. 20 MIPS of a "typical instruction mix" (whatever that means...). Using NOP's as the "instructions" is an Intel trick (according to a developer on the net). >> ...if in fact it does run as "reported", it would >>in most aspects beat out a current SPARC... That should, of course, be "a current SPARC with the same clock rate". > Oh, you mean faster than the Soulborne machine? Seriously, you > haven't been around that long if you think every statement a company > makes, especially about performance, is always met. Not being a hardware expert, I can only go by what I've heard. From what I've heard, Motorola doesn't usually go around blowing up the performance claims about their CPU's. If someone out there has any valid reason to believe otherwise, I invite them to share it with us. Of course, on usenet, such an invitation is totally unnecessary! > Until there > is a 68040 that can be SPECMark'ed by someone other than Motorola, > then the '040 clocks 0 mips in my book. Amazingly, companies don't ALWAYS lie. Some of them are reasonably truthful, especially about making performance claims that, a couple of months later, people can verify as being true or untrue. Anyway, going back to what started all of this, even if the 68040 is slower than the SPARC chips (of the same clock rate), the Amiga should still use a 68040 chip, for compatibility purposes. Unless the SPARC chip is much, much faster than the 68040, the SPARC emulating a 680x0 would be much slower than the 68040 running 680x0 software. Along the lines of what another person said, *IF* the Amiga 3000 is released late this year, if it is based on a 68030, it will be VERY anticlimatic. >>> Rick Spanbauer >>> State U of NY/Stony Brook Rodney Ricks -- "We may have come over here in different ships, but we're all in the same boat now." -- Jesse Jackson // \\ // Rodney Ricks, Morehouse College \/
ckp@grebyn.com (Checkpoint Technologies) (03/14/90)
In article <3952@nmtsun.nmt.edu> dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu (Dr. Mosh) writes: > >I don't think you people are getting the point here... I'm not arguing about >processor speed, we are trying to discuss what is best for the Amiga! Now >can you realistically see Commodore producing a RISC Amiga??? I can realistically see Commodore producing a RISC workstation. They may not call it an Amiga, though. (BTW, I have heard nary a rumor about this so it's speculation on my part.) And why not? Apple's rumored to have an 88000-based machine in the works, IBM has plenty of different architectures, and the workstation market is growing and growing. Heh, Commodore may find the going tough against Sun, DEC, HP/Apollo, IBM, Integraph, Silicon Graphics...
swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) (03/15/90)
In article <6398@sbcs.sunysb.edu> root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Systems Staff) writes: >In article <3951@nmtsun.nmt.edu> dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu (Dr. Mosh) writes: [...] >>...based on pure processing performance, the 68040 IS Faster... [...] > without qualifying it, thus it is meaningless. Motorola claims the > '040 to have an CPI that is roughly the same as some current RISC > chips, so that would indicate for some applications, at the same clock > speed and using '040 instructions that are pipelined, it *might* (if > Motorola marketspeak is roughly true) run same speed as current Sparc. [...] The statements I have read about code density state that RISC code on the average is about 1.3 times longer than equivalent CISC code. Thus, if the CPI average quoted above for the '040 is for typical 680X0 code (and not special hand-picked code) then it would be expected that the '040 would beat SPARC at the same clock speeds. ie time spent = CPI(avg) * [# of instructions] * clock speed If CPI and clock speeds are the same, and CISC is known to require less instructions on the average, then I don't have a problem with the '040 being faster. Doesn't necessarilly mean its's so, but it does make sense. -- --Steve ------------------------------------------------------------------------- {uunet,sun}!convex!swarren; swarren@convex.COM
admiral@m-5.Sun.COM (Michael Limprecht SUN Microsystems Mt. View Ca.) (03/15/90)
In article <100528@convex.convex.com>, swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) writes: > In article <6857@cps3xx.UUCP> porkka@frith.UUCP (Joe Porkka) writes: > [...] > >Even better, make a SPARC Amiga. Yeah I know everything > >would need to be recompiled and all that crap, but you can > >only go so far with 68000 based machines. > [...] > Well, however far that is, it appears to be at least as far as SPARC > (using the same process). I have seen several claims lately that the new > 68040 can outperform SPARC machines running at the same clock speeds. > This of course is not authoritative, since the benchmarks haven't > been released. However, I think it is premature to announce the > death of the 680X0 family. > More marketing hype comparing apples and oranges. Yes it can. But we're talking brand new just released 040 to one to two year old Sparcs. When the new stuff shows up the 040 will be just another cisc slug. Plus the Sparc software that's out there now doesn't have to be "enhanced" to run at optimal speed. Just plug and play. Oh, one more thing. Try to get an 040 from anybody but Motorola. Still, an 040 or Sparc Amiga would be nice. Mick ------------------------------------------------------------------- "I think there's a world market for about 5 computers." - Thomas J. Watson, Chairman of the Board, IBM (around 1948) ------------------------------------------------------------------- uucp: {anywhere}!sun!admiral -------------------------------------------------------------------
cmcmanis@stpeter.Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (03/16/90)
In article <32389@auc.UUCP> rar@auc.UUCP (Rodney Ricks) writes: >From what I remember of the article, the 68040 is faster than a SPARC of the >SAME clock rate (25 MHz). A short clarification, a point of confusion is often that people don't specify *which* SPARC chip they are comparing to. SPARC is an architecture like 68K is an architecture. 68040 is the name Motorola has given to their latest implementation of the 68K architecture. Probably the "fastest" implementation of the SPARC architecture is currently available from Cypress. So is the 68040 faster than the Cypress-SPARC ? I don't know and neither does BYTE. I agree with Rick, wait till some uninterested third party runs the SPECmark package on two _systems_ to see which one is the current king in the MIPs wars. Maybe Fred Fish can tell us how the 68040 compares to the 88000. --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis Internet: cmcmanis@Eng.Sun.COM These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you. "If it didn't have bones in it, it wouldn't be crunchy now would it?!"
wayneck@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM (Wayne C Knapp) (03/16/90)
In article <100578@convex.convex.com>, swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) writes: > In article <6398@sbcs.sunysb.edu> root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Systems Staff) writes: > >In article <3951@nmtsun.nmt.edu> dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu (Dr. Mosh) writes: > [...] > >>...based on pure processing performance, the 68040 IS Faster... All of this talk about a 68040 being faster than anything isn't worth anything until one can get a 68040 in a real system. So far it is just a bunch of talk. The 68040 is just being sampled now. There is no way the a company like Commodore is going to be able to get a 68040 based computer out this year. Face it, we will be luckly to see a 68030 based 3000 out this year. When the 68040 is out in systems, it will make some sence to talk about its speed compared to a sparc or 88K or whatever. However until there are some real 68040 systems out it isn't really possible to compare performance. Wayne Knapp
psu@mtuni.ATT.COM (Paul Siu) (03/16/90)
I know that there's been a lot of argument over whether 68040 is faster than a SPARC, but in my view, they are both fast enough, and discussion of speed is going to go on forever because processors are usually good at some areas, but not in others. What's not discuss is the I/O speed. I notice a lot of 386 clones these days running at 33MHZ still have 8MHZ 16-bit AT bus, so the cpu outpaces the external I/Os. I am curious to see if this is true for Amiga also.
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (03/16/90)
In article <5812@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM> wayneck@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM (Wayne C Knapp) writes: >the a company like Commodore is going to be able to get a 68040 based >computer out this year. Face it, we will be luckly to see a 68030 based >3000 out this year. > > Wayne Knapp Wayne, this isn't directed particularly at you, but unless people are willing to put up evidence it is ridiculous to keep making claims about availability. I have heard all sorts of things. Some people say it probably won't be out next year, other's say that our favorite hacker Hazy has one on his desk and it'll be out at CeBit. Basically, if you are a developer you can't say anything and if you are Commodore you won't say anything. Everyone else is just guessing. Let's stop the guessing game which someone may accidentally take as fact! -- Ethan Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu Compu$erve : 70137,3271 Anyone giving away Amigas or Sharp Scanners??? "I'm a politician. I lie and steal. When I'm not kissing babies I'm stealing their lollipops" -- Red October (probably mungled) "Can it core a apple" -- Edward Norton (Art Carney) "If Commodore had to market sushi they'd call it `raw cold fish'" -- The Bandito, inevitably stolen from someone else
evgabb@sdrc.UUCP (Rob Gabbard) (03/16/90)
In article <6360@sbcs.sunysb.edu>, root@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Systems Staff) writes: > In article <3944@nmtsun.nmt.edu> dksnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu (Dr. Mosh) writes: > >In article <6857@cps3xx.UUCP> porkka@frith.UUCP (Joe Porkka) writes: > >Actually, the 68040 is faster than the current SPARCS used in the Sun > >4/330 and 4/370(both 17 MIPS) and the 68040 is reported to do 20 MIPS. > > Unqualified statements such as yours are meaningless. Which, > '040 beating the Sparc on? Aside from hype, that is ;-) > "Reported to", at least to date, is what Motorola says the '040 I've used systems based on the entire Motorola family quite extensively. After each of their major announcements I was fortunate to use some of earliest systems using the newest chips: 25MHZ '020 - Apollo DN4000 33MHZ '030 - Apollo DN4500, HP370 50MHZ '030 - HP375 One thing I can say about Motorola is that their preliminry quoted numbers are very close to the fact. The 50MHZ '030 is a screamer ! -- ________ _________ _______ ________ / _______| | ____ \ | ___ \ / _______| Rob Gabbard (uunet!sdrc!evgabb) | |______ | | \ \ | | \ | | / Technical Development Engineer \_______ \ | | | | | |___/ / | | Structural Dynamics Research Corp. ______| | | |____/ / | ____ \ | \_______ #include <std/disclaimer.h> |________/ |________/ |_| |_| \________|
seanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham) (03/17/90)
In-Reply-To: message from root@sbcs.sunysb.edu You also have to remember that MIPS is a relative term...it is practically useless for comparing similar chips between differant manufacturers (ie: the '040 and the i486), and even worse when comparing it with different architectures like CISC and RISC. In last months UNIX WORLD there was a very good article on all this that said most companies are actually reporting Vax VUPS and not Vax MIPS...and a VUP is (I believe) .47 Vax MIPS... Sean
tell@oscar.cs.unc.edu (Stephen Tell) (03/20/90)
> Wayne, this isn't directed particularly at you, but unless >people are willing to put up evidence it is ridiculous to keep making >claims about availability. I have heard all sorts of things. Some >people say it probably won't be out next year, other's say that our >favorite hacker Hazy has one on his desk and it'll be out at CeBit. >Basically, if you are a developer you can't say anything and if you >are Commodore you won't say anything. Everyone else is just guessing. >Let's stop the guessing game which someone may accidentally take as >fact! The following aren't guesses, but things that reliable people said at AmiEXPO in Washington D.C. this past weekend. Gail Wellington, CBM special projects, said to expect at least four *BIG* announcements from Commodore in the next few months. The editor of Amazing Computing, (sorry, forget his name) said he did more business after 6:00 pm (when the exhibit hall closed) running around looking at all of the sneak previews in private rooms. He also said to expect a lot of exciting announcements fairly soon. Jay Miner, father of the Amiga custom chips suspects (he is not under non- disclosure and has no inside info) that Commodore is well along with a new set of killer mutant ninja custom chips with features like 2 (easily) to 4 (just maybe) time the speed, 8+ bitplanes, and 6 bits/color (total 256K colors) and possibily improvements to HAM mode to get all 256K colors on the screen at once. Jay also made either a simple mistake or freudian slip an said "Amgia 4000" when he meant to say "Amiga 3000." Now that's a rumor. > -- Ethan > >Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu >Compu$erve : 70137,3271
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (03/20/90)
In article <12735@thorin.cs.unc.edu> tell@oscar.cs.unc.edu (Stephen Tell) writes: >Gail Wellington, CBM special projects, said to expect at least four *BIG* >announcements from Commodore in the next few months. > >The editor of Amazing Computing, (sorry, forget his name) said he did more >business after 6:00 pm (when the exhibit hall closed) running around looking >at all of the sneak previews in private rooms. He also said to expect >a lot of exciting announcements fairly soon. > >Jay Miner, father of the Amiga custom chips suspects (he is not under non- >disclosure and has no inside info) that Commodore is well along with a new >set of killer mutant ninja custom chips with features like 2 (easily) to 4 >(just maybe) time the speed, 8+ bitplanes, and 6 bits/color (total 256K colors) >and possibily improvements to HAM mode to get all 256K colors on the screen >at once. >Jay also made either a simple mistake or freudian slip an said "Amgia 4000" >when he meant to say "Amiga 3000." Now that's a rumor. > Yes, there was a lot of stuff going on at the Expo. It has been my opinion that things will be out in a few months, but I have no basis other than a compilation of all the other rumors I've heard. My message was posted in "the heat of the moment" when I read someone's comments that the 3000 would probably not be out before the end of the year. If that's true he's the only one saying it. Gail hinted at a lot of things, as well as the fact that a major company would start supporting the Amiga. She made that comment after a story about Microsoft's Multimedia conference at which she descreibed herself as "in the back room". Take that to mean what you like, I've already made my conclusions %^> -- Ethan Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu Compu$erve : 70137,3271 Anyone giving away Amigas or Sharp Scanners??? "If Commodore had to market sushi they'd call it `raw cold fish'" -- The Bandito, inevitably stolen from someone else NewTek says, "if you are waiting for the toaster, get your bread ready." Well, I say my bread is now stale so they'd better be making a microwave!
ammrk@swbatl.sbc.com (Mike R. Kraml) (03/20/90)
In article <12735@thorin.cs.unc.edu> tell@oscar.cs.unc.edu (Stephen Tell) writes: >> Wayne, this isn't directed particularly at you, but unless >>people are willing to put up evidence it is ridiculous to keep making >> etc... > >The following aren't guesses, but things that reliable people said at >AmiEXPO in Washington D.C. this past weekend. > >Gail Wellington, CBM special projects, said to expect at least four *BIG* >announcements from Commodore in the next few months. > >The editor of Amazing Computing, (sorry, forget his name) said he did more >business after 6:00 pm (when the exhibit hall closed) running around looking >at all of the sneak previews in private rooms. He also said to expect etc... > >> -- Ethan >> >>Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu >>Compu$erve : 70137,3271 Couldn't some developer get on some machine somewhere under a bogus ID and leave some news with some facts???? I don't know, maybe we would blow that off too, but it would be fun anyway. Just kidding around, see ya, Mike... -- ============================================================================= Mike Kraml - Manager-Separations MECHANIZATION - SWBT - (The Techies) UUCP: {uunet, bellcore, texbell}...!swbatl!slims!ammrk =============================================================================
tep@tots.UUCP (Tom Perrine) (03/21/90)
On the subject of other competitors to the much-rumored Amiga 3000: It appears that the (also much-rumored) Sun SPARClite/SPARCintosh is due on April 15 (just in time for tax refunds??). Rumors are somewhat contradictory (just like the A3000 rumors), but the price point appears to be US$3000, Qty 1. Of course this is almost certainly mono, *might be* diskless, but will have 4-8MB+, plus a built-in Ethernet, etc. It won't do video (or sound) worth a ****, but it is an affordable UNIX box. There are other low-cost SPARCclones waiting in the wings, from Toshiba, Solbourne and Goldstar. Price points for these others have been mentioned as low as US$2500 with a disk. Don't get me wrong. I *love* my Amiga, but I have been waiting so long for UNIX for this beastie, that my head might be turned. I hope Commodore gets its act together on marketing *real soon*, especially in the government sector. Some indication of long-range plans is not just nice, its a requirement. Its not enough for them to say "expect some great things in the next 8 months"; when I want to bid low-cost workstations for a Gov't contract thats going to start in 6-9 months, I need to bid stuff that isn't already on the shelf, now, but will be then. If I don't, my competitor will, and I lose. I can't bid Amiga 3000's because I can't get any non-disclosure info out of Commodore. Sorry, didn't mean to flame. My point is that Commodore is not the only game in town, especially in the UNIX market; and as much as I love my Amiga, I need to see more advertising (to convince our Contracts people and the Gov't that Commodore is serious), a faster time to market with new products, and better support for non-disclosure information. Tom Perrine (tep) Logicon (Tactical and Training Systems Division) San Diego CA (619) 455-1330 Internet: tep@tots.Logicon.COM GENIE: T.PERRINE UUCP: nosc!hamachi!tots!tep -or- sun!suntan!tots!tep
airola@cat27.cs.wisc.edu (Darwin Airola) (04/13/90)
Does anyone have any info. about the Amiga 3000? What kind of microprocessor is it going to use? Will it allow "true" multitasking? Etc.? Thanks, _____________________________________ECE_____________________________________ | | | <omputer EE <*> <omputer EE <*> <omputer EE <*> <omputer EE <*> <omputer EE | | | | If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him. If he | | sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times comes back to you | | and says, "I repent," forgive him. Luke 17:3-4 | | | |________________________________Darwin Airola________________________________|
chrise@hubcap.clemson.edu (Chris Everhart) (04/14/90)
In article <4654@daffy.cs.wisc.edu>, airola@cat27.cs.wisc.edu (Darwin Airola) writes: > Does anyone have any info. about the Amiga 3000? What kind of > microprocessor is it going to use? Will it allow "true" > multitasking? Etc.? I don't know what kind of processor it will use, but since it will be running AmigaDOS AND Unix, yes it will have TRUE multitasking. Unless, of course, you don't consider either of those to be true multitasking, the Amiga has had true multitasking since its release. Chris Everhart chrise@hubcap.clemson.edu weverha@hubcap.clemson.edu
paul@wa1omm.UUCP (Paul MacDonald) (05/06/90)
I had an opportunity to test-drive an Amiga 3000 at System Eyes in
Nashua, NH. Nice box! After using an A2620 for awhile, I was impressed
with the increased speed of Professional Page V1.31 on the 3000.
Workbench V2 is also a nice piece of work. I like the close gadget on
the CLI windows! I did not like the many utlities necessary to
configure the Workbench. I think I'll miss the old V1.3 Preferences!
The 1950 monitor is also one of the better multiscans I have seen in a
long while. I suspect more than Amiga users will be buying it!
--
/\ /\
//\\//\\
+--------------------------------------------+
| From the shack of WA1OMM -- Paul MacDonald |
| Using the power of the multitasking Amiga! |
| |
| Compuserve: 70411,626 PLink: UPPERCRUST |
| Amateur Packet Radio: WA1OMM@KB4N.NH.USA |
+--------------------------------------------+
\\//\\//
\/ \/
boi@richsun.reuter.com (Ken Boi) (05/08/90)
Which machine accomodates more internal expansion cards : the Amiga 3000 or the Amiga 2000? Or are they the same numbers.
ckp@grebyn.com (Checkpoint Technologies) (05/09/90)
In article <885@richsun.UUCP> boi@richs18.richsun.reuter.com.UUCP () writes: >Which machine accomodates more internal expansion cards : the >Amiga 3000 or the Amiga 2000? Or are they the same numbers. The A2000 has 5 Zorro II slots; the A3000 has 4 Zorro III slots. Therefore the A2000 can hold more cards. However, the A3000 has the two most popular enhancements built-in, the hard drive adapter and memory expansion. The A2000 must use at least one slot for this (the Commodore A2091 holds both RAM and hard disk). So you might even consider the A2000 and the A3000 to have the same number of useful expansion slots. -- First comes the logo: C H E C K P O I N T T E C H N O L O G I E S / / \\ / / Then, the disclaimer: All expressed opinions are, indeed, opinions. \ / o Now for the witty part: I'm pink, therefore, I'm spam! \/
david@twg.com (David S. Herron) (05/28/90)
In article <1801@corpane.UUCP> sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: >ckp@grebyn.com (Checkpoint Technologies) writes: >>The A2000 has 5 Zorro II slots; the A3000 has 4 Zorro III slots. >>Therefore the A2000 can hold more cards. ... >So if you think you will be using IBM compatibility a lot, you might be >better off with a 2000. Or buying a separate IBM machine altogether. A thought.. The backplane is a card which plugs into the motherboard, correct? Wouldn't it be almost trivial to design a taller box and taller backplane card? Therefore one could have more slots with a small amount of effort on somebody's part. Pretty ingenious, if true. David -- <- David Herron, an MMDF weenie, <david@twg.com> <- Formerly: David Herron -- NonResident E-Mail Hack <david@ms.uky.edu> <- <- Sign me up for one "I survived Jaka's Story" T-shirt!
akcs.zl1ip@oneb (Jon Wiggens) (05/28/90)
It's finally here. The Commodore Amiga 3000, the latest edition to Commodore's finest family of computers. The new machine has many impressive features, the best of which ( as usual for Commodore ) is it's price. At $3495 for the 16MHz model and $3995 for the 25MHz model, this fabulous machine is a steal. A machine of comparable ability, such as the Mac IIci is about $3000 more. The two models are the 3000/16, a 68030/68881-based machine running at 16MHz and the 3000/25, a 68030/68882 machine running at 25MHz. Obviously, the only difference in the two machs clocks and coprocessors. This is the first Amiga of 32-bit architecture, all the internal pathways are 32 bits wide and use processor's clock. Perhaps the biggest advancement in this new model over the 500 and the 2000/2500 is the enhanced version of the custom chip set the defines the Amiga line. This is going to eliminate that annoying flicker in high resolution modes by using a de- interlacing/scan doubling capability, which takes interlaced high-resolution screens and outputs them with flicker to a 31.5-kHz VGA monitor. ( Commodore is also putting out a new 1950 VGA compatible monitor, but it will work with any VGA-compatible monitor on the market ). What seemed to make the Amiga look very unprofessional was it's Workbench environment. All one would see was a four-color 640- by 200-pixel screen with visible scan lines between each row of pixels. The Amiga 3000 is going to use version 2.0, in which Commodore has improved both the look and functionality of the of the interface by upgrading or rewriting most of the underlying system software. The Commodore Amiga 3000 is an extremely impressive piece of machinery and Commodore is going to be backing it up with strong support. They are, in fact, going to be porting Unix System 4.0 to the Amiga. Even with the additional cost of the operating system, it will still provide an inexpensive yet powerful, Unix workstation. If anybody has had the pleasure of trying Commodore's new beast, please make your opinions heard. I am looking forward to hearing if it is all it is
gouty@wizard.cis.ohio-state.edu (douglas walter gouty) (05/29/90)
In article <6914@gollum.twg.com> david@twg.com (David S. Herron) writes: >The backplane is a card which plugs into the motherboard, correct? > >Wouldn't it be almost trivial to design a taller box and taller >backplane card? Therefore one could have more slots with a small >amount of effort on somebody's part. > >Pretty ingenious, if true. > > David According to the commodore people it is pretty trival to add 1 more Amiga Slot(ONLY ONE booo.) and "several" more IBM slots. I am shure that will be one the first a3000 specific perifs made. Not to start any rumors or anything but can you say Amiga 3500? -- I will not waste chalk...I will not skateboard down the halls...I will not burp in class...I will not instigate revolution...I will not draw naked ladies in class...I did not see Elvis...I will not call my teacher "Hot Cakes"... Garlic gum is not funny...They are Laughing at me, not with me.....
Mario_Capellari@turtle.stgt.sub.org (Mario Capellari) (05/17/91)
In a message dated Mon 13 May 91 20:02, Clark@ssc-Vax (roger Clark Swann) wrote: Hello Clark, CVC> Regarding the A3000 upgrade plan from C=, I have called around to CVC> the local C= dealers in the Seattle area and the three that I CVC> talked to say, "We don't carry the A3000 in the 16 MHz flavor." CVC> Other comments included, "The 16MHz version is dead." CVC> Is this generally the way it is everywhere? Am I forced to go with CVC> a 25Mhz box? Yes I think. Also her in germany whe have a lot of computer shops for commo amigas, but the only modells I`ve seen was the 3000 with 25 MHz with different harddisks. I mean the A3000 with "only" 16 MHz is too slow and to expensive. Maybe Commo makes a good deal with his A3000 UT. Hopefully the price is ok. CVC> One other question; Are the floppies in the A3000 the high density CVC> variety? I haven't talked to or read anything that comfirms this CVC> one way or the other. Somehow I was thinking that C= had gone to a CVC> 1.44 MB format on the A3000... Was I just dreaming? I don`t know. But maybe it`s in the new A3000 UT Computer. so long... -- Via DLG Pro v.96 Beta --- mario capellari BBS`s for Amiga greetings 7000 Stuttgart 1 ++49 711 6407689 the FRG ++49 711 6498429 TurtleSystems UUCP:uunet!mcsun!aragon!tyrell!turtle!mario ..... ---