gilgalad@caen.engin.umich.edu (Ralph Seguin) (10/22/90)
Hi. I had heard that somebody is working on a multi-processor i860 board for the Amiga. The base model consisted of 2 860s running at 40 MHz in parallel, with the option of adding up to 6 more (8 total). This would be quite cool in that it would provide for some really amazing computational power. You could stick an Amiga 3000/25 on a network with one of these babies in it and have it be a compute-server. Everything relying on the Amiga to get things done. I like the sound of that 8-) I'm not certain how much RAM you could add to it, but I had heard that it was something like 128 megs. Another interesting idea would be to write a version of the ieee libraries that accessed this board. It is important to note that special compilers will have to be used in order to obtain fully-parallel code, etc. See ya, Ralph PS- I'm not certain about my numbers, but if the code is fully-parallel, then the max compute power of an 8 node board should be something like 640 megaFLOPS. gilgalad@dip.eecs.umich.edu gilgalad@caen.engin.umich.edu Ralph Seguin | "You mean THE Zaphod Beeblebrox?" 536 South Forest | Apartment 915 | "No. Haven't you heard, I come in six packs!" Ann Arbor, MI 48104 | (313) 662-4805
joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) (10/25/90)
NO! We don't want an Intel chip in our Ami's! I'd rather have an MC88000, since any Motorola chip can easily trash it's Intel equivelent. -Joseph Hillenburg UUCP: ...iuvax!valnet!joseph ARPA: valnet!joseph@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu INET: joseph@valnet.UUCP
cpca@iceman.jcu.oz (C Adams) (10/26/90)
In article <aXgkR9w163w@valnet>, joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: > NO! We don't want an Intel chip in our Ami's! I'd rather have an MC88000, > since any Motorola chip can easily trash it's Intel equivelent. > The i860 is a very fast chip, faster than the MC88000. It is difficult to program, and current compilers don't utilise it properly. Overall Motorola chips are usually better designed than Intel chips, but some of Intel's designers are quite bright. I think the i860 would make a great amiga co-processor board, and hopefully whoever at C= is doing the device independent graphics library will allow it to be used. BTW, If you want a fast Motorola chip, look into their latest multimedia DSPs.... Colin Adams AMIGA, because a CRAY won't fit on your desk. Email Address - cpca@marlin.jcu.edu.au
swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren) (10/27/90)
In article <1119@iceman.jcu.oz> cpca@iceman.jcu.oz (C Adams) writes: >In article <aXgkR9w163w@valnet>, joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: >> NO! We don't want an Intel chip in our Ami's! I'd rather have an MC88000, >> since any Motorola chip can easily trash it's Intel equivelent. >> > >The i860 is a very fast chip, faster than the MC88000. It is >difficult to program, and current compilers don't utilise it >properly. [...] I concur, the i860 is a truly amazing microprocessor. But you really need a good memory system matched to it to get near its potential. I think that you would have to have a lot of money before you should consider sticking one in your Amiga. But the Amiga would probably make a good front-end for an i860 system. You just have to be willing to deal with the inconveniences of a new architecture that is not yet widely used. People (not us) are designing minisupercomputers today based on the i860. -- _. --Steve ._||__ DISCLAIMER: All opinions are my own. Warren v\ *| ---------------------------------------------- V {uunet,sun}!convex!swarren; swarren@convex.COM
p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst) (10/27/90)
In article <1119@iceman.jcu.oz> cpca@iceman.jcu.oz (C Adams) writes: >BTW, If you want a fast Motorola chip, look into their latest multimedia >DSPs.... That's true, but it's still too expensive for me :-( Regards, -- Michael van Elst UUCP: universe!local-cluster!milky-way!sol!earth!uunet!unido!mpirbn!p554mve Internet: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."
ifarqhar@sunc.mqcc.mq.oz.au (Ian Farquhar) (10/31/90)
In article <aXgkR9w163w@valnet> joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: >NO! We don't want an Intel chip in our Ami's! I'd rather have an MC88000, >since any Motorola chip can easily trash it's Intel equivelent. Have you seen the specs on the i860? I agree that it is unsuitable as a general CPU, but the data sheet gives me the impression that it is not meant to perform that function, but to act as an ultra-high performance graphics co-processor. Briefly, the i860 is a 64 bit RISC processor, running at around 50 MHz. It's instruction set is very graphics oriented, and even includes instructions for maintaining a z-buffer and performing matrix transformations through the internal FP ALU. I get the impression that the purpose of the whole design is to keep the ALU fed with data. What it *is not* is yet another Intel chip destined to be thown into the bottomless chasm of MS-DOS ("abandon all hope ye processors who enter here..." :-) Very impressive. However, current price for the i860 (in Oz) is $1440 ex. tax. Also very impressive, extensive, and at a level that would put an i860-based card graphics at about $5000. -- Ian Farquhar Phone : 61 2 805-9404 Office of Computing Services Fax : 61 2 805-7433 Macquarie University NSW 2109 Also : 61 2 805-7205 Australia EMail : ifarqhar@suna.mqcc.mq.oz.au
billsey@agora.uucp (Bill Seymour) (10/31/90)
In article<aXgkR9w163w@valnet> joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes:
:NO! We don't want an Intel chip in our Ami's! I'd rather have an MC88000,
:since any Motorola chip can easily trash it's Intel equivelent.
Better take a closer look at those two chips. They perform vastly
different functions. The 88000 series are targeted at UNIX based systems,
with fairly good performance for that type of thing. The i860 is targeted
more toward a full system PC or video game. It has a graphics engine onboard
as well as the CPU and FPU. With an internal 64bit bus, it's going to make
some killer video games in a couple of years! :-) I personally would rather
see an i860 coprocessor board than an 88000 coprocessor board. After all,
no existing Amiga code would run on either one...
:-Joseph Hillenburg
:
:UUCP: ...iuvax!valnet!joseph
:ARPA: valnet!joseph@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu
:INET: joseph@valnet.UUCP
--
-Bill Seymour billsey@agora
***** American People/Link Amiga Zone Hardware Specialist NES*BILL *****
Bejed, Inc. NES, Inc. Northwest Amiga Group At Home Sometimes
(503) 281-8153 (503) 246-9311 (503) 656-7393 BBS (503) 640-0842daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (11/01/90)
In article <aXgkR9w163w@valnet> joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: >NO! We don't want an Intel chip in our Ami's! I'd rather have an MC88000, >since any Motorola chip can easily trash it's Intel equivelent. Don't knock the i860 -- it's a completely different thing than the 80x86 line of CPUs. While it's a general purpose CPU, it's designed for extremely fast math processing. Especially thanks to a real 64 bit wide data bus, it'll leave the 88k in the dust banging on floating point numbers. Then again, you can buy a couple of complete 88k chipsets for the price of a single i860, which would do you a heck of alot more good if you're interested in more general purpose computing. While not an exact matchup, the Motorola 96002 DSP is more comparable to the i860 in terms of floating point performance. However, they are different critters; you can, for example, get UNIX for the i860, but not for a DSP like the MC96002. >-Joseph Hillenburg -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy Standing on the shoulders of giants leaves me cold -REM
amiga@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Paul) (11/02/90)
Since I live just a few miles away from the Motorola plant here in austin, I have talked to several people from the company. They say that the new version of the 88000 is due to be releaced mid 1991. They say that it will beat the i860 for speed in every catagory. Amiga@walt.utexas.edu .....Paul...... I like boats, they're healthier than valium. Cost more tho.