870646c@aucs.UUCP ('Barry Comer') (02/01/89)
Has there been any speed comparsions posted for the 68020 boards that are out for the 2000 in the last while, and if not could someone who has one of these boards post some. I am thinking on buying the 2620 board but I want to get the facts on the other boards first. later Barry Comer P.S. Had one of those 16Mhz 68000 boards from CMI, the best increase was during the float benchmark where it showed a 47 percent increase, but at the same time it showed no increase during the sieve benchmark. I had to return it because it would not work in "TURBO" mode after I added the Kickstart 1.3 rom to my 2000 for autobooting from the hard disk. It would boot fine, but when I ran the software that switches the speed the machine crashed, so I guess that I will have to "PUT UP WITH" a 68020 board(life is a bitch sometimes).
24847843%WSUVM1.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Shawn Clabough) (02/03/89)
I have a short benchmark that I ran using my old Processor Accelerator
benchmark. It plots two sine waves on the screen and displays how long
it took to complete. In standard 68000 mode it took 51.3 seconds to
complete. With my A2620 in 68020 mode it took 1.5 seconds (yes 1.5).
The program was compiled with the 1.3 IEEE libraries, so it took
advantage of the 68881. I imagine that if this program was written with
inline code for the 68020/881 it would be even faster.
How much do the A2620's cost? I'm selling them for $1575 (retail $1995)
Shawn Clabough
Lombards Underground Computers
24847843@WSUVM1.BITNEThugh@censor.UUCP (Hugh Gamble) (02/04/89)
In article <7856@louie.udel.EDU>, 24847843%WSUVM1.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Shawn Clabough) writes: > I have a short benchmark that I ran using my old Processor Accelerator [benchmark stuff deleted] > How much do the A2620's cost? I'm selling them for $1575 (retail $1995) > > Shawn Clabough > Lombards Underground Computers > 24847843@WSUVM1.BITNET The benchmark results make this less commercial than Shawn's last post, but what I find notable is the lack of phone number or snail mail address. Is the point of this to *avoid* being commercial, or to use usenet/bitnet mail for the business? If the former, I expect many people wouldn't mind knowing how they can patronize this mail order business. If the latter, folks are going to start getting upset. -- Hugh D. Gamble (416) 581-4354 {lsuc, utzoo}!censor!hugh (Std. Disclaimers) I don't want to live in a beer commercial, I just want to play with some of the girls from one. :^)
perry@madnix.UUCP (Perry Kivolowitz) (02/05/89)
In article <1532@aucs.UUCP> 870646c@aucs.UUCP ('Barry Comer') writes: > >P.S. Had one of those 16Mhz 68000 boards from CMI, the best increase was during >2000 for autobooting from the hard disk. It would boot fine, but when I ran >the software that switches the speed the machine crashed, so I guess that I > > You are not alone. I installed the latest rev CMI accelerator (I got a bunch of them because I wrote their multitasking floating point code). I found that "pa" would crash if it was run from a FFS partition but would work if it were run from an OFS partition. I've heard of problems like this before but didn't believe the stories. This is one for CBM to look into. I finally had to remove the accelerator anyway since even the "latest" rev causes an increase in the random guru rate (at least in my machine). Since I've got a bunch of these things, anybody wanna buy one cheap? :-) -- Perry Kivolowitz, ASDG Inc. ARPA: madnix!perry@cs.wisc.edu {uunet|ncoast}!marque! UUCP: {harvard|rutgers|ucbvax}!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!perry
hugh%censor.uucp@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Hugh Gamble) (02/05/89)
----------------------------Original message---------------------------- In article <7856@louie.udel.EDU>, 24847843%WSUVM1.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Shawn Clabough) writes: >>I have a short benchmark that I ran using my old Processor Accelerator [benchmark stuff deleted] >>How much do the A2620's cost? I'm selling them for $1575 (retail $1995) >> >> Shawn Clabough >> Lombards Underground Computers >> 24847843@WSUVM1.BITNET >The benchmark results make this less commercial than Shawn's last post, >but what I find notable is the lack of phone number or snail mail >address. Is the point of this to *avoid* being commercial, or to use >usenet/bitnet mail for the business? If the former, I expect many >people wouldn't mind knowing how they can patronize this mail order >business. If the latter, folks are going to start getting upset. I'm not trying to be commercial with my posts. People have questions about the A2620 and I have the answers. One of these questions is how much they are selling for. Then I tell them how much I am selling for. The reason for no phone number is that I am running the business in my spare time while I go to school and am rarely home. If someone wants to reach me by snail mail, then they can if they want, but I thought that Email would be the easiest for people on the net. Thank you for requiring me to clarify myself, I hope no one is offended. Shawn Clabough (24847843@WSUVM1.BITNET) Lombards Underground Computer Sales 507 S Main Moscow, ID 83843
billsey@agora.UUCP (Bill Seymour) (02/12/89)
From article <1532@aucs.UUCP:, by 870646c@aucs.UUCP ('Barry Comer'):
: P.S. Had one of those 16Mhz 68000 boards from CMI, the best increase was during
: the float benchmark where it showed a 47 percent increase, but at the same time
: it showed no increase during the sieve benchmark. I had to return it because
: it would not work in "TURBO" mode after I added the Kickstart 1.3 rom to my
: 2000 for autobooting from the hard disk. It would boot fine, but when I ran
: the software that switches the speed the machine crashed, so I guess that I
: will have to "PUT UP WITH" a 68020 board(life is a bitch sometimes).
Hmm, sounds like you didn't call and ask... We've noticed a fair amount
of the new 1.3 ROMs that can't handle 14MHz accesses. The solution is to remove
the 'Fast ROM' jumper (J2) from your Processor Accelerator. You get a little
less speedup on ROM routines, but still benefit from the faster processor. Not
as much of a speed up as a 68020, but still a lot less expensive!
--
-Bill Seymour ...tektronix!reed!percival!agora!billsey
...tektronix!sequent!blowpig!billsey
Creative Microsystems Northwest Amiga Group At Home Sometimes
(503) 684-9300 (503) 656-7393 BBS (503) 640-0842jdutka@wpi.wpi.edu (John Dutka) (02/14/89)
Does anyone out there have any experience with CMI's Double Speed 68000 (14 MHz)/68881 accelerator board for the A500 and Workbench 1.3? After hearing of an incompatibility problem with a 68020 board and 1.3, I was just wondering if anybody reading this message knew of any incompatibility problems that would exist, or of any alternative setups at a better buy. +--------------------------+----------------------------+--------------------+ | John A. Dutka (jdutka) | . . . .____. . | jdutka@wpi.bitnet | | Worcester Polytechnic | | | | | | | | jdutka@wpi.wpi.edu | | WPI Box 2308 | | | | |____| | | | | 100 Institute Road | | | | | | +--------------------+ | Worcester, MA 01609-2280 | |__|__| | | | | | (508) 792-1949 | | | | | (c) 1989-cmoir@wpi.wpi.edu | | +--------------------------+----------------------------+--------------------+