topgun@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Chandra Bajpai) (05/03/90)
>>>I didn't buy a portable earlier, because I wanted at least a 68030 so I >>>can run System 7 eventually. I understand Apple's design decision to go >>>with a CMOS 68000, but now I'm wondering when the 68030 (68040?) portable >>>will debut. > >Some of you may have missed the short note in EBN (Electronic Buyer's >News) a few weeks ago: > >"More 68000s in The Work > >Motorola has discussions under way with computer manufacturers about >the use of the newest version of the 68000 microprocessor in upcoming >systems. The device should be released in August or September in >conjunction with an announcement from a major system manufacturer, >said a Motorola marketing official. An enhanced version of an >existing 68000 device is scheduled to be introduced next month." > >My guess is that the August announcement will be of the rumored 68025; >which is based on an '040, stripped down, with a 16-bit bus interface. >Intel has been killing Motorola with the 386sx - the low-cost, 16-bit >bus version of the 80386. Motorola has to respond with a 68k chip >that has an MMU and a 16-bit bus. Can anyone comment about the enhanced version of the 68000 as well as the 68025? What are the specs of these chips? Thanks, Chandra Bajpai topgun@brandeis.cs.edu
valentin@cbmvax.commodore.com (Valentin Pepelea) (05/03/90)
>Some of you may have missed the short note in EBN (Electronic Buyer's >News) a few weeks ago: > >"More 68000s in The Work > >Motorola has discussions under way with computer manufacturers about >the use of the newest version of the 68000 microprocessor in upcoming >systems. The device should be released in August or September in >conjunction with an announcement from a major system manufacturer, >said a Motorola marketing official. An enhanced version of an >existing 68000 device is scheduled to be introduced next month." I strongly doubt this will be a 68040 in a 16-bit package. It will probably be a 16-bit 68030, hopefully pin compatible with the 68000. With the very large number of 68000 out there, there are bound to be houndreds of thousands of people willing to shell out $300 to make their computers run 4 times faster. And the price will probably be much lower. Valentin -- The Goddess of democracy? "The tyrants Name: Valentin Pepelea may distroy a statue, but they cannot Phone: (215) 431-9327 kill a god." UseNet: cbmvax!valentin@uunet.uu.net - Ancient Chinese Proverb Claimer: I not Commodore spokesman be
peg@psuecl.bitnet (PAUL E. GANTER) (05/06/90)
In article <11269@cbmvax.commodore.com>, valentin@cbmvax.commodore.com (Valentin Pepelea) writes: >> >>Motorola has discussions under way with computer manufacturers about >>the use of the newest version of the 68000 microprocessor in upcoming >>systems. The device should be released in August or September in >>conjunction with an announcement from a major system manufacturer, >>said a Motorola marketing official. An enhanced version of an >>existing 68000 device is scheduled to be introduced next month." > > I strongly doubt this will be a 68040 in a 16-bit package. It will probably > be a 16-bit 68030, hopefully pin compatible with the 68000. With the very > large number of 68000 out there, there are bound to be houndreds of thousands Hmmmm.... Amiga's use the 68000, don't they? Let me pull the lid off this 2000 on my desk... ;-) Seriously, could this mean what I think to the Amiga 500 and 2000 owners? I presume the 4x speed increase you suggest is based on a reduction of clock cycles/instruction and would thus work fine in a stock Amiga...? > of people willing to shell out $300 to make their computers run 4 times faster. Damn straight!! :) --Paul P.S. If you prefer to e-mail Amiga-specific info, please feel free! peg@psuecl.bitnet peg@psuecl.psu.edu
kdq@demott.COM (Kevin D. Quitt) (05/07/90)
In article <111512@psuecl.bitnet> peg@psuecl.bitnet (PAUL E. GANTER) writes: >In article <11269@cbmvax.commodore.com>, valentin@cbmvax.commodore.com (Valentin Pepelea) writes: >> >> I strongly doubt this will be a 68040 in a 16-bit package. It will probably >> be a 16-bit 68030, hopefully pin compatible with the 68000. With the very >> large number of 68000 out there, there are bound to be houndreds of thousands > >Seriously, could this mean what I think to the Amiga 500 and 2000 owners? >I presume the 4x speed increase you suggest is based on a reduction of >clock cycles/instruction and would thus work fine in a stock Amiga...? Not quite that easy, unfortunately. The interrupt stack frames are different, so you'll need to path the OS. kdq -- _ Kevin D. Quitt Manager, Software Development DeMott Electronics Co. VOICE (818) 988-4975 14707 Keswick St. FAX (818) 997-1190 Van Nuys, CA 91405-1266 MODEM (818) 997-4496 Telebit PEP last 34 12 N 118 27 W srhqla!demott!kdq kdq@demott.com 96.37% of the people who use statistics in arguments make them up.
valentin@cbmvax.commodore.com (Valentin Pepelea) (05/08/90)
In article <213@demott.COM> kdq@demott.COM (Kevin D. Quitt) writes: >>Seriously, could this mean what I think to the Amiga 500 and 2000 owners? >>I presume the 4x speed increase you suggest is based on a reduction of >>clock cycles/instruction and would thus work fine in a stock Amiga...? > > Not quite that easy, unfortunately. The interrupt stack frames are >different, so you'll need to path the OS. The Amiga operating system already automatically finds out which processor it is running on, and acts accordingly. We already have support for '010 '020 and '030 stack frames, and there are several of us here at Commodore that can make the necessary modification to the OS to handle new exception stack frames within *minutes*. It's quite a trivial task. Valentin -- The Goddess of democracy? "The tyrants Name: Valentin Pepelea may distroy a statue, but they cannot Phone: (215) 431-9327 kill a god." UseNet: cbmvax!valentin@uunet.uu.net - Ancient Chinese Proverb Claimer: I not Commodore spokesman be
bryce@cbmvax.commodore.com (Bryce Nesbitt) (05/08/90)
In article <213@demott.COM> kdq@demott.COM (Kevin D. Quitt) writes: > >> [Plug a 16 bit 68040 into an Amiga] > > Not quite that easy, unfortunately. The interrupt stack frames are >different, so you'll need to path the OS. Nope. None of the stack frames that matter to the Amiga are different on the 68040: ------frame types generated------ M68020/30 $0,$1,$2,$9,$A,$B M68040 $0,$1,$2,$3,$7 $3 is for floating point (which requires software emulation code anyway). $7 is for access errors, which are fatal anyway under traditional Amiga systems. The Amiga ROM is very flexible in dealing with the different 680XX series processors. -- |\_/| . ACK!, NAK!, EOT!, SOH! {o O} . Bryce Nesbitt, Commodore-Amiga, Inc. (") BIX: bnesbitt U USENET: bryce@commodore.COM -or- uunet!cbmvax!bryce Lawyers: America's untapped export market.
Bull@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au (Gareth Bull) (05/09/90)
In article <111512@psuecl.bitnet>, peg@psuecl.bitnet (PAUL E. GANTER) writes: > In article <11269@cbmvax.commodore.com>, valentin@cbmvax.commodore.com (Valentin Pepelea) writes: >>> >>>Motorola has discussions under way with computer manufacturers about >>>the use of the newest version of the 68000 microprocessor in upcoming >>>systems. The device should be released in August or September in >>>conjunction with an announcement from a major system manufacturer, >>>said a Motorola marketing official. An enhanced version of an >>>existing 68000 device is scheduled to be introduced next month." >> >> I strongly doubt this will be a 68040 in a 16-bit package. It will probably >> be a 16-bit 68030, hopefully pin compatible with the 68000. With the very >> large number of 68000 out there, there are bound to be houndreds of thousands > Seriously, could this mean what I think to the Amiga 500 and 2000 owners? > I presume the 4x speed increase you suggest is based on a reduction of > clock cycles/instruction and would thus work fine in a stock Amiga...? Here's an idea, but it depends on the following conditions. 1: The 68025 will be 68000 pin compatible. 2: There are Atari and Mac programs which use the MOVE SR instruction in USER mode. This bad habit is predominantly confined to games software on the Amiga, but this may not be the case for the Mac and Atari. 3: Motorola doesn't include some on chip logic in the '025 to neatly handle MOVE SR attempts from USER mode ( that's a HINT, Motorola ). This SHOULD have been designed into the '010 and successive chips as it is, IMHO. A daughter board to fit into the cpu socket of any 68000 based system with some glue routines to handle USER mode MOVE SR instructions. That's it in a nutshell. I don't know enough about these matters to attempt it myself, or even if it's feasable. Equivelent products may already be available for the Mac and Atari, but if not, there may be a dollar or two in it for someone. That's my 1.5c worth ( adjusted for exchange rates 8). Bull@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au OR com259h@monu1.cc.monash.oz Alias: Gareth Bull, The Opal Dragon ---------> " If I said it, then *I* said it! " <----------