Quote:

I think I've discussed this before, but seriously, I'm curious as to why people say that all the time. I have a MPC8610@1.3Ghz here and it absolutely destroys the G4@1Ghz in terms of performance (200-300% speed increase is not unusual). The 8640D is even better (being dual core). I'm pretty positive that the *only* thing the G4 on the mac mini or the powerbook is going to beat the MPC8610 on are cpu-intensive computations with NO memory access (like a mandelbrot fractal). Even a 3D renderer would be much faster on the 8610 as it actually needs totally random access to memory. Don't forget the 8610 has a 533Mhz memory bus.

With regards to the P1022, well, I can't say for sure as it's quite a different design, but that one has a DDR3 memory interface (~800Mhz) which would make up for its somewhat slower CPU design.

So actually yes, I can compete -rather the cpus chosen can- in processing power, in fact I would say it's the other way around. But seriously, I do not intend to start a flame here, I'm too anxious to see if this thing will actually become reality. :)

[ Edited by feanor on 2009/11/7 16:34 ]

I have a MPC8610@1.3Ghz here and it absolutely destroys the G4@1Ghz in terms of performance (200-300% speed increase is not unusual).

Well, the time of Pegasos with its crappy memory bus, is over. Now you compete with mini @ 1.5 GHz and in the near future with powerbook @ 1.67 GHz. If your MPC 8610 board can beat them, fine. But it won't be easy. Extendability of your design and fast, modern interfaces may be your strong point. For example 2 or 4 SATA interfaces for those needing extreme mass storage. Neither mini nor powerbook deliver any other option than USB or Ethernet for that purpose.

Quote:

The G4 in the mac mini has an internal bus at 167Mh. Because it's Dual Data Rate some sites INCORRECTLY report this as 333Mhz which is of course wrong. The "effective" RAM speed is 333Mhz, in the same way the Pegasos II has an "effective" RAM speed of 266Mhz (133Mhz bus). It is indeed better than the Pegasos, but only 25% faster, let's not get overjoyed here.

Regarding connections, well for sure it would support 4 SATA2 ports, USB2 (USB3 if we find cheap controllers) and gigabit ethernet.

[ Edited by feanor on 2009/11/7 18:03 ]

[ Edited by feanor on 2009/11/7 18:07 ]

Quote:

I heard, Intel and other vendors decided to start USB3 controllers production not in 2010, but in 2011. So, I think that USB2 is enough.

Quote:

I actually had this in mind:

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/05/19/nec_usb_3_host/

Quote:

On the edge of technology :) Well, it's good reserve for future. Ok, let's wait for next week...

Quote:

That's quite sad i have to say.

Quote:

Hence my motivation to better promote MorphOS2.4 and try to get more users (and hopefully developers) with some "New Blood" to revitalize this community.

I do think the message count here has picked up over the last few months though, so that is a good sign.

Quote:

...and DDR533 of the the MPC8610 means that it has an "effective RAM speed" of 1066MHz, which is 320% of the Mac Mini RAM speed!

I have no experience whatsoever from the 8610, but I recall comments from the Genesi affiliated people over at powerdeveloper.org that has evaluated it quite thoroughly, that claims it's generally one of the best performing e600 CPU ever made. It's the newest/last of the e600 core CPU's, the peak of the evolution.

Quote:

Sounds good!

> It's the newest/last of the e600 core CPU's, the peak of the evolution.

Not true. The MPC8610 was introduced in 2007, the MPC8640(D) in 2008.

http://www.powerdeveloper.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1383
http://www.powerdeveloper.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1548

Final results about the market research here:

http://www.codex.gr/index.php?pageID=&blogItem=100

Quote from the blog -the interesting part-:

Quote:

Perhaps even use Genesi's bounty system?

COMMENT: The nice thing with that approach, is that the end design will be open. If the amount of people does not reach critical mass for a mass production -eg. 500- there might still be a few (100 or even less) people that may go for a small production scale and get the board of their dreams, albeit a bit more expensive! And if I would decide to drop out of the project for whatever reason, the design would be open for anyone to continue development on it. Actually, I wonder why didn't I think of that scheme before...

[ Edited by feanor on 2009/11/11 11:29 ]

>>> it just occured to me, that binaries with FPU code, will not be able to run on the e500
>>> cores without some kind of real-time FPU code translation, with performance loss.

>> Exactly, though only true for e500v2 (and before), which the P1 (and P2) series has.

> I just realized that for backwards compatibility, perhaps P1022 is not the best case,
> though attractive overall. It would need some serious work on the FPU real-time
> translation, and I can't even estimate the impact of that.

It seems this didn't hold back some people from working on a combined m68k/PPC expansion board for the Amiga 3000 and 4000, using the single-core version of the QorIQ P1022, which is the P1013, as its 1.0 GHz PPC CPU:

http://www.ultimateppc.nl

Close-up of the prototype board shows the QorIQ P1013 at 800 MHz:
http://www.ultimateppc.nl/img/uppc_reva_devboard_g2_20120507.jpg

As you said, a Power Architecture CPU with an e500v2 core isn't likely to be a good choice for hardware that's wished to provide backwards compatibility with WarpOS/PowerUP binaries or even compatibility with MorphOS or OS4.

Statements with respect to this taken from http://www.ultimateppc.nl/faq.php :

"Q: Will the PowerPC run AmigaOS4.x / MorphOS / etc. ?
A: We hope so! We will work actively with any developer to get these OSes supported on the UltimatePPC.

Q: Will the PowerPC CPU be supported in WarpUP / PowerUp under the Classic 3.x OS versions?
A: That would be awesome. It will be a very difficult task because for this to work as we would need to have a compatible kernel that runs on the UltimatePPC. The PowerUp / WarpUP kernel is closed source and not available to us and we would need to work around the slight differences in architecture. We would love to see this If you have voodoo coding skills, know how and want to put in serious effort please let us know."

Addendum:

> a Power Architecture CPU with an e500v2 core isn't likely to be a good choice for
> hardware that's wished to provide backwards compatibility with WarpOS/PowerUP
> binaries or even compatibility with MorphOS or OS4.

Confirmed by Piru:
http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=694126

...and other OS developers:
http://eab.abime.net/showpost.php?p=820157
http://amigaworld.net/modules/news/article.php?storyid=6389#86088

So ... what happened?

> what happened?

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6640&forum=11

I'd buy a new PPC motherboard for $300 US, assuming the MorphOS Team said they'd get MorphOS running on it. Otherwise, I'll stick to my G5 and wait for x64 MorphOS.

duplicate..delete

[ Edited by TheMagicM 04.11.2015 - 16:52 ]