>> Who is the developer/maintainer of U-Boot for Cyrus/X5000?

> Developer varisys, manteiner was before i quit Perez.

I hope they've been made aware of the problem. It doesn't sound too difficult to fix.

they need only enable an option in the uboot .config and disable another one... but i asked about in march 2016 when i had the 5020 ... now we are in september 2017 and:
uboot is the 2014 version.
nothing change about L3 options.
Uboot integrate the varisys Cyrus config in mainstream github :
shot

[ Edited by tlosmx 11.09.2017 - 14:11 ]

PCIex1 CMI8738 sound card freeze issue also occurs on Sam460ex .
http://forum.hyperion-entertainment.biz/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=3528

PCiex1 ENVYHT24 with ASM1083 revision 1 bridge csip works so it is possible that the issue with the
CMI PCIex1 cards may be able to be fixed in software.
http://forum.hyperion-entertainment.biz/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=3625&start=40#p41538

Quote:

[ Edited by Spectre660 11.09.2017 - 22:12 ]

Thanks, initially I may just use an Envy 24HT PCI card.
That will still goes through a bridge (PCI to PCI-E onboard), but maybe that will work OK.

Quote:

why you dont write about a core a-eon linux manteiner who wrote "why my cmi card work on my x1000 and freeze on x5000?"

> an Envy 24HT PCI card [...] will still goes through a bridge (PCI to PCI-E onboard)

It's even two bridges, as the PCIe-PCI bridge resides behind a PCIe-PCIe bridge.

Quote:

OMG, our poor developers...

topo explained

[ Edited by tlosmx 12.09.2017 - 22:12 ]

> topo explained

Link doesn't work for me.

Quote:

Me either.

pls chek it now


topo

Quote:

My X1000 is looking better and better each day, for running OS4 anyway. I like that it has Altivec and is using the e6500 core (I think), instead of the "weaker?" e5500, e600, or any other PPC core design.

If I remember correctly (which is highly unlikely), the memory read/write speeds and bandwidth for the X1000 was one of it's very few strong points, when the X1000 was compared to G4 and even G5 systems. That superior memory speed and maybe bandwidth, partially may have made up for the many other areas where the PA6T, or X1000 was/is slower than used PPC Mac hardware.

It is a shame, and I feel bad for Trevor and Matthew, that the X5000 is experiencing these apparent problems, or short falls in performance, since so much has been invested in creating what "is" the current (and possibly last) ultimate PPC AmigaOS4 compatible system. I kind of doubt that Hyperion will ever port AmigaOS4 to any Power9 (or even Power8 or lower) work station class systems, and no talk has been leaked that anyone is even thinking of porting AmigaOS4 to the x64 architecture.

Still, everything I have heard from the X5000 beta testers I have talked to, indicates that the X5000 is very noticeably faster at running AmigaOS4.1FE, when compared to the X1000 (or was that comparisons while running Linux?). This thread is the first I have seen where anyone has complained so extensively about the performance of the X5000. I'll have to get more info for Jim when I attend AmiWest 2017 next month, and take notes while playing with one of the many X5000's that will be displayed at the show. Maybe I will be able to set up my X1000 right next to someone's X5000, so a "side-by-side" comparison can be done, running the exact same game, or other software application.

That reminds me, I need to upgrade my X1000's video card and drivers, before the show dates. I haven't decided which video card I am going to put into it yet. I have a 6xxx, or 7xxx Radeon card in my i5 PC, which is a double width card with double fans attached to it, but I'm not sure I want to put such a noisy video card into my X1000, and don't think AmigaOS4.1FE has any software that needs such a powerful video card. I'll probably try to get recommendations from other X1000 and X5000 owners, regarding which video card to look for, then try to have it delivered within the next couple weeks, so I can install it and play around with AmigaOS4.1FE a bit before I pack it up to take to the show.

Let me know if there is anything specific you want tested, or asked of the X5000 owners Jim, so it can help you with your decision to buy an X5000-20, or X5000-40.

The X5000 is more of a sideways move, not a forward move, from the X1000's performance level, that fact was established years ago.

Quote:

I actually preferred the X1000's expansion slot setup as the P50xx doesn't offer as many PCI-E lanes, and the fact that the PA6T has AltiVec instructions is a plus.
I don't think the PA6T core is quite as nice as the e6500 core, but it had some advantages over the e5500.

And the Gen2 PCI-E lanes, SATA2 capability, and DDR3 off the e5500 SOCs are already becoming dated, when compared to current CPUs.

I'd still favor the X5000 over the X1000, but the memory benches are disheartening. I wonder if these can be improved with better firmware.

If the choices are hoping for an X64 shift that appears to be stagnant, waiting for support for X5000 and MorphOS 3.10, sticking with what we have, or hoping for PCI-E G5 support (or some other RISC solution)...

I'm not surprised we're losing users.

David - Have a good time @ AmiWest. My guess is the focus may be the A1222.
The teething issues with the X5000 are actually to be expected, and some of these things will improve.
From what I have been able to tell, the X5000/40 should be ready for release soon.
Since that will offer twice the core count of the X1000, that's the model I really think makes more sense.

And, of course, I still like the goals of the T2080 laptop project.

Hopefully some solutions to utilizing the additional cores available on newer systems will eventually become available.

[ Edited by Jim 13.09.2017 - 03:00 ]

> topo

One of the first two squares of the 2nd PCIe controller is surely the PCIe-PCIe bridge, which creates 8 output lanes from 4 input lanes (see block diagram in the Cyrus Plus technical reference manual as well as the first link I gave you in comment #64).

> My X1000 [...] is using the e6500 core (I think)

It is not, of course. Freescale announced their e6500 in 2011, which was short of 6 years after P.A. Semi announced their PA6T. More info there:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PWRficient
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerPC_e6500
https://www.nxp.com/products/microcontrollers-and-processors/power-architecture-processors/qoriq-platforms/e6500:E6500

> instead of the "weaker?" e5500, e600, or any other PPC core design.

Whether or not PA6T is stronger than e5500 or e600/G4 is surely open to debate and very much depends on the considered performance aspects (integer vs. floating point, cache etc.).

Andreas
this image was made by me some time ago because what i did not understand why they dint use the 3th pcie controller of the P50xx and you explain me so,me post ago.
for them was best made two different board one for 5020 and one for 5040 put less slots and dont use pcie-pcie bridges and use the 3 pcie controller im sure like this the machine will be have all better.

first and second square on the second controller are pcie-pcie bdridge on lshw on linux i sow exactly this but i was hoping was not like this.
If i will have time i will go in my mancave where is my x5000 (i dont turn on it from 1 month)
and will copy and past the log of it just for have better vision of everything.

Seems like the expansion busses and PCI-E routing on these boards is less than ideal.
This is one area the X1000 seems to have a leg up on.
The design of the X5000 could almost be modified for a T10XX.

[ Edited by Jim 13.09.2017 - 09:09 ]

Addendum:

> I doubt Varisys simply forgot to use more than two PCIe controllers, but believe
> there is a good reason for using only two of them. It might be connected to the
> fact that the board has been designed for three different SoCs (P3041, P5020,
> P5040) which are not 100% pin-compatible, so the actual board design
> represents the lowest common denominator between the three SoCs.

I just remembered that 6½ years ago, Jim and I discussed the SerDes assignment options for the P5020's PCIe controllers:

http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=7183&start=154
http://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=7183&start=177

As can be seen, the most sane PCIe config for the P5020 used in a desktop computer would have been x4 x4 x1 x1. Now as the P5040 lacks the fourth PCIe controller, this option can't be used on the board, so Varisys had to use the next best option instead, which is x4 x4 (with bridging the 2nd x4 to x8). And even if there was an x4 x4 x1 config for the P5020 (which there isn't), this would have resulted in only 1 lane more (or 3 lanes less without the bridge for the 2nd x4).
I think this should explain why the Cyrus board only uses two PCIe controllers.

but the most intelligent think will be for me if they use the P5021 and not the P5020 for have less problem?
or dont made the 5040 version and only 5020 and P3041 because are Pin compatible. P3041 plus is pin compatible with 4040 and 4080


Quote:

> for them was best made two different board one for 5020 and one for 5040
> put less slots and dont use pcie-pcie bridges and use the 3 pcie controller

If they had made two different boards for X5000/20 and X5000/40, they could have used all four PCIe controllers of the P5020 in x4 x4 x1 x1 config. For the P5040, the only SerDes config that includes SATA and all three PCIe controllers is x4 x1 x1, which is even less lanes than the x4 x4 config used now.
This means having two different boards would have benefited the X5000/20, but not the X5000/40.

29 SerDes assignment configs for P5020
14 SerDes assignment configs for P5040

As you can see, the only matching configs between the SoCs are 0x11, 0x15, 0x2a, 0x34, 0x35 and 0x36. Cyrus uses 0x11.

andreas
but 4x 1x 1x can be good if will gave the best and lest issue compared to put bridge over bridge.
if an user was need a pci for example there are many adaptor on amazon and this will made the mobo probably prizeless for the less components on it.

right now on my x5000 im using only 4x 1x 1x and im ok.

[ Edited by tlosmx 13.09.2017 - 15:28 ]

Well, since the 5040 is essentially pointless (from an "Amiga" perspective), it would have been better to only do *one* board that fully make use of the *5020 specs*. Now they have obviously made compromises to be able to use the same board with a CPU that no Amigan wants or needs.

Jim wanted one.
I did too but opted to get the X5000/20 as my Sam460ex was acting up.

Quote:

*5010 have same specs but can be more amigan