> I suspect they'll use some kind of decaffeinated 603 cores

Unlikely. 603e cores are not suitable for dual core configuration.

I hope I am wrong but, I think it is going to be a really long "Two more weeks" for all those people waiting to purchase the X1000 and run AmigaOS4.1 on it plus their current Amiga applications and games.

It is nice to have pictures of the new Amiga hardware, but I am not going to get too excited about the X1000 until I see one finished and running so benchmarks can be done on it running AmigaOS4.x.

I don't want to rain all over their parade though, so I will just sit back and relax until they have some news to tell about videos of it running anything.

> I doubt a G5 for MorphOS will cut it either. We will probably see no SMP (as far as one can
> say it is just not possible w/o breaking the compability). And with one core only the 970 isn't
> that much superior over the e600 core.

One PPC970FX core at 2.7 GHz vs. one e600 core at < 2.0 GHz :-)

The description on A-Eon.com said it was a dual-core processor that probably hadn't been seen before in the wild so I suspect it's none of the above. Maybe they've got some partnership going with another PowerPC design company besides AMCC or Freescale. I heard that Texas Instruments was a partner with P.A. Semi before they got bought by Apple. Maybe T.I. has some production rights to the designs.

Quote:

I think It's very important to support PowerMac G4 (quicksilver 2001, 2002 and MDD) because very powerful hardware for Amiga.
In the future also support PowerMac G5.

regards

> The description on A-Eon.com said it was a dual-core processor that probably
> hadn't been seen before in the wild

I know. But where does your "1.8 GHz" figure come from?

> so I suspect it's none of the above.

Zylesea and I did not talk about the X1000's CPU.

I think the original CPU info was 1.6 GHz on the CPU link on A-Eon.com so I don't know where the 1.8 GHz figure came from.

Impressive motherboard (if any day see the light) and impressive her cost, this motherboard can rise up to 1000 eur easily, but this seems like all time Amiga histories full of specs with poor software support.

Sincerely... multicore CPUs is really cool but, an amiga-like OS need multicore CPUs? I hope the best for this motherboard but all this news about "new era" "new hopes" sounds like another squeeze for amiga name, but lets see...

email sent by Ben.

I never knew the details or intentions clearly.
Very interesting to see how they ended up fighting amongst themselves... And further hurting the market they claimed to lead.

Quote:

Well,I didn't said the 970 wouldn't be superior, just not *that much*. The question now is how much this "that much" actually is and if the effort is worth the benefit?
*My* stance on this would probably be: Do the unevitably big cut once the G4 field is grazed. But OTOH I cannot really judge how much effort support for the 970 would be. And some AMP work (which would be beneficial for 970 support) could be tackled with dual g4 cards already. Anyway my current needs are catered well with my mini. I guess the G4s will be fairly okay for the next few years and the next hardware update will be required in about 2-5 years. Dunno if this time could be sufficient to do the big cut. But would be the alternative..?

> I don't know where the 1.8 GHz figure came from.

So you mean that you invented that number to present it as confirmed fact?

> an amiga-like OS need multicore CPUs?

CPU manufacturers of all major architectures have been going multicore for years and will even more so in the future. That includes *lowering* clock frequency of each core even. Reason is that the clock frequency has physical limits in our current semiconductor technology. Multicore will prevent further improvement in general computing power from stalling without radically changing technology to biotech or such. Thus, like any other OS, sooner or later "amiga-like OS" will have to be multicore capable to stay future proof.
Btw, it's usually not the OS itself that needs more and more raw computing power but the applications running on the OS.

Quote:

It was a typo. I meant 1.6 GHz. That's also just what A-Eon was running it at. That's not the normal clock speed for the chip.

> It was a typo.

Alright. Case closed :-)

> some AMP work (which would be beneficial for 970 support) could be tackled with dual g4
> cards already.

Or with stock dual-G4 PowerMacs. But I was aiming at mere single core support for the 970. I think even that would benefit MorphOS.

> I think it is going to be a really long "Two more weeks" for all those
> people waiting to purchase the X1000 and run AmigaOS4.1 on it

It seems the X1000 needs so long to bring to completion that it is now planned to be released along with OS4.2:

"AmigaOS 4.2 [...] is currently planned for release along with the powerful AmigaOne X1000 platform."
http://blog.hyperion-entertainment.biz/?p=479

What I find also interesting in this blog entry is that the "MicroA1-C Mark 2" (I guess that's the one with PPC750GX, right?) is called a "limited developer board" when in fact it was as much sold as a regular product by Eyetech as the previous one with the PPC750FX.

Come on Andreas, people are waiting over 500 days for X1000, they can wait another 500 ;)

@Andreas Wolf

"What I find also interesting in this blog entry is that the "MicroA1-C Mark 2" (I guess that's the one with PPC750GX, right?) is called a "limited developer board" when in fact it was as much sold as a regular product by Eyetech as the previous one with the PPC750FX."

You are confusing the Mark 2 with the Mark 3. The Mark 3 was the Micro model (with both FX/GX) that was distributed by the Eyetech dealer network.
Some developers had Mark 2.(very faulty)

#6

> You are confusing the Mark 2 with the Mark 3. The Mark 3 was the
> Micro model (with both FX/GX) that was distributed by the Eyetech
> dealer network. Some developers had Mark 2.(very faulty)

Thanks for correction/clarification. I wasn't aware that there was a version of the Micro-A1 older than the regular FX model out in the wild. This way it makes sense, indeed :-)

@Andreas Wolf

Located a post I believe backs this up.

source

btw-DaveAE also had one.

#6

> Located a post I believe backs this up.

Oh yes it does. Thanks again.

> DaveAE also had one.

...and as it seems m3x, COBRA, Gopal and SvenHarvey. There's a remark by sg2 that there only ever were 7 of those made:

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&u=http://obligement.free.fr/articles/itwguillard.php

@Andreas Wolf

Very rare indeed.

Actually, the Micro MK3 (FX) is extremely scarce as well, and mostly in the hands of beta testers. You would be hard pressed to find more than a handful listed in owners' signatures.
The majority of the approximately 300 MK3 µA1s sold were GX.

#6

Addendum:

> There's a remark by sg2 that there only ever were 7 of those made

Rigo on the other hand thinks he "heard there was a limited run of 50".

http://forum.hyperion-entertainment.biz/viewtopic.php?p=1954#p1954

@Andreas Wolf

"There's a remark by sg2 that there only ever were 7 of those made"
I'd tend to believe ^^ that.
All MKII were FX, if that hasn't been mentioned or obviously assumed to be true.

Another interesting post about MKII issues:

post #16

#6

> I'd tend to believe ^^ that.

True, 7 sounds much more realistic than 50 for this kind of board, so I think Rigo may have heard wrong.

> All MKII were FX, if that hasn't been mentioned or obviously assumed to be true.

Yes, that was obvious to me.