> PA Semi is low power desktop type

Actually, the PA6T-1682M was originally (i.e. before becoming embedded part) intended to be a notebook type CPU.

> of G5 CPU

"G5" is usually considered as belonging to PPC970 microarchitecture family. However, the PA6T is a unique microarchitecture of its own, developed from scratch.

> It seems Pa Semi on Nemo is downclocked to 1.8GHz from 2Ghz

No, according to Varisys and A-Eon it isn't:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=7183&start=472

> OS4 doesn't support nearly half of board features now.

I think it supports more than half.

> XCore is not UNUSABLE chip [...]. it can do things like SMART HOME CONTROL.

Which, as I said, would make no sense to me on something like the X1000.

> A real DSP on board would be way more Amigish, like Falcon had.

Atari computers are "Amigish"? Interesting note :-)

> they did false advertising with its comparison to Transputer

Let's see what "they" actually claim with regard to Transputer:

"XMOS calls it "Software Defined Silicon", we call it 'Xena' [...]. It's the inheritor of the 'transputer' concept [...]. [...] you might have a Xorro board with an array of additional XMOS chips on, connected together to allow highly multi-threaded applications to run in parallel, in a similar fashion to the famous Transputer concept, the predecessor of the XMOS technology."
http://www.a-eon.biz/nemo.html

I can't really see anything "false" in these claims.

> and adding more Xena cores (how when Xorro isn`t it? Via USB? PCI?)

http://amigakit.leamancomputing.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=1135

Actually, the PA6T-1682M was originally (i.e. before becoming embedded part) intended to be a notebook type CPU.

> of G5 CPU

"G5" is usually considered as belonging to PPC970 microarchitecture family. However, the PA6T is a unique microarchitecture of its own, developed from scratch.

True, but actually all G designations are Apple designations for chip generation, and dont exist. Its kind of PentiumPro or 64-bit modern arhitecture designation.
At least I download Mint PPC G5 64-bit and it does work on PA Semi.

PA Semi is great chip, sadly I have just its only

> It seems Pa Semi on Nemo is downclocked to 1.8GHz from 2Ghz

No, according to Varisys and A-Eon it isn't:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=7183&start=472

Well I don`t believe them a bit. My chip is clocked at 1.8Ghz and originally it was introduced as 2Ghz only. Its now possible to buy it at 2Ghz at selected dealers.

http://forum.hyperion-entertainment.biz/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=2199


> OS4 doesn't support nearly half of board features now.

I think it supports more than half.

Trust me, less then half. DOnt let me count em.

> XCore is not UNUSABLE chip [...]. it can do things like SMART HOME CONTROL.

Which, as I said, would make no sense to me on something like the X1000.

It can make sense if you make use of it, sadly its not boosted in any proper way. My hardware boys find interesting possible uses, but its MUCH MUCH hustle.

> A real DSP on board would be way more Amigish, like Falcon had.

Atari computers are "Amigish"? Interesting note

Falcon is. more then crippled A600, A1200, A4000 and CD32.

> they did false advertising with its comparison to Transputer

Let's see what "they" actually claim with regard to Transputer:

"XMOS calls it "Software Defined Silicon", we call it 'Xena' [...]. It's the inheritor of the 'transputer' concept [...]. [...] you might have a Xorro board with an array of additional XMOS chips on, connected together to allow highly multi-threaded applications to run in parallel, in a similar fashion to the famous Transputer concept, the predecessor of the XMOS technology."
http://www.a-eon.biz/nemo.html

I can't really see anything "false" in these claims.

Don`t let me find all adverts from that time.

> and adding more Xena cores (how when Xorro isn`t it? Via USB? PCI?)

http://amigakit.leamancomputing.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=1135[/quote]

I have wrote only review of Xena and X1000, thanks.

a) the Falcon is just as crippled as A600 and A1200.... 16bit bus on a 030?? WTF !!!
b) all P6T are 1.8 anything 2.0 is overclocked
c) learn proper quoting!!

>>vox wrote:

>Well I don`t believe them a bit. My chip is clocked at 1.8Ghz and originally it was introduced as 2Ghz only. Its now possible to buy it at 2Ghz at selected dealers.

To my understanding it is not possible to be bought as 2Ghz chip, because all chips ever manufactured were 1.8Ghz parts (run also at 2Ghz, though, but only as overclocked a little).

(you could sue those marketing those 2Ghz chips perhaps)

>>> OS4 doesn't support nearly half of board features now.
>>I think it supports more than half.
>Trust me, less then half. DOnt let me count em.

I try.

>CPU: PA Semi Dual-core PA6T-1682M, nominal 2.0GHz (1.8GHz standard) PowerISA™ v2.04+

Supported as well as existing OS can do it.

(Second core is not supported by AOS4 as AOS4 is not capable to do SMP yet. And IIRC, GCC for AOS4 does not yet fully optimize for PA6T.)

>4x DDR2 RAM slots
>10x USB 2.0
>1x Gigabit Ethernet
>2x PCIe x16 slots (1x16 or 2x8)
>2x PCIe x1 slots
>2x PCI legacy slots

All supported.

>2x RS232

I think they are supported.

>1x Xorro slot and xena

Supported in some ways (similarly as the FPGA of SAM?)
So far no developer has done anything signifficant with it and one can not blame a-eon for that I think.

Other supported/in use things are:
Onboard SATA2(not perfectly IIRC), audio,

GPU is poorly supported, only in 2D+compositing when AOS4 is used.
There is no 3D driver for modern GPUs on PPC amigalikes.

Not sure if onboard PATA is supported.

Anyway, it would be nice to see the lest of the another half of HW features that are not supported.

>>> A real DSP on board would be way more Amigish, like Falcon had.
>>Atari computers are "Amigish"? Interesting note
>Falcon is. more then crippled A600, A1200, A4000 and CD32.

LOL!
Btw PA6T has huge DSP performance via Altivec. And xena can do DSP functions also (just inferior when compared to Altivec capabilities).

xena is a bridge chip. One can use it to do things like bridge to A1200 trapdoor connector (like original eyetech/AInc idea was). (I'm sure no one will do that bridge) Another example would be to bridge legacy ports via xena and the available xorro prototyping board.

>> and adding more Xena cores (how when Xorro isn`t it? Via USB? PCI?)

To my understanding xcore links are available on the xorro slot. One should be able to add matrix of xcore chips there.

and...
>Cyrus was introduced rendering Nemo obsolete - correcting X1000 biggest gap and that is low CPU performance.

As long as AOS4 SW is not capable of using multiple cores, but capable of using Altivec of PA6T, Cyrus is not much faster.

>Sadly its again two versions of Cyrus with CPU soldered instead of one board with changeable CPU.

I think that would require a CPU card. And it would make Cyrus more expensive.
And there is three cyrus versions in the plans. x3500, x5000/20 and x5000/40.
(I think they should forget the x3500, though ... unless they manage to come close to SAM460 price)

IMO: x1000 is great HW. Only too expensive for me and for (too) many others.

[ Edited by KimmoK 04.03.2014 - 15:30 ]

Quote:

This keeps coming up, and I've yet to see a reason why this is something for which one would choose X-Core/Xena/Xorro (I'll just stick with 'X' from now on).
Sure, it's possible, but why is it desirable? In what way does this utilise X's 'special properties (low latency, multithreading, programmable, high bandwidth CPU connection)? How useful are these strengths in home automation (lighting, thermostatic, intruder detection, communication, audio/video switching, etc).

It really confuses me every time this is mentioned.

Sure, you can probably find something useful for it to do, but something that justifies its existence on the board in the first place?
Why is it a) there, and b) connected to the CPU like that. What practical application does that enrich above sticking it on a PCI card and calling it an 'option'?

Quote:

Well, yes 16 bit buts is a limit, not a first time for Atari,
but in its era, Falcon is advance over TT, while A4000 is
hardly an advance over A3000 if A3000 had AGA.


You are knowledgeable person, all PA Semis were 2Ghz
http://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2007/02/8828/
http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/171883/startup_launches_its_first_power-efficient_chip/
http://www.google.rs/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CD8QFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hotchips.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fhc_archives%2Fhc18%2F2_Mon%2FHC18.S2%2FHC18.S2T1.pdf&ei=HwYWU5bLLePD4gTP14H4Bg&usg=AFQjCNF_TJpe7b-6qxepLvp2gxiJVbS9MQ&sig2=AT8m9NA-A5VWPqcpgJYIhA&bvm=bv.62286460,d.bGE

Board could have better quoting system. But I can do old school >>> BBBS style.

[quote]KimmoK wrote:
>>vox wrote:

>Well I don`t believe them a bit. My chip is clocked at 1.8Ghz and originally it was introduced as 2Ghz only. Its now possible to buy it at 2Ghz at selected dealers.

To my understanding it is not possible to be bought as 2Ghz chip, because all chips ever manufactured were 1.8Ghz parts (run also at 2Ghz, though, but only as overclocked a little).

(you could sue those marketing those 2Ghz chips perhaps)

>>> OS4 doesn't support nearly half of board features now.
>>I think it supports more than half.
>Trust me, less then half. DOnt let me count em.

I try.


USB 3.0 not supported
3D graphics of my RadeonHD not supported
1GB VRAM only 256MB
4MB DDR2 only 2MB
SD Card not visible
Second core not visible
Onboard ethernet NOT SUPPORTED
Xena/Xorro - basic from AMigaOS, none from Linux

Only SATA/IDE/PATA, USB 2.0, 2D and AudioHD are.
CFE will not be updated, reads only FAT32 and ETX3.
This is BIG prob.

Anyway, it is great HARDWARE, way better then SAM460ex
but yet SAM460ex is way better used from software point of side.

Only LInux on X1000 makes it usable machine.

Now, since there will be no MOS on X1000, lets go back to SAM460ex




[ Edited by vox 04.03.2014 - 17:05 ]

Quote:
And if pigs had wings...
The Falcon had plenty HW bodged together with 0 SW support, AGA in the A4000 was useable from day one, and a 040 was no CPU to frown upon at that time.
Quote:
Quote:
;-)

>> "G5" is usually considered as belonging to PPC970 microarchitecture family.
>> However, the PA6T is a unique microarchitecture of its own, developed from
>> scratch.

> True, but actually all G designations are Apple designations for chip generation

"G5" is the name Apple has used only for the PPC970 family, which the PA6T doesn't belong to (even though the PWRficient was originally intended to be for the Apple notebooks what the PPC970 was for the Apple desktops and workstations). So I wouldn't call the PA6T a "type of G5 CPU".

> Its kind of PentiumPro or 64-bit modern arhitecture designation.

Sorry, I don't understand this, and especially not as a reasoning as to why the PA6T should be called a "G5".

> Mint PPC G5 64-bit [...] does work on PA Semi.

The PPC64-compiled *userland* running on top of the Linux kernel works on any PPC64 CPU, but you need a special PA6T Linux kernel as the PPC970 Linux kernel doesn't run on the PA6T as is (nor on any other PPC64 CPU). That should tell you that the PA6T is no "G5".

> PA Semi is great chip

No, it was a company that was purchased by another company. The chip is called PWRficient PA6T-1682M (full name).

>>> It seems Pa Semi on Nemo is downclocked to 1.8GHz from 2Ghz

>> No, according to Varisys and A-Eon it isn't:
>> https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=7183&start=472

> I don`t believe them a bit.

Fortunately what you do or don't believe doesn't change the facts. I for one trust Varisys in their statement, and EETimes agrees with that:

"Apple sent a letter to the DoD saying it will assure production of the 1.8 GHz PWRficient processor for three to five years, said one source who saw the letter but asked not to be named."
http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1309557

> originally it was introduced as 2Ghz only.

No, the PA6T was introduced (read: announced) as running *up to* 2.0 GHz, but they didn't follow through on that announcement. That's what Varisys and A-Eon have said in the link I gave you, and what Kronos has told you right here in this thread.

> Its now possible to buy it at 2Ghz at selected dealers.
> http://forum.hyperion-entertainment.biz/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=2199

No, it's not. It's still running at 1.8 GHz. Trevor even clarifies that right in the thread you link to. May I propose that you go out of your way and read your own link?

>>> OS4 doesn't support nearly half of board features now.

>> I think it supports more than half.

> Trust me

I won't, that's for sure. You utter way too much false statements and also outright nonsense ad nauseam, even after confronted with evidence, for me to trust you.

> less then half. DOnt let me count em.

Please do count them. Else I won't believe you but instead maintain my opinion that OS4 supports more than half of the Nemo features.

>>> A real DSP on board would be way more Amigish, like Falcon had.

>> Atari computers are "Amigish"? Interesting note :-)

> Falcon is. more then crippled A600, A1200, A4000 and CD32.

Your statement that the Atari Falcon is more "Amigish" than Amiga 600, Amiga 1200, Amiga 4000 or Amiga CD32 is laughable at best. It may work if you define Atari as "Amiga" and Amiga as "non-Amiga", but why should anyone do such nonsense? Amigas are "Amigish" by definition, that's the meaning of the word. The Falcon is clearly "Atarish".

>>> they did false advertising with its comparison to Transputer

>> Let's see what "they" actually claim with regard to Transputer: [...]
>> I can't really see anything "false" in these claims.

> Don`t let me find all adverts from that time.

Please do, else I will continue to refute your claim of "false advertising with its comparison to Transputer".

>>> and adding more Xena cores (how when Xorro isn`t it? Via USB? PCI?)

>> http://amigakit.leamancomputing.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=1135

> I have wrote only review of Xena and X1000, thanks.

Sorry, I don't understand.

>>2x RS232
> I think they are supported. [...] Not sure if onboard PATA is supported.

They are both: http://amigaworld.net/modules/news/article.php?storyid=6345

> GPU is poorly supported

GPU is no Nemo board feature anyway.

> only in 2D+compositing when AOS4 is used.

You can use a fully supported Radeon card with R200 GPU in a PCI slot. It will be slowish due to 32-bit 33 MHz bus, but it will work.

> A4000 is hardly an advance over A3000 if A3000 had AGA.

But the A3000 doesn't have AGA, right? So what's the logical conclusion as per your own statement?

> all PA Semis were 2Ghz

No, the PA6T was not. It was and is a 1.8 GHz part which is possibly overclockable to 2.0 GHz.

>>>>> OS4 doesn't support nearly half of board features now.

>>>> I think it supports more than half.

>>> Trust me, less then half. DOnt let me count em.

>> I try.

> USB 3.0 not supported
> 3D graphics of my RadeonHD not supported
> 1GB VRAM only 256MB

That's cheating as these are no Nemo board features.

Vox> True, but actually all G designations are Apple designations for chip Vox>generation

And>"G5" is the name Apple has used only for the PPC970 family, which the PA6T And>doesn't belong to (even though the PWRficient was originally intended to be for And>the Apple notebooks what the PPC970 was for the Apple desktops and And>workstations). So I wouldn't call the PA6T a "type of G5 CPU".

Look, its a overall designation, not a single chip, similar to PIII and PIV arhitectires. So if G5 overally designates PPC64 chip, yes PWR Eff is G5.
Examle shown is that Mint PPC64 is called G5. I would call it, and would not be much wrong. As much as I would say my AMCC460 is G3 class chip meaning similar ahitecture and performance as Apple designated for G3s.

Vox> Its kind of PentiumPro or 64-bit modern arhitecture designation.

And>Sorry, I don't understand this, and especially not as a reasoning as to why the And>PA6T should be called a "G5".

Ok, yes, you pretend to be an unformed person while you do know your ropes.

> Mint PPC G5 64-bit [...] does work on PA Semi.

And>The PPC64-compiled *userland* running on top of the Linux kernel works on any And>PPC64 CPU, but you need a special PA6T Linux kernel as the PPC970 Linux kernel And>doesn't run on the PA6T as is (nor on any other PPC64 CPU). That should tell And>you that the PA6T is no "G5".

Well, in this case generic PP64 distro works, yes with insrtation of boards pecific kernel. See above discussion why I don`t link it to a single IBM CPU, which anyway had multiply variants and was never officially called G5.

> PA Semi is great chip

And>No, it was a company that was purchased by another company. The chip is called And>PWRficient PA6T-1682M (full name).

Since it made only one chip and ceased to exist, it might well be the same.
Maybe I am too lame, maybe the name is too complex.

Vox> It seems Pa Semi on Nemo is downclocked to 1.8GHz from 2Ghz

And>> No, according to Varisys and A-Eon it isn't:
And> https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&And>topic_id=7183&start=472

And according to all PA Semi materials it never went below 2Ghz, in fact all materials including AEONs says 5W at 2Ghz.

Vox> I don`t believe them a bit.

And>Fortunately what you do or don't believe doesn't change the facts. I for one And>trust Varisys in their statement, and EETimes agrees with that:

Ever heard of marketing?

And>No, the PA6T was introduced (read: announced) as running *up to* 2.0 GHz, but And>they didn't follow through on that announcement. That's what Varisys and A-Eon And>have said in the link I gave you, and what Kronos has told you right here in And>this thread.

True, but look at all PA Semi materials. Nevermind, it seems chip works fine at 2Ghz being overclocked, or not. Just to add spice, by default on Nemo it starts boot at just 500Mhz.

Vox> Its now possible to buy it at 2Ghz at selected dealers.
Cox> http://forum.hyperion-entertainment.biz/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=2199

And>No, it's not. It's still running at 1.8 GHz. Trevor even clarifies that right And>in the thread you link to. May I propose that you go out of your way and read And>your own link?


It is still running at 1.8Ghz but its possible to buy it at 2Ghz.
Read my lines more carefully. Yes, I have read the post I have posted.

Vox> Trust me

And>I won't, that's for sure. You utter way too much false statements and also And>outright nonsense ad nauseam, even after confronted with evidence, for me to And>trust you.


Look, its doesnt matter is it half, third or 10%. Fast etherned, second core of weak CPU, more then 2GB RAM and anything beyond 2D is kind of vital to me.

Vox> A real DSP on board would be way more Amigish, like Falcon had.

And> Atari computers are "Amigish"? Interesting note

Vox> Falcon is. more then crippled A600, A1200, A4000 and CD32.

And>Your statement that the Atari Falcon is more "Amigish" than Amiga 600, Amiga And>1200, Amiga 4000 or Amiga CD32 is laughable at best. It may work if you define And>Atari as "Amiga" and Amiga as "non-Amiga", but why should anyone do such And>nonsense? Amigas are "Amigish" by definition, that's the meaning of the word. And>The Falcon is clearly "Atarish".

Let me explained, way more useful chips then not so fast AGA was introduced which has proven to be generation leap - especially because Paula remained the same. Much respect to all expansion companies, but specs of A600, A1200 and even A4000 and especially CD32 were almost obsolete day they were out. Even I had spent best days of my life with an A1200, and for example have CD32 as YT channel background as respect to first CD based game console, I do keep critic angle on how Commodore failed. And it was defenetely lack of innovation. Sadly Falcon, I never had chance to use, was quickly abandoned to Jaguar.

So in sense in which A1000, A500 and A3000 were really steps forward,
CDTV was nice try, and A500+,A600 and even A1200,A4000,CD32 means of cheap survival, yes, Falcon was quite Amigish.

Vox> Let's see what "they" actually claim with regard to Transputer: [...]

And> I can't really see anything "false" in these claims.

Vox> Don`t let me find all adverts from that time.

And>Please do, else I will continue to refute your claim of "false advertising And> with its comparison to Transputer".

How Xena is very expandable? What shared arhitecture it has with Transputer concept?
How can it be hacked? Is it a funky programmable chip? How to reach up to 400MIPS?

http://www.osnews.com/story/22693/New_Amiga_Sports_Programmable_Co-Processor_Dualcore_PPC
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/21/amiga_x1000/
http://www.amigamccc.org/journal/1002x100.htm
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/blog-post/1686907/transputer-lives-amiga-one
http://www.zdnet.com/amiga-lives-amigaone-x1000-pc-hits-beta-4010023987/

Vox> and adding more Xena cores (how when Xorro isn`t it? Via USB? PCI?)

And> http://amigakit.leamancomputing.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=1135

Vox> I have wrote only review of Xena and X1000, thanks.

And>Sorry, I don't understand.[/quote]

As usual, you provide links as matter of further info, but this time it has zero relevance.

Anyway, its much better to discuss matters, then to just post links.

Or best, to provide your own answers and then give some nice and useful links which provide you are very good at board search engine and have good longlterm memory.

Anyway, what is real is a discussable matter, since science is just description of given world seen through subjective lens of individual humans

Now, back to SAM460ex:

- Will Onboard SATA be supported and is there a way to split it to two devices? Crazy thing is that onboard SATA when DMA is used is quite fast, faster then SATA card
-Will PCI-E x1 slot be of any use under MOrphOS since its only expandable slot left when you add GFX and SATA, which you kind of must.
-Will onboard sound and gfx be fully supported, Sillicon Motion and Cirrus Logic quite strange components, and quite bad, sadly
-Will FPGA Be usable under MOS and do you have any ideas of its use?

Thanks. Hope to join the ranks, which of I dream since MOS 1.x days soon.

Quote:

SATA splitters don't exist. It just isnt possible to build one.

Quote:

Nope. And IIRC SAM is using FPGA internally for something making it difficult for reprogramming.

Quote:

If you have (as you stated in another post in another thread) your SATA card in a conventional 32-bit, 33 MHz PCI slot, you are AFAIK limited to a theoretical max bandwidth of 133 MB/s, for all units simultaneously used in total. (Link)

The theoretical max bandwidth of SATA rev 2 (that supposedly is on the Sam 460 motherboard) is 300 MB/s. (Link)

So if there is a noticable speed difference, it's not *that* crazy IMHO.


Quote:

I completely agree in what you are saying, and IMHO you are de-facto correct, but if the key word is instead "SATA Multiplyer", then Google will point you to this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_multiplier

And: "Many common controllers do not support this feature,[1] as it is not a requirement for a SATA controller.[2]"

Quote:

True, I believe I got an answer from Max Tretene of Acube at one point over at Amiga.org, stating that the FPGA de-facto is some kind of internal glue logic to make it all work, and that it can not be used as some kind of "MiniMig" or whatever custom feature people would imagine when seeing the "FPGA" sign.

[quote]takemehomegrandma wrote:
itix wrote: [/quote]


Thanks ITIX and THM!


[quote]Now, back to SAM460ex:
- Will Onboard SATA be supported and is there a way to split it to two devices? Crazy thing is that onboard SATA when DMA is used is quite fast, faster then SATA card
[/quote][/quote]

>If you have (as you stated in another post in another thread) your SATA card in a >conventional 32-bit, 33 MHz PCI slot, you are AFAIK limited to a theoretical max >bandwidth of 133 MB/s, for all units simultaneously used in total. >(Link)

Yes, surely its ordinary PCI card.

>So if there is a noticable speed difference, it's not *that* crazy IMHO.

OK, now we have some proof I am not *that* crazy IMHO.

[quote]SATA splitters don't exist. It just isnt possible to build one. [/quote]

THM>I completely agree in what you are saying, and IMHO you are de-facto correct, THM>but if the key word is instead "SATA Multiplyer", then Google will point you to THM>this:

Well, thanks for understanding what I do need, however it is called.

THM>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_multiplier
THM>And: "Many common controllers do not support this feature,[1] as it is not a THM>requirement for a SATA controller.[2]"

Which should give me some hope to buy a multiplier, or not?

Manual explicitly says it supports only one device.

I am much disappointing here because SAM440 built around similar SOCC
had less kinky sound, normal gfx and SATA controller onboard, unlike top model SAM460ex. Seems we will need SAM460ex+

Also I am told by Andreas no Gfx board supported by SAM460ex board will be supported, there is no obligation to support onboard gfx and sound at all, hey people how do you imagine using SAM460ex?

[quote][quote]
-Will FPGA Be usable under MOS and do you have any ideas of its use?
[/quote]

THM>Nope. And IIRC SAM is using FPGA internally for something making it difficult THM>for reprogramming.[/quote]

THM>True, I believe I got an answer from Max Tretene of Acube at one point over at THM>Amiga.org, stating that the FPGA de-facto is some kind of internal glue logic THM>to make it all work, and that it can not be used as some kind of "MiniMig" or THM>whatever custom feature people would imagine when seeing the "FPGA" sign. THM>;-)[/quote]

This was a good guess on what I would like to do - I wanted some sort of Minimig core for Lattice, but its now best to leave all hopes away, before I get utterly disappointing like with Xorro and 60+ GBP empty Xena card

>> "G5" is the name Apple has used only for the PPC970 family, which the PA6T
>> doesn't belong to [...]. So I wouldn't call the PA6T a "type of G5 CPU".

> its a overall designation

...used by Apple for the members of the PPC970 microarchitecture family, which the PA6T isn't a member of.

> not a single chip

Yes, hence PPC970 *family*.

> similar to PIII and PIV arhitectires.

Yes, PIII and PIV are distinct microarchitecture families, just like the PPC970 and the PWRficient are. You just prove my point.

> So if G5 overally designates PPC64 chip, yes PWR Eff is G5.

But it doesn't. Besides PPC970 family, chips implementing PPC64 ISA are the POWER3/4/5/6/7/8, PowerEN, Power BQC, Cell BE, PowerXCell 8i, Xenon/XCGPU, PWRficient PA6T-1682M and QorIQ P5/T1/T2/T4 (forgot anything?). Except the PPC970 chips, none of them is a "G5".

> Examle shown is that Mint PPC64 is called G5.

As you were already explained, that's because it comes with a PPC970-compatible kernel that's not compatible with other PPC64 chips.

> I would call it, and would not be much wrong.

But wrong nevertheless.

> As much as I would say my AMCC460 is G3 class chip meaning similar
> ahitecture and performance as Apple designated for G3s.

Yes, you can call the PPC460EX a "G3 *class* chip", but as G3 is PPC7xx you wouldn't call it a "G3 chip", right? I never objected to anyone calling the PA6T a "G5 *class* chip". The word "class" makes the whole difference here, you see?

>>> Its kind of PentiumPro or 64-bit modern arhitecture designation.

>> Sorry, I don't understand this, and especially not as a reasoning as to
>> why the PA6T should be called a "G5".

> you pretend to be an unformed person while you do know your ropes.

Sorry? It gets even more confusing for me. What ropes?

> I don`t link it to a single IBM CPU

Me neither. I link it to a certain microarchitecture family which consist of three IBM CPUs: PPC970, PPC970FX and PPC970MP.

> was never officially called G5.

It was, by the inventor of the "G5" moniker.

>>> PA Semi is great chip

>> No, it was a company that was purchased by another company. The chip is
>> called PWRficient PA6T-1682M (full name).

> Since it made only one chip and ceased to exist, it might well be the same.

No, even a company that only made one single product isn't the same as its product. What can be considered though is PWRficient = PA6T-1682M = PA6T.

> Maybe I am too lame, maybe the name is too complex.

You find "PA6T" too complex?

>>> It seems Pa Semi on Nemo is downclocked to 1.8GHz from 2Ghz

>> No, according to Varisys and A-Eon it isn't:
>> https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=7183&start=472

> according to all PA Semi materials it never went below 2Ghz

"PA6T-1682M-FCN 2.0 GHz
PA6T-1682M-FCG 1.5 GHz
PA6T-1682M-FCD 1.0 GHz"
http://www.hotchips.org/wp-content/uploads/hc_archives/hc18/2_Mon/HC18.S2/HC18.S2T1.pdf (page 26)
http://www.ll.mit.edu/HPEC/agendas/proc07/Day3/19_Bannon_Precis.pdf (page 7)
http://www.ncu.edu.tw/~ncume_ee/digilogi/dsp96212-PWRficient_PA_Semi_Bus_Boards_PBannon.pdf (page 28)

> all materials including AEONs says 5W at 2Ghz.

That's just for one CPU core. For the complete chip the above-linked documents say 13/17 to 25 W at 2 GHz. And it's obvious that the PA6T ran at 2 GHz (and probably even higher) in PA Semi's labs but that doesn't change the fact that according to A-Eon and Varisys no 2 GHz version was sold on the free market, just up to 1.8 GHz. I believe them, and EETimes backs this up too.

>> I for one trust Varisys in their statement, and EETimes agrees with that

> Ever heard of marketing?

Yes, that's why I believe A-Eon and Varisys when they say that PA Semi's 2 GHz claim was just a marketing stunt.

> look at all PA Semi materials.

I did. The mention of 2 GHz chips doesn't mean they were for sale at any point in time.

> it seems chip works fine at 2Ghz being overclocked

So you have tried it on the X1000?

>>> Its now possible to buy it at 2Ghz at selected dealers.
>>> http://forum.hyperion-entertainment.biz/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=2199

>> No, it's not. It's still running at 1.8 GHz. Trevor even clarifies that
>> right in the thread you link to. May I propose that you go out of your
>> way and read your own link?

> its possible to buy it at 2Ghz.

No, Trevor says it's not and I believe him over you any day, especially when it comes to his own products.

> Read my lines more carefully.

You claiming something doesn't make it true.

> Yes, I have read the post I have posted.

So you read where Trevor says that it's not possible to buy the X1000 at 2 GHz?

> its doesnt matter is it half, third or 10%.

Yes, because it's more than half.

> anything beyond 2D is kind of vital to me.

Again, graphics is not a Nemo board feature so counting it as unsupported Nemo board feature is cheating.

>> Your statement that the Atari Falcon is more "Amigish" than Amiga 600,
>> Amiga 1200, Amiga 4000 or Amiga CD32 is laughable at best.

> way more useful chips then not so fast AGA was introduced which has proven
> to be generation leap - especially because Paula remained the same. [...]
> specs of A600, A1200 and even A4000 and especially CD32 were almost obsolete
> day they were out. [...] it was defenetely lack of innovation. [...] So in sense in which
> A1000, A500 and A3000 were really steps forward, CDTV was nice try, and
> A500+,A600 and even A1200,A4000,CD32 means of cheap survival, yes, Falcon was
> quite Amigish.

I still don't understand how that makes the Atari Falcon more "Amigish" than Amiga 600, Amiga 1200, Amiga 4000 or Amiga CD32. The Amiga was a certain evolutionary hardware architecture. It seems like you just use the word "Amigish" as a synonym for the word "innovative". That's way too generic in my book.

>> I will continue to refute your claim of "false advertising with its
>> comparison to Transputer".

> How Xena is very expandable?

A-Eon talks about the possibility of "highly multi-threaded applications to run in parallel" on "a Xorro board with an array of additional XMOS chips", which is what they compare to the Transputer concept of old. This is not an unfair comparison I'd say.

> What shared arhitecture it has with Transputer concept?

I'm not an expert on the Transputer concept, but you can start your research there:

"XMOS was founded in July 2005 by Ali Dixon [...], James Foster [...], Noel Hurley [...], David May (former chief architect of Inmos), and Hitesh Mehta [...]. [...] The name XMOS is a loose reference to Inmos. Some concepts found in XMOS technology are part of the Transputer legacy."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XMOS#Company_history

> How can it be hacked? Is it a funky programmable chip? How to reach up to 400MIPS?

Is any of this part of the Transputer concept?

>>> and adding more Xena cores (how when Xorro isn`t it? Via USB? PCI?)

>> http://amigakit.leamancomputing.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=1135

> you provide links as matter of further info, but this time it has zero relevance.

It has as it contains an answer to your question.

> its much better to discuss matters, then to just post links.

I post links for a reason. But this you can't know of course when you won't stop your habit of ignoring them.

> Or best, to provide your own answers and then give some nice and useful links

I do accompany my links with text when the link alone doesn't give the answer I intend to give. If it does, I don't.

> Cirrus Logic quite strange components

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=9884&forum=11&start=6

> I am told by Andreas no Gfx board supported by SAM460ex board will be supported

Huh? Where have I told this?

> 60+ GBP empty Xena card :-)

It's 45 GBP empty Xorro card.

Quote:

Surely, there are no Postage, Import taxes etc.

>>> I am told by Andreas no Gfx board supported by SAM460ex board will be supported

>> Huh? Where have I told this?

> Well actually you havent said ANY tested cards, which equals it.

Whatever this sentence is supposed to mean, let me once again stress that your claim that you were told by me "no Gfx board supported by SAM460ex board will be supported" is not true. It's either an unfortunate misunderstanding of what I wrote on your part or a blatant lie.

> Veil of mistery on realistic question. Why?

As much as I want to answer your question, I'm afraid I don't understand it.

Quote:

Its intelligence test, English is good and reasonable, no Patois involved.

>> your claim that you were told by me "no Gfx board supported by SAM460ex board
>> will be supported" is not true. It's either an unfortunate misunderstanding of what
>> I wrote on your part or a blatant lie.

> Good.

Does this mean you retract your false claim?

> Show me the list of supported cards, tested on SAM460ex since its very picky board.

As you've been told numerous times by now you know very well which card MorphOS on Sam460 was shown with at Pianeta Amiga last year.

>>> Veil of mistery on realistic question. Why?

>> As much as I want to answer your question, I'm afraid I don't understand it.

> Its intelligence test

Seems I'm too dumb for your test then.

> English is good and reasonable

That may be true, but I don't understand the meaning in the given context nonetheless. Maybe a native speaker can help me out here and dumb it down to my substandard command of the English language?

> Good.

Does this mean you retract your false claim?

> Show me the list of supported cards, tested on SAM460ex since its very picky board.

As you've been told numerous times by now you know very well which card MorphOS on Sam460 was shown with at Pianeta Amiga last year.

And cards are? Since you dont know the answer, how to contact Frank Mariak?
No cards are additionally listed at MOS.de website, there are no news at Pianeta Amiga show and only video seems to be from 2012
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=1450013991893417&set=vb.1441856596042490&type=3&theater
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8ZLv1eehP4

ITIX claimed no RadeonHD support at all.
http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=717508&postcount=61

> Its intelligence test

Seems I'm too dumb for your test then.

The only pic doesnt show gfx card
http://bigfoot.morphos-team.net/test/sam460ex_3.png

> English is good and reasonable

That may be true, but I don't understand the meaning in the given context nonetheless. Maybe a native speaker can help me out here and dumb it down to my substandard command of the English language?[/quote]

Surely, I am dumb as dumber.



[color=#f2f2f2][ Edited by ASiegel 03.05.2014 - 19:05 ][/color]

Vox, when Mark and Frank feel like it, they'll let us all in on the secrets.
Until then, asking isn't going to get you anywhere.

You can be sure an R200 card will work, anything else is speculation.

And in my neck of the woods a Radeon 9250 sells for about $15, so even if its not the final card you wind up using its a minor investment.

>> As you've been told numerous times by now you know very well which card
>> MorphOS on Sam460 was shown with at Pianeta Amiga last year.

> And cards are?

Still the same you were told about two months ago:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=11&topic_id=8931&start=97
https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=38&topic_id=9764&start=30
https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=38&topic_id=9764&start=94
https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=11&topic_id=9544&start=55
https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=11&topic_id=9587&start=40
https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=11&topic_id=9876&start=3

> you dont know the answer

I know it, but you just don't for whatever reason remember that you were given the answer already.

> how to contact Frank Mariak?

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=7379&forum=12&start=1

> No cards are additionally listed at MOS.de website

That's obviously because support has not been released yet.

> there are no news at Pianeta Amiga show

You were given the MorphOS news from Pianeta Amiga 2013 many times here on MorphZone. Please don't pretend you don't know it. It's really getting tiresome.

> ITIX claimed no RadeonHD support at all.
> http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=717508&postcount=61

This comment is from 2012. Pianeta Amiga 2013 was in, you might have guessed it, 2013. Do you think it amounts to a contradiction that there were no plans to support a certain hardware in 2012, but in 2013 those plans changed? If yes, why so?

> The only pic doesnt show gfx card
> http://bigfoot.morphos-team.net/test/sam460ex_3.png

Again, that's from 2012. Leave the past and look at 2013 pics there:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=11&topic_id=8931&start=95

>>> English is good and reasonable

>> That may be true, but I don't understand the meaning in the given context nonetheless.
>> Maybe a native speaker can help me out here and dumb it down to my substandard
>> command of the English language?

> Surely, I am dumb as dumber.

Either that, or you're playing some strange mental games.