>SUSE and Ubuntu should be along soon.

Cool, Ubuntu or Debian (which I guess is redundant to mention) I can handle.

What is the current state of the AMD video drivers?

Don't really know. Probably need a few more in the wild to smooth out the kinks.

LINK

Wow, the best deal I can get on a Radeon Pro WX7100 is about $500 (or more).

I need to spend half a grand or more to get a video card without issues?

There is Radeon HD 5850 support, which I assume means the 5870 ought to work, but I wonder what they mean by, "Currently has issues with only using 32-bit DMA".

[ Edited by Jim 11.05.2018 - 12:32 ]

Perhaps the Linux vendors were supplied with only the Aspeed and Polaris chips to work with to get 64 bit DMA. Since (it looks like) the WX 5100 also works, and has the Polaris, this may be the case.

I don't know where the software falls down. Could be in the Linux kernel, Xorg, or even in the early stages of boot. I'll just bet somebody is working on it.

Quote:

Mildly interesting. I don't follow this sort of tech like you and a few others here. What would you say the general cliff notes are here?

That this company may introduce a cost competitive Power based desktop?

Any chance it may capture the attention of the MorphOS team?

I'm guessing no to both, but let me know what you think.

>> https://twitter.com/RaptorCompSys/status/980910319856955392
>> https://twitter.com/RaptorCompSys/status/981235951719665670
>> https://twitter.com/RaptorCompSys/status/981236288291524614

> That this company may introduce a cost competitive Power based desktop?

I don't think anything built in relatively low numbers and not subsidized can ever be cost-competitive with equally performant x64 hardware.

> Any chance it may capture the attention of the MorphOS team?

This may also depend on the current development progress of the x64 version. The more progressed it is, the smaller the chance I'd say. And the MorphOS team would have to be provided with boards or systems, of course.

>>...this company may introduce a cost competitive Power based desktop?

>I don't think anything built in relatively low numbers and not subsidized can ever be cost-competitive with equally performant x64 hardware.

Not competitive with X64, but definitely priced lower than other Power 9 boards. If they can get it a little closer to the X5000's price, I'd be interested.

>> Any chance it may capture the attention of the MorphOS team?

>This may also depend on the current development progress of the x64 version. The more progressed it is, the smaller the chance I'd say. And the MorphOS team would have to be provided with boards or systems, of course.

Attention sure, but as a possible platform? Not unless they want to explore SMP before the ISA switch. A sixteen thread machine running a single thread would offend most people's sensibilities.

Edit - We COULD buy one for Mark (he already has a Radeon HD 5850 video card).

[ Edited by Jim 12.05.2018 - 00:49 ]

I just don't know enough about POWER9 yet to make any kind of conclusion about it's suitability for other than Linux.

If Linux, the OS that is, runs on a single core and distributes tasks to other cores, which they refer to as 'slices', then perhaps a single threaded OS would at least boot on such a machine. (?)

I'm certainly not advocating that any OS team drop everything and go to POWER9.
However, that should not mean they should ignore POWER9 as an option. The A1222 should be developed and promoted for both MOS and AOS as it fills a gap in the hardware lineup that's been empty for too long.

If Apple had not killed the PA6T perhaps MOS would be on that. Just don't know.
And now Apple is planning another jump away from x86, and you can be sure if they go ARM it will be a custom top secret design that only runs their OS, so porting anything to that would be next to impossible.

POWERx. Is it an option? Certainly not up to me. Would it be cool? Hell yes.

Apple is not planning to jump away from AMD64.

Okay. It's probably just buzz created by Apple to get a better price on processors for all I know. Google 'Apple on ARM'.

Quote:

Maybe not, but the A10 Fusion is very powerfull and Arstechnica has an article about it:

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/04/apple-is-exploring-macs-running-its-own-cpus-but-that-dream-is-a-long-way-off/

> I just don't know enough about POWER9 yet to make any
> kind of conclusion about it's suitability for other than Linux.

A FreeBSD port to the Talos II seems to be on the way.

> perhaps a single threaded OS would at least boot on such a machine. (?)

I see no reason why using more than one core/thread should be mandatory.

> The A1222 should be developed and promoted for both MOS and AOS

1. Development of Tabor/A1222 was finished several years ago.
2. Technically, Tabor/A1222 has not really been developed for OS4 (see current lack of drivers). It's a Power Architecture platform which OS4 required (and still requires in some aspects after so many years) porting to. In general, an OS is developed/ported for a piece of hardware, not the other way round. Porting MorphOS to that platform would surely require similar efforts as porting OS4.
3. It wouldn't make sense to promote Tabor/A1222 for MorphOS when the MorphOS team has made clear that MorphOS won't get ported to it.
4. I hope that the MorphOS team won't change its mind about that. In my opinion, there is too much effort and too many problems involved with making standard FPU programs run on SPE FPU, especially when it comes to interaction between both worlds.

> If Apple had not killed the PA6T perhaps MOS would be on that.

...if there had been another PA6T-based desktop platform than Nemo/X1000, maybe :-)

> if they go ARM it will be a custom top secret design that only runs
> their OS, so porting anything to that would be next to impossible.

I think at least Linux and BSD would be on it quite fast.

At this point the only real advantage I could see to Power 9 would be as a platform to expand the OS to 64bits with SMP, because if we are just using it to run emulation via Qemu that can be done just as effectively on X64 hardware.

While I'd love to stick with PPC, since it's different, I'd have to agree with Andre' s post about following the lead of the developers.

They've decided on X64, so even if I have the funds to buy a TalosII, I'd just have to dedicate it to running Linux (with of course the potential to run virtual machines that might run some of our legacy software).

If the future is X64, so be it.
I wouldn't mind a multi-core high frequency Ryzen based monster.

The SAM460 had apparently been emulated, the X5000 may not be far behind.

We might as well switch to commodity hardware.

$1700 or so would buy a pretty powerful AMD64 system (you don't even really need to spend that much).

> if we are just using it to run emulation via Qemu that can be done
> just as effectively on X64 hardware.

A Power Architecture guest CPU won't have to be emulated when using QEMU on a Power Architecture host CPU:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=9&topic_id=5774&start=60

Quote:

I agree for the most part. We certainly have the best and brightest developers in the post-Amiga space, that's not up for argument. The only thing I've questioned and still question is the distractions brought on by porting to Sam460 and then X5000. It was mentioned that the Sam460 port brought almost no new licenses. I'd venture to guess while the X5000 port did better, it is likely still insignificant compared to the labor involved. It's their baby so I'm not complaining, just observing.

All that said, this new platform is intriguing. Unlike the Sam460 and X5000, I might possibly be interested enough to pay up for one. It's not some head scratching half baked boutique computer. It actually brings some value to the table. I imagine it could be ported to faster than the first X64 release.

Either way, ultimately I will follow their lead. I think they earned that respect.

I totally agree. Especially with it being intriguing.

It's real, available, and interesting. Weather anybody ports any OS to it is up to them. There is no 'gotta do' for any OS. And any threads about this kit need not be about anything other than the kit itself. It's a computer, and I like messing around with computers. Don't we all?

As far as having one......... oh yes, I will have one.

Looking at what could be done under Linux, and considering the possibility of porting AROS to the TalosII platform, I rather wish I had the funds to join you.

It just plain looks more interesting than yet another X64 system.

Ah nice - a new Talos II Single-CPU Board! Link

1780 $ for a complete system w. CPU (wo. RAM), not bad not bad! You may get the RAM cheaper elsewhere. The also updated their server offerings and rackmounted options.

[ Editiert durch ernsteiswuerfel 17.05.2018 - 11:43 ]

> new Talos II Single-CPU Board! Link
> 1780 $ for a complete system w. CPU (wo. RAM), not bad not bad!

Yes, but why still EATX with only one CPU socket and two PCIe slots? Shouldn't the board be much smaller then?

Edit:

"This board is EATX. Depending on how this works out, a redesigned PCB engineered for low cost (i.e. no support for high end CPUs, but with a smaller form factor) is under development."
https://twitter.com/RaptorCompSys/status/996854240890048514

So it seems the Talos II Lite is the same PCB as the full version, just with some places left unpopulated.

[ Edited by Andreas_Wolf 17.05.2018 - 17:10 ]

Important note:

Quote:

> Important note: [...]

Same as has been with the Talos II Desktop Development System using the full version of the board, then.

More info:
https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/hardware/processors-memory/1025053-raptor-launching-talos-ii-lite-power9-computer-system-at-a-lower-cost?p=1025234#post1025234

Talos™ II Lite Base Chassis $1,399.99
IBM POWER9 CPU (4-Core) $375.00

Total $1,774.99


AmigaKit price for X5000 board in USD $1,680.

In other words, the TalosII Lite costs $95 more than an X5000.

May I be the first to state the SMP and 64 bit capability for MorphOS ought to be developed on Power 9.
Using the hypervisor we could even have little endian sessions running alongside big endian sessions, current MorphOS 3.10 sessions running alongside what the future brings, possibly OS4 or AROS sessions running on emulated SAM460, X5000, or PowerMac 7,3 or 11,2 platforms, and still have power left to emulate X64 if need be.

THIS, is a better choice than X64. Our current software would run on this without qemu, it would run MUCH faster, we'd have access to a little endian format that would eliminate the issues with WebKit, and most important of all IT WOULDN'T BE X64/Intel based.

We would remain unique.

With this, my support for an X64 transition certainly wavers.
I'm buying a TalosII Lite, or the ATX successor instead on an X5000.
I should be able to emulate an X5000 in the near future anyway.
And if that can be done, then MorphOS can probably be run on Power 9 whether the development team supports a port or not.

And I know I could get this board to run AROS, which would bring the possibility of future enhancements like SMP, alternative video card support, better OpenGL support...end user development participation.
Basically, a lot.

I've been exploring AROS on PPC over the last few days, and the Linux hosted version could be made to run on most of our current platforms.
I hope to have it running on the G5 by the end of the summer.

To conclude, if an X64 transition is inevitable, so be it, I'll follow and set up an X64 system, BUT I intend to remain a supporter and user of Power.

My favorite processor of all time was the 68000, and the PPC has grown on me.
Further, I was involved in developing 68000 based software and never got over the sting from the loss of market share to inferior Intel based hardware.

So what if its improved? Its still proprietary, Windows has been getting steadily worse since Win 8, and Linux has become a realistic alternative.

Open platform, open OS', no Intel or Microsoft involvement what so ever.

I'm in.

[ Edited by Jim 17.05.2018 - 12:46 ]

At least for AOS, since it already runs on the PWRficient PA6T, it seems more like a step instead of a jump.

For me, I just like the hardware. I have 2 x86_64 (or whatever they're called) running Linux, and absolutely no interest in doing anything on them except playing Free cell and INTERNET stuff. They're just appliances.

Anyway, my order is in for the dual socket Talos II. I don't expect delivery until July/August sometime so will be spending time looking for a case and other needed stuff.

Quote:

Now that they have announce a lower cost derivative, I'll join you in this.
Once I have it, my first objectives will be porting AROS and trying to get SAM460 and X5000 emulation running on it.

The scary thing is that that will still leave a lot of computing power left over for other processes.
Hopefully someone is writing a good hypervisor based virtualization manager.

> the TalosII Lite costs $95 more than an X5000.

...and includes an "EATX chassis with 500W ATX power supply", so it's actually cheaper.

> Using the hypervisor we could even have little endian sessions running
> alongside big endian sessions [...]. Our current software would run on
> this without qemu, [...] we'd have access to a little endian format
> that would eliminate the issues with WebKit

This may be possible on the X5000 as well. The e5500 can be run little-endian and has a hypervisor.

> I should be able to emulate an X5000 in the near future anyway. And if
> that can be done, then MorphOS can probably be run on Power 9 whether
> the development team supports a port or not.

In terms of MorphOS, will a virtualized X5000 have any advantage over a virtualized Sam460?

> I could get this board to run AROS, which would bring the possibility of future
> enhancements like SMP, alternative video card support, better OpenGL
> support...end user development participation.

Why would AROS need the Talos II for this?

> AROS on PPC [...] Linux hosted version could be made to run on most
> of our current platforms.

Yes, the hosted version should run without adaptation everywhere Linux runs.