Frankly, after examining the really poor state of open video drivers for ALL ARM devices, and the poor documentation of their GPUs, at this point I'd rather stay with PPCs and discrete video cards.

And yet it moves... I mean, linux works on it just fine.

Quote:

For example this article on Tom's Hardware Italy:

http://www.tomshw.it/cont/news/udoo-unisce-rasperry-pi-e-arduino-per-cambiare-il-mondo/44936/1.html

It titles UDOO mix Raspberry pi and Arduino.

Quote:

Really? I thought at least they upgraded all the models to dual. What a pity it is mainly single core.
Good to hear that version 2 is quad!

>>> UDOO is based on Raspberry Pi motherboard

>> I doubt this is true. What makes you believe that?

> For example this article on Tom's Hardware Italy: [...]
> It titles UDOO mix Raspberry pi and Arduino.

Whatever the article claims, UDOO may be similar in functionality to Raspberry Pi plus Arduino, but it's certainly not based on Raspberry Pi. As far as I can see (via Google translator), the article fails to mention in what way exactly UDOO should be based on Raspberry Pi.

> I thought at least they upgraded all the models to dual.

The pre-2 models all used the same single-core SoC.

Quote:

The AMD dev board supports discrete cards.

This sounds interesting, they want to standardise ARM dev boards.
A 64bit octa-core for $129 isn't too shabby either!

https://www.96boards.org/

Quote:


Worth noting.
Got any references?

> Got any references?

"PCI Express connectors configurable as a single x8 or dual x4 ports "
http://www.amd.com/en-us/press-releases/Pages/amd-to-accelerate-2014jan28.aspx
http://www.amd.com/en-us/press-releases/Pages/64-bit-developer-kit-2014jul30.aspx

Great, Opteron server processors.
That explains that.
No built in gpu.

> "Skybridge" (products available 2015)

"CEO Lisa Su has commented that AMD has decided to change their focus away from Skybridge based on customer feedback. Customers were telling AMD that they didn't necessarily need socket compatible solutions, so AMD is going to work on differentiated solutions."
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9231/amds-20162017-x86-roadmap-zen-is-in

> "K12" (products available 2016)

"With AMD having opted to prioritize Zen development, K12 has been pushed back from 2016 to 2017, essentially taking the near-simultaneous launch of the two parts off the table. AMD for their part is attributing this change in schedule only to the decision to focus on Zen, however with Opteron A1100 delayed, it’s entirely possible this is also a knock-on effect that has pushed back the entire AMD ARM roadmap."
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9232/amds-k12-arm-cpu-now-in-2017

Well, that makes a lot of sense.
I didn't really understand what they thought they would gain with socket compatibility.
Changing ISAs with a cpu swap would present SO many issues that I wouldn't try to go that route.

Addendum:

> Mentioned in
> http://www.powerpc-notebook.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/LinuxDay2014_Mi_presentation_pub_en.pdf
> (page 12, apparently copied from a Freescale document) for 2016 time frame:
> - LT1082P: 4 x e6500
> - LT1042P: 4 x e6500
> - LT3160P: 8 x e6500
> - LS3xxxP

Mentioned in https://community.nxp.com/servlet/JiveServlet/previewBody/105951-102-1-27443/ftf-snt-f1156.pdf (page 6, from FTF 2015 in June) for 2016/2017 time frame:

- LT10xxP
- LT3xxxP
- LS3xxxP

Mentioned in http://www.nxp.com/files/training/doc/QorIQ-Layerscape-Webinar.pdf (page 4/5, from April 2015) for 2016 time frame:

- LS3xxxP

[ Edited by Andreas_Wolf 25.05.2017 - 17:54 ]

The Freescale Roadmap shown in that first document is not encouraging for future PPC development.
The Qorlq family shifts to primarily ARM processors and the only PPC core left in the furthest part of the forecast is the e6500.

So our current ISA narrows to limit our choices, but they are not bad.
And in the future ARM dominates. Good information to base decisions on our current direction(s).

Isn't a switch to AMD, like, confirmed?

Quote:

I do not remember hearing about that.
Sounds like an ask Andreas moment.

AMD processors with built-in gpus would make as much sense as any other choice.

@Jim

I beat him to it

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=11&topic_id=11137&post_id=118409&viewmode=flat&sortorder=0&showonepost=1

> Isn't a switch to AMD, like, confirmed?

AMD64 *ISA* doesn't necessarily mean AMD :-)

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=11&topic_id=11137&start=19

OK!
I must remember to read entire threads.
No Macs is cool with me.
And I have been using AMD processors in most of my X86 systems since the K6-III+ was introduced.

So we have the e5500 cored processors to look forward to support for in later revisions of our current OS (and with the e6500, a possible direction further).
And AMD's APUs can provide the base for the new branch.

Cool.

A new lightweight OS that isn't weighed down by legacy crap, that IS morphing to something better.

Quote:

As Andreas Wolf mentioned, AMD64 does not mean AMD CPU's, or APU's, it could mean Intel chips as well, that use the AMD64 ISA.

Quote:

Good point David, AMD did lead the move to 64 bit.
Although I tend to use X86-64 or X64 to differentiate this from X86 32 bit.
After all, it is just an advance on an Intel ISA.

Makes you wonder what hardware they will adopt.
If the past is any kind of indication, we may not get that much warning.

Still, I am looking forward to the X5000.
What happens after that...well it will have to be judged on its own merits.

Hopefully, the NGNG OS will incorporate some of the elements (outside of legacy compatibility) that make MorphOS stand out (compact/tight coding, micro kernel, etc).


[ Edited by Jim 15.07.2015 - 15:18 ]

> AMD did lead the move to 64 bit.

...12 years and 7 8 ISAs after the first one ;-)

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=7675&start=17

[ Edited by Andreas_Wolf 10.03.2022 - 12:10 ]

Quote:

Personally, it still looks like the evolution of one ISA to me.
There is a much greater degree of backward compatibility here then say differing Power families.
But I am sure you will contest that. ;)

> it still looks like the evolution of one ISA to me. There is a much greater degree
> of backward compatibility here then say differing Power families. But I am sure
> you will contest that. ;)

Absolutely ;-) PPC64 and PPC32 are much more alike than x86-64 and x86(-32) or AArch64 and AArch32. The reason for the good backward compatibility in the latter cases is the fact that these 64-bit processors separately implement the 32-bit ISA in addition.

Quote:

Good answer.
A fine line, but valid.

Update:

>>> in terms of 64-bit ARMv8 (AArch64) cores, there is announced so far:
>>> - Cortex-A53, Cortex-A57 and Cortex A-72 from ARM Ltd.
>>> - Denver from nVidia
>>> - X-Gene from Applied Micro
>>> - Thunder from Cavium
>>> - Cyclone and Typhoon from Apple

>> - Vulcan from Broadcom
>> - K12 from AMD

> - Kryo from Qualcomm

- Xiaomi from Phytium

http://www.theplatform.net/2015/08/25/inside-chinas-homegrown-64-core-arm-big-iron-chip/
http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1327526