On 9/18/01 at 10:20 PM Peter Graf wrote:
I'm not sure my first reply got through, this new NT virus is bombarding my
web server which also has the proxy program, until it eventually crashes.
[Overclocking a 68060]
>>The Q60, AFAIK uses either a 66MHZ 68060 or a 75MHz (clocked at 80MHz)
>>68LC060.
> Almost. The 66 MHz version is a 68060RC60A (60 MHz) chip clocked at 66
MHz
> ...a 60 MHz chip, overclocked by 10 %. The heatsink is largely oversized,
> so the die is actually a lot cooler than with normal operation at 60 MHz.
> I even ran the 68060RC60A at 70 MHz and more without noticeable problems,
> but I wouldn't use that for production.
Thanks for that info. The 68060 cleverly provides a thermal sensing
resistor on chip, so at least temperature can be conclusively measured.
>>68k CPUs are know to be very conservatively spec'd.
>Confirmed.
Well, at least there is someone with experience to ask :-) I am very
grateful for this data.
But as they say, give them a finger and they want the whole hand :-) - I do
need a bit more data.
First, there have been some impressive figures posted on the Q60 web site
about the power consumption. From what data I could find, it seems that the
060 has signifficantly lower power consumption than the 68040 - no doubt
due to the lower supply voltage. What would be your assesment of this?
Second, you had mentioned on the list that the Q60 cannot use a 68EC060.
Would you care to explain in a bit more detail why not? I am guessing that
it has to do with the interaction of the compatibility requirements in
SMSQ/QDOS and the changes in the memory map on the Q40/60 that were
necessary to add new capability.
>> I've already asked this on my QLhardware e-group, but got no reply.
> I had replied on the ql-developers list. The list owner has kindly
> alowed hardware development issues there, and I very much prefer
> open mailinglists to Yahoo-groups.
> I thought you were subscribed to ql-developers. I apologize for not
> sending a copy of my reply to your personal adress.
No apology is necessary, I thought I was subscribed to QL developers too,
but it seems that my subscription had somehow lapsed. This would not be
surprising as there were several problems with my email due to the various
DOS attacks on Croatian sites, my main mailbox is still on servers in
Croatia! I will look into this shortly.
I can't blame you for not wanting to use an Egroup forum. The prerequisite
to use them and not drown in spam, is to have a 'sacrificial' email account
for the spam, and use only the web access for the egroups. Unfortunately,
if that isn't done from teh start, there could be spam.
>What is the background of your questions? Do you plan to add a 68060
>upgrade socket to the GoldFire specs?
Ah, well, I guess the cat is going to be out of the bag anyway, so I might
just tell everyone.
Currently, the GoldFire (which might actually need a name change, see
below), is a good 3 years late. I know that I keep promising it, and now,
amongst other things, it's a question of honor to produce it. However,
since it's so late, and I cannot for many reasons invest as much work and
money in it as I would like to, I try to upgrade the spec where I can,
without incuring extra cost in developement time or the final cost to the
user. It would make no sense to eventually produce a 3 year old design.
Recently my 'GF fund' got a little boost and I decided to start looking for
a supplier for the ColdFire 5102 CPU that would have it at a reasonable
price and quantity. I finally found a small supplier that had a number of
batches of Motorola chips. I was shocked to find this in the price list:
MCF5102 @ 40MHz, $19 a piece, minimum order 50 pieces.
68EC060 @ 66MHz, $10 a piece, minimum order 50 pieces.
What would you do???
In short, I now have a batch of 68EC060. Using it on the GF presents a
couple of challenges, but they are well worth the increase in performance.
As a result, the dual CPU feature has been simplified, in favour of alowing
a single CPU implementation to work as efficiently as possible. This
actually makes the logic simpler! As far as the 'EC' vs 'real' 68060
matters, there is no difference in the design since the 5102 is essentially
a 68EC040 with a smaller cache. The name 'GoldFire' may be changed since
there is no more ColdFire CPU to justify the original moniker.
The reason I asked the question is that for hardware reasons, it would be
simpler for me to clock the CPU at 70 or 72MHz, which is less than 10%
overclock. I was fairly certain that it could do this with ease.
Let me also take the oportunity to answer a question before it is asked:
I do not consider the Q40 or Q60 in any danger of competition at this time
- the GF is still largely paperware, and it will, unfortunately, stay so
for a while longer, though things ARE moving. Plus, it will be 68EC060
based, though upgradeable (no stopping that, the 'real' 060 or the LC060
are all pin-compatible). It will also NOT be possible to add a different
CPU on-board, as there simply is no space, and neither is there enough
power. Also, at least for a while, the need for QL hardware compatibility
will be slowing IO down.
Regards,
Nasta
