On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 12:20:16 +0100, pgraf--- via Ql-Users wrote:

> If the OSSC wasn't such an expensive, clumsy setup, I would also just
> say: Issue solved. Period.

All what matters for me is that it plain works and secures the usage
of my Q60 in the future. "Clumsy" or not, the fact the OSSC is Open
Source is also a big plus compared to other commercial "solutions"
(that won't even work at all in the first place).

> It's very good that you published your experience - I would never 
> spend the money without knowing that it actually works with the Q60. 
> For the BBQL, I have a better HDMI solution, so I have no other use 
> for an OSSC. If it has not happened yet, I would encourage you to 
> post your result on the QL forum also.

In my case, the OSSC also allowed me to make use again of a QL and of
the Thor XVI, both of which became unusable after my good old NEC
Multisync 3D died.
It also works nicely with my Atari 1024 STE and Falcon 030...

> Or a different board that would run with the 68060 pulled out of the 
> Q60, hence my original question.

While the 68060 is a wonderful CPU (much superior to *any* of its
contemporary competitors), it is alas "dead" (no more produced,
almost impossible to find, even as a second hand product, and when
you find one, you must pay a fortune for it; I know it "first hand"
for having bought a second hand MC68060RC50 a few years ago).

So, a different board to host it sounds like a dead end project.

However, and as you perfectly know, there are other solutions, based
on "IP cores" and FPGAs. I recently stumbled upon:

That "68080" core (implemented with current FPGAs) is 3 times faster
than a 68060 @ 66MHz !

Sadly it does not implement a MMU, so it won't be able to run Linux
and some programs under SMSQ/E would pose issues (IIRC, QLiberated
programs use the MSB of the address registers to store data, and the
Q40/Q60 uses its MMU to "mask" it).
Perhaps a cut-down MMU support (i.e. MSB address "masking") could be
added to the "68080" core so to solve the issue under SMSQ/E...

A hint for a successor to the Q68 ?... :-D


QL-Users Mailing List

Reply via email to