Home   Forum

Welcome to the Apollo Forum

This forum is for people interested in the APOLLO CPU.
Please read the forum usage manual.
VISIT APOLLO IRC CHANNEL



All TopicsNewsPerformanceGamesApolloVampireReleases
The team will post updates and news here

Running ATARI On 68080page  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 

John Heritage

Posts 89
30 Aug 2016 20:17


Also willing to test Atari STs..  I have a 520ST, 1040ST, and a Mega STE.  Fully willing to risk the 1040ST, ..  followed by 520ST and lastly Mega STE :)


Gunnar von Boehn
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 2401
31 Aug 2016 21:17


Enrique Martos wrote:

  If it's possible adapt core to work with Atari ST / STE machines, Vampire 500 will be compatible with Atari ST / Mega ST series and Vampire 600 will be compatible with Atari STE / MegaSTE series.
 

 
 
  The APOLLO 68080 should work out of the box on ATARI....
  I think adding 150 MIPS power and 128 MB ram to ATARI STE should be no problem at all..
 
So if ATARI fans like a fast CPU with fast memory for good price then the Vampire card would be an nice option.

  Right now of course the Vampire includes AMIGA KICK ... so this needs to be changed...As AMIGA OS will not work on the ATARI HW of course...  But this should really not be a problem.


Thierry Atheist

Posts 243
31 Aug 2016 22:05


When they install the Vampire II in their Ataris, they'll be able to use LIGHTNING FAST Ataris AND LIGHTNING FAST Amigas!!! (That's how we'll indoctrinate them, teeheehee.)


Uros Vidovic

Posts 9
01 Sep 2016 08:11


Well ... I dont believe Apollo core is that much interesting for the Atari ST/STE users as it is for Amiga users. Apollo core for the Atari Falcon and TT and other Atari clones would be much more interesting.

But I believe most interesting would be Apollo based standalone motherboard as it could be "easy" turned into Atari clone. Dont forget Atari scene has allready equally fast binnary executing existing clone based on Coldfire CPU.

I agree Apollo core is a lot more advanced as the Coldfire but you have to have software to exploit its advanced possibilities. Coldfire also has the DSP like commands but there is almost no software to uses them.

Anyway, I am looking forward to Apollo project and it will become interesting to me when it will have fully integrated FPU and MMU to be used into Atari clones. Until then I will use my FireBee :)

Oh ... and I dont have any interest to use Amiga computers. i have no nostalgia feelings about it as I never used it. But I am really glad about Vampire accelerators for Amiga computers!
Some Atari users would be interested in Apollo cores for ST/STE computers. But dont expect much. Atari users who wants more power I believe moved to accelerated Falcons and Atari clones.

Anyway, Apollo/68080 CPU is really great achievemnt of Gunnar and his team. Hats off and good luck in future!


Gunnar von Boehn
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 2401
01 Sep 2016 12:13


Uros Vidovic wrote:

  Anyway, Apollo/68080 CPU is really great achievemnt of Gunnar and his team. Hats off and good luck in future!

Thanks :)

Uros Vidovic wrote:

Until then I will use my FireBee :)

I think it would be interesting to compare the Firebee with APOLLO 68080.

Maybe someone can run some benchmarks on the Firebee so that we get a feeeling of how its running?

Running this benchmark would give some information:
CLICK HERE 
Also running this one, would be very interesting:
CLICK HERE 
I would like to see if APOLLO today already gives a speed up compared to Firebee...

As it was discussed before we consider a real high and version for next year - which will cost a lot more - but also provide a lot more performance. Maybe this version would be also very interesting for ATARI users?


John Heritage

Posts 89
01 Sep 2016 18:27


Not the best benchmark, but --

Dhrystone 2.1

Atari 1040 - 1400
Atari Falcon - 2300
ATari TT - 4200-4700 (compilter options)
Atari CT60 @ 66 Mhz with TTRAM = 102000 - 110000 (66-71 VAX mips)
Firebee TTRAM - 66000 (standard compiler / option) -- 466000-480000 (using "dhry21cf).  VAX MIPs 303-312.

In raw dhrystones, it's measuring 4.5x faster than a 68060 @ 66 mhz. 

http://www.firebee.org/~firebee/pictures/files/dhrystone.pdf


Szyk Cech

Posts 99
01 Sep 2016 20:24


I never heard about so fast Ataris...
Don't you think so fast Atari can be dangerous for Amiga?!?


Olivier Landemarre

Posts 11
01 Sep 2016 21:44


The problem with this test, the result not represent anything else than compiler optimisation, it was debate far long time ago. Dhrystone is definitively obsolete test now.
 
  In real use, 3D calculation opengl like with tiny GL api using FPU, Firebee Coldfire 266Mhz is around 2,5 x CT60 @66Mhz or 1,7 x CT60 @ 100Mhz. The test not use too much memory but the memory access is slow compare to CT60.
  CT60 @ 100Mhz is able to access read write 100MByte/sec
  Firebee coldfire 266Mhz is around 84MByte/sec in read and 47 MByte/sec in write
 
  EXTERNAL LINK 
And don't forget that most software are not coldfire native and emulation is slow
 
  Olivier
 
 
John Heritage wrote:

  Not the best benchmark, but --
 
  Dhrystone 2.1
 
  Atari 1040 - 1400
  Atari Falcon - 2300
  ATari TT - 4200-4700 (compilter options)
  Atari CT60 @ 66 Mhz with TTRAM = 102000 - 110000 (66-71 VAX mips)
  Firebee TTRAM - 66000 (standard compiler / option) -- 466000-480000 (using "dhry21cf).  VAX MIPs 303-312.
 
  In raw dhrystones, it's measuring 4.5x faster than a 68060 @ 66 mhz. 
 
  http://www.firebee.org/~firebee/pictures/files/dhrystone.pdf
 

 


Gunnar von Boehn
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 2401
01 Sep 2016 23:07


Olivier Landemarre wrote:

The problem with this test, the result not represent anything else than compiler optimisation, it was debate far long time ago. Dhrystone is definitively obsolete test now.
 
  In real use, 3D calculation opengl like with tiny GL api using FPU, Firebee Coldfire 266Mhz is around 2,5 x CT60 @66Mhz or 1,7 x CT60 @ 100Mhz. The test not use too much memory but the memory access is slow compare to CT60.
  CT60 @ 100Mhz is able to access read write 100MByte/sec
  Firebee coldfire 266Mhz is around 84MByte/sec in read and 47 MByte/sec in write
 
  EXTERNAL LINK 
  And don't forget that most software are not coldfire native and emulation is slow

Yes I agree with you.
When the NATAMI project was started 8 years ago
one of the 1st ideas was also to use Coldfire.

We evaluated at that time Codlfire V4 system and compared it in several benchmarks with an 68060.

Our impression was very similar.
Yes the Coldfire V4 was faster than our 68060 but not that much.
Clock by Clock the 68060 did beat the Coldfire often.

And of course the big problem with missing instruction - with old code 50% of instructions need to be emulated...
And emulation slows down by factor 50 ...

So for legacy code Coldfire seemed us not useful.
And for new code - yes it was faster but only slightly...

I assume today if you compare a
Coldfire@260 MHz with Apollo 68080@93 MHz
The test results will be 50%/50%
The 68060@93 can easily reach over 300 MB/sec memspeed.
So in all memory heavy usescases it will be several times faster than the Coldfire.
For pure Instruction/Clock Speed the Coldfire will be better.
But the 68080 can do about twice the instruction per cycle than the Coldfire.

I think what would be real win for the ATARI fans would be using the 68080 in a faster FPGA where it runs at 200 Mhz..
Then it should in average be around twice as fast as the Coldfire@266.

This would be nice I think...




Enrique Martos

Posts 14
01 Sep 2016 23:18


I'm trying to find a working Atari Emu for my Amiga 600 Vampire 2 but not found. All Atari emu in Amiga only works with 68000 cpu. In the other side i can't run Hatari 68k or StonX with my Vampire V2.
Amtari v3 was the most versatile emu for old Amigas but only works with 68000 cpu.


Uros Vidovic

Posts 9
02 Sep 2016 08:34


I am not hardware expert at all and dont take what I write 100% true! But as an FireBee user I have some experience.

From what I read 68080 is far more advanced CPU as Coldfire. If the  Coldfire has higher clock speed the 68080 has a lot faster memory access and bus speed and that also means a lot! Parallel execution of instructions, ... wow!

FireBee speed is also limited by its design to not reach the full speed Coldfire can provide. I believe this in favor to gain better compatibility with Atari computers.

To me emulation in old software is not that slow. It depends on the application itself but by my feelings in average that would be the speed of 68060 at 50 MHz? That is not that bad at all. Still I dont use that much applications so maybe my feelings arent that right.
Anyway ... I believe 68080 is much faster running old software. But it has similar problem as Coldfire. Old code dont exploit all new advanced features it offers.

Regardin 68080 and Ataris. As I wrote I dont see it that much interesting for the old Atari computers. They are limited by other hardware and to have only very fast CPU is not thatm much revarding as to have new Atari clone with very fast CPU. And I think 68080 would be even more interesting for Atari comunity as for the Amiga one. We have open source and well developed OS-es and other software. Olivier is an author one of the best AES replacement for the Atari computers/clones so I believe he can tell a lot more and more correct as I do. His applications and ports are also Coldfire optimised altought he doesnt own a FireBee :)

And yes, I cant wait to be able to use 68080 in Atari clones. But I would like to see it with FPU and MMU! If you will do standalone Apollo board I believe it could be turned into the Atari clone too.

Regarding Coldfire cores and their speed. Licence to use Coldfire cores can be bought. I think the latest cores offers a little more speed in FPGA version as 266 MHz ASIC ones which can be freely bought. And if you have money you can do ASIC which would be a lot faster. But not that much as I would expect. It doesnt go above or even near GHz :)

I believe V5 core is different story but you cant buy a licence for it :(


Szyk Cech

Posts 99
02 Sep 2016 16:06


Urolos reminds me that most Ataris ST/TT have MMU as standard. But current Apollo core doesn't. So I have question: Does it matter?


Olivier Landemarre

Posts 11
02 Sep 2016 21:48


Gunnar von Boehn wrote:

 
  ...
 
  I think what would be real win for the ATARI fans would be using the 68080 in a faster FPGA where it runs at 200 Mhz..
  Then it should in average be around twice as fast as the Coldfire@266.
 
  This would be nice I think...
 
 
 


I fully agree with you, .... when there will have a standalone version.

Olivier



Gunnar von Boehn
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 2401
03 Sep 2016 11:19


Comparing CPU is always difficult, as there are so many factors.

In most algorithms Apollo 68080 is
per clock significant stronger than 68060.

In many programs we see that 68080 @ 100 Mhz
is equivalent to roughly 68060 @ 150.

This is already pretty good.
Video playback runs pretty well with Apollo.

In addition we have now some new instructions "AMMX".
This instructions are ideal to speed up GFX and Video.
VIDEO decoding using AMMX can run twice as fast as normal code.

This means we can expect video playback speed of 68060 @ 300 MHz - using APOLLO @100 Mhz  - if we make effective use of the AMMX instructions.
 
ATARI and AMIGA fans can both help each other.
If we both work together on creating video players, mp3 players, JPEG decoder - then this will help all of us...

I think it makes good sense for us to work together. :-)


Olivier Landemarre

Posts 11
03 Sep 2016 13:07


Gunnar von Boehn wrote:

Comparing CPU is always difficult, as there are so many factors.
 
 
  In most algorithms Apollo 68080 is
  per clock significant stronger than 68060.
 
  In many programs we see that 68080 @ 100 Mhz
  is equivalent to roughly 68060 @ 150.
 
  This is already pretty good.
  Video playback runs pretty well with Apollo.
 
  In addition we have now some new instructions "AMMX".
  This instructions are ideal to speed up GFX and Video.
  VIDEO decoding using AMMX can run twice as fast as normal code.
 
 
  This means we can expect video playback speed of 68060 @ 300 MHz - using APOLLO @100 Mhz  - if we make effective use of the AMMX instructions.
   
  ATARI and AMIGA fans can both help each other.
  If we both work together on creating video players, mp3 players, JPEG decoder - then this will help all of us...
 
 
  I think it makes good sense for us to work together. :-)

I agree with you, really not easy to compare CPU. I think I could prepare standalone version of Tiny GL bench in memory from Kronos to be able to compare with other Atari systems, the only specific to change is to access to enough accurate timer, if someone is interest to compil it and just 2 or 3 lines of code to change in source code as I have absolutly no idea how to access to it under Amiga system. But as it use a lot of floating calculation to have good comparison Apollo should have FPU enable or I nead to ask to some friends to do the test in full 68000 mode but it will not be optimized at all.

Yes we should work together. I'm C programer only but I know some people very easy in 68K I think they will be very interested on it, we are some now to promote your 68080 project, and this what we were waiting for some of us.

I cross finger for the standalone version to work on it (system ready)

Olivier


John Heritage

Posts 89
03 Sep 2016 22:48


Gunnar von Boehn wrote:

  ATARI and AMIGA fans can both help each other.
  If we both work together on creating video players, mp3 players, JPEG decoder - then this will help all of us...
 
 
  I think it makes good sense for us to work together. :-)

Since the Atari and Amiga don't have a real powerful GPU (like the Raspberry Pi boards do, for example).  Is the MMX the best way to get JPEG/MP3/Video working well on the Apollo?      I do know the Falcon has MP3 players that use the DSP already, and can play MP3s on the stock 16 MHz Falcon because of the power of the DSP. 


Uros Vidovic

Posts 9
05 Sep 2016 08:57


Yes I agree that comparing CPU is difficult.
But 68080 is a lot stronger as 68060 for sure.

Atari scene has developer of C compiler he could add support for 68080 specific instructions if he would have good documentation.
Maybe even GFA Basic could be adapted to compile 68080 code in the future.
We have open and powerful OS which would benefit of 68080 a lot.
We have active hardware developer who could do Atari clone with 68080. Or if there will be Apollo standalone computer whic would be able to replicate some Atari hardware.

Yes, Atari and Amiga users should help each other. But there is one thing. While Atari scene is quite open, also with open hardware projects like MiST and FireBee, Amiga is really closed scene, mostly not interested in cooperation.

I believe Apollo standalone board will be also closed hardware?


Thierry Atheist

Posts 243
05 Sep 2016 10:02


Uros Vidovic wrote:

Atari scene has developer of C compiler he could add support for 68080 specific instructions if he would have good documentation.

Hi Uros,

He is going to LOVE that there are 64 bit instructions usable now!
Uros Vidovic wrote:

Maybe even GFA Basic could be adapted to compile 68080 code in the future.

That would be EXCELLENT!!! Even though, I am only able to code in AMOS Professional... I am inclined to believe that ANYONE could learn to code in AMOS Professional... however, yes, I'm biased in this view.
Uros Vidovic wrote:

We have open and powerful OS which would benefit of 68080 a lot.
We have active hardware developer who could do Atari clone with 68080. Or if there will be Apollo standalone computer whic would be able to replicate some Atari hardware.

Your wish is granted... as they hope to have a standalone 68080 motherboard released (sometime) in 2017!!!
It will have 1 gigabyte of (DDR2) RAM and run 3 times faster than the current Vampire 2 that is running at x11 speed.
Uros Vidovic wrote:

Yes, Atari and Amiga users should help each other. But there is one thing. While Atari scene is quite open, also with open hardware projects like MiST and FireBee, Amiga is really closed scene, mostly not interested in cooperation.

I believe Apollo standalone board will be also closed hardware?


Yes, of course it is...

The APOLLO CORE'd AMIGA "CPU" will have a major impact in the coming years and they are going to keep their information proprietary...

intel is moving to 10 nm in 2017, if WE could get our hands on that fab, and be octacored........??!!!!!!

P.S. So apparently, big news for "win-dos" is EXTERNAL LINK that intel is releasing new faster CPUs this year, that will have as one "bonus capability" of "The company's new 10-core i7 Extreme Edition chips might grab the Computex headlines for their 'mega-tasking' abilities, but Intel says its forthcoming Kaby Lake processors promise advances in performance, battery life, and media capabilities, while also supporting functions like Windows Hello to make logging into your devices faster."

That's what the world's been waiting for, a CPU that makes "logging into win-dos faster"!!!! EPIC FAIL


Simo Koivukoski
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 137
13 Oct 2016 16:32





John Heritage

Posts 89
13 Oct 2016 18:44


...  Drool ....  Looks like a 1040ST/f  ?

posts 159page  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8