68040 upgrade cards in IIci

[Quadraman]

I have something to mention about the difference between the Mobius and DayStar 40MHz 68040 accelerator card benchmark results... it looks to me like the 'CPU' and 'Maths' scores are being inflated on the Mobius card by software that causes 'software-mode' SANE calculations to be performed on the FPU anyway (and at 80-bit instead of 96-bit precision).
DayStar calls this feature 'PowerMath' and when you enable the trancendental functions 'Enhanced PowerMath.' Check to make sure that feature is turned on on your DayStar results.

Well, scratch that idea!

In my SE/30 with 48MHz Turbo040, with Enhanced PowerMath I get the following results: 39.8 CPU, 9.33 FPU (Norton System Info 3.5.3). With Enhanced PowerMath turned off, I get the same results.

You can really see how important memory bandwidth is to some of the tests that they're using, though. With the 128k cache turned off, my scores dropped to 30.1 CPU, 8.1 FPU. Obviously a lot of their tests fit wholly into 128k L2 cache but not into the (32k? I don't remember exactly) L1 cache.

Re: IIci with OS 8... You're totally right about the IIci loving System 6... That said, mine seems to like running OS 8.1 from time to time; it's like going window-shopping and it's glad to get back to System 6 when it can. Since it's used for testing, it's napping 99% of the time anyway.

Also, 68030 Macs run MacOS 8 just fine; the biggest problem is making sure to have enough RAM. http://home.earthlink.net/~gamba2/os8_68030.html

Even if you can use hacks to make it run, would you really want to on an 030? The IIci and IIfx would be the only machines you could realistically consider running MacOS 8 on. Anything running a 20mhz or slower CPU must crawl. There's usually a reason why Apple discontinues support for certain models and it's usually because the user experience would be degraded by upgrading to the newest OS.

 

[trag]

Is there a difference in speed between the original Daystar Turbos and the later ones that didn't have a cache slot (cache built in)?

A Daystar tech told me that there was a significant performance improvement with the newer version. He told me this (or was it a she?) back around '93 - '95. I've never tested it.

But as it turns out, Equill was testing the newer, presumably faster, Daystar card anyway. Hmmmm. Still puzzled that the Mobius/Carrera math scores are so much higher. I don't think the 33 vs. 40 speed should make a 100% difference in math speed.

Ah, one last question. Equill was that Daystar card originally an 'i' version on which you switched the CPU? I ask because there is a ROM difference between the 'i' version and the full FPU version of the Daystar card.

 

[equill]

... was that Daystar card originally an 'i' version on which you switched the CPU? I ask because there is a ROM difference between the 'i' version and the full FPU version of the Daystar card.

That's another for my ever-increasing list of things that I had not previously known. QuadControl reports the ROM version of my DayStar Turbo040 card as 4.11i. What is the significance of that, given that the card was jumpered for a full 68040 (instead of either of the remaining 68LC040 and 68EC040 positions, both of which are without FPUs)?

de

 

[trag]

That's another for my ever-increasing list of things that I had not previously known. QuadControl reports the ROM version of my DayStar Turbo040 card as 4.11i. What is the significance of that, given that the card was jumpered for a full 68040 (instead of either of the remaining 68LC040 and 68EC040 positions, both of which are without FPUs)?
de

I'm not sure what you mean about the card being jumpered, but there is definitely an LC version and a full version of the ROM for that card. Can you tell me what kind of chip the ROM is stored on, under the little sticker. It's the one in the socket over in the corner. If I have a compatible chip on hand, and can ever find an hour, I'll burn you a copy of the later ROM. Then we can see if the Math scores change.

 

[Macbuk]

I had read this topic carefully and i decided to capture another real life test comparing 68030 and 68040.

Flight Simulator 4.0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIgIUh_s2P8&fmt=18

Pathways into darkness demo (already posted)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDqDphSapV8

I've noticed basically minimal or no difference between the daystar turbo 040 (on board cache model) and Micromac carrera 040 "cacheless" (both 33 mhz).

I do like a lot more the Daystar one because it starts even without extensions or control panel in specific folders. Now i'm waiting to setup a macintosh IIx or IIcx with adapters i've received in the bundle. Some photos of the mac IIci micromac 040 equipped.

http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/6656/micromac1zf8.jpg

http://img160.imageshack.us/img160/255/micromac2vk0.jpg

 

[IIsi]

I disagree with the notion that certain OSes are meant for certain Macs, especially concerning II series and 6 only. I never liked System 6, it sucked pretty much from day one. Add that to the fact that 7 runs fine on most II's, and you have me happily running 7.6.1 on my IIsi and IIci. I consider running 6 on most Macs but the 68000's to be crippling them.