• Updated 2023-07-12: Hello, Guest! Welcome back, and be sure to check out this follow-up post about our outage a week or so ago.

68060 accelerator cards for Mac: Would you be willing?

bestobothworlds

Well-known member
A few months ago I realized that although Amiga and Atari Falcon have had 060 accelerator cards made for them in the past, no mac or accelerator card for one has used the 68060 chip. This was probably due to the jump to Power PC and all, but can you imagine how awesome your 020 or 030 based mac would be with a Daystar Turbo 060 card inside it? System 6 would scream and run circles around even the fastest win or mactels, OS 8 would run at near PPC speeds, and games that had slowdown on even the fastest of 040 machines would perform like a dream. And to sweeten the deal, it would come with an onboard Kickstart 3.1 rom and 10MB of flash memory to access the Amiga world. It would be compatible with: Macintosh II, Macintosh LC, SE/30, Classic II, all Performa and Centris/Quadra models, Macintosh TV, all LCs, IIx IIci, IIsi, IIvx, Color Classic, basically everything with an 020 and up. So, how does the prospect of this sound? Anyone willing to make this card?

 

Unknown_K

Well-known member
This topic came up in the last forum and we concluded the 68060 was noyt 100% hardware compatible with the 68040 so the OS would have had to be changed to even get a Mac to boot.

The reason an 060 accelerator was designed but never shipped is because of the above plus the fact that it could not compete in speed with the 601 upgrades being planned/sold.

G3's being dirt cheap now has nothing to do with how fast you can get a 68K to run with upgrades. You do see people blowing $100+ just to get an 030/50 for an SE/30 and $100's more to get 256 greyscale on the same machine.

 

Quadraman

Well-known member
Not all 060 variants are full 060's, either. The ones with the highest clock speeds, up to 75 mhz are all stripped down models the equivalent to an LC in the 040 line, so to get full functionality, you have to go with a slower chip, I think the 50mhz version was the fastest to have both the FPU and MMU on chip. At that speed, the performance difference over a chipped 040 isn't worth the expense.

 

bestobothworlds

Well-known member
the 68060 was noyt 100% hardware compatible with the 68040 so the OS would have had to be changed to even get a Mac to boot. / plus the fact that it could not compete in speed with the 601 upgrades
Ah. Well, it seemed like a good idea at the time... [:I] ]'>
 

Bunsen

Admin-Witchfinder-General
Get an Amiga with an '060 upgrade and run a MacOS emulator on it. Then stick it in a IIfx case :D

 

The Macster

Well-known member
Or find an old PC, install Windows 95, change the boot screen to look like the MacOS splash screen, set Basilisk II to run on startup, and put it all inside a IIfx case! :p Would probably be faster than a real 68k, depending on what sort of PC you could find for the project...

 

Charlieman

Well-known member
601 PPC running vanilla PhotoShop 2.5 -- slower than a 68040 Mac.

601 PPC running PhotoShop 2.5 with PPC plugin -- nippier than any Quadra.

And that is the final history of 68K accelerators. They were never going to be faster than new (competitively priced) PowerMacs and PPC upgrades.

 

Quadraman

Well-known member
601 PPC running vanilla PhotoShop 2.5 -- slower than a 68040 Mac.
601 PPC running PhotoShop 2.5 with PPC plugin -- nippier than any Quadra.

And that is the final history of 68K accelerators. They were never going to be faster than new (competitively priced) PowerMacs and PPC upgrades.
Try using Speed Doubler. It really gives a huge boost to 601's trying to emulate 68k code.

 

Bunsen

Admin-Witchfinder-General
Ahem:

The Freescale ColdFire is a 68k / for embedded systems / not entirely object code compatible with the 68000. /
Newer models of ColdFire are compatible enough with 68k processors that it is now possible to create binary compatible Amiga clones. The Debian project is currently working on making its m68k port compatible with the ColdFires / They can be clocked as high as 300MHz / without overclocking.
Then:

CK68KLib: 68K Emulation for ColdFire
Key features /

* Emulation library / to implement 680x0 / instructions and addressing modes missing from the ColdFire architecture. /

* Runs code written in any language, typically with no modifications /

* / specify which 680x0 family processor you wish to emulate /. The utility then generates ColdFire assembly-language source code /

CF68KLib is available for download free of charge!
I also did ten Google pages digging up links on m68k emulation, and then my browser crashed [xx(] ]'>

You might also be interested in this PPCMLA discussion

 

Maccess

Well-known member
Hmmm.... I think I would be very interested in a 300Mhz 68K mac upgrade based on coldfire. So, who's going to make it?

Ther would have to be the coldfire chip and some flash RAM for the emulator code, and it would have to socket into an 040 socket, much like the QuadDoubler accelrator.

 

trag

Well-known member
The first thing to do is to price ColdFire chips of the type you might wish to use. The problem, in my mind, with the 68060 accelerator idea is that the 68060 chip costs (last time I checked) well over $100 per unit. So even if you designed and built such an upgrade, it would cost in the neighborhood of $200 each even if you gave your time away for free and assumed the risk of not getting your money back after building some number of units.

But if fast Coldfire chips are, say, $30 each, then that would be an affordable upgrade.

I haven't looked at Coldfire in a while but are they 32 bit wide processors? How much does the 300 MHz version cost per chip? Which version of the chip is most 68K compatible?

If the processors are down under $30 each I'd say that it is very doable project, although I'm unclear on how you get the board to run 68K code without losing too much performance.

Ideally, you'd want the Coldfire to execute instructions without any other processing, when an instruction is compatible so that you don't lose any CPU cycles. Yet, you need some mechanism for intercepting non-compatible 68K instructions and translating them, otherwise. Perhaps a little FPGA or second microprocessor could sit between the Coldfire and the datastream from the Mac and monitor the instructions as they go by and provide translation as needed. The only problem with this approach is how does the monitor system distinguish between data and instruction transactions?

Ah, I read the link above. If I'm reading it correctly, 68K instructions which are not supported on the Coldfire, should generate an exception, which can then be handled by executing the proper code on the Coldfire to emulate the excepted 68K instruction. Very neat. It's the same mechanism which the Mac Toolbox uses to execute its routines. Now, would that be completely compatible or only mostly compatible? And again, how much to purchase each Coldfire CPU?

Another approach would be to design a 68030 chip into an FPGA. Chips which can do the deed are available for under $20 each now. But I think the magnitude of completely designing a 68030 compatible CPU chip, even with modern Verilog or VHDL would be enormous. Heck, just reading the User's Manual for the 68030 such that you understand what needs to be emulated is a daunting task. There's a ton of stuff going on behind the scenes on that chip.

Beyond properly emulating each instruction, one must make sure that all the control registers, interrupt functionality and supervisory systems operate as expected. That's a lot of stuff.

 

Bunsen

Admin-Witchfinder-General
Why? When it would be even harder* than doing one for a 68k machine, and you can easily stick a G3 or G4 in there.

*or perhaps impossible. Remember the Coldfire is kinda-sorta 68k compatible, and not even remotely related to the PPC.

 

kreats

Well-known member
The 060 is really quite expensive these days with all the amiga and atari people fighting for them - especially the good revision. It's almost impossible to get them affordably.

Maybe a g3 or g4 card would be better - especially if you could use it just as a co-processor for executing PPC apps (while not giving up the 040 as the main processor)?

 

Charlieman

Well-known member
Another approach would be to design a 68030 chip into an FPGA.
This stuff is way past my abilities but I'm intrigued. There was a similar thread on 'Fritter about emulating a 68000 on a PIC.

Is there anything that can be learned about 68000/68030 implementation on an FPGA/PIC from projects like MAME?

 
Top