-
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.
SE/30... best Mac ever?
- Thread starter TylerEss
- Start date
TylerEss
Well-known member
The fact that Manbu "I sell all the amazing stuff in the world but don't have any real-world answers for anything" Sakai said it won't work is about as valuable to me as the fact that DayStar never promised that it would work. }
I almost guarantee you'd need a 32-bit clean ROM for it to work. I wouldn't be suprised if it failed to work with the upgrade, but I'd be very suprised if it *did* work *without*.
equill
Well-known member
Mindful of Mrs Beeton's dictum (when she was aked how to prepare jugged hare): 'First catch your hare', I have to ask whether anyone owns a 601-based accelerator for the 030 PDS slot? Or a 601-based accelerator for the IIci cache slot? Or an adapter from 030 PDS slot to Quadra PDS slot? Or whatever ...
Or are we all torturing ourselves with fanciful visions of a chimera?
de
Or are we all torturing ourselves with fanciful visions of a chimera?
de
~tl
68kMLA Admin Emeritus
The Turbo601 works in a IIsi. So maybe, with a IIsi ROM chip, it's possible it'll work in a SE/30. It'd be interesting to try anyway. I think you'd probably have better luck with the IIsi ROM than the IIfx ROM. Would probably be best to try it with the IIsi Daystar adapter first and work from there. If it works with that, then try it with the SE/30 one/Twinspark.
I would think heat would be a major problem, you'd probably need to add extra fans to get it out of the case! But how cool (or hot!) would a 100MHz SE/601 be [] ]'>
http://www.brinnoven.co.uk/turbo601/
I would think heat would be a major problem, you'd probably need to add extra fans to get it out of the case! But how cool (or hot!) would a 100MHz SE/601 be [
] ]'>http://www.brinnoven.co.uk/turbo601/
TylerEss
Well-known member
I'm not actually sure I'd even *want* a Turbo601 SE/30, but I'd really love to be the first guy on the internet to discover that it works. ;-)
What could you use a Turbo601 SE/30 for? I can think of two things:
first, a platform to get MacOS 8.5+ running on the SE/30. This wouldn't really be useful.
Second, to run some particular piece of software faster. I'm pretty sure that a 50MHz 68040 is faster than a 100MHz 601 at running System 7 or MacOS 8. On the other hand, if you're using Mathematica a lot on the SE/30, I'm sure the 100MHz 601 would double your speed, and probably even more than that due to it's smoking fast FPU.
Personally, if I wanted Mathematica to be faster I'd run it on a faster computer; I've got a Pentium4 OpenBSD machine available, for example. I'm fine with the speed Mathematica runs on my 68040, and I don't have the time to tinker MacOS 9.2.2 onto the SE/30.
So, I wouldn't have any use for it, but I restate that I'd love to be the guy that first proves it's doable.
What could you use a Turbo601 SE/30 for? I can think of two things:
first, a platform to get MacOS 8.5+ running on the SE/30. This wouldn't really be useful.
Second, to run some particular piece of software faster. I'm pretty sure that a 50MHz 68040 is faster than a 100MHz 601 at running System 7 or MacOS 8. On the other hand, if you're using Mathematica a lot on the SE/30, I'm sure the 100MHz 601 would double your speed, and probably even more than that due to it's smoking fast FPU.
Personally, if I wanted Mathematica to be faster I'd run it on a faster computer; I've got a Pentium4 OpenBSD machine available, for example. I'm fine with the speed Mathematica runs on my 68040, and I don't have the time to tinker MacOS 9.2.2 onto the SE/30.
So, I wouldn't have any use for it, but I restate that I'd love to be the guy that first proves it's doable.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm still trying to find the link (was on a Japanese language site in around 1997), but someone tell me if my explanation makes any sense:
SE/30 Board with CPU pulled
+
68030 -> 68040 Socket Upgrade Board (the 68040 was itself in a socket as well, and offset from the location of the cpu pins that went into the SE/30 board)
+
68040->601 Socket Upgrade Board
All i remember is that it was shown working, I have no clue if the ROM simm was swapped (babelfish sucked hard then and had no japanese translation). I do remember I got to if from the now defunct CCSCC pages somehow, and I think the case had been painted black. There was no greyscale upgrade nor cd-rom in it iirc (for identification purposes)
just trying to help... :?:
SE/30 Board with CPU pulled
+
68030 -> 68040 Socket Upgrade Board (the 68040 was itself in a socket as well, and offset from the location of the cpu pins that went into the SE/30 board)
+
68040->601 Socket Upgrade Board
All i remember is that it was shown working, I have no clue if the ROM simm was swapped (babelfish sucked hard then and had no japanese translation). I do remember I got to if from the now defunct CCSCC pages somehow, and I think the case had been painted black. There was no greyscale upgrade nor cd-rom in it iirc (for identification purposes)
just trying to help... :?:
TylerEss
Well-known member
It makes sense, but I'm a bit skeptical because I don't know of any 68040 upgrade for the 68030-socket Macs. Furthermore, I don't know how such a thing would work, since the 601 upgrades do a lot of voodoo with the system ROM and I wouldn't think that it would have the access to do that when going through another set of glue logic.
But, who am I to argue with success? If they said it worked, it probably did. It is an intriguing route to take, at any rate.
But, who am I to argue with success? If they said it worked, it probably did.
It is an intriguing route to take, at any rate.
yeah.. it was ancient.. and I've been searching for the page on and off for the last year... but it did show it working.. not a clue what the wierd board in the middle with the 68040 upgrade was though, but the concept seemed basically to be that the se30 was rally jsut a backplane at that point for the 68040w/ppc, that it did nothing on its own.
equill
Well-known member
Unquestionably the most accomplished of the Classic AIOs. Never mind what can be done with a CC, because that pokey little screen is a fatal handicap.
However, the more I try/cast about, the more I am impressed with the IIci, having, as it does, so much more potential to complement a faster CPU with useful adjuncts (eg, real 10/100Base-T NICs) in its NuBus slots, and in not needing especially fancy RAM to be useful, nor hens-teeth-class video cards. I can use a Mac Portrait card in 16 greys in one of mine to drive a Portrait Display, which is a mighty fine improvement over anything the SE/30 can be persuaded to do, but a decent Radius card can give 256 greys. And then there's the native 32-bit operation. Though I've been into Classic AIOs so often as to be able to do it in my sleep, I have to favour the case of the IIcx/IIci/Q700. Only battery replacement necessitates large-scale demolition, and at every 5-7 years, that is not a serious handicap. And, best of all, a PowerCache 50MHz card was just a drop-in.
Despite Tyler's care to rig the voting by not providing for a dissenting vote, I register my view by abstaining, so there.
de
TylerEss
Well-known member
You know, if "All-in-one" wasn't such an important part of my decision to use the SE/30, I would totally use a IIci with tons of upgrades (Video, SCSI, 10/100, 68040) and a Portrait display. What a great workstation.
Glad to hear there's a dissenting opinion, it helps to keep us honest. ;-)
Glad to hear there's a dissenting opinion, it helps to keep us honest. ;-)
coius
Well-known member
I'm not going to vote, because there is no "No"
I think that the 840av was the best 68k mac out there. I know it's slower than the 950, but if you look at the AV card, the thing just kicks butt!
As far as the best mac I have seen, I say the 9600 Takes the cake. Wicked fast, maxes out at 1GB memory, all those PCI Slots, and best of all, it can also do AV. Yes, I know the G3 could do that, but if you look at the initial release of the G3, the G3 was slower in real world tests than the 9600 initially. even the 366 was slower than the 9600. just because there was no software to take initial hold on the IBM 750. so, for a while, it was kinda useless.
I think that the 840av was the best 68k mac out there. I know it's slower than the 950, but if you look at the AV card, the thing just kicks butt!
As far as the best mac I have seen, I say the 9600 Takes the cake. Wicked fast, maxes out at 1GB memory, all those PCI Slots, and best of all, it can also do AV. Yes, I know the G3 could do that, but if you look at the initial release of the G3, the G3 was slower in real world tests than the 9600 initially. even the 366 was slower than the 9600. just because there was no software to take initial hold on the IBM 750. so, for a while, it was kinda useless.
