5 ms·
If you really take seriously what you could have done for a home computer if you had started with fully integrated chips, its actually insane. Imagine if you h
by panick21 1y ago
If you really take seriously what you could have done for a home computer if you had started with fully integrated chips, its actually insane.
Imagine if you had an Amiga Chipset and you had combined it with a RISC like chip. If you did that in late 70s with 3.5μm HMOS (like 68k). The resulting system would be insane, in terms of performance to cost. You could outperform minicomputers that cost 10-100x more.
The ARM2 like chip and the complete Amiga chipset seem to have less transistors then a single 68k, so the price off such a system would be very low. And we can see that with the Amiga, what really blows my mind is how cheap Amiga ended up being, an unbelievable achievment.
Its seem the issue really was the the companies that had the resources to do that amount of chip design knowlage and finances were not interest in making a home computers/workstation. Workstation ended up being made by startups who didn't have the resources to do so much costume work. Appollo was a split-off group DEC because DEC was not interested in workstations. IBM was just to slow and couldn't really do prodcut design, and we all know how the eventually got around that problem with the PC. Apple for the Mac did try to do one ambitious chip with VSLI but didn't end up using it.
The split between computer companies and chip design company was just to big to get the needed amount of integration, and there was clearly a lacking vision for what home computer could be. Jobs vision for the Macintosh went in the right direction, but really Jay Mine had the right vision, and he had it because he build a computer for himself. He wanted a home comptuer that was fast, had a proper operating system and enough media capability to run a flight simulator software. Sadly manamgent most of the time wanted him to develop a console and later when they allowed a home computer they didn't share his full vision.
But then also actually plulling this vision off, multi-chip costume design with very few resources is just an amazing achievment. And many of the people didn't even have that much knowlage in chip design, there was a lot of competition for chip design people. Getting into Commmodore where they had the actual semiconductor teams to get these designs over the line was lucky, many other companies who could have bought them might have messed this up.
In a perfect world you add ARM2-like RISC chip, a Sun-like costume MMU to something like Amiga Chipset and you move computing forward by 10+ years. In reality the exact opposite won, a 16-bit PC that had basically no costume design in it what so ever.
- anentropic 1y ago"custom" not "costume" (...I'm only adding this note to help, not criticise)
- BubbleRings 1y agoThank you!
- panick21 1y agoThank you, damn my dyslexia. My hands type by themselves and my brain has no idea what's going on.
- tralarpa 1y agoI wonder how much faster the ARM2 would have been compared to the 68k in a first-generation Amiga. The Amiga's chip memory only delivered 7 MBytes/s, shared between the CPU and the chipset! With its 32-bit instruction words, the ARM2 would have been very far from its theoretical performance.
- memsom 1y agoWell - I used Archimedes computers with ARM2 and owned an Amiga 500+ and honestly, I couldn't tell you the Arcie was faster. It certainly didn't have the custom chips, so it is probably not a fair comparison.
- lproven 1y ago> I wonder how much faster the ARM2 would have been compared to the 68k in a first-generation Amiga. Considerably faster. I looked at both (and the ST) and bought an Archimedes. ARM chips benchmarked from the ARM2 up to the RasPi 3B+: https://stardot.org.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20379 https://stardot.org.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20379 68000 benchmarks around that time: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/motorola/68k-chips-faq/ http://www.faqs.org/faqs/motorola/68k-chips-faq/ ARM2: Dhrystone/sec 5463 68000 @ 8MHz: Dhrystones 68000 2100 MIPS https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/acorn/microarchitectures/arm2 https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/acorn/microarchitectures/arm2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructions_per_second https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructions_per_second ARM2: from 6 to 10 million instructions per second, depending on instruction mix 68000: 1.4 MIPS typical. (For comparison: Intel 8086 at the same speed, something like 300 Whetstones, 0.5 MIPS. So either of them stomped all over a comparable x86 machine from that time.) So, very roughly, ARM2 was between 2-3x faster in typical use. Note: . Neither CPU could do FP in hardware. . Neither had cache memory. . The Amiga had a lot of complex hardware acceleration for graphics; the original ARM2 machines from Acorn (Archimedes A2305, A310, A400) had essentially none. So, Amiga games could do things that on the Arc required raw CPU, typically done careful hand-coded assembler.