Thread
"ultimate" 68k machine
I've been into classic (well really all) Macs for a long time and have quite an random collection of them. I've decided to build myself an "ultimate" 68k machine... i.e. the best 68k mac one could reasonably have. Here's the harder part... which configuration should I go for? The almighty Q840AV has the highest stock 040 at 40mhz, however you can get 50mhz 040 accelerator cards for the Q900, which seems like it would just nudge aside the 840AV for fastest. Built in AV features are cool but NuBus cards in the 900 can fix that (although at greater expense). Personally I like the look of the 900 more than the 840AV so coupled with the extra 10mhz I've been leaning that way...
What does everyone else think?
What does everyone else think?
Well, if you have a program that can take advantage of the AV's DSPs, then it wins, hands down. Any NuBus card you can put in the 900 would also be possible for the 840AV. So for native Mac use, I would definitely say the 840AV would be better.
Of course, if you want to run a UNIX on it, then the 900 would win. With the faster main processor with an upgrade, and the possibility of twice as much RAM as the 840AV, the 900 would be a better server.
Of course, if you want to run a UNIX on it, then the 900 would win. With the faster main processor with an upgrade, and the possibility of twice as much RAM as the 840AV, the 900 would be a better server.
besides with a Thunder IV, the 900 would win. I mean there was very few programs that took advantage of the DSP
But wouldn't installing a video card with DSP's basically put the 900 on par with the 840AV when it came to running DSP enabled programs? (though the 900 should still win with the extra 10mhz)
Also, nearly forgot about that but I do like the idea of having twice as much RAM in the 900 as well.
The only DSP enabled program I can think of offhand is Photoshop and I have a quad core G5 to handle my Photoshop tasks. (I'm a photographer and not about to use a 68k Mac for serious PS tasks)
Also, nearly forgot about that but I do like the idea of having twice as much RAM in the 900 as well.
The only DSP enabled program I can think of offhand is Photoshop and I have a quad core G5 to handle my Photoshop tasks. (I'm a photographer and not about to use a 68k Mac for serious PS tasks)
They made 68040/50 Mhz accelerators for the 950 as well. There were 2 models, one with cache and one without. I have the one with cache, it blows a stock 840av out of the water. The 950 has a faster BUS (33Mhz) compared to the 900 (25mhz) so RAM access would be faster.
There are plenty of DSP enabled programs such as video editing apps and music apps.
Another plus the 950 has over the 840av is the PDS slot, you can find (a rare) accelerator with dual 68 pin SCSI connections for some serious HD speeds.
840av has faster Nubus slots compared to the 950, DAV slot, cheaper 72 pin SIMMs, built in DSP and A/V, and a faster stock CPU plus faster memory bus.
I have been messing with these machines for years, unless you specify what you need to do, you realy can't pick an ultimate 68K mac.
There are plenty of DSP enabled programs such as video editing apps and music apps.
Another plus the 950 has over the 840av is the PDS slot, you can find (a rare) accelerator with dual 68 pin SCSI connections for some serious HD speeds.
840av has faster Nubus slots compared to the 950, DAV slot, cheaper 72 pin SIMMs, built in DSP and A/V, and a faster stock CPU plus faster memory bus.
I have been messing with these machines for years, unless you specify what you need to do, you realy can't pick an ultimate 68K mac.
For me it would be the 840AV.
Out of the box it's a great machine. The 900 / 950 have those awesome towers. However they are to large for me. I'll never do more with a 68K Mac than tinker on it. So loading it up with NuBUS cards is not economically viable for me.
The 840AV can take a reasonable amount of RAM, a video upgrade and storage upgrades. Good enough for my needs. I also love the form-factor of the tower.
Other people with demanding needs for high bandwidth A/V stuff might go for a fully decked out 900/950. Like Unknown_K said above me, it depends upon the intended work load.
Out of the box it's a great machine. The 900 / 950 have those awesome towers. However they are to large for me. I'll never do more with a 68K Mac than tinker on it. So loading it up with NuBUS cards is not economically viable for me.
The 840AV can take a reasonable amount of RAM, a video upgrade and storage upgrades. Good enough for my needs. I also love the form-factor of the tower.
Other people with demanding needs for high bandwidth A/V stuff might go for a fully decked out 900/950. Like Unknown_K said above me, it depends upon the intended work load.
I agree completely with Temetka. My favorite 68k Mac is the 840av, everything I'd want to do with one is right there in a neat little mini-tower package, hooked up to a rather nice AudioVision display.
I'll admit that my configuration is far from "ultimate", it's got 24 megs of memory and a 1.2 gig hard disc. Although, just because it's not ultimate doesn't mean it's not really nice... it's in great overall physical condition, I've got a lot of nice boxed software for it, the cdrom drive works (the floppy doesn't work as well as it used to, but ohwell.) And I've got a nice kb/mouse, and monitor for it. Plus ethernet transceiver and the 4/600PS printer.
It's realistic to the times (I know because I've got it set up almost exactly how the photo teacher I got it from used it) which is one of the main reasons I like it so much.
I'll admit that my configuration is far from "ultimate", it's got 24 megs of memory and a 1.2 gig hard disc. Although, just because it's not ultimate doesn't mean it's not really nice... it's in great overall physical condition, I've got a lot of nice boxed software for it, the cdrom drive works (the floppy doesn't work as well as it used to, but ohwell.) And I've got a nice kb/mouse, and monitor for it. Plus ethernet transceiver and the 4/600PS printer.
It's realistic to the times (I know because I've got it set up almost exactly how the photo teacher I got it from used it) which is one of the main reasons I like it so much.
The built-in video on many of the Quadras is very very fast. The biggest limitation they have is that Apple limited the VRAM ceiling on several of them. Anyway, if I've ever seen a comparison, I don't remember it, but I would not be surprised to find that the Q840AV built-in video beats a Thunder IV NuBus card--at least in bandwidth intensive tests.
For example, in the NuBus PowerMacs, the PDS VRAM card (HPV card) beats any NuBus card for tasks that require high bandwidth, e.g. playing Marathon. While the high-end NuBus cards such as the Thunder IV GX and Villagetronic MacPicasso 340 win at processor intensive accelerated Quick Draw tasks.
Well take a look at this upgraded Quadra 900 that just sold on eBay (and I lost damnit)...the seller did Speedometer benchmarks comparing his souped up 900 to an 840AV...the 900 won.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=330216918249
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=330216918249
I wonder what are the benchmarks of an overclocked 840av (say 48 or 50mhz), with a frontside bus twice as fast...
Yeah the macpicasso is smoked by the q950 onboard video in benchmarks I've done - macbench I think it was. I'd imagine the same would be true with the Thunder IV. It's nice to have both options though (photoshop acceleration, 4mb ram, other driver features).
I like the 950 myself - although loud, it's a mean looking monolith & much more expandable.
PS: I've got the same 50mhz upgrade card as unknown k.
I like the 950 myself - although loud, it's a mean looking monolith & much more expandable.
PS: I've got the same 50mhz upgrade card as unknown k.
Would it possible to add a faster 040 (like the 40mhz one in the Quadra 840AV) and then overclock it to 50mhz?
The cache is what makes those 50's fly, without it they are not as fast as you would think.
From memory also, a lot of those 50MHz upgrades are 40MHz chips that have tested stable with the overclock.
There is a small cache of 950-ology already here to stimulate your little grey cells. One incentive to your ambition must include the knowledge that there is/was a DayStar 100MHz PDS card, as well as the Apple/DayStar 66MHz.
http://68kmla.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3911
http://68kmla.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3904
http://68kmla.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2193
http://68kmla.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1623
http://68kmla.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=503
de
I would upgrade the heck out of a 950 if I wanted the ultimate 68k machine. 840AV's are too thin on the ground and expensive when you find them.
Daystar made a PDS 66 & 100 (I have both) and the models that have RAM slots (80mhz?). The ones with the RAM and much rarer and cost a bunch, the RAM is usable when you are in 68K mode so that helps.
They (50mhz 040 upgrades) all are overclocked 40mhz chips. 40mhz was the fastest 040 ever officially produced.
I realize that there are faster PPC cards but I'm looking to build the "ultimate" straight up 68k machine, no PPC involved, which pretty much leaves me at a 50mhz 040 upgraded Quadra.
Another possibility is the Daystar Quad 040 running at 40 MHz with a 128k SRAM cache, It fits into the PDS slot.
You might be able to overclock that.
Probably could overclock it. But let's not get ahead of ourselves, I still need a Quadra to start with before I even begin to consider upgrade paths! 8-o
There is a 950 on ebay currently
How would you speed it up. Change a part on the motherboard? Could the same mod be done to a Q650?
I'd be interested in seeing some benchmarks from a 950 with an over clocked '040 in the PDS slot.
There are no CPU upgrades for the 840AV are there? I know PPC is not gonna happen, but could I theoretically stick a 50MHz '040 in it, swap oscillators and be on my way?
There are no CPU upgrades for the 840AV are there? I know PPC is not gonna happen, but could I theoretically stick a 50MHz '040 in it, swap oscillators and be on my way?
FYI
Quadra 950
The Quadra 950 has a 67 MHz oscillator which runs the processor at 33 MHz. The max oscillator you can replace it with is 92.9405 MHz, to run the processor at 46.47025 MHz. With an Apple PPC card installed, the max oscillator you can use is 80 MHz, which will run the 68040 at 40 MHz and the PPC card at 80 MHz.
Info from http://homepage.mac.com/schrier/spec.html
Quadra 950
The Quadra 950 has a 67 MHz oscillator which runs the processor at 33 MHz. The max oscillator you can replace it with is 92.9405 MHz, to run the processor at 46.47025 MHz. With an Apple PPC card installed, the max oscillator you can use is 80 MHz, which will run the 68040 at 40 MHz and the PPC card at 80 MHz.
Info from http://homepage.mac.com/schrier/spec.html
But isn't this is only in terms of clock chipping, it is still possible to install an upgrade card with an 040 @ 50mhz actual speed, correct?
I still don't get how people consider the 950 'superior' to the 840av. The 950 was built off an older architecture, which included slower, non interleaved RAM and no onboard video, and, although it was able to hold more NuBus cards, had a full PDS slot and was able to take large number of disks, it still wouldn't outperform an 840av in real terms even with the 50MHz card.
I fall on the side of the 840av because it was revolutionary in the way it pushed the limits of what you could do on a 68k, with DSP integration, Video capture hardware onboard, and CD quality 48kHz DSP accelerated audio. It also had a faster stock CPU, and uses 72-pin 60ns Interleaved RAM which makes the RAM bus significantly faster. The only drawback is the case. It's nasty. I'll openly admit that. I've long since given up using the internal disc bays and use an external Sun MultiPack array hung off the Jackhammer's 68-pin SCSI port instead.
I suppose which one wins out depends on what you are looking for, but technologically and innovationally the 840av was, IMHO, the ultimate 68k.
As a side note, I always look to Dave Haynie's notes on the Amiga 3000+ with a tinge of sadness, and think the 840av architecture is really everything that the Amiga 4000 should have been.
I fall on the side of the 840av because it was revolutionary in the way it pushed the limits of what you could do on a 68k, with DSP integration, Video capture hardware onboard, and CD quality 48kHz DSP accelerated audio. It also had a faster stock CPU, and uses 72-pin 60ns Interleaved RAM which makes the RAM bus significantly faster. The only drawback is the case. It's nasty. I'll openly admit that. I've long since given up using the internal disc bays and use an external Sun MultiPack array hung off the Jackhammer's 68-pin SCSI port instead.
I suppose which one wins out depends on what you are looking for, but technologically and innovationally the 840av was, IMHO, the ultimate 68k.
As a side note, I always look to Dave Haynie's notes on the Amiga 3000+ with a tinge of sadness, and think the 840av architecture is really everything that the Amiga 4000 should have been.
I think I've just evened up the poll [
] ]'>
An 840av for me... why, cos upgrading the ram is fairly simple & it does great things without me having to mess too much with it.... I don't have a soldering iron where my hand should be?
It depends what you want to do with the machine, but read up on the good points of the 840av, interleaved ram, faster nubus slots..... Check out cinemafia's old posts, he had some good nubus/scsi bits in his 840av.
Ultimate.... you mean best stats... fastest machine?
Try a Milan, or Hades (Atari ST clones) or an overclocked Falcon, look for the French guy who wrote aniplay, he has a pretty fast 68k machine.
For Macs, the 840av has the "cult" status, because of of powerfull it is out of the box.
] ]'>An 840av for me... why, cos upgrading the ram is fairly simple & it does great things without me having to mess too much with it.... I don't have a soldering iron where my hand should be?
It depends what you want to do with the machine, but read up on the good points of the 840av, interleaved ram, faster nubus slots..... Check out cinemafia's old posts, he had some good nubus/scsi bits in his 840av.
Ultimate.... you mean best stats... fastest machine?
Try a Milan, or Hades (Atari ST clones) or an overclocked Falcon, look for the French guy who wrote aniplay, he has a pretty fast 68k machine.
For Macs, the 840av has the "cult" status, because of of powerfull it is out of the box.
no onboard video? bzzt... q950 has very fast onboard video
Out of the box doesn't come into it - we're talking ultimate here. With the 50MHz upgrade I'd bet they would bench at least equally as fast in every respect, but the 950 is more expandable.
Feature for feature, a tweaked 950 creams a tweaked q840av (I think there was a newer upgrade for the 840av - but try finding it). Even the Q800 beats the 840av as it at least had a PDS slot (and could possibly take the 950 upgrades as it operated at the same clock frequency).
Most of the differentiators named above were either never used or were inferior solutions anyway. e.g.
You want DSP? Thunder IV
AV inputs? Get a spigot AV or videovision or an avid setup (for which the 950 was the supported model)
You want high quality audio? Audiomedia II
Faster SCSI - atto IV or jackhammer
Want 72 pin ram (and a PPC)? Powerpro 80MHz w/ ram expansion
And most importantly you don't have to choose which cards to leave out - you can have it all!
Plus you keep AUX compatibility.
The only thing bad I'd say about the q950 is the noise - which can surely be fixed.
PS: I would like to see some benchmarks - maybe macbench your 840av's & let us know?
Out of the box doesn't come into it - we're talking ultimate here. With the 50MHz upgrade I'd bet they would bench at least equally as fast in every respect, but the 950 is more expandable.
Feature for feature, a tweaked 950 creams a tweaked q840av (I think there was a newer upgrade for the 840av - but try finding it). Even the Q800 beats the 840av as it at least had a PDS slot (and could possibly take the 950 upgrades as it operated at the same clock frequency).
Most of the differentiators named above were either never used or were inferior solutions anyway. e.g.
You want DSP? Thunder IV
AV inputs? Get a spigot AV or videovision or an avid setup (for which the 950 was the supported model)
You want high quality audio? Audiomedia II
Faster SCSI - atto IV or jackhammer
Want 72 pin ram (and a PPC)? Powerpro 80MHz w/ ram expansion
And most importantly you don't have to choose which cards to leave out - you can have it all!
Plus you keep AUX compatibility.
The only thing bad I'd say about the q950 is the noise - which can surely be fixed.
PS: I would like to see some benchmarks - maybe macbench your 840av's & let us know?