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.
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
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.
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'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
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?
that's funny I don't see any....for the 660AV yes but not the 840AV
http://www.everymac.com/upgrade_cards/by_system/index.html
http://www.everymac.com/upgrade_cards/by_system/index.html
Hmm, there is a 50MHz '040 for the 660AV.
I would rather have a 660AV than an 840AV anyways.
Reasoning is that I love the form factor and it is plenty of 68K Mac for me. I just tinker with the 68K's as they pre-date my switch.
I wonder why there are no PPC's upgrades for the AV series though. Does it have something to do with the DSP's?
I would rather have a 660AV than an 840AV anyways.
Reasoning is that I love the form factor and it is plenty of 68K Mac for me. I just tinker with the 68K's as they pre-date my switch.
I wonder why there are no PPC's upgrades for the AV series though. Does it have something to do with the DSP's?
I think we discussed that in another thread. At that time, we agreed that the PDS slot in the Q660av was not a real PDS slot...
Meanwhile, I've checked the Quadra 660av and 840av Developer Note and found the following information on page 46 :
So, yes, the PDS slot in the 660av is a full-fledged 040 PDS.
Sorry, I must have been thinking of something else...
I doubt the RAM latency will look as good on a 950, but you are probably right when you say it'll be *as* fast. The point is to have a 50 megaton bus next to your desk that only performs as well as an 840av seems a tad pointless to me, unless you have a very good reason to need 6 Nubus Slots (the PDS slot presumably would have the CPU card in).
You use up the 3 NuBus slots in an 800 just adding features the 840av has built in, leaving a fat zero expansion slots for anything else useful that you can add to the 840av. That's hardly a very strong argument
Load up Adobe Premiere 2.1 and hook a VCR to the 840av and tell me that again. I follow that the DSP isn't the strongest out there at the time, but they had to draw a line somewhere or the 840av would have ended up costing 2x the price.
The Thunder IV cost an **obscene** amount of money in it's day. It also doesn't accelerate video capture or the audio component. Both those make the video capture in the 840av possible right off the blocks with no add-on cards.
Ok, lets look at that list.
DSP, already there.
AV Inputs/Video processing, already there.
High Quality Audio, already there.
72-pin RAM, already there.
Oh, and you were posturing about the 040 upgrade for the 840av being rare? I don't expect those PowerPro cards are exactly 2-a-penny either...
So what do I need all these NuBus slots for again? Maybe you want to empty your wallet into Radius Rockets (admittedly very cool, but still...) or buying 6 SCSI arrays and the cards to run them, or maybe you need 7 monitors.
Even *if* you added a Thunder IV (I'm lucky enough to have one in my 840av, which I class as verging on the excessive, but still...), and Wide SCSI (which I also have) that leaves a spare slot and I can do everything your so called 'ultimate' system can do. I even have room to add a Spigot PowerAV to boost the video capture capability even further.
Now, see A/UX is a server OS, for the greater part. This is something that the 950 is good at. Well, it is and it isn't. At the end of the day it's a Mac, it was made to be used. No Mac of that era ever even approached actually being a decent server in the grander scheme of things. The Amiga had a better 68k UNIX anyway, and they released theirs first.
Also the noise is important, this is a workstation, deigned to be worked at/near. I don't expect to go deaf in the process.
My 840av is a sentient life form and I would never agree to this kind of torture under the Geneva Convention...
I don't need to benchmark it, the reason it's better has nothing to do with some arbitrary figures. Benchmarks mean jack squat when it comes to usability and real speed. I can suck in PAL video and dump it to a disc array without much effort and that's all I care about. I also know It's quiet and doesn't weigh enough to kill me when I move it. You can take your ultimate 950, and the fork truck you use to move it around, and drive off in to the sunset.
Well it's like getting a motherboard with everything integrated. Chances are you wouldn't have chosen the parts that are built in and you don't even have the option of removing them - nothing inbuilt in the 840av is best in its class once upgrade cards are regarded.
IMO a Q840av can't compete with an avid or videovision setup regardless of what it is, and today a thunder IV just isn't expensive. Mostly, cost isn't an issue today.
Powerpro cards are reasonably common - more common than any upgrade you'd ever find for an 840av. You'd probably have to pay a few hundred bucks for any such upgrade - and btw no need to be rude.
I know it isn't what you want to hear, but (emotional attachment aside) an upgraded 800/650 is probably the best "ultimate" all rounder of the last generation macs. Personally, I'd rather the 2 extra slots and comprehensive compatibility of the 950/900.
IMO a Q840av can't compete with an avid or videovision setup regardless of what it is, and today a thunder IV just isn't expensive. Mostly, cost isn't an issue today.
Powerpro cards are reasonably common - more common than any upgrade you'd ever find for an 840av. You'd probably have to pay a few hundred bucks for any such upgrade - and btw no need to be rude.
I know it isn't what you want to hear, but (emotional attachment aside) an upgraded 800/650 is probably the best "ultimate" all rounder of the last generation macs. Personally, I'd rather the 2 extra slots and comprehensive compatibility of the 950/900.
I'm with kreats in my preference for the 950, especially. Video has no fascination for me, on any machine at any time. Sound I edit on far more capable machines than 68K. So my preference is utilitarian: number of NuBus slots and drive bays; a PPC upgrade path; a PSU to support those; Rocket, WGS and A/UX capability, ease of access (albeit that the fastenings for the side panel are fussy); and a nice, warm, comfortable, heavy presence. Mine aren't noisy, but if they were, I should simply replace their fans with a quieter model. To me, the 950 is the ultimate 68K Mac. To paraphrase whomever it was, that may be but my appraisal, but it's the one that I am sticking to.
de
de
Some links:
"Macintosh: SCSI Data Transfer Rates"
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=12315
"Developer Notes: All Hardware Products"
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/hardware2.html
Apparently the 840av has a tweaked nubus design - it'd be interesting to see if this made a difference with any nubus performance. AFAIK cards have to be specifically designed to support nubus90 to realise any benefit.
"Macintosh: SCSI Data Transfer Rates"
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=12315
"Developer Notes: All Hardware Products"
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/hardware2.html
Apparently the 840av has a tweaked nubus design - it'd be interesting to see if this made a difference with any nubus performance. AFAIK cards have to be specifically designed to support nubus90 to realise any benefit.
Just as interesting, in a wry sort of fashion, is the frequent (Developer) reference to 'five NuBus expansion slots with NuBus ’90 features and space for oversized NuBus cards' (my emphasis) in the 900/950.
What useful card, if any, ever took advantage of NuBus 90?
de
What useful card, if any, ever took advantage of NuBus 90?
de
From the Q840av notes RE improved nubus:
"Improved NuBus interface. Both models use the Macintosh Universal NuBus Interface (MUNI) for accessory cards. This interface supports block transfers and data bursts to and from the main processor bus. MUNI capability is optional in the Macintosh AV Centris 660."
"The Macintosh Universal NuBus Interface (MUNI) is a CMOS chip in a 208-pin package."
"The MUNI version of NuBus supports the full range of NuBus master/slave transactions with single or block moves, including dumps and runs in which the main processor is master and NuBus is slave supports faster data transfer rates to and from the CPU bus supports NuBus90 data transfers between cards at a clock rate of 20 MHz provides First-in, First-out (FIFO) buffering of data between the CPU bus and accessory cards AV , the MUNI is mounted on the main circuit board; in the
In the Macintosh Quadra 840 AV Macintosh Centris 660 , it is on an optional NuBus adapter card. Details of the MUNI operation are given in NuBus Interface, later in this chapter."
"MUNI provides separate FIFO buffers for data on the CPU bus and on NuBus. These buffers can operate concurrently"
"All data transfers on NuBus are synchronized by a 10 MHz clock. An additional 20 MHz clock supports burst transfers in cards that conform to the NuBus90 specification. This permits faster data transfers than are possible with earlier NuBus designs."
Dunno if that helps.. there's a little bit more in the appendix about needing to alter the ROM of cards which support this improved nubus. Apparently nubus features (specifically block transfers) are laid out a bit clearer in the designing nubus cards book/document.
"Improved NuBus interface. Both models use the Macintosh Universal NuBus Interface (MUNI) for accessory cards. This interface supports block transfers and data bursts to and from the main processor bus. MUNI capability is optional in the Macintosh AV Centris 660."
"The Macintosh Universal NuBus Interface (MUNI) is a CMOS chip in a 208-pin package."
"The MUNI version of NuBus supports the full range of NuBus master/slave transactions with single or block moves, including dumps and runs in which the main processor is master and NuBus is slave supports faster data transfer rates to and from the CPU bus supports NuBus90 data transfers between cards at a clock rate of 20 MHz provides First-in, First-out (FIFO) buffering of data between the CPU bus and accessory cards AV , the MUNI is mounted on the main circuit board; in the
In the Macintosh Quadra 840 AV Macintosh Centris 660 , it is on an optional NuBus adapter card. Details of the MUNI operation are given in NuBus Interface, later in this chapter."
"MUNI provides separate FIFO buffers for data on the CPU bus and on NuBus. These buffers can operate concurrently"
"All data transfers on NuBus are synchronized by a 10 MHz clock. An additional 20 MHz clock supports burst transfers in cards that conform to the NuBus90 specification. This permits faster data transfers than are possible with earlier NuBus designs."
Dunno if that helps.. there's a little bit more in the appendix about needing to alter the ROM of cards which support this improved nubus. Apparently nubus features (specifically block transfers) are laid out a bit clearer in the designing nubus cards book/document.
All Quadra era machines have some Nubus 90 features, but the 660AV and the 840AV are the ones that got most of them.
"Nubus '90 features - All Quadra computers have some Nubus '90 features. Traditionally Nubus has a throughput of 10MHz while Nubus '90 has a throughput of 20MHz."
from: http://www.angelfire.com/ca2/tech68k/quadra.html
"NuBus 90 NuBus 87 back compatible. avg throughput: ~30 MB/s (I&CS {Instrumentation & Control Systems} 07/92 v65 n7 p23(2)); burst mode: 20 MHz 70 MB/s (Noah Price). I/O bottleneck removed with Quadra 660av and 840av (MacWeek 08/02/93). 6" card standard was enforced in newer machines. Replaced by PCI."
from: http://members.aol.com/BruceG6069/mac-ibm-info.html
"Nubus '90 features - All Quadra computers have some Nubus '90 features. Traditionally Nubus has a throughput of 10MHz while Nubus '90 has a throughput of 20MHz."
from: http://www.angelfire.com/ca2/tech68k/quadra.html
"NuBus 90 NuBus 87 back compatible. avg throughput: ~30 MB/s (I&CS {Instrumentation & Control Systems} 07/92 v65 n7 p23(2)); burst mode: 20 MHz 70 MB/s (Noah Price). I/O bottleneck removed with Quadra 660av and 840av (MacWeek 08/02/93). 6" card standard was enforced in newer machines. Replaced by PCI."
from: http://members.aol.com/BruceG6069/mac-ibm-info.html
It should be noted that Apple's implementation of NuBus 90 only allowed for 20 MHz transfers from NuBus card to NuBus card. All transactions to or from the host machine (the Macintosh) was at 10 MHz. I don't know when you'd ever see a NuBus transaction directly from one NuBus card to another, except maybe in some of the Audio Media suites of cards, or perhaps between Radius Rockets.
There were early video accelerators on their own Nubus card that sped up quickdraw over the Nubus to the Video card (I have ones made by rasterops) that would have benefitted from the 2x speed card to card. Those cards were bus mastering and had their own RAM (up to 16MB for RAM cache or Gworld).
Another possibility would be for video capture cards to send data directly to the SCSI card.
Most multi card setups just had cables from one card to the other to get away from hogging the slow Nubus.
Another possibility would be for video capture cards to send data directly to the SCSI card.
Most multi card setups just had cables from one card to the other to get away from hogging the slow Nubus.
trag: Yes, but:
"Supports the full range of NuBus master/slave transactions with single or block moves, including dumps and runs in which the main processor is master and the NuBus is slave , supports faster data transfer rates to and from the CPU bus, and supports NuBus 90 data transfers between cards at a clock rate of 20 MHz."
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=12738&coll=ap
"Supports the full range of NuBus master/slave transactions with single or block moves, including dumps and runs in which the main processor is master and the NuBus is slave , supports faster data transfer rates to and from the CPU bus, and supports NuBus 90 data transfers between cards at a clock rate of 20 MHz."
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=12738&coll=ap
I'm sorry, I seem to be missing your specific point. The support for block moves is nice, assuming that was not available before, but transactions to and from the CPU are still at 10MHz in all Macintosh machines. Only card to card transactions have the option of running at 20 MHz.
If you doubt this, look up the specific Apple Hardware Developer Note for each NuBus machine after the Q900 and you'll find that they all stick to 10 MHz transactions with the CPU.
If you doubt this, look up the specific Apple Hardware Developer Note for each NuBus machine after the Q900 and you'll find that they all stick to 10 MHz transactions with the CPU.
Well the point is that the q840av notes say it is doing something faster wrt nubus speeds through the cpu. I assume they are comparing it to existing quadra models (such as the q950).
Assuming Apple isn't flat out lying, what is responsible for this increase in speed and did anything take advantage of it?
Assuming Apple isn't flat out lying, what is responsible for this increase in speed and did anything take advantage of it?
Personal preference:
840av (one that will overclock to 48Mhz, Nubus 90 standard, two Apple Hi-Res color monitors, max out the VRAM and RAM)
Add:
FWB Hammer SCSI-2 card (more compatible with the overclock than the ATTO cards)
FWB External Ultra SCSI array
Radius Thunder IV 1600x1200 with 4 DSP daughter board
Radius Photoengine coprocessor card
Wacom ADB tablet
Then crank up Photoshop and watch the 8 coprocessors blink away...
840av (one that will overclock to 48Mhz, Nubus 90 standard, two Apple Hi-Res color monitors, max out the VRAM and RAM)
Add:
FWB Hammer SCSI-2 card (more compatible with the overclock than the ATTO cards)
FWB External Ultra SCSI array
Radius Thunder IV 1600x1200 with 4 DSP daughter board
Radius Photoengine coprocessor card
Wacom ADB tablet
Then crank up Photoshop and watch the 8 coprocessors blink away...
that's only three cards there - the scsi array and wacom tablet are not nubus cards.
If you were running out of slots, you could get an external nubus enclosure, but I'm not sure how well this is supported (Only avid setups?).
btw - the photoengine works cooperatively with the thunder IV?
If you were running out of slots, you could get an external nubus enclosure, but I'm not sure how well this is supported (Only avid setups?).
btw - the photoengine works cooperatively with the thunder IV?
Aaw crap!
I made a mistake. A newbish one at that. Yes you are only using 3 cards. I went back and re-read your post and attempted some form of reading comprehension. Thinking about the setup made me almost slap my forehead. Almost.
Sorry about that.
8 Co-Processors you say?
Anything else besides Photoshop take advantage of all those spare cycles laying around?
I made a mistake. A newbish one at that. Yes you are only using 3 cards. I went back and re-read your post and attempted some form of reading comprehension. Thinking about the setup made me almost slap my forehead. Almost.
Sorry about that.
8 Co-Processors you say?
Anything else besides Photoshop take advantage of all those spare cycles laying around?
kreats is correct, only three nubus slots used in this config.
The Radius and Adobe software allow work to be spread across all eight DSP chips (4 on the Thunder and 4 on the Photoengine) in this setup. The simplest and most direct way to see this is to run with the case off the 840av and look for the LEDs (1 per processor; upper right hand corner of the boards). If they're on (flashing on/off) the processor is active.
The Radius DSP hardware accelerators were developed specifically for Adobe software and use the "Adobe-Charged" system. I know them mostly from Photoshop (versions later than 2.5.1 supported) but don't recall if they also work with Adobe Premiere.
Cheers...
The Radius and Adobe software allow work to be spread across all eight DSP chips (4 on the Thunder and 4 on the Photoengine) in this setup. The simplest and most direct way to see this is to run with the case off the 840av and look for the LEDs (1 per processor; upper right hand corner of the boards). If they're on (flashing on/off) the processor is active.
The Radius DSP hardware accelerators were developed specifically for Adobe software and use the "Adobe-Charged" system. I know them mostly from Photoshop (versions later than 2.5.1 supported) but don't recall if they also work with Adobe Premiere.
Cheers...
What I mean is, I know they are cool to have, but if you are actually going to use them, isn't using a faster machine and newer software more productive? And if you use them, you run the risk they will stop working so you spend a huge amount of money on a collectible peripheral and then wear it out.
kreats - In my hands the Photoengine cards appear to scale very nicely. I have never timed things but the Photoshop speedup seems roughly proportional to the number of Photoengines. One thunder IV plus two Photoengine cards makes 12 DSP coprocessors and the speedup is quite noticeable.
Unknown_K - Nubus speed does not appear to be limiting but, as I said, I have not timed things.
Quadraman - Just speaking for myself - the point is that there is no point. There are many better ways to run Photoshop. BTW - The Radius Rocket is not a DSP-based coprocessor and what are we wearing out? The ROMs will eventually degrade but that will happen with use of not.
Cheers...
Unknown_K - Nubus speed does not appear to be limiting but, as I said, I have not timed things.
Quadraman - Just speaking for myself - the point is that there is no point. There are many better ways to run Photoshop. BTW - The Radius Rocket is not a DSP-based coprocessor and what are we wearing out? The ROMs will eventually degrade but that will happen with use of not.
Cheers...
Old software with old hardware can be very productive as long as you do not need some newer feature to do your work ( and don't need to use the internet).
I have scanned in some large pictures and cropped them in photoshop 3 on my Q950 and it wasn't realy slow. Saving as JPG took a little more time then it would have on my main machines, but the SCSI scanner wasn't running slower and I had plenty of RAM to work with.
Most people do not use most of the features of newer apps anyway.
I have scanned in some large pictures and cropped them in photoshop 3 on my Q950 and it wasn't realy slow. Saving as JPG took a little more time then it would have on my main machines, but the SCSI scanner wasn't running slower and I had plenty of RAM to work with.
Most people do not use most of the features of newer apps anyway.
SCSI on the beige G3 was deliberately designed as a low end interface to support legacy scanners, Zip drives etc. Apple had lost interest in creating their own high performance SCSI solutions, hence the market for Adaptec SCSI cards.
For the PowerBooks, assume slow SCSI. Were there any good PCMCIA or PC card SCSI adapters?
Hi everyone
I was "obsessed" some years ago by making the ultimate 68k machine and i think that i have got the ultimate one :
- Quad 840av (i choosed this one because it's the only model having 60ns ram )
- reaching 50 Mhz using this
http://www.micromac.com/products/mach10_jet.html'>http://www.micromac.com/products/mach10_jet.html
or this
http://cgi.ebay.com/Newer-Tech-Quadra-Overdrive-Plus-for-Centris-650-NEW_W0QQitemZ150206630340QQihZ005QQcategoryZ51046QQcmdZViewItem
- trying to overclock a little more Laugh using this
http://www.micromac.com/products/mach10_jet.html
- adding a 128k cache card
http://www.micromac.com/products/quadra_cache_cards.html
- using the Radius Thunder Iv as a graphic card
with such a configuration i'm sure it's possible to reach the early PPCs performance Big Smile
What do you think ??
I was "obsessed" some years ago by making the ultimate 68k machine and i think that i have got the ultimate one :
- Quad 840av (i choosed this one because it's the only model having 60ns ram )
- reaching 50 Mhz using this
http://www.micromac.com/products/mach10_jet.html'>http://www.micromac.com/products/mach10_jet.html
or this
http://cgi.ebay.com/Newer-Tech-Quadra-Overdrive-Plus-for-Centris-650-NEW_W0QQitemZ150206630340QQihZ005QQcategoryZ51046QQcmdZViewItem
- trying to overclock a little more Laugh using this
http://www.micromac.com/products/mach10_jet.html
- adding a 128k cache card
http://www.micromac.com/products/quadra_cache_cards.html
- using the Radius Thunder Iv as a graphic card
with such a configuration i'm sure it's possible to reach the early PPCs performance Big Smile
What do you think ??
It would be easier (!) to find a way the disable the clock-doubler of a Quadra Overdrive Plus, so it would run at the same speed as your bus (50 mhz) with 128k of cache...
There was a thread on http://www.nextcomputers.org/forums/ about a guy who made some radical changes to his Quaddoubler board. You could start there...
There was a thread on http://www.nextcomputers.org/forums/ about a guy who made some radical changes to his Quaddoubler board. You could start there...
If a IIci sees only inchoate fragments when it comes across 6.0.8, no Quadra is going to be able to discern anything at all ...You people and your friggin' Quadras. No Quadra is the ultimate 68k machine because no Quadra can run System 6.
quod erat f'in demonstrandum
Sicut erat in principio, et nunc et semper.
de
There is an AsantéFAST 10/100 NuBus card, three of which I use in IIcis. Because of an oddity in the short keyslot at the bottom of the card's fascia plate, it cannot fit into a Q900 without removal of some plastic from the Quadra. I've never found an answer, or a reason, for this oddity. It did cause me to muse that the fabled NuBus 90 might have some bearing.
de
Anyone have a slotless MicroMac Quadra Cache Card that they could test Andre's idea with?
Alternatively, can anyone explain why the cache (that interacts with the CPU, a standard 40mhz 68040) would not work with an 840av? Voltage/amperage mismatch? Timing issues?
Just wondering; 128k of SRAM cache would be a nice addition...
Illegitimi Non Carborundum
http://www.santacruzpl.org/readyref/files/a-b/bastard.shtml
Alternatively, can anyone explain why the cache (that interacts with the CPU, a standard 40mhz 68040) would not work with an 840av? Voltage/amperage mismatch? Timing issues?
Just wondering; 128k of SRAM cache would be a nice addition...
Illegitimi Non Carborundum
http://www.santacruzpl.org/readyref/files/a-b/bastard.shtml
AFAIK these work by doubling the onboard oscillator. So assuming the 840av runs at 40mhz bus speed, you'll get 80mhz - which will be too hot. If you want to mod the oscillator you might have luck - but that might bugger up other things in the 840av.
The 800 it would prob. work in however.
The 800 it would prob. work in however.
Gosh darn it, now I really wish there was a realtime audio app for those.
I've recently ordered two different Quadra Overdrives from him, one being the Plus (with cache). I'll try them in various machines and report back.
You can still get overclocking kits from Output Enablers. I've used one of theirs on a 6100 with much happiness and joy.
I agree. AFAIK there's no voltage difference between any of the '040 series, and the extra current consumed by a cache card should be pretty trivial. If there is an issue it would be to do with either speed or physical room (ie collision with the case or other components)
Heh - I just like being the System 6 evangelist around here. I don't blindly believe it's better - I understand that people have their own preferences.
For a stock machine of course a IIfx is king of the System 6 world, but I'm personally a big fan of the IIcx/IIci form factor, and consider either of those machines with a 50MHz '030 installed to be my 'ideal' System 6 box.
I don't blindly believe it's better - I understand that people have their own preferences.For a stock machine of course a IIfx is king of the System 6 world, but I'm personally a big fan of the IIcx/IIci form factor, and consider either of those machines with a 50MHz '030 installed to be my 'ideal' System 6 box.
Both Farallon and Asante made 10/100 NuBus ethernet cards. They are a little rare, but I've seen the Asante cards go for under $30 on Ebay. I have not been watching closely, as I have a stash of them in the attic. Asante was, at one point, clearing out discontinued items. Things like 10/100 PCI cards with ethernet cable at prices that made it worth buying the card just to get the cable.
If it has an external port, and Apple built it, then the SCSI speed is unenhanced SCSI, i.e. 5 MB/s top speed and usually considerably slower.
Apple did not want the support issues of dealing with folks with external SCSI chains with high performance SCSI interfaces. At least with Fast internal SCSI (8100, x500, x600) they had some control over the internal ribbon cable shipped with the machine. With external SCSI, there's no telling what folks will daisy chain together, so Apple always kept it to 5 MB/s to minimize cable length issues, and incidentally, killing performance.
All this from a friend who was once a tech support guy at Power Computing.
I've got one that I pulled out of a Duo Dock. Stuck it in my Q840. Unfortunately, NetBSD doesn't know what to do with it. (Reports as "nubus0 slot c: Fast EtherTX NuBus (Vendor: Farallon Computer, Part: PN-990) not configured" at boot.) I'd put it in my Q800, but A/UX doesn't have a clue either. I'm not sure a 68k could handle data that fast anyway...
While I cannot speak for cross-Pacific (now there's an Irish bull for you) usage in pig-Latin, I am more familiar with Non permittere bastardari carborundum to express the sentiment. It does at least contain what the other lacks: that part which translates(?) as the imperative 'Don't let ...'.
de