68060 vs 68LC060 on a TF1260...for example

[YouKnowWho]

In all honesty, what can a full 68060 do for you that makes it worth while considering the recent spike in this CPU cost? Can we itemize it and qualify it?

Is it just the 100Mhz? Can the 68LC060 75MHz be pushed to 100MHz successfully ever? Is 75MHz not enough?

Beside the killer awesome 100MHz SysInfo screens, what is the practical functional benefit of a 68060 over a 68LC060 today?

What can a 68060 do that a 68LC060 cannot do or cannot do as well?

May I just remind us what is printed sarcastically as a predicted ignorant EAB comment on the TF1230 "No FPU? ...useless!"

 

[miggymad]

I prefer not to overclock the CPU on my TF1260 cards even though I have managed to get them up to 100mhz with proper cooling just for testing purposes.

Practical benefits of overclocking? Not many apart from faster rendering and processing power for stuff like hi-res GFX.

Oh and maybe some bragging rights of course, but not much else TBH.

 

[YouKnowWho]

100% agreed miggymad, I'm not much into overclocking either, because of the added heat stress. I figure much of the software runs on a 68000, or maybe needs 030, so having the awesome horsepower of a 060 at whatever MHz is already a bonus.

I do like fractal generators and fooling around with some productivity software like VistaPro where rendering performance makes itself know. At same speed, with the FPU on the full 68060, would that be utilized and thus a feature of the full CPU? What is the quantifiable difference in rendering speed at same MHz I wonder?

Also, if full 68060 lets user overclock, then that is a something a 68060 can do but 68LC060 can't do. Is there no way to overclock the 68LC060?

I'm just trying to be analytical and logical about this comparison.
Therefore, so far...
Full 68060 advantages - faster rendering and overclocking capability vs 68LC060?

 

[nickrb]

I would think that a 68LC060 would be more conducive to overclocking, actually, due to the reduced heat production without the FPU.

 

[Boing-ball]

It’s horses for courses. I’ve always favoured the full fat 68060 (Rev 6 if possible). Don’t forget that certain revisions have bugs in them (Not sure about EC or LC versions). But the Rev6 with FPU and MMU pretty much squashed most arithmetic bugs found in the REV 1 and REV 5. It was only discovered these were issues after problems with iBrowse were discovered. Luckily if you used ThorsMMU Libs then it fixed this.
There are as you have pointed out application software that makes use of the FPU such as Lightwave etc.. Hold and Modify has demonstrated these on his YouTube channel.

There are also Demos and a lot of Games being ported over to the Amiga which require the FPU such as Star Wars Dark Forces… Yes there are cases where some programs have a No-FPU option. But don’t you want to experience the best you can get on your Amiga? I do.

 

[Xanxi]

68LC060 is the el cheapo CPU. When 68060 boards became available in the late 90's, Phase 5 /DCE never sold any card with a FPUless 68060. There is only the exception of the Apollo 1260, i had one in the early 2000's with a 68LC060 which could use a special Apollo lib with no FPU. I was using it with an Ateobus at the time.
Only recently people are using them due to prices.

 

[YouKnowWho]

@nickrb - interesting and logical conclusion. Is there any real world use data on this to verify?

@Boing-ball - I checked my 68LC060s and they seem to be Rev 4 - any bugs on those that anyone is aware of? Only Rev 1 and 5 have issues? The error manifests itself only with iBrowse? I agree with your logic about the best experience you can get, but any 060 is already pretty darn sweet in my view. I remember how jazzed I was when I got the GVP 040 card for my 2000, it was a dream. Is it really such a bad experience to run an LC060 at 3 times 040 performance with less heat and on a light budget?

@Xanxi yeah the price is the stickler, hence the question about ROI on full vs LC. Back in the late 90s as you note, the price difference on the low use 060 between full and LC was probably minimal, hence few bothered with the LC. Motorola probably offered some deals as Apple didn't use the CPU and volume was fraction of 040 sales most likely. But if you're running a LC060 at 75MHz today, is life really THAT bad?

 

[Xanxi]

[USER=2421]@Xanxi yeah the price is the stickler, hence the question about ROI on full vs LC. I mean, if you're running a LC060 at 75MHz, is life really THAT bad?

Dude, having an empty socket or slot somewhere wakes me up at night.

 

[YouKnowWho]

Dude, having an empty socket or slot somewhere wakes me up at night.

I think I understand. I have an A2091 inside the 4000D. It's only for the CD-ROM but it bothers me. I force myself to live with it, as I don't use the CD player much anyway.

I am tempted for that re-issue A4091. Then again, wouldn't an IDE CD-ROM also work AND free up a slot for some future itch? Then again that would be a problem so leaving the A2091 in there prevents that whole mess from materializing. The 4000 is currently filled up with cards. But am I a bad person because it still has an A3640@25MHz?

What is this sickness by the way? Does every slot have to be populated with the very best thing there is?

 

[klx300r]

In all honesty, what can a full 68060 do for you that makes it worth while considering the recent spike in this CPU cost? Can we itemize it and qualify it?

Is it just the 100Mhz? Can the 68LC060 75MHz be pushed to 100MHz successfully ever? Is 75MHz not enough?

Beside the killer awesome 100MHz SysInfo screens, what is the practical functional benefit of a 68060 over a 68LC060 today?

What can a 68060 do that a 68LC060 cannot do or cannot do as well?

May I just remind us what is printed sarcastically as a predicted ignorant EAB comment on the TF1230 "No FPU? ...useless!"

only full CPU for me cause I love watching FPU intensive demos and also still dabble with Lightwave

 

[Xanxi]

I think I understand. I have an A2091 inside the 4000D. It's only for the CD-ROM but it bothers me. I force myself to live with it, as I don't use the CD player much anyway.

I am tempted for that re-issue A4091. Then again, wouldn't an IDE CD-ROM also work AND free up a slot for some future itch? Then again that would be a problem so leaving the A2091 in there prevents that whole mess from materializing. The 4000 is currently filled up with cards. But am I a bad person because it still has an A3640@25MHz?

What is this sickness by the way? Does every slot have to be populated with the very best thing there is?

Damn! You see I am awaken 4:33 AM now.

 

[lilwashu]

The LC060 will overclock much more readily than most revisions of the full 060 on a TF1260 so if you
care about speed and don’t care about software that needs an FPU (the vast majority of the Amiga library) that is a good choice.

A good number of things like the recent Duke3D and Dark Forces ports require a real FPU to run at playable speeds/at all, plus the demos etc, so if thats the sort of thing you are looking to run you will need a real FPU.

 

[YouKnowWho]

The LC060 will overclock much more readily than most revisions of the full 060 on a TF1260 so if you
care about speed and don’t care about software that needs an FPU (the vast majority of the Amiga library) that is a good choice.

A good number of things like the recent Duke3D and Dark Forces ports require a real FPU to run at playable speeds/at all, plus the demos etc, so if thats the sort of thing you are looking to run you will need a real FPU.

Interesting.

So:
LC060: way lower cost, overclocks more readily on TF1260, which is most popular 060 accelerator for 1200.
Full 060: FPU to support full software library, productivity, rendering, and overclocks on all cards.

As a side note, perhaps this also shows us something about the efficiency of software written back in the day. It was lean, it worked on broad range of CPUs and much of the later software by taking advantage of new hardware options narrowed down the operating parameters and by extension user base, and of course became more bloated. As more time passes, I am more amazed at Workbench multitasking GUI operating system fitting on a single 880kb floppy for example. So sleek and lean.

 

[Watson]

What's the verdict using a virtual fpu, such as softieee for e.g, is it not worth bothering with?

​

 

[Boing-ball]

I think I understand. I have an A2091 inside the 4000D. It's only for the CD-ROM but it bothers me. I force myself to live with it, as I don't use the CD player much anyway.

I am tempted for that re-issue A4091. Then again, wouldn't an IDE CD-ROM also work AND free up a slot for some future itch? Then again that would be a problem so leaving the A2091 in there prevents that whole mess from materializing. The 4000 is currently filled up with cards. But am I a bad person because it still has an A3640@25MHz?

What is this sickness by the way? Does every slot have to be populated with the very best thing there is?

@nickrb - interesting and logical conclusion. Is there any real world use data on this to verify?

@Boing-ball - I checked my 68LC060s and they seem to be Rev 4 - any bugs on those that anyone is aware of? Only Rev 1 and 5 have issues? The error manifests itself only with iBrowse? I agree with your logic about the best experience you can get, but any 060 is already pretty darn sweet in my view. I remember how jazzed I was when I got the GVP 040 card for my 2000, it was a dream. Is it really such a bad experience to run an LC060 at 3 times 040 performance with less heat and on a light budget?

@Xanxi yeah the price is the stickler, hence the question about ROI on full vs LC. Back in the late 90s as you note, the price difference on the low use 060 between full and LC was probably minimal, hence few bothered with the LC. Motorola probably offered some deals as Apple didn't use the CPU and volume was fraction of 040 sales most likely. But if you're running a LC060 at 75MHz today, is life really THAT bad?

I ended up using a Oktagon 2008 Z2 board for CD ROM and SCSI multi card. It does still rely on what CPU card you have as no DMA access or interrupts.

I’m not sure about the REV 4 LC CPUs about bugs in them. I’m thinking this was more of a FPU problem identified. IBrowse now has a fix in place from 2.5.7 onwards to sort that out. But if using THORSMMU Libs package this quashed the issue. Not sure though if the patch/fix has any bottlenecks. The Rev 6 MC68060RC50 CPU’s also run cooler than the very hot rev 1’s.

 

[CCRider]

In all honesty, what can a full 68060 do for you that makes it worth while considering the recent spike in this CPU cost? Can we itemize it and qualify it?

Is it just the 100Mhz? Can the 68LC060 75MHz be pushed to 100MHz successfully ever? Is 75MHz not enough?

Beside the killer awesome 100MHz SysInfo screens, what is the practical functional benefit of a 68060 over a 68LC060 today?

What can a 68060 do that a 68LC060 cannot do or cannot do as well?

May I just remind us what is printed sarcastically as a predicted ignorant EAB comment on the TF1230 "No FPU? ...useless!"

What "recent" spike on this CPU cost?

The seller that sold me my full 060 last year is selling it $<snip> cheaper now (and for quite a while, in fact).

 

[Xanxi]

What's the verdict using a virtual fpu, such as softieee for e.g, is it not worth bothering with?

​

Slow as hell, slower than 68882.

 

[Watson]

What "recent" spike on this CPU cost?

The seller that sold me my full 060 last year is selling it $<snip> cheaper now (and for quite a while, in fact).

Lets not forget price discussions are forbidden.

 

[YouKnowWho]

Slow as hell, slower than 68882.

So...if we reverse the math it's twice the speed of 68LC060? Forgive, I can't stop myself with lame jokes.

 

[UberFreak]

If you want to watch scene demos written for 060 (99.9% of AGA demos in the last >20 years) then you need a full 060.