CompuServe Thread

#Amiga 4000/030

53 messages in this thread
#93160From: Betty Clay/SYSOPMar 26, 1993 1:50 AM
Here is a message about the Amiga4000/030 that Greg Malcangi left me to upload after the machine was introduced. So here it is. Date: 20-Mar-93 13:46 CST From: Greg Malcangi [100031,3502] Subj: New Amiga Dear Betty, Next Tuesday Commodore UK will announce the launch of a new model of Amiga; the Amiga 4000/030. Unfortunately I will be abroad on tour and as a portable Amiga is not yet available I will be unable to upload the information myself. Although I am not covered by any non disclosure agreements with C= I would appreciate that this information not be released before Tuesday when C= plan to give a press conference. After that time please feel free to upload this for the general information of all. Last week Andrew Bishop (Blue Ribbon Soundworks) and myself gave a demonstration of the new Amiga 4000/030 (fitted with the Proteus Sound Engine and Bars & Pipes Pro v2.0) to Music Maker Publications (publishers of Home & Studio Recording and many other music industry magazines). The New Amiga 4000/030 comes with 2Mb of Chip RAM and 2Mb of Fast RAM as standard (4Mb RAM in total). Standard also is an 80Mb HardDisk (IDE again). With the package will be a monitor which will allow the display of the new AGA no flicker resolutions. The model of monitor used for our demo was the C= 1960 but I was told that a cheaper monitor will be going into production which allows for the new resolutions but which will list at around the #250 instead of the #400 (approx) price of the current 1960. In appearance it is identical to the 4000/040 except that the top left hand logo of course now reads 4000/030. The speed is excellent, I could only just tell the difference between my A4000/040 and the new A4000/030 even though I believe that the 68030 chip used is only clocked at 16Mhz. The price of the new Amiga 4000/030 will be #999 for the above mentioned package including monitor. This may seem quite high to our American friends but the A1200 lists at #399 and the A4000 lists at about #2300, so the price point is very competitive. There was the suggestion that this new Amiga would also be available as a bundle with Bars & Pipes Professional v2.0 and the Proteus Sound Engine (which contains sounds from the Proteus 1/2 and 3 range) which is a plug in board. The suggestion was that this should list for #1500. This would be an amazing deal, as realized by the people to whom Andy and I were demonstrating. If this package does come about it will place Commodore in a very powerful position with in the music industry in a relatively short space of time. Greg Distribution: —Betty
#93205From: Steve SetzerMar 26, 1993 11:16 AM
Well if the list price includes a monitor, as what Greg suggest, that makes it a litttle more palletable. If I could get the 4000/030 with monitor for around $1700-$1800, that may more tempting. Although I do hope it is 25mhz rather than 16mhz that he says. my .02 ====>>> Motorola 68030 Inside <<<====
#93216From: Mark D. ManesMar 26, 1993 12:36 PM
No monitor deal here in the US Steve. I also pray it is a 25mhz machine, that I didn't ask. -mark= Drivin' on Otto Pilot
#93237From: Harry CallesisMar 26, 1993 6:02 PM
Steve – My local dealer said he should have what he called an A2400 in stock in the next week or two. The specs he gave match the press release I saw on Portal last night for the A4000/30 (25MHz, 4M RAM, 120M HD, etc.) My main question (I've seen parts of the answer, but I'm not 100% clear) is, what's the difference between the EC030 and a regular 030? I've heard that the EC is supposed to be a lower voltage part (only matters for laptops, etc., as far as I know) and has no MMU (which is currently used on the Amiga mainly for mapping ROM to 32-bit RAM, which probably wouldn't be needed on a 32-bit bus machine, and for virtual memory which doesn't exist yet on the AMiga and would probably only be important to "power users" like me 8^) ). Is there anything I'm missing? He quoted me $1895 without monitor, and $525 for a 1960. I've been wanting an AGA machine, but the A1200 wasn't expandable enough and the A4000 was too expensive. Now that I finally have a job again I was seriously considering blowing my first few paychecks on this new machine. If the EC030 is pin-compatible to the 030 and is not soldered on it could be replaced with a regular one, or I would assume an 040 daughterboard might be made available separately for future upgrade. Anyway, I'm rambling now so I'll quit. Any info on whether the new machine will at some point be included in CBM's extended (to May sometime) power-up? Harry
#93241From: michael heinzMar 26, 1993 7:05 PM
I think the chips are pin compatible, but they aren't cheap (which is the whole point, isn't it) – as for virtual memory, I can think of 3 different virtual memory programs for the Amiga, one of them a commercial release. Also, no MMU means no kick-ram which slows the machine down further.
#93351From: Ron LegroMar 27, 1993 5:05 PM
There are software-based ways on the 2000 and 3000 to map Kickstart ROM to RAM without a MMU.
#93593From: Tom JonesMar 30, 1993 2:33 PM
MMU is what seperates the Mini from the Micro, kind of. For a multitasking computer not to support it in the operating system is to flirt with the guru, and CBM knows it. One of the most important functions is to set up protected areas of memory for each running task so they don't "stomp on each other" or write in one another's memory areas. Also, at one time it was in the guidelines that CBM would never sell a non MMU machine and third party developers were told not to use EC parts. This is just a cost reduction move and a pretty dumb one that locks us out of ever getting a more stable operating system.
#93941From: michael heinzApr 2, 1993 3:06 PM
I know that well. I program unix systems for a day job. But in all fairness, AmigaDOS does a good job of multi-tasking without memory protection. I just want virtual memory.
#93956From: Mike SchillerApr 2, 1993 6:19 PM
Michael: What machine do you have? There is a commercial program called Gigamem that seems to work ok, but only works with either an 020+MMU or a real 030 (not an ec030). Roumor has it that the latest revision also supports the 040, and if that's true I'm gonna run out and get it as I have an 040, and have already set aside a 60 meg partition just for gigamem! // -Mike Schiller \X/ AMIGA! On AutoPilot in sunny Fort Lauderdale
#94230From: michael heinzApr 5, 1993 11:39 AM
I'm aware of those, Mike. If I remember correctly, I was responding to someone who said that the Amiga didn' t have virtual memort.
#93976From: Tom JonesApr 2, 1993 9:54 PM
Yes, me too. GigaMem works well I hear.
#93992From: Christopher LapriseApr 3, 1993 12:28 AM
"This is just a cost reduction move and a pretty dumb one that locks us out of ever getting a more stable operating system." I agree it is a cost-reduction move, but don't be silly.. Non-MMU models do not shut AmigaDOS out of VM. It would make sense that a VM-capable AmigaDOS could also run on a non-VM machine. -Chris
#94117From: Black Belt SystemsApr 4, 1993 7:38 AM
Christopher, He's NOT being silly. An AMiga without an MMU cannot ever hope to run a general VM capability. It also has no hope of running individual processes protected from each other so that the crash of one program doesn't bring down ALL the programs running in the system. At this point in time, the production of Amiga platforms without MMU capability can be taken as indicating either NO such capabilities are planned for the future, or, that those capabilities will not be available for those machines without the required hardware (which is an MMU). Either way, he's not being silly – he's *exactly* on the mark.
#94157From: Mark D. ManesApr 4, 1993 5:44 PM
VM can be implemented without a MMU. Want an example? The old TRS-80 Model 16b running Xenix. You are of course correct about memory protection. I do not think the inclusion of the 68EC… series processors indicate anything other than Commodore keeping the costs down. I also believe those who understand the need for VM, will not buy an EC machine.
#94232From: Black Belt SystemsApr 5, 1993 12:00 PM
VM canNOT be implemented without an MMU. An MMU can be made with standard off the shelf logic, and that's what the TRS-80/16 had in it. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#94297From: Mark D. ManesApr 5, 1993 10:09 PM
As far as I know the TRS-80 Model 16 had a 68000 and 2 Z80 processors. Are you saying that these chips had assistance from other hardware on the board to provide the functions of a MMU? I will review my books, you may well be right if so, you'll get a note from me. 🙂 Do you agree with me that Commodore's use of a EC part does not really have anything to do with what engineering (software/hardware) may be doing? You know, after being around as long as you have been, that kind of coordination you suggest between the sales organization and the development side of Commodore doesn't exist. -mark= Drivin' on Otto Pilot
#94327From: Black Belt SystemsApr 6, 1993 12:48 AM
Yep, that's what I'm saying. The 68000 can't page memory – all it can do is "fault" if it tries to go after memory that's not there. At that point, new memory must be paged into that location and the instruction restarted for VM to work. An MMU is able to do the paging more-or-less automatically; dedicated TTL hardware can do it too – but that just means you have a custom MMU. Without such paging, you can't have general VM. You most certianly CAN have a single program (just like ImageFX) which does it's own paging by _constantly_ checking to see if it has the memory it needs; however, this is much slower than an instantaneous hardware detection of missing memory ONLY when it is actually missing and a page operation to accomodate the loss. That way, if you have the memory you need, you NEVER check to see if it's there and you NEVER fault. If you are missing some, the hardware faults you – you STILL never check. The bottom line will be either that a system "without" an mmu either didn't actually have VM, or the "missing" mmu was actually there in one form or another. Yes – I agree that the software people could well have a complete VM system ready to go, and I wouldn't doubt for a moment that some other faction within the company with more decision making power would get a machine released that was too crippled to use it. Doesn't Otto object?
#94431From: Christopher LapriseApr 6, 1993 8:35 PM
Well, I don't see it that way. Not all Macs or PCs have an MMU, yet they have MMU support. VM is a feature, and if they choose to leave out the MMU on certain models then it will just have to be a feature that people look for when they choose the CPU. Further, even an A1200 (heck, even the 500) can run VM if you install a CPU with an MMU.. All the OS has to do is look for the MMU before enabling the feature. Lastly, I don't think VM will ever be an essential feature on the Amiga.. I don't think you have to make the machine _dependant_ on it if you want that feature in the OS. I think you are pole-vaulting to conclusions here. -Chris
#94532From: michael heinzApr 7, 1993 2:59 PM
My understanding was that System 7 only gave you virtual memory if you >had< an MMU…. Actually, the Mac memory allocation system makes implementing VM in software a breeze, so maybe your right. – In Mac, you never actually get a pointer to memory, you get a pointer to an entry in the "heap" which points to where the memory is. Therefore, the Mac can de-frag memory on the fly; and you could presumably implement VM by "flagging" heap pointers that currently point to disk storage and pulling the memory in as needed. Again, I don't know if this is how to do it, but that's the way we implemented a hacked VM for Macs when I was still in college.
#94581From: Black Belt SystemsApr 7, 1993 10:44 PM
No, I agree, in fact – you don't have to make the machine dependant on it. But I feel that the high end machines – of which the 4000/030 *would* have been one – should have the capability. The fact that the EC030 is socketed is the next best thing. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#94738From: Christopher LapriseApr 9, 1993 12:30 AM
Right, but that doesn't mean a 4000/EC030 would _never_ (your word) be able to do VM. A processor replacement would solve that. The EC030 is making more and more sense to me. It's like the 486SX.. Some people just need alot of non-FPU horsepower (for playing presentations, music, or most 2D graphics) and don't want to pay for an FPU or MMU up-front (I know the 486SX has an MMU, but AmigaDOS isn't Windows). Buying an A4000/EC030 is buying that kind of performance with the insurance of future expandability. -Chris
#94780From: Steve AhlstromApr 9, 1993 10:25 AM
"Right, but that doesn't mean a 4000/EC030 would _never_ (your word) be able to do VM. A processor replacement would solve that." … Then it'd no longer be a 4000/EC030, would it? <grin> -sja
#94790From: Paul IdolApr 9, 1993 11:28 AM
That's a rationalization. How much does a 68030 cost, and how much is an EC030? That's what we need to know. I think they're both pretty cheap – 030 technology has been around for a long long time, and 030s are being made faster and smaller – 0.85micron last I heard. I think the EC030 is a screw up. -Paul
#94822From: Black Belt SystemsApr 9, 1993 4:40 PM
It's a little different – no FPU in the 68k architecture can be solved with the wink of a compile. No MMU isn't solvable without special purpose, highly duplicable code.. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#94921From: Tom JonesApr 10, 1993 10:25 AM
Butt-insky mode on: I think some concern was precisely that there be "insurance of future expandability" built in, as it was in the A2000. Hopefully that is indeed true with the reports from WOC N.Y. that they socketed the CPU chip. To appeal to hobbyists it must be as flexable and upgradable as possible. If all the reports so far are true it is going to be a very popular model. BTW the socket is not just important for MMU, it is also a door to the buss for socketed after-market upgrades. If CBM is ready to quit chasing the elusive niche markets and take back the consumer market that was once their bread and butter they need to listen to the consumer, and they are apparently doing that. This might be the turning point at last. It had better be, they are almost out of lives. Tom
#94262From: Tom JonesApr 5, 1993 5:47 PM
I am hearing rumors that there will be a MMU model with 6882 offered for hard-to-please customers like me in the US only, if that is true I will buy that one. Otherwise I guess you will all have to endure me until the 68060 board comes out and I can get someone's excess 68040 board maybe. I know there was software based MMU before the hardware came out, I used to install what we called the "scientific option" on the old battleships. But I have a feeling it would be pretty slow on a 68EC030 too. If you mean the trick circuitry on GVP accellerators that lets you upload kickrom to high memory however, that would not work for processing multi-megabyte images etc. I just have a feeling VM option will be used more in the future since more programs are using it now. "This, too, shall pass." Tom, Redneck from Okie City
#94296From: Denny Atkin [COMPUTE/AmiApr 5, 1993 9:54 PM
At WOCA I learned that the EC030 in the A4000/030 is socketed. So you can upgrade it to a full 030 if you want. I'd guess you could probably buy a "pulled" 030 from Krueger and sell them your EC030 and not end up spending a while lot.
#94323From: Steve MottoApr 6, 1993 12:40 AM
Socketed? (smile spreading across face) Is this for certain? And, are these boards FPU-ready? // \X/ Amiga -Steve ——> On AutoPilot from Silicon Valley
#94378From: Denny Atkin [COMPUTE/AmiApr 6, 1993 12:53 PM
Steve, Yep, Lew Eggebrecht made a point of mentioning that the chips were socketed. And there are two sockets for FPU chips–one for PGA and one for PLCC chips.
#94533From: michael heinzApr 7, 1993 3:00 PM
Denny, how much does an '030 go for these days?
#94573From: Tom JonesApr 7, 1993 9:46 PM
Hi Denny You sure about this? We have had so many conflicting reports. Some say it is surface mounted on a plug-in card that is the same as the '040 card in the first 4000. (Those cards will be thrown at the used market once the '060 card is introduced.) I planned to pull the '030 from my GVP3001 accellerator and dump it with the 'EC030 to someone who don't care, but I don't know if this will be an option. You are saying it may be an option? Thanks for the feedback. Tom
#94739From: Denny Atkin [COMPUTE/AmiApr 9, 1993 12:54 AM
Tom, I think the confusion came from the fact that the original design WAS surface-mounted. (The prototypes some of us developer types saw.) Lew Eggebrecht, though, made a point of mentioning that it was socketed at World of Commodore. I'd wait for someone to actually see one first, though, to be positive. 🙂
#94793From: Tom JonesApr 9, 1993 11:53 AM
OK Denny, thanks for the words. I guess it sounds too good to be true but if so it adds one more brick to the increasing evidence that this company has finally started serving the customer again. We will see. Tom.
#93248From: Steve SetzerMar 26, 1993 8:36 PM
Harry, From what I understand you are right on with the differences between the 68EC030 and the 68030. Mapping KS to hi ram does very noticably increase the speed (at least in my 2000) I too am lusting after the AGA graphics but at that price I will wait. I was hoping for something in the $1200-$1500 range :-\. I have heard that the 040 daughterboard in the 4000 is the same part # as the 040 card for the 3000T. But that too is rather pricey (over $1000). Oh well when dealing with C= one learns patience! …Steve ====>>> Motorola 68030 Inside <<<====
#93347From: Harry CallesisMar 27, 1993 4:43 PM
Steve – KS mapping makes a difference on my A2000 as well 8^) but I was thinking that since the new ROMs have 32-bit access (it's a full 32-bit bus, right?) KS mapping would make less of a difference there. I guess I'll wait a couple weeks more to see if C= adds the new machine to the power-up deal. Harry
#93290From: Richard EricksonMar 27, 1993 2:39 AM
I heard a rumor that there would be two models of the 4000/030. One with the EC030 version and one with a full fledged 030 with a FPU. The same rumor had CBM making a lower priced monitor for $300. Gould only knows if it's right. Richard -> via the Amiga 1000 AutoPilot
#93591From: Tom JonesMar 30, 1993 2:33 PM
THANK YOU for those threads of hope to see me through yet another dark release from the company that does it right the last time. Do you really believe they will do anything so intelligent? Tom
#93717From: Richard EricksonMar 31, 1993 12:53 PM
Let's hope so. Richard -> via the Amiga 1000 AutoPilot
#93350From: Ron LegroMar 27, 1993 5:05 PM
Well, everything's relative. Only about a year ago I paid $1500 on sale for an A2000HD-P with 2 megs RAM and a 50 Mhz hard drive, with a few hundred bucks' worth of productivity software bundled in. That A4000/30 price you were quoted is rather astounding, all things considered. Then again, Apple is being very aggressive on its Mac III line, so C= doesn't have a choice but to keep current with market prices.
#93278From: Denny Atkin [COMPUTE/AmiMar 27, 1993 1:05 AM
Greg's wrong on that one… It's a 25MHz chip.
#93592From: Tom JonesMar 30, 1993 2:33 PM
God is not dead. Tom
#93628From: Denny Atkin [COMPUTE/AmiMar 30, 1993 9:18 PM
"God is dead" — Neitzsche "Neitzsche is dead, and I killed him." — God
#93896From: Tom JonesApr 1, 1993 11:44 PM
famous last words,eh? Sorry if I wax a bit religious when talking about CBM's survival odds.
#93594From: Tom JonesMar 30, 1993 2:34 PM
So, then, if one strips out the $500 monitor, the $190. ide drive, the $100 of simms from their $1800 street price we are comparing a naked 4000/30 to a naked 2000 at about the same selling price of $1000. Not at all a bad price for a full 32 bit machine with AGA. On the other hand they seem to think they can sell us dumb Amis the same price without the monitor I hear, which ain't going to happen. I kind of like pal monitors anyway. I would like to hope they will eventually offer a HD-less and memory-less model to us who want it. Or a MMU '030 model with 4mb simms for experienced users etc. Why am I wasting your time and my money? By the way, do you know if the 4000 can use a normal IDE/AT harddisk like the ones on my GVP3001 accellerator? They aren't the 2.5" type are they? My dealer has never had a 4000 in stock long enough to put it on display.
#93618From: Betty Clay/SYSOPMar 30, 1993 8:05 PM
I'm sorry – I did not learn the physical size of the disk in the 4000/030. —Betty
#93712From: Greg MalcangiMar 31, 1993 12:20 PM
Hi Betty, Thanks for posting my message last week. I've heard that the music bundle will now go ahead. The bundle will be the A4000/030 with Bars & Pipes Pro v2 and the Proteus Sound Engine. The bundle will have a list price of 1500 pounds. Greg
#93790From: Betty Clay/SYSOPApr 1, 1993 12:07 AM
Was glad to post it for you, Greg – and it provided good information for some of the people here who were asking about it. I'm glad the bundle will go, and hope it sells well. It sounds great. —Betty
#93748From: Denny Atkin [COMPUTE/AmiMar 31, 1993 7:01 PM
The American A4000/030 has a 120MB drive. The Euroversion has an 80MB drive.
#93791From: Betty Clay/SYSOPApr 1, 1993 12:07 AM
That would add a bit to the price, but I'd rather have the 120 all the same. —Betty
#93795From: Tom JonesApr 1, 1993 12:35 AM
Not a problem. Thanks Betty. Tom
#93636From: Norm MillerMar 30, 1993 9:41 PM
Tom, It is a standard 3 1/2 drive but only 1" high. Seagate ST3144A. They sell for more than $190. If you can find one for $190 let me know :). Norm.
#93897From: Tom JonesApr 1, 1993 11:44 PM
So we trim the price of the bare 4000/30 a bit more then? I read that one of the magazine advertisers (SafeHarbor) is taking advance bookings on the 4000/30 4mb/120HD for $1800 by the way. Haven't talked with them myself. Tom
#93899From: Tom JonesApr 1, 1993 11:44 PM
I will Norm, and I might even find it. I live in Oklahoma City where the Seagates are made and sometimes the employees get discount deals on new drives. What goes around comes around. Tom