How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compatibl
How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compatibl
How easy is it to have an FPGA that is both Opcode and Pin compatible?
If you were to clone a modern day chip, are there large enough FPGA chips or space to emulate a larger chip?
For example, I searched the internet with Google looking for an FPGA clone of the Motorola 68000 series CPU and couldn't find one. That doesn't mean there isn't one.
At what point does a chip become too large to become feasible?
I thought I would ask the question under "Newbies" than to clutter the logic section with a question.
If you were to clone a modern day chip, are there large enough FPGA chips or space to emulate a larger chip?
For example, I searched the internet with Google looking for an FPGA clone of the Motorola 68000 series CPU and couldn't find one. That doesn't mean there isn't one.
At what point does a chip become too large to become feasible?
I thought I would ask the question under "Newbies" than to clutter the logic section with a question.
Re: How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compa
Well, FPGAs do keep getting bigger. The largest ones are amongst the largest chips made, but they are also extraordinarily expensive.
Fortunately, the 68k isn't so complicated as a CPU. I found some open source HDL at
http://opencores.org/project,ao68000
which says
Edit:more resource pointers at http://www.amigacoding.de/index.php?topic=296.0
Note that CPUs after the 68000 tend to have on-chip caches. We're told that FPGAs do not efficiently implement caches, but that doesn't mean it can't be done - FPGAs do generally have on-chip RAM.
For a more modern example, the 2006 SPARC from Sun (now Oracle) was released as the OpenSPARC, and will fit into an £1800 FPGA chip.
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/syste ... index.html
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/syste ... 530358.pdf
Hope this helps
Ed
Fortunately, the 68k isn't so complicated as a CPU. I found some open source HDL at
http://opencores.org/project,ao68000
which says
Quote:
Uses about 4750 LE on Altera Cyclone II and about 45600 bits of RAM for microcode,
Note that CPUs after the 68000 tend to have on-chip caches. We're told that FPGAs do not efficiently implement caches, but that doesn't mean it can't be done - FPGAs do generally have on-chip RAM.
For a more modern example, the 2006 SPARC from Sun (now Oracle) was released as the OpenSPARC, and will fit into an £1800 FPGA chip.
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/syste ... index.html
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/syste ... 530358.pdf
Hope this helps
Ed
Last edited by BigEd on Thu Nov 06, 2014 3:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compa
The 68050 has 2.5 million transistors. Can an FPGA emulate the 2.5 million transistors?
Can an FPGA be opcode and pin compatible?
Can an FPGA be opcode and pin compatible?
Re: How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compa
I don't see the '050 in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_6 ... ly_members, but anyway:
- opcode-accurate: yes of course, if someone takes care and does the work.
- pin-compatible: yes, I don't see why not. But existing projects might not implement everything exactly - they might only implement what was needed.
- pinout/package compatible: no, surely an FPGA will be a different size and shape and have different power and ground pins. You'd need an adapter board if you wanted a plugin replacement.
- cycle-compatible: probably not, because that's more work, more verification, and a much smaller number of people would be interested in it.
Note that later CPUs are often disproportionately larger because they dedicate transistors and complexity to performance enhancements. An HDL version doesn't necessarily need to do the same, depending on what level of performance and compatibility you want. For example, cache size will only affect performance, not software-level behaviour.
- opcode-accurate: yes of course, if someone takes care and does the work.
- pin-compatible: yes, I don't see why not. But existing projects might not implement everything exactly - they might only implement what was needed.
- pinout/package compatible: no, surely an FPGA will be a different size and shape and have different power and ground pins. You'd need an adapter board if you wanted a plugin replacement.
- cycle-compatible: probably not, because that's more work, more verification, and a much smaller number of people would be interested in it.
Note that later CPUs are often disproportionately larger because they dedicate transistors and complexity to performance enhancements. An HDL version doesn't necessarily need to do the same, depending on what level of performance and compatibility you want. For example, cache size will only affect performance, not software-level behaviour.
Re: How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compa
BigEd wrote:
I don't see the '050 in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_6 ... ly_members, but anyway:
http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/sit ... de=MC68060
http://cache.freescale.com/files/32bit/ ... df?pspll=1
My computer didn't block these sites at home but Emisoft blocked them at work and I haven't had any security issues with this site so I feel it is safe.
Someone is still making a 68020 but I'm not sure what the difference is between a real 68020 and this one that is implemented:
http://www.tekmos.com/products/68020-microprocessors
My real question is: I know that people have worked on 6502 in FPGA so I'm wondering what the level of performance has been and how difficult it would be to go from implementing the 6502 in FPGA to implementing something larger. I know that Parallax's Propeller chip has been implemented in FPGA so I guess it is not impossible.
Thank you for taking the time in answering my questions.
Re: How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compa
A 6502 core running on FPGA can achieve speeds five times faster, or more, than an actual 6502/65c02. Is this why you're interested in FPGA cores? Best to check, but I'm pretty sure if you do the comparison for a more complex CPU (such as 68000 compared with a 68000 FPGA core) you'll find the speedup is less dramatic.
Are you asking simply out of curiosity, or do you have a goal -- such as building a 6502 or 68000 project?
cheers,
Jeff
Are you asking simply out of curiosity, or do you have a goal -- such as building a 6502 or 68000 project?
cheers,
Jeff
In 1988 my 65C02 got six new registers and 44 new full-speed instructions!
https://laughtonelectronics.com/Arcana/ ... mmary.html
https://laughtonelectronics.com/Arcana/ ... mmary.html
Re: How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compa
We were watching the progress of others try to make 68060 emulation in FPGA which they did but since they didn't get the results they wanted, they stopped.
Because there has been no progress for three years, we were trying to figure out the practicality of the project and I've been trying to explain to another user that it isn't so easy so I tried to make sense of the datasheet for them to show them the difficulty level because they are waiting and waiting for something a little more than vaporware and they are not willing to walk away after the project abruptly stopped with a lack of communication.
Because there has been no progress for three years, we were trying to figure out the practicality of the project and I've been trying to explain to another user that it isn't so easy so I tried to make sense of the datasheet for them to show them the difficulty level because they are waiting and waiting for something a little more than vaporware and they are not willing to walk away after the project abruptly stopped with a lack of communication.
Re: How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compa
Hi Chuck
When you say the project didn't get the results it wanted, is that to say that the CPU was finished, but not fast enough? Or too big to fit on the target FPGA? Or, perhaps, it was never completed or never debugged?
It is actually very difficult to finish a CPU project - for each successful effort there are several which don't make it. I think it's crucial to keep the thing as simple as you can - even though there are always temptations to make it more featureful or faster. In a hobby context, you also have the issue that people's motivation and interest level will ebb and flow, and real-life issues like work, family and health may intervene. And if there are even two people involved, there will be some scope for disagreement which may or may not resolve. Yet, with only one person, it will inevitably take longer. Even more reason to start simple, finish that, and only then move on to add features.
All that said, a CPU project is interesting, and anyone making progress on one will learn from it.
Cheers
Ed
When you say the project didn't get the results it wanted, is that to say that the CPU was finished, but not fast enough? Or too big to fit on the target FPGA? Or, perhaps, it was never completed or never debugged?
It is actually very difficult to finish a CPU project - for each successful effort there are several which don't make it. I think it's crucial to keep the thing as simple as you can - even though there are always temptations to make it more featureful or faster. In a hobby context, you also have the issue that people's motivation and interest level will ebb and flow, and real-life issues like work, family and health may intervene. And if there are even two people involved, there will be some scope for disagreement which may or may not resolve. Yet, with only one person, it will inevitably take longer. Even more reason to start simple, finish that, and only then move on to add features.
All that said, a CPU project is interesting, and anyone making progress on one will learn from it.
Cheers
Ed
Re: How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compa
BigEd wrote:
Hi Chuck
When you say the project didn't get the results it wanted, is that to say that the CPU was finished, but not fast enough? Or too big to fit on the target FPGA? Or, perhaps, it was never completed or never debugged?
When you say the project didn't get the results it wanted, is that to say that the CPU was finished, but not fast enough? Or too big to fit on the target FPGA? Or, perhaps, it was never completed or never debugged?
My only interest was surveying the available hardware for a single board computer.
Re: How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compa
I think it's true that all the completed CPU projects are pretty much one person getting started - others might join in later - and not those which start with a wish-list conversation. There are always going to be more people with creative ideas than there are with the skills and motivation to finish a project. It's not a shortage of ideas which leads to a lack of completed projects, it's a shortage of finishing power. Group projects do have an extra failure mode, which is "musical differences." Projects with a commercial ambition have another failure mode, which involves keeping everything secret.
What do I recommend? Doing it yourself. Start simple. Learn by doing. Work in the open, and open source your work. By all means ask for help, but also be sure to do your own searches and study. If you don't have the wherewithal to pursue your own project, try to assist on an existing one. Bug reports, testing, documentation, bug fixes are all useful contributions.
For reference, I found a conversation about a 68060 project at
http://www.amiga.org/forums/archive/ind ... 63590.html
and it might serve as a useful illustration of how things often end up.
Cheers
Ed
Edit: typo
What do I recommend? Doing it yourself. Start simple. Learn by doing. Work in the open, and open source your work. By all means ask for help, but also be sure to do your own searches and study. If you don't have the wherewithal to pursue your own project, try to assist on an existing one. Bug reports, testing, documentation, bug fixes are all useful contributions.
For reference, I found a conversation about a 68060 project at
http://www.amiga.org/forums/archive/ind ... 63590.html
and it might serve as a useful illustration of how things often end up.
Cheers
Ed
Edit: typo
Last edited by BigEd on Sun Nov 09, 2014 5:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- BigDumbDinosaur
- Posts: 9426
- Joined: 28 May 2009
- Location: Midwestern USA (JB Pritzker’s dystopia)
- Contact:
Re: How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compa
BigEd wrote:
For reference, I found a conversation about a 68060 project at
http://www.amiga.org/forums/archive/ind ... 63590.html
and it might serve as a useful illustration of how things often end up.
http://www.amiga.org/forums/archive/ind ... 63590.html
and it might serve as a useful illustration of how things often end up.
x86? We ain't got no x86. We don't NEED no stinking x86!
- jac_goudsmit
- Posts: 229
- Joined: 23 Jun 2011
- Location: Rancho Cucamonga, California
- Contact:
Re: How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compa
I'm not sure who/what you guys are talking about when you mention locked-up Commodore IP, but there's a project called MIST which has an FPGA and an Arm CPU on board, and lets you emulate an Amiga (not sure which one, probably not 68060 based anyway) or an Atari ST. As far as I can tell, it's in production and you can order it for EUR 199.99.
http://lotharek.pl/product.php?pid=96
But I'm sure you already know that, and anyway, what was this thread about again?
===Jac
http://lotharek.pl/product.php?pid=96
But I'm sure you already know that, and anyway, what was this thread about again?
===Jac
Re: How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compa
There has been a lawsuit between the hardware maker and the software maker for Amiga. I could find the pages on Amigaworld but the story goes on for pages and pages and pages.
No one knows who owns what in the Amiga I.P. because there is doubt in a lot of things.
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/vie ... at&order=0
Tulip Computers changed their names to Nedfield and they can't use the brand name "Commodore".
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/vie ... orum=17&96
Then I read that someone was selling the Amiga I.P.
http://www.osnews.com/story/23983/Amiga ... _Trademark
So it is very confusing indeed.
No one knows who owns what in the Amiga I.P. because there is doubt in a lot of things.
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/vie ... at&order=0
Tulip Computers changed their names to Nedfield and they can't use the brand name "Commodore".
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/vie ... orum=17&96
Then I read that someone was selling the Amiga I.P.
http://www.osnews.com/story/23983/Amiga ... _Trademark
So it is very confusing indeed.
Re: How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compa
BigEd wrote:
For a more modern example, the 2006 SPARC from Sun (now Oracle) was released as the OpenSPARC, and will fit into an £1800 FPGA chip.
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/syste ... index.html
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/syste ... 530358.pdf
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/syste ... index.html
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/syste ... 530358.pdf
Here in my "cave", I hadn't heard about the OpenSparc !
Mike
Re: How easy is it to make an FPGA both Opcode and Pin compa
jac_goudsmit wrote:
I'm not sure who/what you guys are talking about when you mention locked-up Commodore IP, but there's a project called MIST which has an FPGA and an Arm CPU on board, and lets you emulate an Amiga (not sure which one, probably not 68060 based anyway) or an Atari ST. As far as I can tell, it's in production and you can order it for EUR 199.99.
http://lotharek.pl/product.php?pid=96
But I'm sure you already know that, and anyway, what was this thread about again?
===Jac
http://lotharek.pl/product.php?pid=96
But I'm sure you already know that, and anyway, what was this thread about again?
===Jac
Amiga Inc. started trial versus Hyperion:
http://www.amigaworld.net/modules/newbb ... 32&forum=2
Amiga Inc vs Hyperion: today the 10 days deadline for Hyperion to respond to the Court case:
http://www.amigaworld.net/modules/newbb ... 37&forum=2
First round goes to Hyperion"
http://www.amigaworld.net/modules/newbb ... 29&forum=2
Hyperion VOF v. Amino Development Corporation:
http://www.amigaworld.net/modules/newbb ... 76&forum=2
Amiga Inc v. Hyperion VOF (update 22 Feb 2008):
http://www.amigaworld.net/modules/newbb ... 97&forum=2
Amiga Inc v. Hyperion VOF part 2:
http://www.amigaworld.net/modules/newbb ... 25&forum=2
The lawsuit... a never ending story.:
http://www.amigaworld.net/modules/newbb ... 79&forum=2
T. Frieden, H. Frieden & A. Vallinotto v. Amiga Inc. & Hyperion VOF:
http://www.amigaworld.net/modules/newbb ... 26&forum=2
Itec steps forward in the Big Apple, part 2 DISMISSED:
http://www.amigaworld.net/modules/newbb ... 59&forum=2
New court documents #124 - #126:
http://www.amigaworld.net/modules/newbb ... 61&forum=2
Hyperion and Amiga Inc. reach settlement!:
http://www.amigaworld.net/modules/newbb ... 77&forum=2
Hyperion/ITEC/AMINO Agreement posted on Justia.com:
http://www.amigaworld.net/modules/newbb ... 48&forum=2
All of the things which came out in the lawsuit have made us doubt if certain parties ever had a right to the I.P.
Other people are selling the rights even though the court granted Hyperion the right to the operating system they made for Amiga.
This message goes with my previous message.
Chuck