68060 sources

[alenppc]

Somehow the x86 world with far more configs and instruction set addons have survived without those kinds of auto-checks, and with having to explicitly tell the compiler which, if any, versions of SSE, AVX, etc you actually need.
Would be quite strange if Windows applications by default went "no SSE5, no fun" and you're only making some simple text editor or whatnot :)

Exactly.

People are completely missing the point and failing to understand and appreciate what a big deal SoftIEEE is.

Linux, Windows, MacOS 68k, BSD etc all have an FPU emulator, so that if you are using a CPU without an FPU, everything will still work. On AmigaOS you'd be greeted with a red guru on everything. Even booting to Workbench was hard because there are so many components littered with FPU code.

If you are patient, you could find them, isolate them, and replace them with integer versions. This is what I did when I built my first LC060 disk image. But every time you decided to install something new, you'd have to nitpick through every library and binary to make sure they are not installing FPU code, otherwise the whole system would crash and burn.

Now, with the help of this amazing piece of software you can just behave as if you had a full CPU. Of course the emulated FPU will be a lot slower than the real one, but that's obvious, I don't know why would anyone expect anything different?

Yes, binaries compiled with -nofpu options will run a lot faster than those that use emulated FPU. Compare the SoftFloat quake with FPU Quake running on LC060. Softfloat will give you 4-5 fps, while the emulated will give you less than 1 fps. If you had 68030+68882 you'd still get less FPS than on LC060.

Hell, the SoftIEEE is so good, you can run the full Quake2 port on it. YES, IT WILL BE VERY SLOW, but it will NOT CRASH.

So no, you won't get a full speed FPU, nobody said you would. But you'd get a lot more bang for the buck for your $50 LC060.

The Amiga port of Descent won't run at all on LC060 since it was compiled with FPU code. But with SoftIEEE it is fully playable with a good framerate. Another example of a binary that doesn't need an FPU but it is compiled for it just because.

TL;DR version: compile binaries with -nofpu whenever possible. For those that can't be recompiled, congratulations, you can now still run them, yes it will be slow, but they WILL run.

[matt020]

Now, with the help of this amazing piece of software you can just behave as if you had a full CPU. Of course the emulated FPU will be a lot slower than the real one, but that's obvious, I don't know why would anyone expect anything different?

Because people read the first few words "it emulates an FPU" and stop there and go off to do some speed tests and what-not, and believe they are making a point for the world to see. Those of us who read past the first line put our faces in our hands in disbelief. You can't get around this, its human nature.

[mikro]

Are these real or theoretical applications?

Kronos comes to my mind as a typical example (damn it, another benchmark!) There you have at least the option to choose the FPU manually but let's face it: if I own an LC060 and can choose FPU: 68000, 68881, 68040 and 68060, which one am I going to choose as an average user?

And do they overshadow the amount of programs not launching at all even though they are not even using fpu instructions?

Hard to say. The error message comes from programs compiled against mintlib in the past ~10 years. I can't say how many of them just pretend to need the FPU. FreeMiNT's tools (qed, toswin2 etc) are a special case and a better solution would be just not compile them at all: offering 020-60 executables in 020/030 archives is a mistake which I intend to fix one day.

Trust me guys, it breaks my heart to be on the "bad" side of this discussion but ... I have seen things. :-)

I've remembered about another example: the infamous CT60 5s delay option. Despite being OFF by default, for freakin' 20+ years there's every now and then an idiot who read somewhere that it's a good idea to turn it on ("it improves compatibility") and then spams forums with question like "Why is Quake 5 FPS on my setup, did I buy wrong CPU?"

So no, I'm not putting it into the kernel. However I have absolutely nothing against supplying it in the archive, should someone develop something like SoftIEEE. Or maybe there could be an option in the boot menu to turn the emulator on, sure, that works, too.

As for the topic of FPU vs. non-FPU, fortunately Atari world has somewhat agreed to always release at least three versions of the app: 000, 020-60 and ColdFire. So there's no need to cripple FPU applications.

[agranlund]

if I own an LC060 and can choose FPU: 68000, 68881, 68040 and 68060, which one am I going to choose as an average user?

I'm going to keep playing devils advocate and ask; are these LC users real or theoretical?

I used an LC for a while and as a programmer it was quite fun in a problem solving context.
As a non-programmer expecting things to actually work, I would absolutely not recommend it.
It would be great if those cheap LC's, which happily run 100 mhz, was a viable option if you don't want to gamble on very expensive and possibly fake Rev6's.


060ifsp? It did not install the integer support part unless you also have FPU = crashes galore on programs executing 68000 integer instructions no longer present on 68060. QED among others..
(Ok, this is probably a me-issue for using EmuTOS instead of CT60-TOS. I'm assuming the implementation inside CT60-TOS is not broken like the one in the Freemint repo was for the past forever amount of years)

Doom? I'd expect it to be a fairly common thing to test after getting yourself a fancy new fast 060?
It does not work on LC. Checks for 060 and if found assumes it must have an FPU and does a little bit of floating point math. Easy fix, but you'd need to be a programmer of course.
Apparently there was zero reports of this issue over all these years so a fixed official release was unlikely.
I put a forked version that works on LC on Github.

There was a whole slew of fresh SDL ports released quite recently. They're all compiled for 020-060 because why not, they wont run on 8mhz machines anyway so taking advantage of the better instructions makes sense (for anyone not old in the Atari game knowing about our gcc pecularity)
None of these will work on 060LC, or 030 accelerators without FPU unless you recompile them from source and know how to work around the no-start issue.
Or compile them for 000. I am unsure if this may cause integer instruction emulation to happen, which is not a nice tradeoff.

Mint? Surely it has to be annoying having to explain to LC users that they can in fact not use the 060 package on their 060? The 000-ST-STE one is the correct working one if you have a 060LC, regardless if you have an ST/STE or not.
You can possibly do a mix-and-match with the 000 package as the base and select parts from the 060 package.

mxPlay? Does a little bit of floating point in the GUI code. SoftIEEE would hardly dent performance here and make it run instead of not run on LCs.
(I'm not bringing this one up as some sort of attack because you made it. It's because I think it's the best one out there, the usage of float is perfectly normal and what it does would easily be handled by FPU emulation)

Being forced to use programs compiled for stock 68000?
If they aren't demanding applications then it doesn't matter, as long as you have a working 060ifsp :)
If they are I'd recompile them for 68020-60 or 68060 with suitable workarounds to get rid of the forced FPU check. SoftIEEE would work wonders here too to avoid having to do this.

So my question is actually sincere. Are those LC users real or theoretical? Hasn't everyone who tried one already been scared off when realising it is; mostly not working, requires a lot of troubleshooting and recompiling of old stuff, or unnecessarily crippled by having to run 68000 compiled versions of everything (if those are even available)?

As for the topic of FPU vs. non-FPU, fortunately Atari world has somewhat agreed to always release at least three versions of the app: 000, 020-60 and ColdFire. So there's no need to cripple FPU applications.

That setup is really: 000 (and for FPU-less people regardless of CPU type), 020-060 (won't even attempt to start if no FPU is present) and ColdFire.

I understand why it was made that way back in the days. Full 060 was cheap, and in the case of 030 accelerators the old ones had a socket for one. This is not necessarily the case today.

My gripe is mostly about the forced and completely artifical no-start on 020-060 compiled applications that are not even using floats. I rather it started, because many times it would work, but it is what it is since many years back - hence a real FPU or an emulator for such has been made pretty much mandatory today.

So no, I'm not putting it into the kernel. However I have absolutely nothing against supplying it in the archive, should someone develop something like SoftIEEE. Or maybe there could be an option in the boot menu to turn the emulator on, sure, that works, too.

I think that's fair. Even though I truly believe this kind of thing belongs in the kernel, it's easy for me to rant about stuff when I'm not the one having to support and explain.

But surely, a canned reply like this is sufficient with no other explanation needed?
"You bought the CPU model that is 1/10th the cost of the Premium model. Some things may or may not be slower - be happy it's now finally usable."

[terriblefire]

if I own an LC060 and can choose FPU: 68000, 68881, 68040 and 68060, which one am I going to choose as an average user?

I'm going to keep playing devils advocate and ask; are these LC users real or theoretical?

On the Amiga they exist. They're cheaper than a gold top 030 and 7 times the speed.

IMHO the operating system should handle this. But since (on the amiga at least) it doesnt. Thats what SoftIEEE is for.

[Steve]

I agree on the OS should handle it... would be nice if it detected an EC/LC 060 and automatically enabled FPU emulation. This would be a perfect world.

Who gives a crap if 1 in 100 users got confused about some FPU benchmark, when 99 other users are very happy with the compatibility.

Just because there's a minority of confused people out there (I'm being diplomatic with the word 'confused') shouldn't mandate that 'we cannot have nice things'.

[JezC]

I can see the arguments from both sides...

From my personal POV, I'd absolutely love a Raven (or even a Firebee, MIST or similar) but they're sadly way beyond my budget at the moment (unless I can exchange a few ST's for them ;)) but even if I could afford the rest of the parts to build a Raven there is so little chance of affording the full 060 that I'd have to go the LC route to start with & hope at some point (probably years later) to upgrade to the full 060

A similar argument blocks me from upgrading my Falcon (bought new in the mid-90s, as soon as TOS 4.04 was out & in stock locally) past the DFB1X it currently sports - a CT60 or higher spec would be lovely but is unaffordable.

In the meantime I'll keep hoping for the lottery win and reading up on these high end systems with envious eyes! :mrgreen: :coffee: :foldarms: :ball:

[chronicthehedgehog]

I can see the arguments from both sides...

From my personal POV, I'd absolutely love a Raven (or even a Firebee, MIST or similar) but they're sadly way beyond my budget at the moment (unless I can exchange a few ST's for them ;)) but even if I could afford the rest of the parts to build a Raven there is so little chance of affording the full 060 that I'd have to go the LC route to start with & hope at some point (probably years later) to upgrade to the full 060

A similar argument blocks me from upgrading my Falcon (bought new in the mid-90s, as soon as TOS 4.04 was out & in stock locally) past the DFB1X it currently sports - a CT60 or higher spec would be lovely but is unaffordable.

In the meantime I'll keep hoping for the lottery win and reading up on these high end systems with envious eyes! :mrgreen: :coffee: :foldarms: :ball:

A full 060 went for £77 on ebay yesterday. Whoever won it got a good deal. I didn't have the funds this month to go the whole hog but I did put a couple of early bids in.

[JezC]

A full 060 went for £77 on ebay yesterday. Whoever won it got a good deal. I didn't have the funds this month to go the whole hog but I did put a couple of early bids in.

Interesting, might have to save up a bit & try my luck...and hope it's a genuine working example!

Thanks for giving me hope for the future (even if it gives my wallet palpitations...)
:thumbup: :thanksblue:

[chronicthehedgehog]

Interesting, might have to save up a bit & try my luck...and hope it's a genuine working example!

Same here. I'd like a Raven one day as well :D