Friends of this exquisite thread,

I find it toweringly hilarious that a whole bunch of you who's here extolling the virtues of electric vehicles and dropping monocles in indignation at the very mention of oil, the poison of all poisons,

is then in other threads crawling and slithering in Trevor's worship, a man who made his money by sucking that ghastly pitch black venom out of the very earth.

Remember, my friends:
your disgusting execSGs, your miserable System 54s, your pitiful checkered paraphernalia, your pathetic Xsomethings,

ARE POWERED BY OIL.
MADE POSSIBLE BY OIL.
SOAKED WITH OIL,
DRIPPING.





/mega!

_________________
I HAVE ABS OF STEEL
--
CAN YOU SEE ME? CAN YOU HEAR ME? OK FOR WORK

@MEGA_RJ_MICAL

Quote:

DRIPPING

Mmmmmmmmm dripping...

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

Deniil715 Quote:

Tesla is for the car industry what Amiga was for the computer industry.

The Amiga was green in some ways and not so green in other ways.

+ Amiga used relatively weak CPUs due to custom chips
+ Amiga custom chips used minimal transistors saving power
+ Amiga integration reduces power
- CBM was slow to convert custom chips from NMOS to CMOS (10-20 times the power requirement)
- CBM used old custom chip processes which used more power
- CBM was slow to further integrate the Amiga custom chips
- AmigaOS lacked low power states even on later CPUs like the 68060 which supported them

The Amiga also had a green advantage compared to x86 PCs due to the reduced power requirements of 68k CPUs. Customers didn't really care that newer PCs had higher power requirements and were wasteful. It was not the green movement but actually the necessity of needing mobile computers to run on batteries and the energy savings of embedded systems that brought forth the demand for low power computers.

The Vampire SA is advertised as "eco-technology" and "eco-friendly" using a claimed 2 watts of power.

http://www.apollo-computer.com/v4standalone.php Quote:

The Apollo V4+ Standalone is a low power, 'green', environmental-friendly design. V4+ by itself needs only 2W of power. Super-cool it doesn't even need a fan.

This may sound to Amiga users like it is green but a FPGA uses 3-6 times as much power as an ASIC.

https://www.tekmos.com/products/asics/fpga-conversions Quote:

An ASIC will reduce the power consumption of an FPGA based circuit typically by a factor of 3-6. Why? The main reason is that the ASIC uses fewer transistors to implement a logic function. The logic blocks in an FPGA are actually small ROMs. And being ROMs, they have an address decode, and some sort of output circuit. In an ASIC, we just implement the logic gate. The total power consumption is directly related to the number of transistors switching, so if we reduce the number of transistors that switch, we reduce the power. Another source of power reduction is more subtle. Because an ASIC uses fewer transistors than an FPGA, it can be implemented in an older technology and still achieve the same performance level obtained in the FPGA. And while older technologies have larger transistors, and thus draw more operating power, this can be offset by the reduction in leakage found in the latest technologies.

The Apollo core is likely not using power gating (reducing power of unused units) to reduce power like most modern CPU cores. It should be possible to have a much higher clocked ASIC CPU core while drawing less power. Only operating the FPGA core at 100MHz may be greener than an ASIC at 1000MHz if customer are satisfied with that level of performance. CBM could have tried to market the Amiga as green using cheap and weak CPUs compared to the competition too but the Amiga instead became more and more viewed as low performance and noncompetitive.

Last edited by matthey on 26-May-2022 at 11:17 PM.

@matthey

Performance wasn’t the problem, the OS was. That’s why Linux and BSD continued to live on m68k for many, many years after CBM was gone. Today is a different story, of course.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@BigD

Available at a dealer near you.

Sports car money, SUPERCAR SPEED: Chevrolet Corvette, 184mph, 480+bhp | Top Gear

_________________
"Unix is supposed to fix that." -- Jay Miner

@Karlos

Three of the cars were old generation Nissan Leaf leases. The range was never enough on these old models. It would slightly increase per model year but they were not as nice as the current generation Leaf that got a body style refresh and goes over 200 miles per charge. Like I said I was an early adopter and got in too early. Still I’m sure it saved me a lot on maintenance if I would have had a gas car. Currently the plug in hybrid is great because it has a backup gas engine if needed. This type of car would be great for a vast majority of people since you can plug in to save money on gas but it’s not required. You have a backup energy source so no range problems or worry.

_________________
Sent from my Quantum Computer.

@DiscreetFX

Quote:

DiscreetFX wrote: @Karlos Of course you’re right, my wording was off. You can’t get cancer that quickly in one setting. I should have said it’s toxic and lethal in this hypothetical experiment, not that you will get cancer that fast. My point was that it’s harmful to humans or almost any living being for that matter.

Your point is simply FALSE, because the paper that YOU posted talks of something which is VERY different.

As I've already said, science is clearly NOT for you. Try something else: religion, for example, perfectly suites you...
Quote:

But this has been addressed. Most EVs as required by law emit a high pitched noise when traveling at low speeds. My first EV, a Nissan Leaf did this way beck in 2012. That EV was not ready for prime time and only went about 84 miles per charge which did force me to plan my route carefully. Thank goodness modern electric cars go 200-300 hundred miles per charge. The 84 mile range was not practical for most people back then.

You still have to carefully plan your travels when they are longer than the autonomy of your car.

@Deniil715

Quote:

Deniil715 wrote: @cdimauro Quote: cdimauro wrote: @Deniil715 I beg to differ. There's no relationship between the two things. Unless you prove it, of course. No relation, but parallelism. Both pioneering the future

That's not true for Tesla: there were already car vendors proposing EVs.
Quote:

But reading through half of the posts here I take it you're not quite a Tesla fan :-p

Well, how it could be: it's my competitor.
Quote:

Personally I would agree more with the arguments of bhabbott, agami and DiscreetFX when it comes to 1.climate change, 2.EVs and 3.hydrogen. 1. It is more logical to believe the conclusions of people who have spend most of their working career on a subject, that random youtube dudes and BigOil lobbyists and other couch thinkers suffering badly from Confirmation Bias and The Dunning-Krüger effect.

I never stated something against the climate change. I'm definitely NOT Trump, eh!
Quote:

2. I have wanted one since I was 10-12 years old and made my own boxcar (or whatever you call a piece of wood on wheels) and fantasised of putting a car battery and a starter-motor on it, but didn't have the welding tools or skills Now I have finally got the financial muscles to get one and have never been so pleased with any car (except possibly the A-traktor I got as a 16-year-old).

You choice, your fun. Nothing against that.

I prefer CE cars.
Quote:

3. Efficiancy!! Or the lack of it. What makes hydrogen unsuitable and not having a break-through (pimarily in cars) is the low efficiency. Especially for clean hydrogen which sadly is as bad as for gasolin. Converting natural gas into hydrogen is less energy demanding I suppose, but then you're running on fossil gas anyway so no point. Burning hydrogen in conventional ICE cars is even worse due to the low efficiency of those engines as well. This is why batteries so far is the way to go. Simply efficiency. One windmill instead of four to take a car a certain distance.

The situation with Hydrogen might improve in future. Let's see.

@DiscreetFX

Quote:

DiscreetFX wrote: @Karlos Three of the cars were old generation Nissan Leaf leases. The range was never enough on these old models. It would slightly increase per model year but they were not as nice as the current generation Leaf that got a body style refresh and goes over 200 miles per charge. Like I said I was an early adopter and got in too early. Still I’m sure it saved me a lot on maintenance if I would have had a gas car. Currently the plug in hybrid is great because it has a backup gas engine if needed. This type of car would be great for a vast majority of people since you can plug in to save money on gas but it’s not required. You have a backup energy source so no range problems or worry.

I want to see if the "vast majority of people" has the possibility to charge at home...

@matthey

Quote:

matthey wrote: Here in the U.S. many of the leftist anti-business socialist/communist hypocrites want to destroy the "capitalists". Of course it is communist doctrine to destroy capitalism by whatever means possible including the use of violence. Putin and his throwback to Russian communism has also been spreading the green agenda. https://www.scribd.com/document/353439133/Smith-Weber-Letter-to-Mnuchin-re-Russia-and-Green-Groups Quote: The Committee on Science, Space and Technology is conducting oversight of what appears to be a concerted effort by foreign entities to funnel millions of dollars through various non-profit entities to influence the U.S. energy market. According to the former Secretary General of NATO, "Russia, as part of their sophisticated information and disinformation operations, engaged actively with so-called non-governmental organizations - environmental organizations working against shale gas - to maintain dependence on imported Russian gas." Other officials have indicated the same scheme is unfolding in the U.S. These statements and related reports provide evidence that Russia is also behind the radical statements and vitriol directed at the U.S. fossil fuel sector. The purpose of this letter is to request that the U.S. Department of Treasury investigate these and related allegations. As if all the wrong environmental doomsday predictions were not enough, the communist anti-business messaging seems to still be successful even after Putin embarrassed Europe and their radical green agenda he helped finance. I'm for practical environmental improvements but the radical green agenda is counter productive.

Please stop your republican (and likely trumpist, unfortunately) propaganda. And it's disgusting that you still support Putin after all that he made.

BTW, there are no communists anymore neither left parties (especially in US: democratics are just sitting at the center, and republicans to the right. The left side is empty since AGEs).

Last but not really least, the climate change is a FACT. Whatever Trump, and the idiots the sustain him, continue to say (Science is not for Trump as well)...

P.S. Since we're already off-topic, please tell me about what happened in Texas a few days ago.

Do you still love your Constitution? Tell it to the parents that have lost they children...

@matthey

Quote:

matthey wrote: The Amiga was green in some ways and not so green in other ways.

True, though nobody cared about that back then. More importantly it could do stuff that you needed a lot more 'green' to do on a PC or Mac.

Quote:

The Amiga also had a green advantage compared to x86 PCs due to the reduced power requirements of 68k CPUs.

I'm not sure this was true, at least during Commodore's reign. 286 and 386 CPUs didn't need a heatsink. PCs had a large power supply to support hard drives etc, but so did the A2000 and A4000.

However when the 486 and Pentium came out it was obvious that Intel was getting faster speeds by pumping more power into the CPU. Later 68060s ran reasonably cool without a heatsink, while 486s above 25MHz needed one, and Pentiums needed ever-increasing heatsink and fan sizes as they got faster. Even worse, PC power supplies often ran at only around 50% efficiency despite using switch-mode technology.

Quote:

Customers didn't really care that newer PCs had higher power requirements and were wasteful.

Yep, just like car owners today don't care about wasteful their SUVs are. In fact they enjoy it. Manufacturers even put fake exhaust pipes on the lower-end models to make them look more powerful!

Quote:

It was not the green movement but actually the necessity of needing mobile computers to run on batteries and the energy savings of embedded systems that brought forth the demand for low power computers.

That's true for laptops (though many of them are still far too power hungry, and tend to overheat you work them too hard). However PCs becoming 'green' was more due to actions of the EPA with Energy Star ratings etc., which manufacturers took onboard because they didn't want to lose government contracts (stinking liberal gummint, forcing us to buy efficient electrically powered devices!).

Modern PCs have a lot of stuff in them to manage CPU power, but that is only to stop the cores from burning up. Modern PCs have higher wattage power supplies than older models. In the old days 250-300W was enough. Now you need 700-1000W for a good gaming PC.

Quote:

The Vampire SA is advertised as "eco-technology" and "eco-friendly" using a claimed 2 watts of power.

The A500 and A1200 don't use much power anyway (the A500 power supply is rated at 60W, less than most laptop PSUs) but lower power reduces temperature and makes the machine more reliable. One reason I didn't get an 060 board for my A1200 was that my 50MHz 030 was already a bit too hot for comfort. I had to cut a hole through my A3000's drive shelf (heavy gauge metal, not easy!) to get a fan onto the 060.

Quote:

V4+ by itself needs only 2W of power. Super-cool it doesn't even need a fan.

No fan, another advantage. The fan in my A3000's PSU was incredibly noisy! My Dell PC has a huge fan in the front that usually is quite quiet, but sounds like a freight train when working hard. Sometimes it vibrates and I have to kick the machine in the side to shut it up. I'm with Steve Jobs on not having fans in PCs (but only if passive cooling is enough to keep the temperature down...).

Quote:

This may sound to Amiga users like it is green but a FPGA uses 3-6 times as much power as an ASIC.

Not sure why we would think that - everyone(?) knows that FPGAs are not as efficient as ASICs. They are better than most CPLDs and PALs though. Early 'gate arrays' were also very power hungry, especially TTL ones like the Ferranti ULAs used in the ZX81 and Spectrum. A modern FPGA is far more efficient than anything we could get back in the 1980s - even full ASICs.

Quote:

An ASIC will reduce the power consumption of an FPGA based circuit typically by a factor of 3-6.

That's fine, but what about the overall efficiency? If you are only doing small production runs an FPGA is cheaper, and in our world where the cost of energy determines the price of goods that means the total energy used is probably lower. An FPGA can also be modified simply by flashing another bitstream, whereas you have to spin up another ASIC (and probably the PCB for it) if the present one doesn't do what you want. That means FPGA is more environmentally friendly in a market like ours, where people don't expect to throw away their devices every few years.

Quote:

The Apollo core is likely not using power gating (reducing power of unused units) to reduce power like most modern CPU cores. It should be possible to have a much higher clocked ASIC CPU core while drawing less power.

Perhaps, but I wouldn't say it doesn't already do some power management. In the Amiga the 68k CPU idles when no tasks are running, which does make it draw less power. FPGAs also use less power when they are doing less. I suspect the primary reason the Vampire is not clocked higher is that it can't meet the timing requirements, not that it would get too hot.

Quote:

CBM could have tried to market the Amiga as green using cheap and weak CPUs compared to the competition too but the Amiga instead became more and more viewed as low performance and noncompetitive.

Nobody cared about 'green' back then, only getting sufficient performance for the software they wanted to run. The Amiga became noncompetitive when PCs became fast enough to run games that low-end Amigas couldn't. The fact that Amiga fans flocked to bulky desktop and tower PCs is proof that being small, efficient and cheap wasn't what attracted them (just like people today are attracted to brutish heavy SUVs rather than efficient small cars).

This thread is all over the place. From gassing yourself in your garage to demonstrate how gasoline causes cancer to the eternal battle of FPGA versus ASIC.

Only Amigans make it possible.

Last edited by Karlos on 27-May-2022 at 11:46 AM.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@Karlos

FYI, I was one of the first owners of a Nissan Leaf in my city. It didn't give me cancer!

And now I drive a hybrid. Best of both worlds. Pollute the atmosphere at the same time as green signalling. What else could you ask for?

_________________
Trust me. I'm a doctor.

@GadgetMaster

Quote:

FYI, I was one of the first owners of a Nissan Leaf in my city. It didn't give me cancer!

I remember it well. However, it's only petrol/diesel cars that do that.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@Deniil715

Quote:

2. I have wanted one since I was 10-12 years old and made my own boxcar (or whatever you call a piece of wood on wheels) and fantasised of putting a car battery and a starter-motor on it, but didn't have the welding tools or skills Now I have finally got the financial muscles to get one and have never been so pleased with any car (except possibly the A-traktor I got as a 16-year-old).

I never knew DIY box cars with a car battery and motor needed such a large financial outlay.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@matthey

Quote:

matthey wrote: The Amiga also had a green advantage compared to x86 PCs due to the reduced power requirements of 68k CPUs.

That's not correct. Reporting it several times doesn't make it true.

First (and most important) 68k CPUs used less transistors compared to the x86 ones because Motorola, starting with the 68030, decided to remove features (PMMU pages and stack frames) & instructions (MOVEP, long MULs&DIVs, tons of FPU instructions, CALLM, etc.), and also didn't provide equivalent features (notable examples: Pentium's 64-bit databus + Machine registers + pipelined FPU + bigger fetch/decode queue for the two instructions. But with the 80186 Intel already started adding new instructions on each new processor generation).

All of this impacted the power consumption, of course. That's why the comparison isn't fair.

Second, the 68040 was hotter than 80486. That's because Motorola used an internal double clock (if I recall correctly), which Intel introduced only starting with the DX2 versions.

68k processors were very complicated CISCs (much more than x86 in several aspects), so pushing their performances was a challenge as well. AFAIR also Mitch Alsup reported something like that some years ago.

/OT (OT? Let me laugh a bit ).

@bhabbott

Quote:

bhabbott wrote: However when the 486 and Pentium came out it was obvious that Intel was getting faster speeds by pumping more power into the CPU.

Maybe because it was easier to push the clock higher due to their ISA (yes, it might be incredible) compared to 68k. As I've said before, 68k were really complicated processors.
Quote:

Yep, just like car owners today don't care about wasteful their SUVs are. In fact they enjoy it.

Correct: they are quite comfortable, and that's the reason that they are selling so good.

I also like them. However I also like to drive, and I prefer a different class of cars from this PoV.
Quote:

The Amiga became noncompetitive when PCs became fast enough to run games that low-end Amigas couldn't.

PCs built around '87-88 were already capable of running games at good speeds.
Quote:

The fact that Amiga fans flocked to bulky desktop and tower PCs is proof that being small, efficient and cheap wasn't what attracted them (just like people today are attracted to brutish heavy SUVs rather than efficient small cars).

We like SUVs because, I've said above, they are very comfortable. Maybe you never tried them...

@cdimauro

I've got TDS too, but not as bad as you!

_________________
"Unix is supposed to fix that." -- Jay Miner

@Karlos

Quote:

This thread is all over the place.

Nürburgring BEST OF Vans & Busses on the Nordschleife - Special Compilation!

_________________
"Unix is supposed to fix that." -- Jay Miner

@bison

Training for Prime Same Day Delivery....

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@Karlos

Quote:

Only Amigans make it possible.

I think Elon Musk knows that - so he is buying Twitter.

@Nonefornow

Well he also thought hyperloop was a good idea, so who knows how good his judgement is?

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@Nonefornow

And getting sued for it

Quote:

I think Elon Musk knows that - so he is buying Twitter.

_________________
Trust me. I'm a doctor.