Date   : Sun, 30 Oct 2005 22:44:04 +0000
From   : Jules Richardson <julesrichardsonuk@...>
Subject: Re: Internal Coprocessor

Jonathan Graham Harston wrote:
>>Message-ID: <435D1B89.1070302@...>
> 
>  
> Jules Richardson <julesrichardsonuk@...> wrote:
> 
>>Jonathan Graham Harston wrote:
>>
>>>A *production* 68000 copro? Where?
>>
>>Torch Atlas or Neptune. (Acorn never got into the 68k game for some
> 
>  
> Oh yes. I've got a advertising broacher for that somewhere.

For the bare board, or one of the products which used it? I wouldn't 
mind a scan sometime (when you stumble across it!) if the former, I 
don't think it's something I have.

> I didn't like the Torch copros as they didn't use the Tube
> protocol properly, they bypassed it and played with the Tube I/O
> address space directly. 

Yep, I think I remember reading something about that. I wonder if it was 
for performance reasons or just the Torch guys being sloppy - I guess 
that for their 700 series machines which ran UNIX, squeezing as much as 
possible out of the beeb was desirable...

> I had no objection to replacing the ULA with their own circuitry, 

Hmm, interesting point. Presumably the TUBE ULA was Acorn copyright and 
not available to other companies? All the non-Acorn copros I've come 
across seem to do their own implementations with VIA chips and the like...

cheers

Jules