🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1058@cs.rit.edu>, pap4660%ritcv@cs.rit.edu writes:
> 
> I am considering to put a 68010 into my 1000.  The questions I have is
> what will not work.  What programs that do not use dos, use the 
> commands that are supervisor commands in the 68010.  Basically, I am 
> trying to find out if it is worth it to change.

Any speedup is so subtle, I don't think anyone can notice.  It's probably
not worth the bother.  But, for $20, I did it, and it works with most things.
The most noticable improvement was with DMCS, which can now keep the screen
updated with the music (without getting behind; if you have DMCS, you'll know
what I mean).

I suspect (and perhaps someone really knows :-) that the reason there's not
much an advantage is that most things are simply waiting for you to do
something, like, say, press a key, or depend on the Amiga hardware.  One PD
benchmark program rated my machine an "average" of 130% of a standard Amiga,
if I recall correctly.  (Clearly, the benchmark was a biased CPU test, since
in no way do things seem 30% faster.)

I've mostly found that a couple of games won't work with it. I use the 68010
without any patches or such.  I have run across decigel, a program that can
patch the system to trap the illegal instruction in case you have to run an
offensive program (but of course, this method tends to fail miserably with
games that don't allow multitasking).  Others, like Transformer (imagine!
C/A's own program [ok I know they only bought it, but still]) have to have
their object code hacked (and there's a PD program to do that too).

> 
> Thanks,
>  Patrick
> 
> Patrick Palmer              "dbx is not reality"
> uucp: !rochester!ritcv!pap4660      bitnet: pap4660@ritvaxc
> "Just librium and me and E.S.T. makes three"  -David Bowie

Gary "Why do I have a 68010?" Wolfe   ..!uunet!hite386!tlvx!sysop