Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.hardware:12069 comp.sys.m68k:2376 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!oakhill!jtr From: jtr@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Jim Reinhart) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.m68k Subject: Re: 68040 for 68030 substitution (question) Message-ID: <1991Jun13.134546.25578@oakhill.sps.mot.com> Date: 13 Jun 91 13:45:46 GMT References: <43234@cup.portal.com> Reply-To: jtr@oakhill.UUCP (Jim Reinhart) Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin, Texas Lines: 36 In article <43234@cup.portal.com> mingo@cup.portal.com (Charles Hawkins Mingo) writes: > > Let's try this again from a better machine. > >In article alanr@cecelia >media-lab.media.mit.edu (Alan Ruttenberg) writes: >> >> I was wondering if a 68040 can be substituted for a 68030 in a >> MacIIfx. I understand that the pinouts and the clock rate (40Mhz 030 >> 25Mhz 040) are different. >> >> What I am curious about is what a minimal upgrade to a 040 would >> entail. Can I buy a chip, and build a small adapter board? Or are >> there many changes that would have to be made. > > Daystar has distributed a memo explaining why substituting the 68040 >for the 68030 is harder than you might think. I'm just forwarding this, >and you should address any comments/questions to "73777.2453@compuserve.com". > Motorola categorically denies substance to Daystar performance claims attributed to Motorola and will post a thorough discussion of the erroneous and misleading data presented by Daystar. The summary of this discussion is that Daystar builds a warped set of conclusions (some are actually reasonable) based on data attributed Motorola that is WRONG. They know it is wrong as well but persist in this silly pursuit to justify not bringing a product to market and we strongly encourage anyone who reads the Daystar paper to take it with a strong grain of salt. -- Regards, Jim Reinhart Motorola Microprocessor Products Group Austin, Texas