The article describes the 68030 as a 68020 with an added MMU.
One of my Amigas a while back had a 68EC030, which is described as a 68030 without the MMU. So, I'm wondering what the difference really is between the 68EC030 and the 68020.
One of my Amigas a while back had a 68EC030, which is described as a 68030 without the MMU. So, I'm wondering what the difference really is between the 68EC030 and the 68020.
The EC chips, at least at the beginning, had a defective MMU that was disabled and sold cheaper than a 'full' chip. Fine for the Amiga OS, or embedded stuff. I don't know if they ever made them without the MMU at all. The EC nomenclature extended to the 68040 and 68060, where it meant "no MMU or FPU", and added the LC nomenclature which means "MMU, but no FPU".
Except that by the time the 68020 came out Unix and C were king and C's dirty hack solution to modularity (#include .h files) was now considered good enough. Intel and National kept full backwards compatibility (to this day, in the case of Intel) but Motorola quietly dropped the stuff from the 68030.