You say 64bit learning ECU, prove it.
05-12-2006 | 01:36 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 237
From: Kentucky
You say 64bit learning ECU, prove it.
All I hear is how the ecu in what is close to the cheapest car on the market is some advanced 64 bit computing engine that will shaft you on the power any mod you put on will produce.
Put me in my place, shove it in my face and rub it in, I want PROOF of this. Not just "A guy told me" or "A tech at the dealer told me" I want a toyota document, a picture of the processor with a silkscreen of it's origin and the manufacurers papers that state that model processor is 64 bit capable, anything to PROVE this.
I think it's BS, so prove me wrong, PLEASE.
Put me in my place, shove it in my face and rub it in, I want PROOF of this. Not just "A guy told me" or "A tech at the dealer told me" I want a toyota document, a picture of the processor with a silkscreen of it's origin and the manufacurers papers that state that model processor is 64 bit capable, anything to PROVE this.
I think it's BS, so prove me wrong, PLEASE.
05-12-2006 | 02:38 AM
#2
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,270
From: Lost in Tranquility
BoogieQ, you always come up with some of the best things i read on SL. You don't just ask "ahhh what exhaust should I get?". You are determind to figure this little engine that hopefully can... and could, out aren't you. Good, we need more people out there who are willing to push the envolope to figure the truth out about them and what they can do. 
But what make's you think that the ECU's are not what they say they are?
Obviously they are smart enough to learn, how we drive.
What do you think they are?
Cause i think we all have come to realize, that these ECU's are one of our biggest road blocks in overall modding for HP.
Im very intersted in hearing some of your thoughts on the why and whats of the ECU.
But what make's you think that the ECU's are not what they say they are?
Obviously they are smart enough to learn, how we drive.
What do you think they are?
Cause i think we all have come to realize, that these ECU's are one of our biggest road blocks in overall modding for HP.
Im very intersted in hearing some of your thoughts on the why and whats of the ECU.
05-12-2006 | 01:43 PM
#3
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 398
From: Asoko ni iru
64-bit is hardly advanced. The first 64-bit CPU came out in 1991.
So, if part of you argument is the fact that such a highly advanced CPU would not be fitted into such a conservative car, you're making an incorrect assumption.
* 1991: MIPS Technologies produced the first 64-bit CPU, as the third revision of their MIPS RISC architecture, the R4000. The CPU was commercially available in 1991 and used in SGI graphics workstations starting with the Crimson, running the 64-bit version of the IRIX operating system.
* 1992: Digital Equipment Corporation introduced the DEC Alpha architecture which was born from the PRISM project.
* 1994: Intel announced plans for the 64-bit IA-64 architecture (jointly developed with HP) as a successor to its 32-bit IA-32 processors. A 1998-1999 launch date was targeted.
* 1995: Fujitsu-owned HAL Computer Systems launched workstations based on a 64-bit CPU, HAL's independently designed first generation SPARC64. IBM released 64-bit AS/400 systems, with the upgrade able to convert the operating system, database and applications.
* 1996: Sun and HP released their 64-bit processors, the UltraSPARC and the PA-8000. Sun Solaris, IRIX, and other variants of Unix continued to be common 64-bit operating systems.
* 1997: IBM released their RS64 full 64-bit PowerPC processors.
* 1998: IBM released their POWER3 full 64-bit PowerPC/POWER processors.
* 1999: Intel released the instruction set for the IA-64 architecture. First public disclosure of AMD's set of 64-bit extensions to IA-32 called x86-64.
* 2000: IBM shipped its first 64-bit mainframe, the zSeries z900, and its new z/OS operating system — culminating history's biggest 64-bit processor development investment and instantly wiping out 31-bit plug-compatible competitors Fujitsu/Amdahl and Hitachi. 64-bit Linux on zSeries followed almost immediately.
* 2001: Intel finally shipped its 64-bit processor line, now branded Itanium, targeting high-end servers. It fails to meet expectations due to the repeated delays getting IA-64 to market, and becomes a flop. Linux was the first operating system to run on the processor at its release.
* 2002: Intel introduced the Itanium 2 as a successor to the Itanium.
* 2003: AMD brought out its 64-bit Opteron and Athlon 64 processor lines. Apple also shipped 64-bit PowerPC chips courtesy of IBM, along with an update to its Mac OS X operating system. Several Linux distributions released with support for x86-64. Microsoft announced that it would create a version of its Windows operating system for the AMD chips. Intel maintained that its Itanium chips would remain its only 64-bit processors.
* 2004: Intel, reacting to the market success of AMD, admitted it had been developing a clone of the x86-64 extensions, which it calls EM64T. Updated versions of its Xeon and Pentium 4 processor families supporting the new instructions were shipped.
* 2005: In March, Intel announced that their first dual-core processors will ship in the second quarter 2005 with the release of the Pentium Extreme Edition 840 and the new Pentium D chips. Dual-core Itanium 2 processors will follow in the fourth quarter.
* 2005: On April 30, Microsoft publicly released Windows XP Professional x64 Edition for x86-64 processors.
* 2005: In May, AMD pre-released its dual-core desktop processor family called Athlon 64 X2. Athlon 64 X2 (Toledo) processors feature two cores with 1MB of L2 cache memory per core and consist of about 233.2 million transistors. They are 199 mm² large.
* 2005: In July, IBM announced its new dual-core 64-bit PowerPC 970MP (codenamed Antares).
* 1992: Digital Equipment Corporation introduced the DEC Alpha architecture which was born from the PRISM project.
* 1994: Intel announced plans for the 64-bit IA-64 architecture (jointly developed with HP) as a successor to its 32-bit IA-32 processors. A 1998-1999 launch date was targeted.
* 1995: Fujitsu-owned HAL Computer Systems launched workstations based on a 64-bit CPU, HAL's independently designed first generation SPARC64. IBM released 64-bit AS/400 systems, with the upgrade able to convert the operating system, database and applications.
* 1996: Sun and HP released their 64-bit processors, the UltraSPARC and the PA-8000. Sun Solaris, IRIX, and other variants of Unix continued to be common 64-bit operating systems.
* 1997: IBM released their RS64 full 64-bit PowerPC processors.
* 1998: IBM released their POWER3 full 64-bit PowerPC/POWER processors.
* 1999: Intel released the instruction set for the IA-64 architecture. First public disclosure of AMD's set of 64-bit extensions to IA-32 called x86-64.
* 2000: IBM shipped its first 64-bit mainframe, the zSeries z900, and its new z/OS operating system — culminating history's biggest 64-bit processor development investment and instantly wiping out 31-bit plug-compatible competitors Fujitsu/Amdahl and Hitachi. 64-bit Linux on zSeries followed almost immediately.
* 2001: Intel finally shipped its 64-bit processor line, now branded Itanium, targeting high-end servers. It fails to meet expectations due to the repeated delays getting IA-64 to market, and becomes a flop. Linux was the first operating system to run on the processor at its release.
* 2002: Intel introduced the Itanium 2 as a successor to the Itanium.
* 2003: AMD brought out its 64-bit Opteron and Athlon 64 processor lines. Apple also shipped 64-bit PowerPC chips courtesy of IBM, along with an update to its Mac OS X operating system. Several Linux distributions released with support for x86-64. Microsoft announced that it would create a version of its Windows operating system for the AMD chips. Intel maintained that its Itanium chips would remain its only 64-bit processors.
* 2004: Intel, reacting to the market success of AMD, admitted it had been developing a clone of the x86-64 extensions, which it calls EM64T. Updated versions of its Xeon and Pentium 4 processor families supporting the new instructions were shipped.
* 2005: In March, Intel announced that their first dual-core processors will ship in the second quarter 2005 with the release of the Pentium Extreme Edition 840 and the new Pentium D chips. Dual-core Itanium 2 processors will follow in the fourth quarter.
* 2005: On April 30, Microsoft publicly released Windows XP Professional x64 Edition for x86-64 processors.
* 2005: In May, AMD pre-released its dual-core desktop processor family called Athlon 64 X2. Athlon 64 X2 (Toledo) processors feature two cores with 1MB of L2 cache memory per core and consist of about 233.2 million transistors. They are 199 mm² large.
* 2005: In July, IBM announced its new dual-core 64-bit PowerPC 970MP (codenamed Antares).
05-12-2006 | 05:01 PM
#6
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 145
Re: You say 64bit learning ECU, prove it.
Try adjusting your throttle cable till it's pulled 50% @ idle. I was trying to up my idle so it wouldn't stumble but after driving around for a day the idle went from 2500 back to 750 stumbling.
Originally Posted by BoogieQ
All I hear is how the ecu in what is close to the cheapest car on the market is some advanced 64 bit computing engine that will shaft you on the power any mod you put on will produce.
Put me in my place, shove it in my face and rub it in, I want PROOF of this. Not just "A guy told me" or "A tech at the dealer told me" I want a toyota document, a picture of the processor with a silkscreen of it's origin and the manufacurers papers that state that model processor is 64 bit capable, anything to PROVE this.
I think it's BS, so prove me wrong, PLEASE.
Put me in my place, shove it in my face and rub it in, I want PROOF of this. Not just "A guy told me" or "A tech at the dealer told me" I want a toyota document, a picture of the processor with a silkscreen of it's origin and the manufacurers papers that state that model processor is 64 bit capable, anything to PROVE this.
I think it's BS, so prove me wrong, PLEASE.
05-12-2006 | 05:02 PM
#7
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 745
From: New York
I can see some of boogie's argument, I mean the echo had a what? 8-bit cpu? he's not arguing they don't exist.. just why all that processing power.
however, its probably not that expensive given the advances in fabbing these days
however, its probably not that expensive given the advances in fabbing these days
05-12-2006 | 05:07 PM
#8
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 522
From: The West Side of the LBC
I certainly hope that it's at least a 64bit processor on that bad boy.
With all the thousands, possibly millions of calculations it has to do with my crazy driving, I'd hate to think that I'm being backed up by a 32bit Playstation One.
OH Crap! Slick Roads, Must Stop! ...... loading......... Loading..... Please wait, Loading.....
With all the thousands, possibly millions of calculations it has to do with my crazy driving, I'd hate to think that I'm being backed up by a 32bit Playstation One.
OH Crap! Slick Roads, Must Stop! ...... loading......... Loading..... Please wait, Loading.....
05-12-2006 | 05:09 PM
#9
Thread Starter
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 237
From: Kentucky
But what make's you think that the ECU's are not what they say they are?
Obviously they are smart enough to learn, how we drive.
Obviously they are smart enough to learn, how we drive.
64-bit is hardly advanced. The first 64-bit CPU came out in 1991.
Also, regarding the ECU, cant its programming be cracked? I know its been done with other car comps, why not this one?
What do you think they are?
Cause i think we all have come to realize, that these ECU's are one of our biggest road blocks in overall modding for HP.
Cause i think we all have come to realize, that these ECU's are one of our biggest road blocks in overall modding for HP.
Seems most think it isn't possible in the least for a mod to have no benefit at all, or in some cases, rob you of power. Yes, it IS possible for a mod to do nothing for you at all or hurt you in some cases... because of a bad design, or a small motor not needing a larger header, etc. Everyone is so quick to blame the ECU without looking at what the ECU is actually doing. Maybe it's trying to HELP but the mod installed is of no benefit at all.
However, I could be wrong and the ECU could have torque management so thick it will kill anything you try to do. It is VERY possible for the ECU to try and limit torque output by pulling ignition timing, etc. But without more details on this mythical creature, nobody knows for sure. (until they step up and give me some proof.. I'm waiting for someone to stick it to me! Come on!)
05-12-2006 | 05:21 PM
#10
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,971
From: Tiverton, RI
Hey I designed and built a 64 bit cpu back in college in 1978 - and I didn't even realize it until my Professor pointed it out to me.
From my 06xB driving I find that it likes slow throttle changes - nothing too fast - back off on the gas before you put the clutch in also helps for a much smoother shift. There are times when the engine is really responsive and times when it boggs down and I have to back off the gas. Usually if the revs are up over 2000 rpm and light throttle use it will take more and remain crisp. Some of the lag may be from the valve timing changes - can't be sure - maybe I will tap into the control wire with an LED run to the dash and see when it blinks to adjust the valve timing.
From my 06xB driving I find that it likes slow throttle changes - nothing too fast - back off on the gas before you put the clutch in also helps for a much smoother shift. There are times when the engine is really responsive and times when it boggs down and I have to back off the gas. Usually if the revs are up over 2000 rpm and light throttle use it will take more and remain crisp. Some of the lag may be from the valve timing changes - can't be sure - maybe I will tap into the control wire with an LED run to the dash and see when it blinks to adjust the valve timing.
05-12-2006 | 05:30 PM
#11
Thread Starter
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 237
From: Kentucky
Try adjusting your throttle cable till it's pulled 50% @ idle. I was trying to up my idle so it wouldn't stumble but after driving around for a day the idle went from 2500 back to 750 stumbling.
Again, I'm not shooting down the idea of a 64bit ECU, it's very possible and probably within the realm of cost effective enough to use one.. just seems odd that this cheap little car would get such a boost in computing power from factory controled V6 supercharged engines still running 32bit wide programming and running just fine.
My guess is that it isn't 'smart' it's simply programmed for a whole hell of a lot of torque management. As an example, a 97'-03' Grand Prix GTP (3.8L Supercharged) has a torque managment program that pulls roughly 20% power on shifts and in other situations to prolong transmission life. When going to the 04+ models, same engine, new supercharger revision, same basic car, they had an ECU upgrade to a faster processor and issued some 45% reduction on shifts and in other areas to prolong transmission life. That doesn't mean the ECU is any smarter per se, but more strict in it's limitation of power through shifts, etc.
If this is the case in our ECU, we need to gain access to the programming to change it. This isn't possible at this time, obviously. Technology exists to perhaps make it possible, but I don't know if anyone is willing to try. Thus, we need to find out what the ECU can actually do to hinder us, and find a way around it, or at least know what our cars are doing FOR REAL instead of offhand speculation (which I am also guilty of as I have not logged realtime output of the ECU yet.)
I still find it funny that I have asked maybe 15 times on here of people that know a bunch and have turbo'd , etc , what the stock Timing values in the ECU are.. nobody knows... running boosted at an unknown timing level is just asking for hurt.
Ecu's also have tables in the managment section that if you start having detonation from too much boost, there is a time limit that the ECU has set in it as to how fast to start adding timing back until knock occurs again. This value can be in tenths of a second such as you hit a burst of knock, timing goes to 5, then up to 6 then to 7, etc as fast as the table allows. If it's set in longer incriments, you get the idea.
I think this year will mark some REAL GOOD progress for these cars, as well as the xA's. Hopefully we can get some good hard data into the community to benefit us all.
05-12-2006 | 05:35 PM
#12
Thread Starter
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 237
From: Kentucky
From my 06xB driving I find that it likes slow throttle changes - nothing too fast - back off on the gas before you put the clutch in also helps for a much smoother shift. There are times when the engine is really responsive and times when it boggs down and I have to back off the gas. Usually if the revs are up over 2000 rpm and light throttle use it will take more and remain crisp. Some of the lag may be from the valve timing changes - can't be sure - maybe I will tap into the control wire with an LED run to the dash and see when it blinks to adjust the valve timing.
Not to mention the engine is a turd with little HP and Torque. Because of it's low output and N/A setup it is going to show drastic changes according to weather. if you get a real low pressure front run through you will lose a good amount of power output. Weather plays a big role in how a car performs. On a cold night it will feel like you gained HP, on a hot midday afternoon, it will feel weak... and even weaker in bumper to bumper traffic on a hot low pressure day. *shrug*
As for the shifting, you can free rev it forever after you push the clutch in, let the rpms fall and drop the clutch at the right RPM level per speed and gear you are using and you won't feel a thing. It's all timing of the release to rpm's to speed being travled at, not the ECU.
Due to pittly power output, there is little difference between 50% and 100% throttle in any gear below 3,000-3,500rpm... however this is mostly opinion as well.
05-12-2006 | 07:39 PM
#13
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 464
From: Denver, Co
BoogieQ has a point- I've seen no real evidence that the ECU actually "learns" from my driving. OTOH, it seems to me that it's just doing what it's supposed to do- using the feedback from the various sensors to very closely regulate injection timing and duration, ignition timing and cam timing. If it builds an internal table from feedback/ experience for that stuff, then it's just more able to do it's job. If you want to to things differently, then it'll need to be reprogrammed or have some device to alter the feedback signals installed- the Greddy emanage does just that...
And it's quite possible for it to control the acceleration rate, for example, although there's no real proof that it does. I work on light rail vehicles with truly ancient 16 bit processors that do exactly that, and also control slipslide in both acceleration and dynamic braking... and that's with an 8086 processor... lots of other stuff simultaneously, as well.
Referencing the engine as a "Turd" is uncalled for, however. I rather suspect that the reason mods don't necessarily do much is that it's pretty highly tuned in the first place, and that the only way you'll get much more out of it (without serious work) is to cause the emissions to go to hell, something the computer won't allow...
Show me another normally aspirated 1500cc emissions legal engine with significantly more power, and we can talk, OK? Yeh, sure, wilder camshafts will give more high end power, but not without paying a price in driveability and low end torque... not to mention fuel economy.
And it's quite possible for it to control the acceleration rate, for example, although there's no real proof that it does. I work on light rail vehicles with truly ancient 16 bit processors that do exactly that, and also control slipslide in both acceleration and dynamic braking... and that's with an 8086 processor... lots of other stuff simultaneously, as well.
Referencing the engine as a "Turd" is uncalled for, however. I rather suspect that the reason mods don't necessarily do much is that it's pretty highly tuned in the first place, and that the only way you'll get much more out of it (without serious work) is to cause the emissions to go to hell, something the computer won't allow...
Show me another normally aspirated 1500cc emissions legal engine with significantly more power, and we can talk, OK? Yeh, sure, wilder camshafts will give more high end power, but not without paying a price in driveability and low end torque... not to mention fuel economy.
05-12-2006 | 08:45 PM
#14
Thread Starter
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 237
From: Kentucky
Referencing the engine as a "Turd" is uncalled for, however.
While it's peppy for a 1.5L engine, it is just rather slow unless you spin it to high RPM's all the time. I'm used to fast cars, so it's taking some getting used to. By calling it a turd I wasn't saying it's a horrible motor, it's just, weak in comparison.. but for what it is, it's doing a good job.
It will never be a giant N/A monster unless it is built up to spin to 10,000rpm's with wild cams.
Bewst is the key, and the ECU might be the keymaster.. but back on topic.. I wana see the proof of the claims!
05-12-2006 | 09:55 PM
#16
Senior Member
SL Member
Scion Evolution
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,416
From: Club Daily Driven
Originally Posted by SSM_tC
I certainly hope that it's at least a 64bit processor on that bad boy.
With all the thousands, possibly millions of calculations it has to do with my crazy driving, I'd hate to think that I'm being backed up by a 32bit Playstation One.
OH Crap! Slick Roads, Must Stop! ...... loading......... Loading..... Please wait, Loading.....
With all the thousands, possibly millions of calculations it has to do with my crazy driving, I'd hate to think that I'm being backed up by a 32bit Playstation One.
OH Crap! Slick Roads, Must Stop! ...... loading......... Loading..... Please wait, Loading.....
I'd like to think we have more then a PS one in our cars. . . I have a scan tool two of them, one is a snapon scanner, it's old but it'l do generic obd2 and I have a new OTC scanner, what should I look for to find out if it's a 64 bit computer? or am I just getting in over my head? let me know maybe we can put this thing to bed. 
05-12-2006 | 11:00 PM
#17
Member
SL Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 66
hey how do you think I feel, I went from driving a car that spins over 11,500rpms on the street till my sponsors told me to stop driving it on the street or else type thing. oh and it did crank out what my profile message says and some. will be racing in the pro modified fwd class once I can pass safty inspection!!! need 5k in safty equipment. any body want to sponsor my race car!!! 
05-12-2006 | 11:04 PM
#18
Member
SL Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 66
oh I will try and find out if it is 64bit, but I would not doubt that it isn't because a lot of the newer cars are going to start running 64bit and higher, plus the car is what people are calling obd3 the vehicle has the same technology that is in the new engine control systems just not labled obd3 yet.
05-13-2006 | 02:07 AM
#19
Thread Starter
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 237
From: Kentucky
A scan tool will probably not tell you what kind of code and processor power the unit is running off of.
You have to understand, a PS1 ran MANY more computations per second than a car ECU has to. Heck, they only needed 2 or 3 P4 processors in the VW Toureg that won the Darpa challange and that car processed GPS waypoints, Laser scan readouts, visual camera inputs, AND had to drive the car.
Comparing a gaming system or a desktop computer to a cars control systems is a bit overkill. The data bus systems are beefy in a car to receive constant inputs from various locations, but the computations are not as extreme. All it sees is "IF THIS, ADJUST THAT" in basic terms.
The main point of this post was to try and get some hard information about the ECU it'self, not so much to discount it and diss it's abilities. I still hope some good info comes to light that can help us move forward but I'm not holding my breath
You have to understand, a PS1 ran MANY more computations per second than a car ECU has to. Heck, they only needed 2 or 3 P4 processors in the VW Toureg that won the Darpa challange and that car processed GPS waypoints, Laser scan readouts, visual camera inputs, AND had to drive the car.
Comparing a gaming system or a desktop computer to a cars control systems is a bit overkill. The data bus systems are beefy in a car to receive constant inputs from various locations, but the computations are not as extreme. All it sees is "IF THIS, ADJUST THAT" in basic terms.
The main point of this post was to try and get some hard information about the ECU it'self, not so much to discount it and diss it's abilities. I still hope some good info comes to light that can help us move forward but I'm not holding my breath
05-13-2006 | 03:23 AM
#20
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,971
From: Tiverton, RI
power output
Originally Posted by BoogieQ
Not to mention the engine is a turd with little HP and Torque. Because of it's low output and N/A setup it is going to show drastic changes according to weather.
Due to pittly power output, there is little difference between 50% and 100% throttle in any gear below 3,000-3,500rpm... however this is mostly opinion as well.
Due to pittly power output, there is little difference between 50% and 100% throttle in any gear below 3,000-3,500rpm... however this is mostly opinion as well.