DimensionX

Only if you switch the screen off then you can't see your rainbows . That's actually not true. When you switch off the screen everything is the color in COLBK. Change that on the fly and you have wall-to-wall RAINBOWS!! I have never argued about the speed of A8, just the main processor. And A8's is faster clocked. Swedish computer ABC 80 was quite fast too, for it's time. Check the benchmarks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABC_80

I think they can also. If YOU choose to read "POKEY has 4 channels, SID has 3, to get greater accuracy you need to combine them to get 16 bit channels" as 3 is more than 4 then either you're worse at maths than you seem to think Americans are OR you're trolling. If you take it out of context (as you obviously wish to do) and just read the "you really only have 2 channels" with a smiley wink, as being my entire stance on the matter then you're purposefully ignoring the rest of the post and taking something out of context to use as an attack. *edit* Most of the above Always link to the posting that you quote, is one thing i have learned trough the years as a member in different forums. When i said that Pokey had 4 channels and Sid 3, i meant physical channels, no matter what bit. But i also said that in my posting. Please stop pissing about. You posted your big list of I'm so clever and condescending, here is what I've learned so far, in that list you put "SID has more channels because they're 16 bit". I asked you to show where someone said EXACTLY that because ONLY saying EXACTLY that would mean that was what they thought to be fact. You've failed to do so, linked to a post where it doesn't say that, if you've missunderstood it to mean that, your fault not mine. If you read further posts I go on to point out that there are ways you don't need to have 16 bit accuracy as some of the notes are in tune anyway, you ignore all that too. Now I've shown you're talking out your arse again it's reverted to YOU (as in DimensionX) said, not someone else said SID had more. Troll. I think that people can judge that by themselves by reading your and my postings. You also said that SID could produce any sound. And i told you that Sid couldn't. Use the link and judge for yourself. You also said that some people belived that Sid was good just for bass sounds and that i haven't listen to more then 20% of my Sid tunes to be able to judge the sound of Sid. Even if i have over 100.000 sid tunes. When are you going to admit something Pete? Instead of calling people for trolls?

My first reply after you entered this discussion :- http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic/142211-commodore-64-vs-atari-800-xl/page__view__findpost__p__1994995 Was because the discussion was becoming a subjective comparison. Subjective comparisons are not based on facts. They are based on personal preferences and feelings. Programmers write games based on the facts they know about the machine at hand. If they uncover new facts or different tricks they are exploited too. Except in this thread apparently . Okey, we met a bit earlier. I remember that you posted a joke and i said soemthing like, Aaah, someone with humour. Your next reply wasn't especially nice. And i agree that a discussion like my own was very subjektive and had little to do with programming. See?

That's not true, sorry. That is precisely the issue over time. Just show me something that i have said, that was wrong, and i will admit that i was wrong in 1 sec. I'm not afraid at all to admit when i'm wrong. Try and see for yourself. That means that you are wrong, are you going to admit it then?

I think they can also. If YOU choose to read "POKEY has 4 channels, SID has 3, to get greater accuracy you need to combine them to get 16 bit channels" as 3 is more than 4 then either you're worse at maths than you seem to think Americans are OR you're trolling. If you take it out of context (as you obviously wish to do) and just read the "you really only have 2 channels" with a smiley wink, as being my entire stance on the matter then you're purposefully ignoring the rest of the post and taking something out of context to use as an attack. *edit* Most of the above Always link to the posting that you quote, is one thing i have learned trough the years as a member in different forums. When i said that Pokey had 4 channels and Sid 3, i meant physical channels, no matter what bit. But i also said that in my posting.

Just because you can't understand what we are telling you doesn't make us wrong. It's persons like you i have a hard time to stand. Why is that? Is it the claim of lack of understanding that gets you? Well, there is a difference between ignorance and stupidity. Ignorance is something fixable. People learn stuff, and it's fixed!! Being stupid isn't so fixable, because people have to learn to be smarter, then learn stuff. That's tough. Often this is confused too. Somebody says another person doesn't know those things required to reach an understanding. That's really just ignorance. No harm no foul there. If the person, who doesn't know what they need to to carry the conversation properly confuses that with stupid, then they get pissed off, thinking they aren't stupid at all. Throughout this discussion, it's clear that you don't know some of those things needed to validate the statements you make. Remember that list I posted? Well, that's what happens when a person doesn't accept that. The fix is to learn some things, and then the whole affair goes away. This is simple, human, and not a cause for shame or anger. If you want to lay claim to one number being bigger than the other one, great!! But saying that has as much impact as a sticker placed on the computer that says, "Better" does... without some technical qualification, which has been at issue the entire time you've shared time with us here. No, that's not what i mean, but i think that pointless attacks is very unessessary. Even his first reply was an attack. Then i paid back by calling him old. My first reply to him was both nice and polite. Belive me, i'm the first one to admit when i'm wrong.

You've even just quoted the VERY important part of his reply. If you don't understand it, get out of the thread, DO NOT accuse people of lying or being wrong. Pete says... >> on POKEY you have to combine 2 channels to form one 16 bit one, therefore to get 16 bit accurate (ie, in tune, something quite important with music) notes you really only have 2 channels << http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic/142211-commodore-64-vs-atari-800-xl/page__view__findpost__p__1997596 I linked to TMR's posting. You can read the whole posting. And A8's processor is NOT about 75% faster. And i link to your posting as well. Well, i'm outta here anyway, because you can't be wrong. I asked you to post where someone had said EXACTLY what you said they had, once again you post things that DO NOT say that and because you choose to misunderstand the explanation (that I and others have wasted our time trying to explain to you) you try to use it as proof that in fact it's you that knows the answers to everything. It's nothing more than trolling still. I link to the posting. Then everyone can read the whole posting plus the other that belongs to it. Yes and if they have any technical knowledge at all (everyone here apart from you obviously) they'll say that what I say is 100% true and that nowhere does it say SID has more channels but in fact does say POKEY has 4 SID has 3. The fact that you'll use your troll tactic of purposefully misunderstanding what has been said in a technical discussion just so you can try to gain the high ground means nothing to anyone apart from yourself. I think that people can both read and judge that by themselves. By using the link to the actual posting. And i don't call you troll either.

If a car goes at 80 miles and hour it's not almost going at 100 miles an hour. The numbers we're discussing are in MHz so the difference looks small, but when you understand what they actually mean the difference is far more pronounced. Well, i understand very well what you mean. And you know better then me the speed of A8 and C64. I'll remind you for the umpteenth time that you are in the PROGRAMMERS FORUM arguing with PROGRAMMERS. We deal in facts not fantasy and wishes. If you don't understand something, say so, its not held against you. Continually going on and on when your are talking tripe isn't doing you any favours. And that's why.

Yes i did. So now you can stop saying it's "almost twice as fast" because it isn't; 79.75% or thereabouts higher is quite a distance from being 100% higher. i never tried to hide anything. i made an honest miscalculation and have now corrected it, but the original points both still stand. 78% is almost twice as fast. But if A8 is 78% faster or 78% slower, i don't know. Then i'm at least honest.

You've even just quoted the VERY important part of his reply. If you don't understand it, get out of the thread, DO NOT accuse people of lying or being wrong. Pete says... >> on POKEY you have to combine 2 channels to form one 16 bit one, therefore to get 16 bit accurate (ie, in tune, something quite important with music) notes you really only have 2 channels << http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic/142211-commodore-64-vs-atari-800-xl/page__view__findpost__p__1997596 I linked to TMR's posting. You can read the whole posting. And A8's processor is NOT about 75% faster. And i link to your posting as well. Well, i'm outta here anyway, because you can't be wrong. I asked you to post where someone had said EXACTLY what you said they had, once again you post things that DO NOT say that and because you choose to misunderstand the explanation (that I and others have wasted our time trying to explain to you) you try to use it as proof that in fact it's you that knows the answers to everything. It's nothing more than trolling still. I link to the posting. Then everyone can read the whole posting plus the other that belongs to it.

Just because you can't understand what we are telling you doesn't make us wrong. It's persons like you i have a hard time to stand.

Yes, i miscalculated. It's a shade under 80% rather than 75% but the point still stands since 80% is quite a distance from 100%. And you've miscalculated far more than i did: 1.77 - 0.985 = 0.785. Yes i did. You see, i'm not the one who's trying to hide that i was wrong. And you neither i see, thumbs up.

You've even just quoted the VERY important part of his reply. If you don't understand it, get out of the thread, DO NOT accuse people of lying or being wrong. Pete says... >> on POKEY you have to combine 2 channels to form one 16 bit one, therefore to get 16 bit accurate (ie, in tune, something quite important with music) notes you really only have 2 channels << http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic/142211-commodore-64-vs-atari-800-xl/page__view__findpost__p__1997596 I linked to TMR's posting. You can read the whole posting. And A8's processor is NOT about 75% faster. And i link to your posting as well. Well, i'm outta here anyway, because you can't be wrong.

Talking to yourself as well now then? Ok, let's try another one from your list.. "SID has more channels because they're 16bit" As with the MHZ please show us where someone said EXACTLY that. Ok, let's get things straight I said... >> Atari's main processor was almost twice as fast as the main processor in C64. << TMR answered >> On paper it's about 75% faster (which isn't "almost twice" really) but anyone who has tried to program on both knows that in practice it's more like 50% or less depending on the screen mode in use. << WRONG The PAL version is 0.93 Mhz faster That's NOT 75% C64 PAL - 0.985 MHz Atari PAL - 1.78 Mhz http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic/142211-commodore-64-vs-atari-800-xl/page__view__findpost__p__1994968

No it isn't! If the CPU is halted in a cycle stealing DMA system then the CPU isn't doing anything. It has to release the address and data buses for another I/O device to use for a period of time. If the CPU is halted it isn't doing anything and it is effectively running at 0MHz for the time that the I/O device has the address and data bus. Are you by any chance talking A8 I'm talking just the processor itself, and the Mhz of it. Nothing else. And you're wrong. Now you can discuss this yourself, i'm well aware of that i was right anyway.

I really see no point in to discuss with people who can't be wrong.

Did TMR say "no it isn't", or did he say, "no it isn't, because..", there's a massive difference when you're basically accusing people of lying. If it's the latter then you've got no basis to do so and are just trying to cause an argument (as you obviously were with the rest of the crap you posted it in the middle of). Yes, he said it wasn't because...etc etc Then i told him that the Mhz will always be the same anyway, and the fact is that A8 has an almost twice as fast CPU because it's faster clocked. So nobody actually JUST said what you claim they did, they qualified it with DMA etc etc. So why do you post that in a ridiculous list of "what I've learned in this thread" as if all the things listed are lies or otherwise somehow false. Still, the Mhz is the same. Yes, i said that the processor, not A8. Was almost twice as fast, TMR said it wasn't. That's no lie. He meant A8, i meant the processor, nothing else.

Did TMR say "no it isn't", or did he say, "no it isn't, because..", there's a massive difference when you're basically accusing people of lying. If it's the latter then you've got no basis to do so and are just trying to cause an argument (as you obviously were with the rest of the crap you posted it in the middle of). Yes, he said it wasn't because...etc etc Then i told him that the Mhz will always be the same anyway, and the fact is that A8 has an almost twice as fast CPU because it's faster clocked. ST had bit faster clocked 68000 then Amiga too. But lacked Amigas support chips.

Yes, no wonder... The problem you have, is failure to really understand the computer! Rather than get pissed over it, projecting that onto those of us that do, why not enjoy learning something about the cool old machines? Processors are processors, and they have clocks. The processor in the A8 and C64, is the same damn processor. They have no inherent advantage over one another, as far as how much they can get done over time. Read it again: No difference at all. The difference between the two machines is the system clock. An Atari runs a faster system clock than the C64. So, if we have the two machines doing nothing but computing, the Atari will get more computing done per unit of time. That's seeing the blank, one color screen, while the computer does math, or something like that. Know anybody out there doing that kind of thing? Of course not! That's no fun, and we've got much faster computers for computing things, meaning the only practical comparison is with the graphics and sound turned on, and so that means it's not possible to compare the two machines, without considering the WHOLE MACHINE, not just the clock. I'm well aware of that. But if we only look at the Mhz of the processors, then A8's processor is "almost twice as fast?" TMR said it wasn't and i answered the Mhz is still the same no matter what programming or hardware we use. 1.78 Mhz processor will always be a 1.78 Mhz processor. That was the whole point. If A8 is faster or slower is something completly different.

Can you at least read my postings? I never said that A8 was almost twice as fast, just the processor No wonder that i leave this thread.

Not if you have cycle stealing DMA in operation. What's the point? You don't even know what DMA is because you are NOT A PROGRAMMER arguing with PROGRAMMERS in the PROGRAMMERS FORUM. It's still the same processor no matter what programming or support chips. C64 PAL - 0.985 MHz Atari PAL - 1.78 Mhz And the fact is that 1.78 Mhz is almost twice as fast.

And did anyone actually say that? Flat out 1.77/8 isn't nearly 2x 0.98? OR, did they say something about DMA etc? The fact is you're in a programming thread (in case that didn't sink in yet) and WE all know the score with this stuff, some of the A8 guys (I'm not QUITE there yet) could off the top of their heads tell you EXACTLY how many cycles are free for the CPU on each scanline of each mode depending on DMA modes for PMGs etc. Just because you don't understand is no need to think everyone else is lying and then try to get out of it by saying the "processor itself" because that would mean someone (an American no doubt) cant divide 1.78 by 1. *edit* for the "and that was my point" addition... ..because it WASN'T your POINT was it? You just stuck it in the middle of a load of stuff you'd made up from words from other people's posts saying none of the coders here know what they're talking about because they said....."your list" Please forget programming. What's the Mhz? C64 PAL - 0.985 MHz Atari PAL - 1.78 Mhz That's it, no matter what you say.

It does change - ANTIC, GTIA and timing info A stopped CPU is the same as 0 MHz, so the average MHz is less than the 1.7MHz Oh no. Forget everything else, just concentrate on the Mhz on the processor itself. The "processor itself" "by itself" is almost twice as fast as the one in C64. And that was my point. That's why i find it totally meaningless to post in this thread.

That, of course, is utter garbage because even if a despicable C64 coder like me (one who has, incidentally, written, completed and released three more Atari 8-bit games than you have) were to lie and post false information about the Atari 8-bit as you're accusing us of, one of the Atari 8-bit programmers like Rybags or Bryan who knows the hardware very well indeed would correct that information. But they're correcting what you're saying. Yeah, A8's processor isn't "almost twice as fast". I think that the Mhz will change when i'm a programmer. Nuff said. Have a good day.

Still showing your ignorance here as firstly the "crap" part of what you posted above is what YOU made from a bunch of FACTS other people posted. Some of the ones you posted are actually correct, things like "SID has more channels because they're 16 bit" was NEVER said by ANYONE. Therefore you are a liar once again. Let's see how you like it.. DimensionX, Angry synaesthetic who thinks all Americans are dumb and can't count, thinks atari 800 is better than EVERY other computer, will quite happily threaten other forum members for perceived slights and promise retaliation. Anything dithered is ugly UNLESS it's on the A8. Anything without a rainbow is ugly. Pokey has 5 channels because you can combine 2 to make a bass and still have 3 left. Shall I go on? Then you call me a liar? I think it speaks for itself. To all readers. Just read the thread to see who's lying and who's not. LMAO don't you get it? I've posted a load of things taken out of context or things that you say were misunderstandings and turned it into a post making you look like the worlds biggest ass. which is EXACTLY what you did. If you want to see who is the liar just go back to an earlier post of mine that you conveniently avoided replying to where I posted 2 quotes from you. One where you STATE you think the A8 is a BETTER computer than the C64 after a whole night of attacking me (the other quote) for saying I PREFER the C64 whilst you were high and mighty proclaiming you didn't think one was better than the other. THAT is lying. The best thing is to read the whole thread. Good luck doing that. Now i'm off.