Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

68 Excellent

About Guspaz

  • Rank
    Chopper Commander

Recent Profile Visitors

1,497 profile views
  1. I'm sure a bunch of the early home computers would work considering most of them have similar hardware to consoles that are already implemented. Apple Macintosh and Sharp X68000 and Commodore Amiga? That's the Genesis CPU. Commodore 64 and Apple II? That's the NES CPU. ZX Spectrum? That's the Master System CPU. Apple IIGS? That's the SNES CPU. Input isn't a problem, it has USB input. (not all of those are exact matches, some of them are off-brand or derivative CPUs, I'm talking about scale and not exact matches).
  2. I don't think they've confirmed that, and the HDMI 2.0 support is via an Intel example IP core, not inherent to the FPGA itself.
  3. Sure, they may not like it, but they do it anyway. It's silly to boycott development for Analogue's platform because the platform itself is closed source when the existing mister platform is just as closed.
  4. Essentially all open source code runs on closed-source hardware, the vast majority of them relying on closed-source firmware blobs. I don't see how the DE-10 Nano is any different in that regard than the Analogue Pocket.
  5. Umm, he kind of *hired* Kevtris. Like, as an employee. That's what companies normally do. You hire somebody, they do work for you, your company owns that work. Because you paid them to do it.
  6. Even if it were the exact same FPGA, you'd need to port the cores because the pinout wouldn't be identical, even more so with a similar but smaller FPGA. So you'd need to port the cores no matter what. That's also assuming the mister cores don't rely on anything running on the ARM CPUs that FPGA has onboard. FPGAs... don't expect them to come down in price much. They're not like CPUs. $400-500 was the cost to build the stuffed board, I believe, not the cost to build a polished console out of it, with a profit margin on top of that. I think Analogue has realized that staying under $200 leads to a great deal more revenue due to much higher unit sales. I don't think they'd put out a $299 console.
  7. Never going to happen. The FPGA alone in the MiSTer costs $246 USD, let alone the rest of the cost of a console. People are building the MiSTer out of dev boards that are sold at a huge loss in hopes of driving business. Kevtris said the actual cost of the DE-10 Nano would be something like $400-500 if you tried to build one, and that's not even considering a profit margin selling the thing. Analogue would not sell very many consoles if they charged $600-700 for it.
  8. Super Nt announcement: October 16th, 2017 Mega Sg announcement: October 16th, 2018 Pocket announcement: October 16th, 2019 Is it really that hard to predict when they'll announce the Analogue 8? Though they did tease additional announcements in the near-future, so who knows.
  9. If the jailbreak firmware supports the SNES and Genesis directly, and the third-party cores cover some of the 8-bit stuff, I'd be happy. I'm not sure about the business case for Analogue including any SNES or Genesis functionality directly, though.
  10. The Cyclone V in the Super Nt, Mega Sg, and Pocket, have 49k LE. The only Cyclone 10 chips that seem to make sense from a size/power/cost perspective are the low power ones, and considering the price difference between the 49k Cyclone V and the next step up (77k), only the 6K and 15K LE models would seem to make financial sense... Otherwise they might as well have just used the larger Cyclone V. It sounds like Analogue is only giving developers access to the Cyclone 10, and that it's going to be much smaller/less capable than the Cyclone V, so my speculation is that you're not going to be able to port anything but basic 8-bit cores to the Pocket, even if the primary FPGA is capable of handling 16-bit consoles. I could be totally off-base here, maybe they didn't go with a larger Cyclone V because there were other limits (like IO or multipliers or something), or maybe they intend to give developers access to both FPGAs.
  11. Using a real ARM7 doesn't violate the "zero emulation" claim, though I'd agree that it's more likely they're just splitting the load between the two FPGAs.
  12. I'm curious about how the GBA is implemented. I'm guessing that either some stuff has been offloaded to the secondary FPGA, or there's an actual ARM7TDMI stuck in there.
  13. They already have a SNES core, this console will require a GB core (refined to a greater degree than the NT Mini's), and this thing will have two FPGAs, one of which should be able to handle the SNES without any issues (if it can handle the 32-bit GBA, surely it can handle the SNES). So I don't see why they couldn't do a full-blown SGB implementation, with SGB features supported.
  14. Why are you making the assumption that the dock has no power input? They clearly show the console connecting to the dock via the USB-C port, so obviously you're not going to be connecting power directly to the handheld when it's docked.
  15. One big question mark is the "second FPGA". The primary FPGA needs to be a chonky boi if it's going to support the GBA, and you'd imagine it would have no problem at all supporting the SNES and Genesis. But they've been very careful to say that the *second* FPGA is available for core developers. I can't imagine the secondary FPGA being nearly as powerful as the primary. We may end up in a situation where the primary FPGA has more than enough power to implement any 16-bit console, but developers are limited to 8-bit consoles since they only get access to a smaller FPGA.
  • Create New...