classic battle atari 8bit vs commodore 64

[shoestring]

Actually, I've always said the exact opposite. You had to be a brilliant programmer to get anything at all out of a Commodore 64. The Basic language had zero graphics commands. I/O commands were weak and inflexible compared to the Atari. At least programming the sound chips and sprites were about the same amount of effort on the two machines.

 

Somebody above mentioned something about how the C64 could put 16 colors seamlessly on the screen. That person has never programmed a C64 or he would know that the VIC II chip breaks the screen up into regions that can display only 4 out of the sixteen available colors.

 

You can show 128 colours on the Atari onscreen simultaneously. 256 in GTIA modes 9 / 11.

 

But only 4 on 1 scansline or 5 in antic mode 4. c64 can display 16 colours per scan line. With display lists you can get more but not much is left over, as I mentioned earlier. To display a better picture on the Atari requires more memory than the 64.

 

Having the ability to display 16 colours on the same scanline makes games look very good IMO.

[fujidude]

 

 

"Filet Mignon" the NES of steak; wildly popular but a poor imitation of a real steak

 

Huh?

[emkay]

Having the ability to display 16 colours on the same scanline makes games look very good IMO.

As long as the colors were useful, you are right. 16 colors out of 4096 is great. 16 colors out of 16 is rather limited.

placing greens on a pink field, or green for skin color , isn't really nice

Most C64 bleed pinkish, just for showing the "superior" 16 colors.

Sorry, many games simply were there because, people don't want to see the truth.

Particular Archon makes me laugh hard But C64 guys swear the C64 version is good.

8 states of light and dark were indicated by the used brightness of one color. C64 shows 8 weird different colors there.

Also, Bruce Lee, the protagonist only show skin colors on the Atari. On other platforms Bruce is more an Alien, not an Asian

16 color on the screen may look nice on screenshots, but for working game engines, it is always nice to have different color arrangements, particular when they add to the gameplay.

Edited October 30, 2018 by emkay

[popmilo]

The OS and the peripheral device handling.

Agreed on peripherals. SIO port was like 20 years ahead of it's time. Such a simple tech and so expandable. Made it in 1978 and you can still push stuff through it in 2018 over wifi/bluetooth etc... Just brilliant.

Another good thing about Atari is faster cpu.

 

On the other side, some things you can do with SID and VIC chip are just impossible on Atari...

 

Imho most of people who are dissing c64 aside while comparing some games come from US and played games in early years (for c64) and late years for Atari. Europe got that 8bit wave of computers little later and had much more developed games and music.

If you wanna see what each machine can do, go to something like www.pouet.net and check out best demos for both computers:

Atari: http://www.pouet.net/prodlist.php?platform%5B0%5D=Atari+XL%2FXE&page=1&order=thumbup

C64: http://www.pouet.net/prodlist.php?order=thumbup&platform%5B%5D=Commodore+64&page=1&order=thumbup

 

Think you'll see obvious platform strengths soon. Atari has much better 3d in something like 4x4 modes, and c64 has full screen effects that will amaze you.

Example:

 

At the end I love both platforms and have them both in my room with me right now. Some months it's 800xl hooked up on crt, others it's c128. Don't you love what we can do in 2018 ?

 

ps. And nothing beats good stake on a grill

[emkay]

Edge of Disgrace. One of the C64 I really like. Not by the VIC2 , but the SID soundtrack is from that type of "more than the summary of all parts". It is a "real" Soundtrack, not just some Tune.

 

Sprites and SID "basses" , this is what the Atari never can reach. The good part is that not everything makes sense when only Sprites and basses is given for solutions

[TMR]

"Atari owners hate the C64, film at eleven!"

 

If that's all this thread plans on being... why bother? Yes, we (as in the people who lean towards other platforms) get it but restating the "discussion" again won't change anything.

 

Instead of posting, you could be creating something for your Atari instead, the chipset is a "programmable playground to be used in incredible and unexpected ways" after all so spend some time exploring. Or draw some graphics, compose music, learn to do one or more of the above, make stuff not war and show some software-powered love for your platform of choice. Sod it, make a demo about how much you hate the C64 if you really feel it's that important...

 

And with that, we now return you to your scheduled programming.

[Mclaneinc]

Sigh...Spot on me old mucker...I'm orf to play Bruce Lee II on the darn hated machine

 

Works for me!!

Edited October 30, 2018 by Mclaneinc

[Mr Robot]

 

Huh?

 

 

I meant that the Filet Mignon is an overly expensive, under flavoured, soft, crappy bit of meat that people think is the best one because it's the most expensive. As a result it has become the most popular/sought after.

 

Just like the NES vs either the C64 or the Atari800, it was the most popular, but not because it was the best.

VHS vs Betamax etc. etc.

[carlsson]

Sometimes I wonder what the world of computers would have looked like if Commodore never had existed. I can think of two major scenarios:

 

1. The Japanese would have "killed off" Texas Instruments in 1984 and taken Atari by surprise. Possibly MSX had become a world standard after all.

 

2. None of the price wars had occurred, most of the minor manufacturers had survived and customers would've to stick with buying what they could afford. Would Atari have become the prince in shining armour here, offering quality computers for a fraction of the price even without nobody forcing them to?

[emkay]

Sometimes I wonder what the world of computers would have looked like if Commodore never had existed.

PC had become faster the main standard, and 3D games would have been there a decade earlier .

[Mclaneinc]

PC had become faster the main standard, and 3D games would have been there a decade earlier .

 

I doubt that would have happened, tech would have stalled it to a big extent..An idea is great but being unable to bring it to visual reality with a real engine would have been tougher..I just think it wasn't other competition that saw the true 3D game a non starter at that point..

 

Remember I'm talking Doom or earlier tests..

[_The Doctor__]

The price war was brewing and would have erupted with other players in the mix. Not much else to say. I mean what if that mosquito wasn't eaten by that bat or was never born, and the butterfly didn't disturb the air at that moment... like what if the sky is different colors for everyone but we all learned to call it blue, or like.. maybe tasty wheat really tastes like chicken... the matrix has you!

 

The major ground breaking stuff wasn't done in that machine. It was in others. In order for tech to thrive the significant machines had distinctions. If they were not made it would change everything. I mean a YUGO was a car and a bazzilion sold or was it le car.. in any event they didn't change anything and sold a ton then were gone. They wouldn't lead to anything to change cars, just at the 64 didn't lead to anything to change computers. This is why they went with the Amiga and it's build on the ground breaking ideas that came from it's predecessor. The Amiga mattered. I would say what if were no Amiga! Much better Arguement. And the STe etc had a large impact in DTP, Music and such areas, though not my favorite... we could continue but it's all been done and pointless... a rehashed thread is still just that...

Edited October 30, 2018 by _The Doctor__

[carlsson]

For being so technically insignificant, the C64 really was remarkably successful. Though I know you could say the same, and to even greater extent, about the ZX Spectrum.

[_The Doctor__]

trollin trollin trollin doctor does the trollin'

some one should re make chase the chuck wagon and make it fun... add the music, make it a real chase...

Edited October 30, 2018 by _The Doctor__

[fujidude]

 

 

I meant that the Filet Mignon is an overly expensive, under flavoured, soft, crappy bit of meat that people think is the best one because it's the most expensive. As a result it has become the most popular/sought after.

 

Just like the NES vs either the C64 or the Atari800, it was the most popular, but not because it was the best.

VHS vs Betamax etc. etc.

 

I think it has an excellent flavor completely despite the fact that it's on the leaner side. It is also a very tender cut. I think the biggest reason it is more expensive is because there is relatively little of it provided by each animal butchered. So even if demand were the same or even a bit less than for say, Rib-eye, it would command a substantially higher price based on that smaller supply alone. Speaking of Rib-eye, I like that quite a bit as well. In fact I like a good top sirloin a fair amount too. Liver I don't like, but all the rest of the steak and roast cuts (round, bottom sirloin, etc.) I do like at least some.

Edited October 30, 2018 by fujidude

[Geister]

Don't get the impression that I don't like the C64. It's just that between the two, the C64 seems to be the Plain Jane of the two computers. It has a weaker Basic, no disk operating system to speak of, and a slow serial i/o system with very little flexibility. But once you get past that and buy some upgrades, it's a decent 6502 based PC.

 

16 colors per scan line? Yes, and the same 16 colors on the next scan line, and the next, etc. The Atari may be limited to 4 or 5 colors per scan line or reduced horizontal resolution in trade for high color resolution, but what you can do with a display list interrupt makes up for the limitations.

[Faicuai]

Don't get the impression that I don't like the C64. It's just that between the two, the C64 seems to be the Plain Jane of the two computers. It has a weaker Basic, no disk operating system to speak of, and a slow serial i/o system with very little flexibility. But once you get past that and buy some upgrades, it's a decent 6502 based PC.

 

16 colors per scan line? Yes, and the same 16 colors on the next scan line, and the next, etc. The Atari may be limited to 4 or 5 colors per scan line or reduced horizontal resolution in trade for high color resolution, but what you can do with a display list interrupt makes up for the limitations.

If that is hhe case, this means it will be impossible for the C64 to show 60fps video, like Avery's SIDE-to-6502-to-ANTIC player... and at 500 KBytes/sc of net throughput... with native chipset (no HW modifications of any kind, other than the cart.)

[shoestring]

The Atari may be limited to 4 or 5 colors per scan line or reduced horizontal resolution in trade for high color resolution, but what you can do with a display list interrupt makes up for the limitations.

 

Both machines were a compromise. The Atari has more restrictions due to lack of char colour ram.

 

If you look at the later c64 european titles. Apart from the fixed colour palette of the c64, it was a much better compromise with an excellent range of standard colours.

[TMR]

If that is hhe case, this means it will be impossible for the C64 to show 60fps video, like Avery's SIDE-to-6502-to-ANTIC player... and at 500 KBytes/sc of net throughput... with native chipset (no HW modifications of any kind, other than the cart.)

That's doing I/O through the cartridge port I think...? If that's right, 10K a frame (a Koala format multicolour bitmap is 10,001 bytes of data for 160x200 in 16 colours but it could be pared down to 8,000 for just the bitmap data) at 60FPS is doable from a Commodore-style RAM expansion with some processing time left over, I've got prototypes that use a similar technique to completely rewrite the bitmap and colour RAM once per frame for fast scrolling.

 

For animation that be a little over 600,000 bytes per second give or take and just shy of 28 seconds on a 16Mb RAM expansion (they're surprisingly common these days even if half the people who own them have never enabled the option!) or a smidgeon under 35 seconds just for bitmap.

[peteym5]

Every computer system is going to have advantages and disadvantages when comparing them to each other. Between the companies Atari and Commodore, I favor what Atari did with using the same chipset throughout the 8-bit line and maintaining a high amount of compatibility from the 400 to the XEGS. IBM and Apple also did this practice. Commodore was the company with every computer model, you had to buy new software and sometimes new peripherals.

 

Technical standpoint I am seeing what programmers are able to do with the Atari 8-bit set up now, being way more flexible and going beyond what the Commodore 64 is able to do.

 

Yes, the Commodore 64 ran at 1mhz has the colormap and 8 multi-colored sprites, can do some decent looking games. Atari 8-bit at 1.79mhz has 256 color palette, display list interrupts, able to multiplex the player missile graphics, and mix graphics modes. A good programmer will know how to take advantage of either set up.

 

If we are going to show people stuff this time, use Youtube videos to compare stuff in motion. Games in action seem to have more going on with the Atari, probably because of the higher clock speed.

[Faicuai]

That's doing I/O through the cartridge port I think...? If that's right, 10K a frame (a Koala format multicolour bitmap is 10,001 bytes of data for 160x200 in 16 colours but it could be pared down to 8,000 for just the bitmap data) at 60FPS is doable from a Commodore-style RAM expansion with some processing time left over, I've got prototypes that use a similar technique to completely rewrite the bitmap and colour RAM once per frame for fast scrolling.

 

For animation that be a little over 600,000 bytes per second give or take and just shy of 28 seconds on a 16Mb RAM expansion (they're surprisingly common these days even if half the people who own them have never enabled the option!) or a smidgeon under 35 seconds just for bitmap.

 

No, it seems that we may not be considering the original implications.

 

1. The SAME 16-color set for EVERY scan-line does not bode well for the colorimetric implications of displaying real-time video.
2. Stock CPU, stock system timing/sync, stock RAM (motherboard & speed), stock Gfx and Sound chipset (from 1979)... for both VIDEO and AUDIO streams from same source.
3. I can go as low as Colleen OS (A) !!!, 32K and boot from floppy and launch the video player from SIO port. All needed is IDE storage plugged on system CART port.

All of the above NOT implying that we will be watching 160x200 60fps movies from now on, but to rather show the platforms' true engineering latitude.

Edited October 31, 2018 by Faicuai

[_The Doctor__]

Notice for Atari it's stock but but for Commodore it becomes if they do this with that upgrade/expansion/ on this blah blah blah... that's to be accepted as just fine. If you do or say the same thing going the other way around it's always contested or unaccepted.

 

That's why I just shake my head...

[TMR]

No, it seems that we may not be considering the original implications.

You only talked about doing 60FPS video originally, no other implications were stated...

 

I can go as low as Colleen OS (A) !!!, 32K and boot from floppy and launch the video player from SIO port. All needed is IDE storage plugged on system CART port.

The same is true for the C64, the cartridge does the donkey work of chunking data around at speed so the standard I/O isn't in use after starting up (the boot program could be loaded from tape if needed, it'd be tiny and a good fastloader'll get that done in no time) and in both cases it doesn't work if you take the extra hardware in the cartridge away. The Atari player seems to be doing (assuming a cursory, headache-impaired search found the right variant) is presenting the ANTIC with data for it's DMA directly from the cartridge where the C64 code I was talking about just "loads" data into the RAM where the VIC-II is looking for it.

 

Doing sampled audio at the same time is more tricky since that data transfer is intrusive on the C64 - the DMA halts the 6510 whilst working whilst the VIC-II "multitasks" and carries on regardless - so restarting the processor every X cycles to play a nybble of sample the "traditional" way is probably not viable with 60FPS playback. From what the devs say about the sample driver in Fantasmolytic (fast forward to 6:22) it'd be at least potentially doable that way I think...?

 

Notice for Atari it's stock but but for Commodore it becomes if they do this with that upgrade/expansion/ on this blah blah blah... that's to be accepted as just fine.

If "stock" includes a whacking great IDE interface plugged into the cartridge port, then you're working with a very odd definition of the term there... but s'okay because a whacking great RAM expansion plugged into the C64 cartridge port counts as "stock" under that definition too. =-)

[emkay]

You only talked about doing 60FPS video originally, no other implications were stated...

If "stock" includes a whacking great IDE interface plugged into the cartridge port, then you're working with a very odd definition of the term there... but s'okay because a whacking great RAM expansion plugged into the C64 cartridge port counts as "stock" under that definition too. =-)

If whacking huge RAM Cartridges were allowed, we finally could agree to have all games available on the Atari in 128 colors and endless moving objects available

[_The Doctor__]

You don't need a great big add on modified this or that IDE device... the storage device is needed for a good length color movie with sound.... you can use cartridges to do it, you can use a lowly myIDE cart. and on and one all different ways to get the data there. nice deflection though... I expect the leap to modified memory management extensions to follow and a bunch of other drivel...

Edited October 31, 2018 by _The Doctor__