video upgrade?

[drac030]

VBXE also requires getting inside the unit and desoldering and resoldering on unsocketed units.

 

Yes, you plug it directly in the motherboard.

 

We've also been hearing about VBXE for two years now. I suspect it is somewhat overengineered.

 

I can't see how your second sentence is related to the first. We have been hearing about Atari computers for 30 years, does this mean that they're somewhat overengineered?

 

Simplicity in installation is a virtue because the need to open the unit up will reduce the potential audience by half or more. It also means you don't pay to have someone else install it for you. A cart/PBI device is "plug-n-play" in a way that VBXE can never be unless redesigned.

 

But there is no ANTIC bus (I mean the lines by which it controls the GTIA) on the CART/PBI connector. Which means that you either get no compatibility or crap display - while VBXE offers both. So it is a matter of tradeoff something for something else.

 

And btw. VBXE exists. I have one.

 

I also have doubts about VBXE because it's capabilities seem to be a poor impedance match for the A8. A high bit depth hi res screen is of little use if it takes minutes to draw it. I realize the board itself is a kind of video accellerator but it still has to be fed through the A8's relatively slow buses. How is a 1.79 Mhz machine going to have the processing and IO bandwidth to fully utilize such a device?

 

There was a demo distributed some time ago in a form of an AVI file or something. So you had an occasion to see, how If not, I can tell you: without problems.

 

If it is as expensive as I suspect it's going to be then how many people will buy it? Unless a lot of us buy it then hardly any software will be written for it and without software why buy the hardware?

 

What does mean "expensive"? The cost of an unit is about 300 PLN (not counting shipping), which is equal to 130 USD. This is less or more the price one paid for Atari 65XE in late 80's, and the computer at that time was CHEAP as dirty water (in terms of Western prices, of course, because at out side of iron courtain 130 USD was an incredible lot of money, maybe something like 5000 or 10000 - five or ten thousands - USD now). So at this price, VBXE exists, offers compatibility (with existing software and existing hardware, including existing cartridges), flexibility, incredible features, and its display is of top quality (its it RGB, so the picture sharpness is no worse than on VGA).

 

Since I am an Atari enthusiast, I can pay this price for top quality enhancement for my computer, and I wouldn't get a cheaper (note: not cheap, only _cheaper_, we heard about 50-75 USD, if I remember, so this is around a havf of the price you pay for VBXE) replacement that, offers much less, and does not exist (yet). Exactly like I prefer a more expensive, but top quality hard disk controller instead of the (insert here the adjectives you prefer) MyIDE, eventhough it is cheap, or in the past I preferred a disk drive over the cassette recorder, eventhough that latter was something like 1/10 of the price and was "easier" to operate.

 

So, like I said, this is a matter of taste. Besides, I am not going to advertise VBXE here, for I do not sell nor produce it, and I am not an expert of its internals and operation either. For details, if any doubts remain, you can mail its author, i.e. electron.

Edited September 2, 2008 by drac030

[DamageX]

Is opening the machine to install an upgrade that much of an issue? Yes it could be a pain in the case of having to remove chips that are soldered on the board, but think about the alternatives:

 

Cartridge. Precludes the use of other cartridges, unless it has its own connector for pass-through, which still results in an ugly stack of devices protruding from the machine.

 

PBI/ECI device. Needs an adaptor to fit the other kind of port, and if you have an A8 without PBI/ECI you're out of luck.

 

How many people who are still inclined to use Ataris after all these years have never opened the case?

 

However, even though the VBXE looks like a very capable and well-designed device, $130 plus shipping is a bit steep for what is basically a toy. I mean, if you just want to play games, various game systems are available for $130 or less, and if it's something else you have in mind $130 will buy a second-hand PC too. That being said, I might buy one anyway, but I have yet to see an announcement that anyone is accepting orders for VBXEs.

 

Is someone planning a run of boards? Is the data available for download at vbxe.atari8.info enough that a third party could arrange to have a batch produced professionally?

 

As for the cartridge-based device being discussed, I'm sure that at $50-75 it would sell larger numbers. But I would like to see a certain minimum level of functionality, like directly addressable display memory through the cartridge port window for instance. Making the hardware too simple so that a burden is shifted to the CPU would seem to run counter to the philosophy of Jay Miner's chipset and Atari's intelligent SIO peripherals. Plus it's not like the humble Sally has a lot of time to spare.

 

I did a little Google search on the subject of PLDs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programmable_array_logic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_progr...le_logic_device

My Needhams Electronics programmer supports PALs and some low-end CPLDs like the Atmel ATF750. There is some freely downloadable software for these here:

http://www.atmel.com/dyn/products/tools_ca...sp?tool_id=2759

These chips came in DIP packages, and combined with one of those 32KB*8 SRAMs that are on old 486 motherboards, I think they would be ideal for a PCB that could be soldered by hand.

[+bob1200xl]

We're moving towards a simple, but flexible video display device. It is not easily 'sized' as to its performance in most applications. Kind of an empirical approach. "Here is a neat 'thing' - what can you do with it" exercise. Technically, for example, you could do a sync-on-green VGA output at 31khz. (or higher) That may hold a special interest in you and 50 other Atarians worldwide. 50 other Atari users may want 80 columns on their TVs...

 

Power Users may want the SuperStocker, with a fast-clocked 65816 in the cartridge to drive the FRAM(s). And, a Virtual Cartridge that emulates all cartridges. We can bolt on as much stuff as people want - gotta start at the beginning.

 

Maybe amaze ourselves.

 

 

ATMEL also has some CUPL tutorials - that's what I learned on. Even their larger CPLDs come in PLCC packages, which can be hand soldered.

 

We don't necessarily need very high speed SRAMs. They can get pretty current hungry. (price is right, isn't it?)

 

Bob

 

 

 

Is opening the machine to install an upgrade that much of an issue? Yes it could be a pain in the case of having to remove chips that are soldered on the board, but think about the alternatives:

 

Cartridge. Precludes the use of other cartridges, unless it has its own connector for pass-through, which still results in an ugly stack of devices protruding from the machine.

 

PBI/ECI device. Needs an adaptor to fit the other kind of port, and if you have an A8 without PBI/ECI you're out of luck.

 

How many people who are still inclined to use Ataris after all these years have never opened the case?

 

However, even though the VBXE looks like a very capable and well-designed device, $130 plus shipping is a bit steep for what is basically a toy. I mean, if you just want to play games, various game systems are available for $130 or less, and if it's something else you have in mind $130 will buy a second-hand PC too. That being said, I might buy one anyway, but I have yet to see an announcement that anyone is accepting orders for VBXEs.

 

Is someone planning a run of boards? Is the data available for download at vbxe.atari8.info enough that a third party could arrange to have a batch produced professionally?

 

As for the cartridge-based device being discussed, I'm sure that at $50-75 it would sell larger numbers. But I would like to see a certain minimum level of functionality, like directly addressable display memory through the cartridge port window for instance. Making the hardware too simple so that a burden is shifted to the CPU would seem to run counter to the philosophy of Jay Miner's chipset and Atari's intelligent SIO peripherals. Plus it's not like the humble Sally has a lot of time to spare.

 

I did a little Google search on the subject of PLDs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programmable_array_logic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_progr...le_logic_device

My Needhams Electronics programmer supports PALs and some low-end CPLDs like the Atmel ATF750. There is some freely downloadable software for these here:

http://www.atmel.com/dyn/products/tools_ca...sp?tool_id=2759

These chips came in DIP packages, and combined with one of those 32KB*8 SRAMs that are on old 486 motherboards, I think they would be ideal for a PCB that could be soldered by hand.

[frogstar_robot]

Is opening the machine to install an upgrade that much of an issue? Yes it could be a pain in the case of having to remove chips that are soldered on the board, but think about the alternatives:

 

Yeah. I see posts all the time to the effect of "Can someone do this mod for me?" or "I'm not an electronics wizard..."

 

Cartridge. Precludes the use of other cartridges, unless it has its own connector for pass-through, which still results in an ugly stack of devices protruding from the machine.

 

So use disk based software that can utilize the upgrade. Yeah that is a minus but I believe it a smaller minus than desoldering ICs to get the thing in. And it has the virtue of being plug compatible with most Ataris.

 

PBI/ECI device. Needs an adaptor to fit the other kind of port, and if you have an A8 without PBI/ECI you're out of luck.

 

That's a tradeoff that splits the difference in performance and capability between a simple cart and a solder-in module. This too is an audience limiter only we are limiting the audience based on which Atari you have rather than your workbench skills or time to employ them. Still if the basic concept is proven with a cart, we may see a more capable derivative that uses the ECI/PBI.

 

How many people who are still inclined to use Ataris after all these years have never opened the case?

 

I'm capable of installing such a mod but somewhat limited living space and a wife and kid means I won't be doing it. All of my workbench hobbies are on hold until the living situation changes. I can drag my 130XE of the box now and then and hook it up to the TV quickly. I love all things Atari but life means I have to be a little sparing with that love.

 

I use emulation even more often not because it is superior but because it is convenient. If any of these devices passes a certain threshold of popularity then emulators will simulate it as well.

 

However, even though the VBXE looks like a very capable and well-designed device, $130 plus shipping is a bit steep for what is basically a toy.

 

Fully agreed. The combination of a relatively steep price (especially these days) and the necessity to desolder things on many units doesn't bode well for it IMHO. And I don't mean to disparage an outstanding technical achievement. It is doubtless faster, more sophisticated, and capable then what we are discussing. But we Atarians well know that it takes more than great technology to have a winner.

 

As for the cartridge-based device being discussed, I'm sure that at $50-75 it would sell larger numbers. But I would like to see a certain minimum level of functionality, like directly addressable display memory through the cartridge port window for instance.

 

Simple things tend to be hackable things. It looks like what Claus has in mind is to get a simple device working and then show us how he did it and what problems he ran into. We can kick it around from there and figure out how to make it optimal in terms of skill to install and use, price, performance, and ease of development for. The best outcome is if we get a spec for an upgrade many of us could protoboard and build. A fully specced inexpensive upgrade that uses a minimum of custom components and is noninvasive to install has the best chance of being widely adopted.

Edited September 3, 2008 by frogstar_robot

[Rybags]

I say just build the thing.

 

Who cares about pass-through? The only time you'd ever need pass-through is to use language carts. Sure, in the future there might be games which can run from cart and use enhanced graphics but first things first.

 

80 columns - care factor not much there. If you want to run spreadsheets or WP, use the Wintel box. And, bitching about M$ Office prices is not on - OpenOffice is available for free.

 

The main concern I have is how fast you can write to the screen - if it was done so that you had true random access at a decent speed, then the game/demo ability is instantly there.

[+warerat]

ATMEL also has some CUPL tutorials - that's what I learned on. Even their larger CPLDs come in PLCC packages, which can be hand soldered.

 

Yikes. I thought WinCUPL was AWFUL. The software is counter-intuitive, buggy, and the syntax makes my worst uncommented 6502 code with one-character labels look like it was penned with flowing gold silk ink.

 

Have you looked Xilinx (yeah, I'm slightly biased) or Altera CPLDs? Even if you don't know VHDL or Verilog their free tools can synthesize the design directly from a schematic and are several orders of magnitude more flexible and capable than CUPL. Not to mention JTAG so you can program these things in-circuit without a fancy programmer and can use boundary-scan tools to debug it while it's running.

[drac030]

If $130 for a fully programmable and customizable GTIA replacement is a high price, and $75 for a "simple hackable thing" is low price, then someone here has a problem estimating what is worth money, I'd say. "Especially these days", when US dollar is cheap.

 

Despite that, in serial production, I think, it would get a bit cheaper, if it matters so much - $130 was just the price of the first 20 VBXEs.

[roland p]

The main concern I have is how fast you can write to the screen - if it was done so that you had true random access at a decent speed, then the game/demo ability is instantly there.

Sorry for redundant posts, but are there some specs about that video-enhanchment cartridge?

[+bob1200xl]

I started with CUPL on the Atari PAL chip - read the fuse map and hand decoded it back into CUPL statements. So, it is what I know. I can build useful things with it.

 

I write programs for the Atari in BASIC and ASM/ED. Nothing elegant - again, it's what I know.

 

Do you think a novice can be productive in VHDL or Verilog sooner than CUPL?

 

Bob

 

 

 

ATMEL also has some CUPL tutorials - that's what I learned on. Even their larger CPLDs come in PLCC packages, which can be hand soldered.

 

Yikes. I thought WinCUPL was AWFUL. The software is counter-intuitive, buggy, and the syntax makes my worst uncommented 6502 code with one-character labels look like it was penned with flowing gold silk ink.

 

Have you looked Xilinx (yeah, I'm slightly biased) or Altera CPLDs? Even if you don't know VHDL or Verilog their free tools can synthesize the design directly from a schematic and are several orders of magnitude more flexible and capable than CUPL. Not to mention JTAG so you can program these things in-circuit without a fancy programmer and can use boundary-scan tools to debug it while it's running.

[+bob1200xl]

No, not really. About the only known 'given' is that it will use high speed FRAM SPI serial memory made by RAMTRON. The expectation is for 640x192x1 and 320x192x2 video overlaying the Atari screens.

 

Claus may be able to expand on these...

 

Bob

 

 

 

The main concern I have is how fast you can write to the screen - if it was done so that you had true random access at a decent speed, then the game/demo ability is instantly there.

Sorry for redundant posts, but are there some specs about that video-enhanchment cartridge?

[+warerat]

I started with CUPL on the Atari PAL chip - read the fuse map and hand decoded it back into CUPL statements. So, it is what I know. I can build useful things with it.

 

I write programs for the Atari in BASIC and ASM/ED. Nothing elegant - again, it's what I know.

 

Do you think a novice can be productive in VHDL or Verilog sooner than CUPL?

 

Bob

 

I understand you're familiar with CUPL. It wasn't my intent to offend. I wrote a program in BASIC to manipulate the SCSI port on the MIO. I'll even admit to using MAC/65 on a real machine. Nothing wrong with that. My intent was only to suggest leveraging newer tools/devices in order to reduce the development cycle of this design.

 

Do I think a novice can be productive in VHDL or Verilog sooner than CUPL? No, that's silly.

 

Do you think a novice can be productive dragging/dropping/connecting gates (without knowing *any* VHDL/Verilog) in a schematic capture and directly synthesizing a working circuit sooner than CUPL?

 

(and you're no novice)

[peteym5]

I cannot disagree that $130 for VBXE is an expensive mod for something that many consider a toy. Maybe with some professional mass production, it can be dropped down to under $100 USD. However I think a few people are going to produce some professional applications and it was mentioned that it was going to support 640 pixel mode. I am curious as to see what arcade clones people will try with VBXE or this Video Cart. Maybe corrected versions of Centipede/Millipede, Galaga, Donkey Kong, etc. If the market on one of these becomes wide spread, I may port a version of Tempest.

[+bob1200xl]

Oh, I'm not offended in the least.

 

I've never tried schematic capture so I can't voice much of an opinion. It does seem like once you know the logic at the gate level, you could skip the extra step of creating a schematic and proceed to generating the PLD file directly. I know I have to 'translate' a schematic in my head into 'NOTclk716 AND addressD301' when I look at it.

 

Bob

 

 

 

I started with CUPL on the Atari PAL chip - read the fuse map and hand decoded it back into CUPL statements. So, it is what I know. I can build useful things with it.

 

I write programs for the Atari in BASIC and ASM/ED. Nothing elegant - again, it's what I know.

 

Do you think a novice can be productive in VHDL or Verilog sooner than CUPL?

 

Bob

 

I understand you're familiar with CUPL. It wasn't my intent to offend. I wrote a program in BASIC to manipulate the SCSI port on the MIO. I'll even admit to using MAC/65 on a real machine. Nothing wrong with that. My intent was only to suggest leveraging newer tools/devices in order to reduce the development cycle of this design.

 

Do I think a novice can be productive in VHDL or Verilog sooner than CUPL? No, that's silly.

 

Do you think a novice can be productive dragging/dropping/connecting gates (without knowing *any* VHDL/Verilog) in a schematic capture and directly synthesizing a working circuit sooner than CUPL?

 

(and you're no novice)

[carmel_andrews]

IF the video cartridge upgrade taps into Antic somehow...wouldit not be possible to extend antic timing for DLI's...i.e so that you can program more elaborate DLI's instead of being restricted to only a few 'cycles' for DLI programming or instead of theantic timing for DLI's being restricted to 'cycles', would it not be possible to route that aspect of antic's timing to the onboard cart. mem again so you can program more elaborate DLI routines and the only restriction is the amount of video FRAMS memory

 

Just a thought that's all

[STGAC]

The first few times I read your post I said "HUH?".

 

But,,, after you unravel all the spagetti... yes! You could extend DLI code into the cartridge.

 

That's actually a great avenue to pursue!

 

Bob

 

 

IF the video cartridge upgrade taps into Antic somehow...wouldit not be possible to extend antic timing for DLI's...i.e so that you can program more elaborate DLI's instead of being restricted to only a few 'cycles' for DLI programming or instead of theantic timing for DLI's being restricted to 'cycles', would it not be possible to route that aspect of antic's timing to the onboard cart. mem again so you can program more elaborate DLI routines and the only restriction is the amount of video FRAMS memory

 

Just a thought that's all

[ClausB]

The first few times I read your post I said "HUH?".

 

But,,, after you unravel all the spagetti... yes! You could extend DLI code into the cartridge.

 

That's actually a great avenue to pursue!

 

Bob

 

 

IF the video cartridge upgrade taps into Antic somehow...wouldit not be possible to extend antic timing for DLI's...i.e so that you can program more elaborate DLI's instead of being restricted to only a few 'cycles' for DLI programming or instead of theantic timing for DLI's being restricted to 'cycles', would it not be possible to route that aspect of antic's timing to the onboard cart. mem again so you can program more elaborate DLI routines and the only restriction is the amount of video FRAMS memory

 

Just a thought that's all

Sorry, I can't quite unravel it. Please explain.

[STGAC]

As long as the cartridge knows where he is on the display, you can use that timing to initiate video alterations to the combined display screen. Not as versitile as the DLI but it would incur no overhead to the system (other than loading the FRAM initially). This gives you back CPU time that would be spent on DLIs. And, it's much 'faster' than a DLI.

 

Bob

 

 

 

The first few times I read your post I said "HUH?".

 

But,,, after you unravel all the spagetti... yes! You could extend DLI code into the cartridge.

 

That's actually a great avenue to pursue!

 

Bob

 

 

IF the video cartridge upgrade taps into Antic somehow...wouldit not be possible to extend antic timing for DLI's...i.e so that you can program more elaborate DLI's instead of being restricted to only a few 'cycles' for DLI programming or instead of theantic timing for DLI's being restricted to 'cycles', would it not be possible to route that aspect of antic's timing to the onboard cart. mem again so you can program more elaborate DLI routines and the only restriction is the amount of video FRAMS memory

 

Just a thought that's all

Sorry, I can't quite unravel it. Please explain.

[ClausB]

Sorry for redundant posts, but are there some specs about that video-enhanchment cartridge?

Specs are still in flux, but presently the horizontal resolutions are 640 monochrome pixels with 2 or 4 luma levels, or 160 pixels with 16 or 256 artifact colors. Write speed estimates are about 0.25 Mbps for the FRAM design vs. about 1.5 Mbps for a SRAM/PLD design.

[ClausB]

As long as the cartridge knows where he is on the display, you can use that timing to initiate video alterations to the combined display screen. Not as versitile as the DLI but it would incur no overhead to the system (other than loading the FRAM initially). This gives you back CPU time that would be spent on DLIs. And, it's much 'faster' than a DLI.

I still don't get it. Maybe I'm too fixated on the present design, which connects to the cartridge port, not directly to ANTIC. But it does use DLIs to sync the enhanced video output with the ANTIC/GTIA video.

[STGAC]

I'm not a programmer, but the DLI is used to sync the CPU with a certain point on the screen. The FRAM is already in sync with the screen display (we hope!) so we can make changes with the FRAM instead of making the CPU do it. This may free up the CPU to execute DLI code that was not able to 'fit' into the cycles available without the FRAM cart. It doesn't have anything to do with ANTIC, actually.

 

Some programs might need just a little more DLI 'space'. Maybe a game coder could jump in here and explain what they would use this for.

 

Bob

 

 

As long as the cartridge knows where he is on the display, you can use that timing to initiate video alterations to the combined display screen. Not as versitile as the DLI but it would incur no overhead to the system (other than loading the FRAM initially). This gives you back CPU time that would be spent on DLIs. And, it's much 'faster' than a DLI.

I still don't get it. Maybe I'm too fixated on the present design, which connects to the cartridge port, not directly to ANTIC. But it does use DLIs to sync the enhanced video output with the ANTIC/GTIA video.

[Rybags]

I say "huh" too.

 

But in a slightly more complex way, I think it would work.

 

If the thing is done with a PGA or whatever, then it might be desirable to have some sort of quick palette reload ability. It'd be nice to be able to just write to a "Palette Base" register, which caused the device to use a different set of luma values for subsequent parts of the display.

[UNIXcoffee928]

Don't even bother worrying about the size restrictions of the physical cartridge dimensions, just run a ribbon cable from the cartridge port out to any sized project box or peripheral chassis.

 

If it was a small & thin pizza-box design, it could fit under the Atari, and its footprint wouldn't take up extra desk space..

 

This would also leave plenty of room for a cartridge pass-thru, somewhere on the side of the box.

[+bob1200xl]

Summer's over...

 

:>)

 

 

Bob

 

 

 

Sorry for redundant posts, but are there some specs about that video-enhanchment cartridge?

Specs are still in flux, but presently the horizontal resolutions are 640 monochrome pixels with 2 or 4 luma levels, or 160 pixels with 16 or 256 artifact colors. Write speed estimates are about 0.25 Mbps for the FRAM design vs. about 1.5 Mbps for a SRAM/PLD design.

[ClausB]

Summer's over...

I get the hint! Although, it was 80° here today. Forecast says Summer will be over next week.

 

But here in Michigan we have another season between Summer and Winter. It's called FLL. That's FIRST Lego League competition season. Go Programmers!

[peteym5]

Oh you are in Michigan, I am in Western New York state (not NYC), not that far away. I look forward to news on your project. I am glad someone is doing a cartridge approach for 80 columns instead of going through the Joystick port and does not require anybody to solder it inside the computer. If it was an internal upgrade, I would like to see several internal upgrades on a single board instead of a PCB board for each one so it doesn't have wires all over the place. Something like 65816, video, memory, and dual pokey, IDE, on a single board.