Atari v Commodore

[emkay]

MOS produced these advanced chips, and Jack said, "Great! How cheaply can we build a computer around them?" So, the 64 is an advanced chipset in re-used VIC-20 packaging.

 

 

The real advance is the fact of having higher clocked RAM cheaply available. That's why normal VICII activities do not interfere with the CPU memory handling. And that is simply caused by the timely later development of the C64's layout. When the development was done for the A8, then RAM was multiple times higher prized. When the C64 was developed, the RAM was faster clock-able and cheaper available.

[Rybags]

The RAM on the '64 only has to cope with access speeds fractionally higher than the A8.

 

It's like 1.99 MHz vs 1.79.

 

They could have just gone the 2 MHz route on the CPU, but I suppose that might have meant higher cost because a 2 MHz guaranteed CPU would have lower yields than a 1 MHz guaranteed one.

 

Even then, they'd be hit with higher DMA penalties than the Atari, so the net gain mightn't have been worth the effort. Additionally, they'd also have had to do proper SIO rather than bit-banging because the timing accuracy can't be guaranteed with sporadic DMA.

[emkay]

- Atari has 1.79Mhz CPU

Which loses many cycles to ANTIC. So in the end it's just 20% faster than the 0.985 MHz CPU of the C64. Nothing left of the "2 times faster" which atariski dreams of.

 

As a programmer you know, every extra cycle is important. There are most of these 2D games that Atari can do it better because the extra cycles. Meanwhile not use the extra cycles on games that require to equal the 8 sprites of C64.

 

Whatever it could mean. But, the main VBI speed is real 1.8 times faster on the A8. Put game calculations in there and see and/or feel the difference

[emkay]

The RAM on the '64 only has to cope with access speeds fractionally higher than the A8.

 

It's like 1.99 MHz vs 1.79.

 

They could have just gone the 2 MHz route on the CPU, but I suppose that might have meant higher cost because a 2 MHz guaranteed CPU would have lower yields than a 1 MHz guaranteed one.

 

Even then, they'd be hit with higher DMA penalties than the Atari, so the net gain mightn't have been worth the effort. Additionally, they'd also have had to do proper SIO rather than bit-banging because the timing accuracy can't be guaranteed with sporadic DMA.

 

And with Antic we've got a master of DMA handling. Making it possible to do a good balancing between speed and graphis details.

Even today people mention that the A8 is sometimes faster by the used 2 scanline mode. They are partly right. The real spot is that Antic copies one scanline and puts it to the next line

-without any extra CPU usage

-giving CPU usage back by not using DMA cycles for the screen content in that line.

 

People say the C64 has the advantage by the sprite's "shape" which uses no full CPU activity. Well, it's granted. But, what's good on the C64 is bad on the Atari? ... weird thing...

[Bryan]

Advanced chips? Haven't I already pointed out that there still is a huge difference?

The differences are huge in both directions, but look around at the graphics chips available at that time. VIC2 beats the vid chips Motorola and TI were producing and it beats the Antic/GTIA combo in many areas. A chip doesn't have to outperform in every possible way to be advanced.

 

If the SID really was an advanced chip, it would had have the possibility of using free waveforms. And, if VICII was something like an advanced chip, it would had have 256 colours at least.

??? I guess now I know the technical definition of advanced.

[youki]

MOS produced these advanced chips, and Jack said, "Great! How cheaply can we build a computer around them?" So, the 64 is an advanced chipset in re-used VIC-20 packaging.

 

 

The real advance is the fact of having higher clocked RAM cheaply available. That's why normal VICII activities do not interfere with the CPU memory handling. And that is simply caused by the timely later development of the C64's layout. When the development was done for the A8, then RAM was multiple times higher prized. When the C64 was developed, the RAM was faster clock-able and cheaper available.

 

 

So the C64 is better!

 

[emkay]

MOS produced these advanced chips, and Jack said, "Great! How cheaply can we build a computer around them?" So, the 64 is an advanced chipset in re-used VIC-20 packaging.

 

 

The real advance is the fact of having higher clocked RAM cheaply available. That's why normal VICII activities do not interfere with the CPU memory handling. And that is simply caused by the timely later development of the C64's layout. When the development was done for the A8, then RAM was multiple times higher prized. When the C64 was developed, the RAM was faster clock-able and cheaper available.

 

 

So the C64 is better!

 

 

It explains why the colours and sprites were easier to handle with the C64.

[Bryan]

One more comment about the context of each machine...

 

IMO Atari had the best engineering on the planet in the 2nd half of the '70s. Nobody (including Commodore/MOS) had anything like what Atari was designing. Even if it wasn't marketed well, the 800 was the machine to beat. Atari then allowed their top engineers to leave rather than allowing them work on a new generation of hardware. I blame this on Warner Communications who didn't really understand their own product.

 

This is why Commodore emerged as the leader a few years later. Imagine if Atari had been doing actual chipset engineering from 1979 to 1982. Atari also had the advantage that they were simultaneously designing cutting-edge arcade hardware. New VLSI designs would have been a benefit to both divisions.

[Allas]

In 1979 Atari designed his 8bit line very carefully, the idea was to be the most powerful 8bit computer in his time. And I think it reached the objective, Have a lot of new nice features and the best performance in every topic that we could discuss. And there isn't a computer that equal in his time.

 

In 1982 C64 came, and was designed with nice features for his time. But was not built as better in every topic, some things like video (VIC II) and music (SID) was planned carefully, but others have my disappointment (CPU, palette colors, BIOS, no-booteable, default slow disk access and a long list of minor things)

 

Every computer have the top in his time, but i prefer the older computer Atari, because his design is very elegant and despite the years is very competitive against the C64. It's like cars, I prefer the old good car against the recently good cars. However I understand, C64 users can't share this point of view, because most of them not live the 70's time on 8bit computing, so for this reason not feel how big and powerful is the Atari design.

[youki]

Imagine if Atari had been doing actual chipset engineering from 1979 to 1982.

 

easy to imagine. You would have had the Amiga in 1982.

[Bryan]

Every computer have the top in his time, but i prefer the older computer Atari, because his design is very elegant and despite the years is very competitive against the C64. It's like cars, I prefer the old good car against the recently good cars. However I understand, C64 users can't share this point of view, because most of them not live the 70's time on 8bit computing, so for this reason not feel how big and powerful is the Atari design.

 

I agree. The Atari was planned out to be refined in every area, and the 64 shows evidence of its budget and time constraints. It doesn't affect the quality of software that much, but it affects the experience of using the machine. This is a point that I think would matter more to someone who had spent time using the Atari, however.

[Heaven/TQA]

oh...do we come to an end? the last posts are one of the less fan-boys ones... fully agreed... (while still debugging damned soft sprite engine here for Beyond Evil).

 

I really love the flexibility of the display list approach compared to the fix ones in the c64... but well... who cares in the end...

 

(maybe I dig out my A1200 and start coding there... )

[emkay]

Imagine if Atari had been doing actual chipset engineering from 1979 to 1982.

 

easy to imagine. You would have had the Amiga in 1982.

 

Or better "the real XL series"...

[miker]

Święty has emulated the SID on Pokey, and has released the SID Player

No he hasn't. SID playing is a bit more than "playing melodies of SID tunes".

 

Actually it emulates SID. Not 100%, some features are missing and the resulution is 4, not 8 bits. And you may of course deny this but the sense of it is like denying 2 x 2 = 4 equation.

 

@youki: No, Xbox360 is better! And you can even stick on it a sticker of your fav compy. Either Amiga, Atari or Commodore.

 

Most of people here have chosen Atari and this fact will probably remain long.

 

AMEN!

[potatohead]

That's where I'm at. Atari machines are the best because they do the kinds of things I like to see.

 

(and I'm not into scrollers with lots of sprites as much as I am into things like YOOMP!)

 

Are we at the end of exploiting the chipsets of the respective machines? Seems C64 has been more fully exploited than the Atari chips have. Or, is it just a lull?

[Bryan]

oh...do we come to an end?

 

But we're up to 140 pages. We can't stop now!

 

the last posts are one of the less fan-boys ones... fully agreed... (while still debugging damned soft sprite engine here for Beyond Evil).

 

I'm embarrassed when I see posts by people who simply must win. It doesn't matter how weak the argument is, as long as they can point to some spec that says mine is tEh r0xoR and yours SuX!.

 

Personally, I think the Atari is fun because it is difficult to use to its full potential. That means when you write something good it really stands out ("how did he do that!?!"). That's the thing that is unique about the Atari is the extent to which clever coding pays off. It's like the 2600 in that regard.

 

Of course, it means that most of the commercial software won't be very good.

 

I really love the flexibility of the display list approach compared to the fix ones in the c64... but well... who cares in the end...

I know. I wish it had been applied to some new modes in the XL or XE.

 

(maybe I dig out my A1200 and start coding there... )

Well, that thinking is open ended. Why code the A1200 when you can code a PC or PS3!

 

-Bry

[Allas]

--

Edited April 10, 2009 by Allas

[Fröhn]

Any Atari2600 coder will prove YOUR lameness, then, for using 64 KB in your C-64, if this has to be an argument

I seriously doubt that.

 

This, and the widescreen parallax scroller, should keep you busy for at least a week. Unless, of course, you fry your lovely soap-box by inadvertedly connecting a joystick, while the power is on.

Uh uh uh widescreen, now that does a REAL change on a game.

[Bryan]

Has any 64 fan ever stuck up for the Atari in a 64 forum?

[Fröhn]

Has any 64 fan ever stuck up for the Atari in a 64 forum?

Yes I even coded a bunch of crap for Atari. But sadly all C64 gfx people I asked (3 so far) rejected Atari for pretty similar reasons: Their or the the works of people they respects had been stolen by Atari people with their tag removed with "OMG loooks Atari is better than C64" underline.

[Bryan]

Has any 64 fan ever stuck up for the Atari in a 64 forum?

Yes I even coded a bunch of crap for Atari. But sadly all C64 gfx people I asked (3 so far) rejected Atari for pretty similar reasons: Their or the the works of people they respects had been stolen by Atari people with their tag removed with "OMG loooks Atari is better than C64" underline.

Ah, too bad. The way I see it there are two reasons to be into retro computers:

 

1. You're genuinely interested in the technology of yesteryear.

 

2. You're perpetually childish and stuck in the past.

 

I think most of us fit into both categories to some degree, but I'd imagine you run into full-on type 2's in every computer scene.

Edited April 10, 2009 by Bryan

[drac030]

Uh uh uh widescreen, now that does a REAL change on a game.

 

For a parallax scroller? Of course, it does. For other games it does too, as it gives you wider playfield.

 

But I understand that you are not able to accept that anything that C-64 can't actually do (easily, like opening the borders, or at all, like 256 colors) "does really matter"; as everyone knows, that the 16 colors (incl. 5 brown and 5 violet) is better than 256 (be it 128), 20%-100% faster CPU does not really matter, bigger screen does not really matter, more memory (which means that upgrades are common and coders can use them, if they want) does not really matter etc. as long as these are things C-64 can't do.

 

On the other hand anything that C-64 CAN do (at all or better) does MONSTRUOUSLY matter in any such argument. But saying truth I like 70 KB of assembly buffer, and a fast storage, and good OS, and hardware upgrades and... etc. much more than vanilla stock machine that can do hardly anything more than 8 sprites. And attribute map, which however takes up 4 KB (or something like this) of the I/O area and makes the ROM kernel utter crap.

 

In a way I understand you. On Atari coders constantly have something new to play with: memory upgrade, second Pokey, COVOX, better OS, hard drive, video card... A C-64 coder apparently has only the choice between trolling on Atari forum, and sitting at his machine trying to open the borders. So your elaborate argumentation here does not suprise me at all

 

You said one you came here to correct wrong views Atarians supposedly have. Today you actually proved that you didn't even know, that Atari's 256 colors are displayable at one time in NTSC. So what else you want to "correct" here?

[potatohead]

LOL!!!

 

I think the wide screen is a pretty big deal. We've got wide aspect displays popping up all over the place. Atari is there ready to make good use of them. The C64 large border really shows on my newer WEGA TV, service menu tweaked to show all but 5 percent of the NTSC frame. And on the plasma, it's this little square in the center of the screen.

[Bryan]

When Fröhn said the 256 color mode doesn't work on NTSC, I figured he meant the GTIA 9/11 interleaved trick which does require PAL to function.

[slampam]

Ooooooooh!...Pretty!

 

Reality Bites...(Dragonbobs)

 

But I wish this stuff were in actual games. If I can't interact with it, then it's just eye candy. If I could shoot the bobs and they popped - now that would be something.