The same and usual C64 guys talking of A8 todays versions

[José Pereira]

1) you can't hit at CPU speed from the CPU - you'd lose time from the LDA/STA pairs, so it would still be an improvement

2) if a write needs to be synchronised (e.g hitting a register at a specific time synced to the beam) there's a big CPU drag in synchronising, waiting and then performing the write.

so there's still pretty good gains to be had even with those limitations. It must be possible to do though, as the REU manages it.

 

You certainly could build such a device that would write to GTIA (or other chips) at full CPU speed. That is, one write per PHI2 cycle. The question is if this would be worth. How much this would be cheaper and simpler than more advanced devices.

 

If you could do that on cartridge, then it might be worth. But you can't. I don't think even the PBI would be enough here. Something like this would require removing say, GTIA, inserting a custom board in GTIA's socket, and put GTIA in the board. When you go that far, you start asking yourself if it's not worth to take the extra step and do something like VBXE.

 

 

Is it so different A8 and C64 that we could not have something like that C64 cart?

The idea would be a cart that could chnage quickly colour Registers, more cycles, more powerfull... Don't know how to explain

[sack-c0s]

looking at another way of doing things... you can't write memory from the cartridge, but can you 'snoop' writes to memory?

 

that way you could watch an address range as control registers to feed commands in, do whatever graphics processing you liked to an internal buffer and then a processed version of that memory would then just be seen as ROM and read just like any other data from the cartridge by a piece of 6502 running on the host.

 

In my mind from the computers point of view it wouldn't be any different from a bankswitched cartridge

Edited September 14, 2011 by sack-c0s

[Creature XL]

Just one thing no one pointed out regarding the limits of cart expansiosn, so sack listen up

The limit of a cart is the price. As asy a that. GR8 managed to put some ROM and RAM in a cart and sell it fro 30 EUR? I don't know.

You can buy the 1MB Atarimax for 20-50 USD and put Space Harier on it. If people are willing to pay it then it is OK.

So, if oyu build a FPGA (or ASIC) put it in a cart and sell it for 40 EURO its Ok. As an FPGA is much more expansive and a run of ASICs as well I guess you have your answer regards what is possible with a cart.

 

Lastly, I had an Atari 800XL with a 256KB extra RAM in the 1990s so it is not stock, but acceptable.

I would go for 64Kb though and try to make it single load, however, I don't see the point the C64 guys always make that single load is essential. Everything that fits on one disk (-side even?) is acceptable in my point of view.

[sack-c0s]

I know price is an issue, but right now I'm weighing up experimenting with a few things purely for my own curiosity here. maybe the most that will come out of this is I cobble something together out of bits I already own to show myself that it can be done, a few photos taken and then it all gets taken to bits again.

 

 

I think the single load thing comes about because during the 80s the average European game played from tape, so a single load was preferable.

[Rybags]

Price shouln't be a huge issue - a REU or REU/coprocessor type cart is something that can be used by multiple programs, so it's not like you're paying for 1 cart that has one program on it.

 

If you disregard the graphics, VBXE is essentially the same thing. Extra RAM with the ability to quickly move it around, although not exchange with main RAM but you can overlay any part of main RAM.

 

You can't really snoop memory accesses from cart. Carts can potentially only "see" accesses to $8000-BFFF and $D500-D5FF. Of course you can map I/O space, RAM, ROM, in any way you see fit to those regions although the norm is to put I/O stuff @ Page D5.

[ANTIQ]

To answer the original question, for me the dividing line is between extending and replacing.

 

But I'd still like to see what an A8/C64 chipset could really do when liberated from a slow processor and a shared bus. Modifying an emulator would probably be easiest.

Edited September 14, 2011 by ANTIQ

[Sheddy]

Sorry about that - it's a good answer, but people trying to perpetuate a war pushed things over to the next page.

 

Quoted to keep it visible

 

I think what people are wondering is where is the line? I know it's going to be blurry at best, but I'm wondering what the consensus is...

I like to define it as "anything which fundamentally alters the character of the machine". Hence I have no problem with banked carts and RAM carts, internal RAM expansions, IDE interfaces, etc, etc. Faster processors, higher resolution graphics and / or greater bit depth, blitters, co-processors, etc, are on the other side of the line. They delegate work away from the CPU and Antic and imbue the machine with capabilities which simply may not have been achievable "back in the day", while hard disks, banked carts and RAM upgrades were relatively common in the machine's heyday.

 

That seems reasonable to me too. Of course, if one machine is using a RAM expansion and the other is not, then it is not a totally fair comparison either, but much fairer than one off-loading processing to extra hardware.

[popmilo]

...The limit of a cart is the price...

Doesn't have to be. There are projects like easyflash for C64:

 

http://skoe.de/easyflash/index.php?page=the-hardware

 

It shows what can be done with just a few modern chips.

 

It is flash memory based so it is not Ram expansion - it's purpose is to simulate multiple cartridges.

 

Similar 1Mbyte sram chip costs around 5 euros + board 5euros + some simpler components + some free time with soldering iron and you get 1024 Mb ram expansion for less than 20e - that should be accessible to anyone.

Even if someone would produce batch of them and sell them for double price would be cheap...

 

C64 has /DMA line on cartridge port so if we add any modern cpu (arm, parallax propeller...) or some fpga logic - c64s ram is available for manipulation.

[Charlie_]

I don't see the point the C64 guys always make that single load is essential.

 

Maybe because the loading on a C64 is just so very slow?

[high voltage]

a format war forum? that must be the saddest forum on the whole internet.

 

anyhow, Apple ][ won

Edited September 14, 2011 by high voltage

[sack-c0s]

a format war forum? that must be the saddest forum on the whole internet.

 

Well the inspiration was to take the warring elements from here, put them in their own place and let AA/lemon64/world of spectrum/whatever carry on business as usual in their absence.

 

The irony is the people who like these wars don't have the balls to sign up, and those who are over there now have the kind of discussions we intended would take place *outside of formatwar with the trolls removed*, with technical discussions going on, people proving ideas through code, a collaboration which has lead to a C64 release (and i hear an A8 version is on the way)....

 

it's not sad - just a great piece of reverse psychology

[emkay]

a format war forum? that must be the saddest forum on the whole internet.

 

Well the inspiration was to take the warring elements from here, put them in their own place and let AA/lemon64/world of spectrum/whatever carry on business as usual in their absence.

 

The irony is the people who like these wars don't have the balls to sign up,

 

Those with the war in their head are already there. No irony happens.

 

 

 

 

and those who are over there now have the kind of discussions we intended would take place *outside of formatwar with the trolls removed*, with technical discussions going on, people proving ideas through code, a collaboration which has lead to a C64 release (and i hear an A8 version is on the way)....

 

it's not sad - just a great piece of reverse psychology

 

 

Seeing the Thread of Edge Grinder, made me laugh. Using the Commodore at a low limit of it's best features, just to have people from other Formats taking part.

 

"Der Hase und der Igel" .....

 

After someone may took part, just pust another moving object here and there, to still have an advance... make others run behind it until they're dead

 

 

Would be a good cause to join there , after someone starts a good Ego view game on a competition.

Edited September 15, 2011 by emkay

[sack-c0s]

If you read things properly Emkay you'd know that the original intention was to have a rotation of 'platform ambassadors' take the lead version of the collaborative project and do whatever they felt best showed the features of their chosen platform, and everyone else adapts to it.

Edge grinder was done for the C64 as it's TMRs platform of choice and he was the one taking the initiative to kick things off. It was also kept fairly 'by the book' code-wise to ease people into the collaboration, rather than shut them out by making things really complicated. All the assets (code/art/music) were shared on a wiki page to foster the porting effort.

 

When this is done and dusted there will be another, and it's quite open to anyone to be 'the lead platform' and produce a project using whatever techniques they want. The only thing is should share the resources (music, graphics, etc.) to aid the conversion to other platforms. The other rule is you must be the one doing the development, so you can field questions about how it works (both technical and the game rules, to help keep ports faithful).

 

If you (or anyone else) would like to kick off a project with the A8 as the lead platform then I'm sure that would be welcome. But you would really need to be the one developing the game yourself.

 

 

and you would need to actually produce something, no spout endless tirades about how it may potentially be done. This is a 'code or GTFO' situation

 

But as I say - you are welcome to join in.

[popmilo]

...

Seeing the Thread of Edge Grinder, made me laugh. Using the Commodore at a low limit of it's best features, just to have people from other Formats taking part.

Its name is "Collaboration" - "Zusammenarbeit"

 

How would we even try to code A8 version if TMR used Armalyte like multiplexer or multicolor bitmap mode ?

 

This way there is at least chance to use those nice graphics that we got for free...

 

...Would be a good cause to join there , after someone starts a good Ego view game on a competition.

You are welcome to join in and start new collaboration.

 

Or to prove how A8 is superior for "ego" games - start a competition, and challenge everyone else ?

[emkay]

...

Seeing the Thread of Edge Grinder, made me laugh. Using the Commodore at a low limit of it's best features, just to have people from other Formats taking part.

Its name is "Collaboration" - "Zusammenarbeit"

 

 

 

It's called Collabortition.... and the cause for that is clear.

[emkay]

 

How would we even try to code A8 version if TMR used Armalyte like multiplexer or multicolor bitmap mode ?

 

Simply don't do useless stuff, and produce software that fits to the A8's capabilities.

[José Pereira]

 

How would we even try to code A8 version if TMR used Armalyte like multiplexer or multicolor bitmap mode ?

 

Simply don't do useless stuff, and produce software that fits to the A8's capabilities.

 

 

Emkay, are you there?

Don't... let others try, o.k.?

[sack-c0s]

 

How would we even try to code A8 version if TMR used Armalyte like multiplexer or multicolor bitmap mode ?

 

Simply don't do useless stuff, and produce software that fits to the A8's capabilities.

 

but multiplexing would increase the enemy/bullet count, giving bigger attack waves, and would be a fundamental part of the game rather than 'useless stuff'.

Edited September 15, 2011 by sack-c0s

[oky2000]

Back on the topic though, where do you draw the line?

 

I have an FPGA development board back home with half a meg of RAM, half a meg of ROM and an FPGA clocked at 66MHz. I could potentially code up some arbitration logic in VHDL to pass data back and forth between the host machine and the 'cartridge' and offload as much or little work onto the 'cartridge' as I wanted. True it would be a board haning out of the cartridge port by wires, but once the proof of concept worked you could refactor the whole lot into something the size of a 1980s released cartridge. Hell - you could even do video generation on the FPGA and hang a composite output off the cartridge, further relegating the host machine to an overly-complicated keyboard.

 

but by the rules we've been discussing the whole thing would plug into a stock machine, and whatever game was written would class as a 'native C64/A8 game'

 

I think what people are wondering is where is the line? I know it's going to be blurry at best, but I'm wondering what the consensus is...

 

Turbo 64 cartridge....nuff said

 

@all

 

So anyway what is the issue? Cybernoid II soundtrack on A8 video? What is the actual bugbear here?

[oky2000]

Sorry about that - it's a good answer, but people trying to perpetuate a war pushed things over to the next page.

 

Quoted to keep it visible

 

I think what people are wondering is where is the line? I know it's going to be blurry at best, but I'm wondering what the consensus is...

I like to define it as "anything which fundamentally alters the character of the machine". Hence I have no problem with banked carts and RAM carts, internal RAM expansions, IDE interfaces, etc, etc. Faster processors, higher resolution graphics and / or greater bit depth, blitters, co-processors, etc, are on the other side of the line. They delegate work away from the CPU and Antic and imbue the machine with capabilities which simply may not have been achievable "back in the day", while hard disks, banked carts and RAM upgrades were relatively common in the machine's heyday.

 

That seems reasonable to me too. Of course, if one machine is using a RAM expansion and the other is not, then it is not a totally fair comparison either, but much fairer than one off-loading processing to extra hardware.

 

Problem is....in 1984/85 when XE was launched 256kb extra ram would cost more than 130XE + 1050 so with respect it is meaningless in reality....never would have been sold as a home machine (and for business you have sane choices of Atari ST or PC1)

[oky2000]

I'm still curious about my question actually - given how flexible the respective cartridge ports are on the A8 and C64 and the price of FPGAs these days you can pretty much cram something approaching an entire computer into the form factor of an 80s cartridge and relegate the C64/A8 itself to ebing a mere keyboard/joystick reader (not far off how starfox worked on the SNES).

 

So how much 'cartridge assistance' do people feel is appropriate before it's no longer 'a stock machine game'?

 

I bought back in time on my oldest Job in Super/Hypermaket an 'out of stock' Megadrive with some games and a Master System. Emulating cart (what a great Afertnoon as I also bought a Game Gear with the T.V. Adapter with some games (sadly the sound was broken)). It was really great Bargains I've got there !...

The games I also bought there were most of them from Master system and they run all on MegaDrive.

It was a cart with a Male and a Female... plugs into Megadrive and on the other side he plugs-in the Master system carts.

 

Would this be the same as those today FPGAs.?

 

And what could we expand the A8 with just a cart? can we, for example have new Gfxs. Modes or it will only turn A8 into a 'Slave Machine'?

That REU cart on C64 what it, exactly expands the C64 stock Machine?

 

Look at either the 64DTV new 256 colour mode or the C64 Turbo cart from Individual Computers ltd.

[oky2000]

And what could we expand the A8 with just a cart? can we, for example have new Gfxs. Modes or it will only turn A8 into a 'Slave Machine'?

 

 

If using an external CPU, you could use that speed to write directly to the GTIA registers, making a full software colour overlay for the 128 colours (OR 256 colours in GTIA mode). Which would result in a real 160x240 256C mode, limited to always one CPU/Antic cycle for all changed registers.It would be fast enough for changing 4 colour registers every 4 colour clocks aswell.

But, we talk of stock machines with the always allowed reachable Memory from it.

 

 

 

That REU cart on C64 what it, exactly expands the C64 stock Machine?

 

It serves like an ultrafast Drive. This would make it possible to handle more graphics content, making it changeable more fluent. 'But more gfx need more speed from the CPU to get coordinated.

The C64 could get a really good looking Dragon's Lair version with it. The candy-colours fit and there is only precalculated content to handle.

 

But, as we may see in Metal Dust, even with a very fast CPU (and up to 16MB direct adressable RAM), it still looks like C64, just more objects got to be moved.

 

Biggest profit by the expansion there is the digital audio....

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ie79hicxteg

 

1. SuperCPU didn't sell.

2. Metal Dust pushes the limits about as much as those crappy 1980-81 A8 games push technical abilities of A8. Enforcer 2 on stock 1982 C64 is 90% of Metal Dust on SupErCPU.

 

C64 + SuperCPU = fast solid filled 3D gamesmore like an ST/PC/Amiga. Exactly what the Turbo 64 cart does

[oky2000]

Oh the old Bomb Jack/Commando/Space Harrier/Yia-ar Kung Fu rubbish?

 

Well Bomb Jack on C64 is 1982 first generation quality coding, and they didn't use my awesome Sega USA version of Space Harrier level 1-10 video (which runs the same in PAL).

 

That leaves Yie=Ar Kung Fu (shit game, shit coding) and Elite version of Commando (again C64 DSE Crew cracked version looks./sounds same but has ALL the levels)

 

Memory issues aside my $0.02 worth is Atari Commando is inferior (sepia toned game) Bomb Jack better (hard to be worse unless you code it in BASIC!) Space Harrier split decision (A8 colours too dark and muddy for me) and Yie-Ar Kung Fu worse (crap game with awesome SID Jean Michel Jarre's Magnetic Fields rendition by Martin Galway...A8 crap game with crap POKEY version of music).

 

Problem is programming time issue comparing games programmed in 1980s....classic example Star Raiders II or Gauntlet. Homebrew taking 5 years vs commercial game taking 5 weeks in 1980s = pricks argument anyway as it's meaningless

 

PS An amateur Youtube uploader compared to me.....but I am going to do commercial A8 vs C64 games videos instead now

Edited September 15, 2011 by oky2000

[oky2000]

Or....look at it this way...

 

low memory Congo Bongo for A8

 

low memory Congo Bongo cart for C64

 

multi-part loader version of Congo Bongo on disk for C64.

 

 

I see where the people moaning about 320kb A8 games compared to stock single load 64kb (53kb in reality) are coming from

[emkay]

 

C64 + SuperCPU = fast solid filled 3D gamesmore like an ST/PC/Amiga. Exactly what the Turbo 64 cart does

 

 

According to this, we're allowed to create a Wolf 3D game in GTIA modes and use a Math Coprocessor (as used in Cartridges). It would handle like a 386 PC then....