fujidude Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 To be fair I think the BBC wiped the floor with the Atari and Commodore so far as loading speeds were concerned. Although to be fair the C64 and Atari 8-bit had stuff that was actually worth the wait, so it worked out nice in the end.... You are referring to the Acorn computers? I had heard of them barely at the time, and have only learned a little more about them so long after the day. My understanding is that they are the beginnings of the ARM processors. ARM meaning Acorn RISC Machine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rybags Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 BBC has a 6502 @ 2 MHz. Relatively quick because the graphics accesses were interleaved with the CPU so effectively the memory was at 4 MHz. But it needed that speed, there's no sprites, little control for scrolling and the better graphics modes use 16K. Many machine configs were only 32K Ram so it suffered there as well. Had one of the best OSes and Basics of any 6502 machine though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Willy Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Chilly, did you mean that you found a way to speed up the Percom? I want to learn as much as possible about all A8 drives... My goal is an UltraSpeed ATR-8000, and a Happy compatible Indus GT. NEED AS MUCH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE...... I'll have to dig out the listing and schematics, but from memory, the Percom has the code in the BIOS to respond to the "?" SIO command. That was how most drives of the period switched to high speed mode. If the SIO command timed/errored out, DOS knew to not change the serial rate, but if the command succeeded, the return value was the new serial rate value to use. It was assumed that the drive switched to the higher speed after responding to the SIO command. The Percom had the command, but no way to change the serial clock to the serial chip used to communicate with the Atari. My goal was to add another clock at the proper rate and a switch to select between them. The Percom used the 6809, which was my first real exposure to that processor. I wrote my own 6809 disassembler for the Atari to generate the code from the BIOS. IIRC, I pulled the rom from the Percom PCB and put it in an Atari cart to dump it to my brother's 1050 so I could disassemble it. I had one of our 400's with a switch wired to the /CART line so we could put in a cart, disable the cart to boot into DOS, then enable the cart and dump to a file. Worked great for dumping those carts that were flagged as diagnostic to keep DOS from loading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kogden Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 As far as a serial interconnect bus, I think SIO was still probably the most forward-thinking design of the day. For a home computer, the Atari machines could be expanded considerably more than most. Especially with PBI thrown in the mix though PBI never got the attention it really deserved. All this expansion integrates nicely with the ROM OS if done properly and makes things more straightforward. As far as archaic systems go, I think the Atari 8-bit clearly wins on the plug-and-play expansion and versatility front. Probably among the fastest 8-bits in regards to I/O as well. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Don't forget the one major advantage and ultra cool thing about the Commodore drives is that they can have code uploaded to them. You can even use the drive as a co-processor for the computer. Back in those Days I had the 1040ST as a programmable Drive for the Atari. You know, how much faster the ST was as a Co-Processor, compared to the 1541 So, not sure, if that argue counts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 A result of that was my "Atari-Schiffeversenken" where the ST changes from a drive to a networking computer, to have two players playing "battleship" ... ATARI Schiffeversenken.zip To have this running, you have to start it on any ST that is connected to the SIO of the 8-bit.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefan Both Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Hi Stefan- .... Any other suggestions for the comparisons? -Larry Dear Larry, I just wanted to make a little contribution to this thread. I definitively don't want do discuss the pros and conts of the different brands, or something else. Why? +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ My own experience: Well... I own a lot of different oldies. At first ,for example, I totally ignored the Atari 8bits, as well as the CPCs. Those "ugly strange sisters of "my" C64... The seperated DOS and the Basic "thing" of my XL. That silly CP/M and this Basic of the CPC with it's strange behavior... It is "soooo siiiimple" to start a program with my C64. Just a LOAD, and LIST command, and you see the directory of the disk... you can use your cursor then, to navigate to the file entry you want to load. A simple LOAD as prefix - and a ,8,1 as suffix, and the program starts... ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ But with the years, I busy myself with those "strange" computers. I learned a lot, and I learned to love ALL of those other computers with its (often unique features). In fact, I'm a bit proud to be able to operate those ancestors of our PC's. It is the opposite of boring It is funny to see, that in every "specialised forum" AtariAge/Forum64/ Amstrad(Schneider) CPC... there is a "what was the better computer" thread - from time to time. And best of all... guess what is the conclusion of those threads Man, I tell ya, I'm happy to know you guys, as well as my colleagues from classic-computing. Your forum helped me a lot to become familiar with the XL. 30 years after my first prejudices I'm a bit ashamed, after I learned more about your preferred computers. One last thing. Maybe it's a fairer competition, I you choose a real opponent for the 1050. You could do a lot of funny things with the 1541. e.g. telling the printer to be a listener, and the 1541 to be the talker. That means, the cwmak 1541 (computerwithoutmonitorandkeyboard) spooled the file to the printer without the C64's help... but... IT WAS THE SLOWEST DRIVE EVER. Greets Stefan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 (edited) The problem , I have , when people explain "C64 was slow, but it also had been faster, if you use this or that" is ,that what we see today is a summary of software that runs on hardware that hasn't died out over the years. Millions of C64 and floppies had been sold, and, if Big C had the clear "go" for higher speeds on every hardware, they surely had built it into every hardware. But, particular Commodore had a lot of crap sold, which means Hardware that ran, but ran with limited settings. That Hardware died out and the rest of those "millions" of C64s is able to run high speed stuff. On the other hand, Atari missed to build fully working DMA Controllers. Cartridges were able to change 8K of RAM with just a poke. This would result in a DMA-like controller, moving up to 20MB around.... Edited January 27, 2015 by emkay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kogden Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 There were much worse machines you could buy than a C64. I'm just saying from an I/O standpoint, a development standpoint and an expandability standpoint, the Atari clearly has the edge. The C64 was definitely cheaper to build and "good enough" at the time for most casual home users or parents making a decision based on price. It wasn't pathetic for the time.... it just wasn't.... special I guess. Between a VIC20, C64 or ZX81.... I'll take the C64 any day. I'm glad my parents didn't hate me enough to buy me a ZX81. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Loguidice Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 There were much worse machines you could buy than a C64. I'm just saying from an I/O standpoint, a development standpoint and an expandability standpoint, the Atari clearly has the edge. The C64 was definitely cheaper to build and "good enough" at the time for most casual home users or parents making a decision based on price. It wasn't pathetic for the time.... it just wasn't.... special I guess. Between a VIC20, C64 or ZX81.... I'll take the C64 any day. I'm glad my parents didn't hate me enough to buy me a ZX81. I think this is an extreme mis-characterization of what the C-64 was and is capable of, which is evidenced by the amazing products that still get made today for the platform. To say there was nothing special about the C-64 (what about the SID for goodness sake?) or that most purchase decisions were based on price is simply not accurate. There were plenty of cheaper systems. It's true the C-64 had an extraordinary combination of price/performance for the time, but if it wasn't married to features like 64K of RAM standard and audio-visuals the equal of any other 8-bit (and some that cost more had far inferior audio-visuals), it's quite likely it wouldn't have sold anywhere near the way that it did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) I think this is an extreme mis-characterization of what the C-64 was and is capable of, which is evidenced by the amazing products that still get made today for the platform. To say there was nothing special about the C-64 (what about the SID for goodness sake?) or that most purchase decisions were based on price is simply not accurate. There were plenty of cheaper systems. It's true the C-64 had an extraordinary combination of price/performance for the time, but if it wasn't married to features like 64K of RAM standard and audio-visuals the equal of any other 8-bit (and some that cost more had far inferior audio-visuals), it's quite likely it wouldn't have sold anywhere near the way that it did. The C64 really shouldn't be pressed down. The SID, well, remembering back to those days, it was weird to have this noisy chip playing clean notes, but every synthesizer was better. Till today I ask myself, what was it that made the SID being accepted as a "real" music device for many people from the start. And the 16 colour "hires" mode. In Germany we had "Bildschirmtext" (Datex-P) and the C64 was the only "cheap" homecomputer that was able to show/handle the content right. Even CPC couldn't display it. So the C64 was used there long time at "professional" workplaces. Edited January 28, 2015 by emkay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 The 64 has some great hardware. I just the wish the implementation of the system wasn't quite so minimalist and cheap. It borrowed waaay too much from the VIC-20. Of course, once you've got code running on it, all that matters is the chipset. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle22 Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Thanx for the Percom info Chilly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fujidude Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Atari had some cool stuff you could do with the display list, but the 16 color hi-res mode on the C=64 was better. Also the SID was better than POKEY for sound. For everything else (unless I'm forgetting something), I give the nod to the Atari8. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Atari had some cool stuff you could do with the display list, but the 16 color hi-res mode on the C=64 was better. Also the SID was better than POKEY for sound. For everything else (unless I'm forgetting something), I give the nod to the Atari8.SID was better for Music, but not for Sound... definitely 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbking67 Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 (edited) Pokey was no slouch... there are many examples where pokey sounds better... and it has 4 voices. SID Is well loved, but pokey doesn't get the credit it deserves. Just listen to the music in mule, ghost busters or ballblazer... pokey stacks up very well. Edited January 28, 2015 by bbking67 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Willy Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Thanx for the Percom info Chilly. No problem. When I locate the stuff, I'll scan the blueprints and post them and the BIOS disassembly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle22 Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 No problem. When I locate the stuff, I'll scan the blueprints and post them and the BIOS disassembly. cool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 That might be the case, but 19200 also makes sense when you consider the nature of SIO. If you could afford it, you could have 7 or 8 devices connected and the data will get quite noisy. If SIO is fixed at a high value, then things stop working. Happy warp speed has problems with just a few devices. I wanted to add a little bit. I've been watching a talk by Joe Decuir: And he says they limited IO to 19200 to keep the FCC happy. I'm sure that's why the speed limiting caps are there too. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fujidude Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Pokey was no slouch... there are many examples where pokey sounds better... and it has 4 voices. SID Is well loved, but pokey doesn't get the credit it deserves. Just listen to the music in mule, ghost busters or ballblazer... pokey stacks up very well. Yes, there are examples where POKEY sounds better than SID, but there are far more situations where the reverse is true. I was always an A8 person and never had a C64, but I have to admit SID is more capable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
landgraf Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Mind you, the 1541 is pretty much the 1540 disk drive for the VIC-20 with minor firmware addons to accomodate for the C64 CPU being halted every now and then by videochip DMA (what slows down data transfer even further, btw. ). C= didn't even bother to make a proper user manual for some time, they just put a different coverpage on the 1540 manual an wiggled in an extra page describing the two commands to switch between 1540 and 1541 mode - everything else in the manual still refers to the 1540 and VIC-20 So while 300 bytes/sec. seem kinda tolerable considering the stock VIC-20 had only 5K of ram, it's certainly way too slow to transfer up to 64K. However, most commercial games came with their own fastloaders as part of the copy protection, and some of them were really fast in terms of throughput. A nice overview can be found here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesD Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 I wanted to add a little bit. I've been watching a talk by Joe Decuir: ... And he says they limited IO to 19200 to keep the FCC happy. I'm sure that's why the speed limiting caps are there too. He said the TRS-80 was an 8080 machine. Interesting video. Too bad they had to reduce the noise to the point where it limited speed. I know people think the FCC was stupid for being this strict but it was a product of the unshielded antenna cable that was used at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 He said the TRS-80 was an 8080 machine. Interesting video. Too bad they had to reduce the noise to the point where it limited speed. I know people think the FCC was stupid for being this strict but it was a product of the unshielded antenna cable that was used at the time. Yeah, he made some boo-boos but I'll cut him a little slack. If you don't live this stuff day to day, you get a little rusty on the details. Did you notice that the De Re Atari diagram he showed (26 min. mark) doesn't seem to indicate that Pokey makes sound? What exactly is Pokey feeding into GTIA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 So while 300 bytes/sec. seem kinda tolerable considering the stock VIC-20 had only 5K of ram, it's certainly way too slow to transfer up to 64K. However, most commercial games came with their own fastloaders as part of the copy protection, and some of them were really fast in terms of throughput. A nice overview can be found here. Eventually they did, but I got an 800 in 1981, and a couple friends of mine got C64s within the first year it was available and I can tell you loading games was initially TORTUROUS!! There was a practice of opening the drive door every once in a while to see if the system had locked up (which apparently could happen in a way which would leave the drive running). The drive would seek and the busy light would flicker if the drive was still reading so you'd close the door and go have a sandwich or something. The ability to upload drive code saved that system, IMO. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Did you notice that the De Re Atari diagram he showed (26 min. mark) doesn't seem to indicate that Pokey makes sound? What exactly is Pokey feeding into GTIA?That's fitting to what I was writing some "weeks" ago POKEY was intentionally planned as a "POKEY" driving chip GTIA was planned as the Graphics and Sound-Device Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.