Cyprian Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Atari TT shifter sometimes referred as "double shifter"?! - TT shifter had 64bit width and 16MHz access to 154KB of ST-RAM (16 256Kbit 100nS) link and have 250nS time slots for shifter/CPU RAM access - ST shifter had 16bit width and 8MHz access to 32KB ST-RAM? Shifter never interfere with CPU ram access since MC68000 can read from RAM every 4 cycles and shifter read from RAM in oposite cycles since memory is fast enough for this. It has 500ns time slots for shifter/CPU RAM access. - Falcon Videl had 32bit width and 16MHz but with Burst mode of FAST-PAGE RAM (3, 1, 1... cycles; total 17 longword in sequence) with no limit on memory amount, only limit was bus and memory speed (e.g. if you increase bus speed from 16 to 25MHz you can get greater resolutions!). Does MC68030 in TT have any speed penal if TT run in specific resolution or is MC68030 running always at full speed regardless of resolution? There are infos in link that I left but it is not clear to me they stated that RAM have slices of 250nS (same as speed of RAM in ST??)... in case of ST-RAM, the TT has the same memory access scenario as the ST. Memory has 250nS time slots interleaved between TTShifter and CPU. Therefore any video mode in both machines has no impact on the CPU. The only difference is the CPU speed 32MHz vs 8MHz and the bus wide 32bit vs 16bit The same story is with A1200 which has exactly the same 280nS memory access scenario as A500. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoidLittleMan Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 in case of ST-RAM, the TT has the same memory access scenario as the ST. Memory has 250nS time slots interleaved between TTShifter and CPU. Therefore any video mode in both machines has no impact on the CPU. The only difference is the CPU speed 32MHz vs 8MHz and the bus wide 32bit vs 16bit The same story is with A1200 which has exactly the same 280nS memory access scenario as A500. I think that there is more in this: 2x bandwith than in ST is not enough for 320x480 in 256 colors - it needs 4x . Still, it can be done without extra CPU slowdown because as I know, TT RAM is actually 64-bit for video. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyprian Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 I think that there is more in this: 2x bandwith than in ST is not enough for 320x480 in 256 colors - it needs 4x . Still, it can be done without extra CPU slowdown because as I know, TT RAM is actually 64-bit for video. yep. TTShifter has 4x wider access to the ST-Ram than the ST Shifter: 64bit vs 16bit. We can check the ST-Ram memory bandwidth with Nembench benchmark. For the TT it shows the same figures for all video modes: Linear 32bit read (ST-Ram) -> 7.867 MByte/sec (~148%) Linear 32bit write (ST-Ram) -> 7.867 MByte/sec (~121%) In case of Falcon, Nembench shows a different figures for a different video modes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calimero Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 OK, I agree with the general consensus, that Workbench and productivity in Amiga interlaced resolution SUCKS! But is it any worse than attempting AGA Super HiRes mode on a TV? We're talking 1280 pixels wide, here! hm... Falcon with 1600x600px http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=25543 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foebane Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 hm... Falcon with 1600x600px http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=25543 Hmm, didn't know that. Guess Falcon trumps AGA there once again (audio aside). But does Falcon have a proper Chunky mode? Was Doom ever attempted on it satisfactorily? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayreon Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 (edited) http://doom.wikia.com/wiki/BAD_MOOD or for Quake 2 http://devilsdoorbell.com/2015/01/21/falcon030-quake-ii-idtech-2/ Edited February 9, 2016 by Ayreon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynxpro Posted February 9, 2016 Author Share Posted February 9, 2016 I'm surprised Amiga enthusiasts - and commercial 3rd party hardware companies - didn't bring out an upgrade featuring the Motorola 56K DSP found in the Falcon030 and the NeXT computers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calimero Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Hmm, didn't know that. Guess Falcon trumps AGA there once again (audio aside). But does Falcon have a proper Chunky mode? Was Doom ever attempted on it satisfactorily? Doug finished his BadMood project (started decades ago): When you are there, check his "Quake" project for 16MHz Falcon...: 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynxpro Posted February 9, 2016 Author Share Posted February 9, 2016 One of the things that bugs me about both the ST and the Amiga is that so much commercial software [games] won't work with a 68010 because of the differences with protected mode operations. Yet a lot of games work fantastic on a Sega Genesis [Mega Drive] with a 68010 upgrade... Check out Tengen's Genesis port of Hard Drivin' playing on a Genesis modded with a 10Mhz 68010 here: It's definitely a separate topic but me thinks the Jaguar's [backup] CPU should've been a 68010 instead of a 68000... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barnieg Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 I'm surprised Amiga enthusiasts - and commercial 3rd party hardware companies - didn't bring out an upgrade featuring the Motorola 56K DSP found in the Falcon030 and the NeXT computers. http://amiga.resource.cx/exp/delfinaplus Not sure if would be possible to use these for anything other than audio 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DarkLord Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 (edited) Hmm, didn't know that. Guess Falcon trumps AGA there once again (audio aside). But does Falcon have a proper Chunky mode? Was Doom ever attempted on it satisfactorily? Falcon audio is awesome...compared to almost anything from that era. Glad the others posted links to Doug Little's work - the guy is amazing and just shows how much a stock Atari Falcon is capable of. Edited February 10, 2016 by DarkLord 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foebane Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Falcon audio is awesome...compared to almost anything from that era. Glad the others posted links to Doug Little's work - the guy is amazing and just shows how much a stock Atari Falcon is capable of. If you can find a Falcon, that is. Also, that is Half-Life above, not Quake (regardless whether or not it's GoldSrc). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoidLittleMan Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 One of the things that bugs me about both the ST and the Amiga is that so much commercial software [games] won't work with a 68010 because of the differences with protected mode operations. Yet a lot of games work fantastic on a Sega Genesis [Mega Drive] with a 68010 upgrade... It's definitely a separate topic but me thinks the Jaguar's [backup] CPU should've been a 68010 instead of a 68000... There is support for 68010 in TOS 2.06. But it never became popular. Myself ordered couple years ago one 68010 from China to play little with it, but that CPU is just dead. Still, I can tell you some things: that CPU is just little faster than 68000 at same clock. Main benefit is that you can set vector base anywhere in RAM - but my opinion is that it helps not much in case of single tasking. The reason why many SW fails on 68010 is same why fails on 68030 - stackframe size - it's 8 bytes instead 6, right because flexible vector base address. All it can be fixed in SW relatively easy - I patched a lot of games for Falcon, TT in that way. With source code is even easier. So, in case of Sega it's just that coders took care about that it be 68010 compatible. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calimero Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Also, that is Half-Life above, not Quake (regardless whether or not it's GoldSrc). Third video is Quake. Dougs engine can load both: Quake1/2 and HalfLife maps... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foebane Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Third video is Quake. Dougs engine can load both: Quake1/2 and HalfLife maps... No, the games in order are: Doom, Half-Life, Quake 3 Arena. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oky2000 Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 I think the ST was fine as it was, the Amiga 1000 was indeed a ludicrously powerful machine (as decided by PCW and Byte magazines of the time of launch so don't be hating) BUT what you have to realise is the Amiga (all of them) is a hideous and horrible design to extract the maximum performance from, worse than the Sega Saturn (which essentially why the Playstation 1 did so much better, it was as powerful and very easy to code for so most of the games looked fantastic not just the in house coded ones). The ST was a colour Mac with a better OS within 12 months of the 128k Mac launch and at 70% lower cost (as well as that prick's favourite the PC XT), how much else could you ask for. So putting the elephant in the room, the Amiga, aside I think the ST only really needed a register to provide pixel scroll by redefining start of screen memory on the fly. If you didn't have to scroll 4 bitplanes with the 68000 whilst doing everything else the Gauntlet arcade motherboard does in hardware it would have made all the difference. The sound perhaps is a sore point for some people but I don't think the YM chip is actually that bad, go and listen to the Amstrad CPC's AY rendition of something like Uridium title tune and for me it sounds better than the C64 version. Also the 68000 is a massively capable CPU at 8mhz and the blitter of the Amiga 1000 may be 200% the speed of the 68000 it also causes a lot of contention on the system bus for access to the first 512kb of RAM unless you time your blits with pico second accuracy and with the overhead of scrolling removed it is fine for software sprites or game logic of any kind. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarian63 Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 (edited) I grew up with Atari XL machines, and naturally wanted to go to the next Atari machine, but I would never have gotten the ST (I did) had I known that the true successor to the A8 was the Amiga (I got an A500 soon after I found out). And then ironically had to put up with a friend's constant gloating that his ST was better than my "crappy Amiga" (I'm astounded by the sheer ignorance there). However the messed up cartoon commodore os though powerful was awful Edited February 12, 2016 by atarian63 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarian63 Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 AGA was a good step-up in spec for the Amiga, even if it was flawed in places, and it allowed the Amiga to be evenly-specced with the PC, except maybe sound. It's just a shame the AA chipset never got finished. I didn't say ST wasn't "real Atari", but I refuse to believe that Hi-Toro/Amiga developed Lorraine for Atari, they were just one of the potential buyers, the field was wide-open. It was just a horrible mess that all the Atari/Amiga/Commodore shenanigans happened in the first place. No it was a planned Atari console Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foebane Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 the Amiga (all of them) is a hideous and horrible design So putting the elephant in the room, the Amiga, aside I think the ST only really needed a register to provide pixel scroll by redefining start of screen memory on the fly. If you didn't have to scroll 4 bitplanes with the 68000 whilst doing everything else the Gauntlet arcade motherboard does in hardware it would have made all the difference. The sound perhaps is a sore point for some people but I don't think the YM chip is actually that bad, go and listen to the Amstrad CPC's AY rendition of something like Uridium title tune and for me it sounds better than the C64 version. Also the 68000 is a massively capable CPU at 8mhz and the blitter of the Amiga 1000 may be 200% the speed of the 68000 it also causes a lot of contention on the system bus for access to the first 512kb of RAM unless you time your blits with pico second accuracy and with the overhead of scrolling removed it is fine for software sprites or game logic of any kind. Your opinion. Where's the proof that it was a "horrible design"? That's YOUR opinion. In MY opinion the AY chip IS actually that bad, and my ears bleed if I listen to it too much. I can only tolerate it with sample playback, and even then it's bad. Where does this BLASPHEMY come from, Oky2000? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foebane Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 However the messed up cartoon commodore os though powerful was awful Better than that GEM crap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarian63 Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Better than that GEM crap. Neither I nor my customers thought so and we sold both 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DarkLord Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Better than that GEM crap. I actually like TOS/GEM. Especially v2.xx and up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynxpro Posted February 12, 2016 Author Share Posted February 12, 2016 (edited) However the messed up cartoon commodore os though powerful was awful People also seem to forget Commodore purchased [what became] the Amiga OS and then customized it [similar to Atari Corp and GEM]. Amiga OS [AmigaDOS/Workbench/whatever] certainly wouldn't have been running on any Atari Inc system using the Lorraine chipset. Edited February 12, 2016 by Lynxpro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynxpro Posted February 12, 2016 Author Share Posted February 12, 2016 I actually like TOS/GEM. Especially v2.xx and up. I'll admit, I didn't like GEM's default green color [i preferred blue and would change it]. But I definitely preferred/prefer the desktop metaphor vs the [Amiga] workbench metaphor. Seems like the market does too. I think the IBM Rational [Clearquest] Suite is the only stuff out there preserving the "workbench" metaphor today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calimero Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 I'll admit, I didn't like GEM's default green color [i preferred blue and would change it]. But I definitely preferred/prefer the desktop metaphor vs the [Amiga] workbench metaphor. Seems like the market does too. I think the IBM Rational [Clearquest] Suite is the only stuff out there preserving the "workbench" metaphor today. Amiga Workbench metaphor: "Mum tries out AmigaOS Workbench 1.1" 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.