Atari 5200 HDMI, Component Video, S-Video and video upgrade comments

[+-^CrossBow^-]

The plug in version does simply it yes. But keep in mind that on the 5200 you still have to attach the 4050 buffer IC in the circuit somewhere. Or at least I always have to. If you don't do some trim and rework on the UAV and just get it as it comes populated, then you won't really be able to attach the top RF shield back onto the system afterwards. I basically order the kit unpopulated. Use my own wire leads for the jumper connections and then mount the 4050 on the top pins that are used to seat into the 4050's socket on the mainboard.

[TheCoolDave]

The plug in version does simply it yes. But keep in mind that on the 5200 you still have to attach the 4050 buffer IC in the circuit somewhere. Or at least I always have to. If you don't do some trim and rework on the UAV and just get it as it comes populated, then you won't really be able to attach the top RF shield back onto the system afterwards. I basically order the kit unpopulated. Use my own wire leads for the jumper connections and then mount the 4050 on the top pins that are used to seat into the 4050's socket on the mainboard.

 

Thanks, I hope there is a diagram/directions someplace on how to wire/install it...

 

I'll order it on Friday

[+-^CrossBow^-]

I believe MacRorie provides a set of instructions when you purchase the UAV from his site now. There is also Bryan's original blog which, is what I used when I did mine. Audio isn't covered but there are a number of ways to do that.

http://atariage.com/forums/blog/695/entry-14462-install-uav-ac-in-the-5200/

[eegt97]

I installed this one that the Brewing Academy now sells and he does ship with instructions and provides a link to softcopy from the site linked below One thing about the kit version I received, the screw in terminals were installed on the bottom side of the board which is opposite of the pictures I saw in the UAV thread. This prevented me from installing directly over the 4050IC using the socket included. I had to use another socket (lucky to have another on hand) to get it high enough to prevent it from hitting the chip just north of the 4050 (can't recall which it is offhand). I didn't really have the desire to go through de-soldering and re-installing that.

 

Manual Link if you want to take a look: http://tinyurl.com/yyq25uvz

[TheCoolDave]

Thanks, I'm sure I will have more questions when I get it. Thanks for all the advice. The audio will be a must but, maybe I can figure out from the docs..

 

I'm getting closer to my goal... only about 4-5 consoles left mod

[+-^CrossBow^-]

I installed this one that the Brewing Academy now sells and he does ship with instructions and provides a link to softcopy from the site linked below One thing about the kit version I received, the screw in terminals were installed on the bottom side of the board which is opposite of the pictures I saw in the UAV thread. This prevented me from installing directly over the 4050IC using the socket included. I had to use another socket (lucky to have another on hand) to get it high enough to prevent it from hitting the chip just north of the 4050 (can't recall which it is offhand). I didn't really have the desire to go through de-soldering and re-installing that.

 

Manual Link if you want to take a look: http://tinyurl.com/yyq25uvz

 

This is why I but the kit version that is unassembled. I then just use small leads to create the jumper points directly. I solder on the socket pins to the bottom so it can be plugged into the 4050 socket and then solder the 4050 ontop of the pins on the top side of the UAV. So yeah...I basically rebuilt how it is laid out but then I'm also able to easily put the terminal block on the top again etc.

[eegt97]

 

This is why I but the kit version that is unassembled. I then just use small leads to create the jumper points directly. I solder on the socket pins to the bottom so it can be plugged into the 4050 socket and then solder the 4050 ontop of the pins on the top side of the UAV. So yeah...I basically rebuilt how it is laid out but then I'm also able to easily put the terminal block on the top again etc.

 

Ah yeah, that sounds like a good way to do it. Also, reading my previous comment sounds like I wasn't happy with it, Couldn't be further from the truth, the mod is great! The thing I really like about the UAV over previous video mods I've used is the ability to set the artifact colors and get those dialed in right.

[+-^CrossBow^-]

 

Ah yeah, that sounds like a good way to do it. Also, reading my previous comment sounds like I wasn't happy with it, Couldn't be further from the truth, the mod is great! The thing I really like about the UAV over previous video mods I've used is the ability to set the artifact colors and get those dialed in right.

 

Yes that is a cool feature but it doesn't do much on the 7800 side. Although I've since learned in looking at the Brewing Academy docs that there is a jumper to invert the artifacting? But it isn't listed where this is on the UAV? I'd be curious if that has any results in correcting the odd composite coloring you get on 7800 games that use artifacting like Tower Toppler.

 

Also, I think MacRorie installs the terminal block on the bottom so that you can easily see what connection is what as that is only marked on the top of the UAV. The green terminal block ...blocks those markings so you have to know what goes where in that case. I've got it memorized as this point after so many installs but not everyone would.

[eegt97]

 

Yes that is a cool feature but it doesn't do much on the 7800 side. Although I've since learned in looking at the Brewing Academy docs that there is a jumper to invert the artifacting? But it isn't listed where this is on the UAV? I'd be curious if that has any results in correcting the odd composite coloring you get on 7800 games that use artifacting like Tower Toppler.

 

Also, I think MacRorie installs the terminal block on the bottom so that you can easily see what connection is what as that is only marked on the top of the UAV. The green terminal block ...blocks those markings so you have to know what goes where in that case. I've got it memorized as this point after so many installs but not everyone would.

 

Yes, there is a jumper, in fact I'm pretty sure I had to invert it to get it right for the 5200, or at least I experimented with it. I'd have to go back and look, maybe I found which one it was from one of the threads here, been a while, just can't quite recall.

[HDTV1080P]

I finally purchased an Atari 5200 videogame system for the very first time

 

Brief comparison between the Atari 5200 and ColecoVision system

 

 

 

My first videogame system that I owned was the ColecoVision videogame system that I purchased in August 1982 or September of 1982 then the Expansion module #3 ADAM computer in October of 1983 was purchased. Therefore, the ColecoVison is the reference system that I compare all other systems too. Back in the 80’s I use to play with the Atari 5200 videogame system in retail stores but never owned one until summer of 2020.

 

I ended up purchasing both a used Atari 5200 4 port system and a used Atari 5200 2 port system to compare the different styles of systems and to do some testing on both systems. EBAY has many used Atari 5200 systems to choose from, however its much harder to find a 2 port Atari 5200 system for sale since most people want that system since it’s a better system. People are unloading their 4 port Atari 5200 systems and one needs to pay a premium price for a 2 port Atari 5200 system. The only advantage of the 4 port Atari system is that it allows one to play select rare 4 player games made for the Atari 5200 system.

 

The advantage of the 2 port Atari 5200 system is that 100% of them are compatible with the Atari 2600 adapter (most 4 port systems except for the later models do not work with the Atari 2600 adapter). Also, the other advantage of the Atari 5200 2 port system is that one is not required to use the Atari 5200 switch box. The 4 port Atari 5200 system unless taken apart and internally modified requires the custom switch box where the power cord plugs into the switch box instead of the actual Atari 5200 console. I liked my Atari 5200 2 port system where I do not need any switch box and the power cord plugs directly into the Atari 5200 videogame system console. Also, I noticed a little better picture quality on the 2 port system that does not use a switch box. Both of my Atari 5200 4 port and 2 port systems are unmodified and have the original RF NTSC output with no video modifications. I am disappointed that Atari made the RG-59 RF cable hardwired into the circuit board, so if the cable is every damaged the console needs to be taken apart to replace the cable. The ColecoVision has the better RF jack on the outside of the ColecoVision console case that allows a high quality RG6 RCA style cable between the length of 3 feet to 100 feet to be used.

 

While the original ColecoVision and Atari 5200 videogame cartridges from the 80’s had a maximum capacity of 32KB, now with bank switching technology in the 21^st Century the capacity can go much higher for both systems. The ColecoVision videogame system can now use 8MB Supergame cartridges and perhaps something similar can be designed for the Atari 5200 videogame system (Also both systems can use the ATARIMAX Ultimate SD Wafer Drive which allows a videogame developer to make a videogame with up to 32GB storage capacity with the ability to store high scores and save paused games to a 32GB SDHC card). The ColecoVision cartridge shells have the advantage of being smaller in size, however I like the style of the Atari 5200 cartridge shell that protects the circuit board from getting damaged. The ColecoVision cartridge circuit board is not fully enclosed inside the cartridge shell when compared to the Atari 5200 cartridge circuit board.

 

There were over 2 million ColecoVisions sold and only around one million Atari 5200 videogame systems sold, therefore the ColecoVision was a more popular videogame system. While both the ColecoVision and Atari 5200 system have an expansion module interface. The ColecoVision expansion module interface is better and actually was used by both Coleco in the 80’s and third party companies like OPCODE in the 21^st Century. There was the Expansion module #1 Atari 2600 adapter and Expansion module #3 ADAM computer that was designed for the ColecoVision system front expansion port. However, it should be mentioned that even though Atari never used the rear small expansion port on the Atari 5200, they did come out with a Atari 2600 adapter that plugs into the Atari 5200 cartridge slot. Perhaps it would be possible to use the rear expansion port on the Atari 5200 and the top cartridge slot to turn the system into an Atari computer with a keyboard (or maybe not). Atari already had two separate computer systems since 1979, the Atari 400 and Atari 800, therefore someone that wanted a computer would have just purchased an Atari 800. So, while the October 1983 Adam computer by Coleco was more powerful then the Atari computers, Atari had a computer 4 years earlier.

 

One of the biggest weaknesses of the Atari 5200 system is the non-centering analog controller. Therefore, I prefer the ColecoVision controller over the Atari 5200 controller. However, if Atari would have made the analog controller to be a centering analog controller I would have liked the Atari controller better. There are some advantages to the Atari 5200 controller over the ColecoViion controller plus the ColecoVision only had the standard 2 controller ports instead of some Atari 5200 systems that have 4 controller ports. Some advantages to the Atari 5200 controller is the Start, Pause, and Reset button on the controller itself. Also there is 4 separate function buttons on the Atari 5200 controller, ColecoVision owners were required to purchase the CoelcoVision Super Action controller to get the 4 separate function buttons. The ColecoVision Super action controller is a better controller with a spinning wheel on the top of the controller also. My point is the Atari 5200 controller is not as bad as some people complain about. While playing Pacman on the Atari 5200 I had to get use to the non-centering analog controller joystick that I did not like, but overall 95% of the time the controller functioned fine for me in my testing of Atari 5200 videogames.   

  

The ColecoVsion/ADAM system has a very nice Roller controller that has dedicated games like Slither that make use of the Roller Controller. However, there were not many games made for the ColecoVision that make use of the Roller Controller. One advantage of the CoelcoVsion/ADAM Roller Controller is that it has a switch on the controller that allowed for any standard joystick game to work with the Roller Controller, however the catch was the Roller Controller no longer functioned like a true trackball but instead did not work as well when compared to videogames that required the dedicated Roller Controller. Personally, I only use the ColecoVision/ADAM Roller Controller for videogames that require the Roller Controller, since I do not like the way the Roller Controller operates in the simulated joystick mode for videogames that do not make use of the Roller Controller.  

 

I own an Atari 5200 Track Ball controller now and it is a very nice system that uses only one controller port on the videogame console instead of two ports that the ColecoVision/ADAM Roller Controller requires. The Atari 5200 Roller controller has the keypad and function buttons built into the controller itself which is much easier to setup. Since the ColecoVision/ADAM DB9 controller ports do not provide power, a special power plug adapter plugs into either the ColecoVision power supply or the ADAM computer power supply in order to power the ColecoVision/ADAM Roller Controller. One advantage of the Atari 5200 system is that each of the controller ports are DB15 with plus 5 volts offered on each controller port, which allows the Atari 5200 Roller controller to receive power without needing an external power plug adapter. Therefore even though the CoelcoVision/ADAM Roller controller is very nice, the Atari 5200 Roller Controller is easier to setup because of the better engineering choice to use a controller port that provides power plus the keypads built into the Roller controller instead of requiring the two joysticks to be placed in a cradle like the ColecoVision/ADAM Roller Controller. There appears to be many more videogames made for the Atari 5200 Roller Controller when compared to the ColecoVision Roller Controller. Also, Atari was smart and made their videogames automatically detect when the Roller Controller is hooked up and when it is not. Therefore, as far as I am aware all Atari 5200 videogames will work with the standard Atari 5200 game controller and some videogames specially detect the Roller controller attached and switch to a Roller controller true trackball mode. However one disadvantage of the Atari 5200 Roller Controller is that it is only compatible with certain games that are specially designed for the Roller controller, there is no joystick mode for the Atari 5200 Roller Controller. Therefore many games will not work for it (However I personally do not like the joystick mode on the ColecoVision/ADAM Roller Controller since it’s better to use a joystick then to have a simulated trackball mode instead of a true trackball mode). While it was possible to make ColecoVision/ADAM games work with the Roller Controller or joystick with an online menu selection, many of the dedicated Roller Controller games for the ColecoVision work only with the Roller Controller which can hurt videogame sells. At least Atari made all their Atari 5200 videogames work with the standard joystick with many Atari 5200 videogames automatically switching to the Roller Controller mode if the videogame was programmed to send a control flag to authorize true trackball compatibility. So very nice design on the Atari 5200 Roller Controller.

 

Unless one downloads an Atari 5200 emulator for their Windows PC, some people have not played an Atari 5200 videogame since they were a young kid or teenager in a retail store in the 80’s. The 1982 Atari 5200 videogame system clearly has a much better picture and sound quality when compared to the 1977 Atari 2600 videogame system (just look at Pacman for comparison).  While the graphics are better on the Atari 5200 system, since I am use to playing Space invaders on the Expansion Module #1 Atari 2600 adapter for the CoelcoVision, I prefer the Atari 2600 Space invaders since that is what I grew up with (even though the Atari 5200 version has better graphics and was specially designed to work with the Roller Controller). But overall, the Atari 5200 is a big improvement over the Atari 2600 videogame system (Over 30 million Atari 2600 systems were sold versus the Atari 5200 only sold 1 million systems).

 

When it came time to compare the exact same early 80’s ColecoVision videogame to the Atari 5200 80’s videogame, the ColecoVision videogame system was the clear winner in picture and sound quality. However, some videogames for both systems were real close in quality and one might prefer one game system over the other. In 1983 Atari made Pacman for the ColecoVision, however the quality of the Pacman game was so good that it is even better then the Atari 5200 Pacman game, therefore Atari decided not to release the Pacman game for the ColecoVision. However, someone leaked the 1983 unreleased version of Pacman in the 21^st Century online (perhaps a former Atari employee uploaded it online). I have the actual Pacman game cartridge for the Atari 5200 videogame system and when I compared it to the Pacman made for the ColecoVision, I liked the graphics quality better for the ColecoVision version especially after Pacman eats a ghost and the eyes return back to the center (Both versions of Pacman for the two systems are real good). I have the actual game cartridge for Popeye for the Atari 5200 videogame system that was made by Parker Brothers, and Parker Brothers released the exact same game title on the CoelcoVision videogame system. Popeye for the ColecoVision has better graphics when compared to the Atari 5200 version of Popeye. The game characters are more detailed on the ColecoVision and the sound quality appeared to be better when compared to the Atari 5200. Recently in the 21^st Century some third-party videogames were released for the Atari 5200 system called Beef Drop and Venture. Beef Drop looks and feels real similar to Burger Time, however the graphics quality for Burger Time is better on the ColecoVision with more detailed characters. Also when I played the Venture videogame on the Atari 5200 the sound was off or different and I prefer the ColecoVision version of Venture.  

 

In summary every videogame and computer system from the 1980’s has its pluses and minuses. The 1982 Atari videogame system real world videogame quality is not as good when comparing the exact same game titles offered on the 1982 ColecoVision. Plus, in 1983 the Expansion Module #3 ADAM computer increased the videogame size capacity from 32KB to 256KB with Digital Data Packs that hold Super Games. Overall, the ColecoVision was the best quality system between the years 1982 to 1985. In North America in October of 1985 the Nintendo videogame system came out with a little bit better graphics when compared to the ColecoVision.

 

However, every system has its pluses and minuses, and the Atari 5200 is a close second to the ColecoVision with some games being almost as good as the ColecoVision in terms of graphics and sound quality. The Atari 5200 was a clear improvement over the Atari 2600, and I wish Coleco would have made an Atari 5200 adapter back in the early 80’s since ATARI has exclusive games that were never released on the ColecoVision (In fact every videogame system has exclusive videogames). The Atari 5200 has a nice Roller Controller with a game console that has the better quality DB15 controller ports that offer voltage. Coleco’s mistake with the CoelcoVision and ADAM is the controller ports did not offer any voltage. So, the Expansion Module #2 Steering Wheel, Roller Controller, and later on a third party ADAM mouse all required a special power supply or adapter plug to fit onto the original ColecoVision or ADAM power supply. The ColecoVision has a better quality expansion module interface when compared to the unused Atari 5200 expansion module interface. It would have been interesting to see companies like OPCODE make a Super Game Module for the Atari 5200 videogame system. Maybe extra memory and a sound chip could be plugged into the Atari 5200 to improve the videogame quality and sound quality. However, with only one million Atari 5200 systems made and an estimated 10,000 people still using the Atari 5200 system the demand might not exist for a OPCODE Super Game Module specially made for the Atari 5200. The ColecoVision had over 2 million systems made and the ADAM had over 500,000 systems made (many standalone ADAM systems). Therefore there is an estimated 25,000 people still using their ColecoVision/ADAM systems. If a company like OPCODE was every to make a Super Game Module for the Atari 5200, then a virtual SGM could be ported over to an Atari 5200 Windows emulator. There are over 1.5 billion Windows devices in the world and most people playing Atari 5200 and ColecoVision videogames today are downloading a free emulator for their Windows PC or other operating system.

Edited August 17, 2020 by HDTV1080P

[HDTV1080P]

Another advantage of the ColecoVision system, is that if one turns the videogame console on without a cartridge, they get a nice ColecoVision logo screen that says “ColecoVision: Turn Game Off Before Inserting Cartridge or Expansion Module”. For some reason almost all 80’s videogame systems including the ATARI 5200 require a cartridge to be inserted to get a logo on the screen.  

Edited September 1, 2020 by HDTV1080P

[+-^CrossBow^-]

11 hours ago, HDTV1080P said:

Another advantage of the ColecoVision system, is that if one turns the videogame console on without a cartridge, they get a nice ColecoVision logo screen that says “ColecoVision: Turn Game Off Before Inserting Cartridge or Expansion Module”. For some reason almost all 80’s videogame systems including the ATARI 5200 require a cartridge to be inserted to get a logo on the screen.  

Normally I don't really have any issues with your posts. But in this case, you are totally derailing the topic by turning what is basically a thread on options for various video upgrades on the 5200 to a comparison between the CV and the 5200?! You either search for and add to a thread that already likely exists to add in your opinions on this matter, or you start a new one dedicated to that purpose. You don't jump in and just randomly start comparing systems in a thread that isn't about comparing systems?

 

[ApolloBoy]

31 minutes ago, -^CrossBow^- said:

Normally I don't really have any issues with your posts. But in this case, you are totally derailing the topic by turning what is basically a thread on options for various video upgrades on the 5200 to a comparison between the CV and the 5200?! You either search for and add to a thread that already likely exists to add in your opinions on this matter, or you start a new one dedicated to that purpose. You don't jump in and just randomly start comparing systems in a thread that isn't about comparing systems?

 

I put him on ignore a few years ago and I've been better for it honestly.

[+-^CrossBow^-]

2 minutes ago, ApolloBoy said:

I put him on ignore a few years ago and I've been better for it honestly.

I skim through his postings as occasionally he has some interesting insight and opinions to present. Heck I wouldn't have known about the other CV power supply solution (And a much better one at that) over the ColUSB if I had him on ignore so for that I'm glad to see his postings. But this one was just... Well again it had NOTHING at all to do with what was being discussed in this thread and I just couldn't be silent on it this time...

 

[HDTV1080P]

Yes I should have created a new thread to compare the ATARI 5200 to the ColecoVison system, but then maybe someone might complain that I started a new thread. I originally started this current thread that people are reading. There was only one brief post that was added to this thread to compare the ColecoVision and ATARI 5200 systems (plus a second brief comment that I could not add to that brief post since the ATARIAGE forum will not allow one to edit a post after 1 hour).

 

Maybe in the future I might move from RF NTSC output on the ATARI 5200 to some type of video upgrade like HDMI output so it has a clean picture like a Atari 5200 PC emulator that is connected by HDMI.     

Edited September 1, 2020 by HDTV1080P

[Osgeld]

might help if you did not make every single post from the perspective of "colecovision is the only thing I have ever known" CV was my one and only games machine until the sega genesis came out, I love it its a great machine for its era, I do not make it the main focal point of every post I make as if it was as popular as the NES or something ... its a bit of an obscure main line 80's console. 

[adamchevy]

Back when I owned a 5200 I did the Sophia Rev C DVI mod and it looked great! I really like the 5200s trak ball, and trak ball games. If I could afford to have all of the systems I enjoy playing, the 5200 would be in my top 5. I also really like the 5200 cartridge design. You really feel like your getting something for your money.

 

[HDTV1080P]

3 hours ago, adamchevy said:

Back when I owned a 5200 I did the Sophia Rev C DVI mod and it looked great! I really like the 5200s trak ball, and trak ball games. If I could afford to have all of the systems I enjoy playing, the 5200 would be in my top 5. I also really like the 5200 cartridge design. You really feel like your getting something for your money.

 

Thanks for the information. DVI can handle up to 1080P (2K) resolutions with no audio. HDMI 2.1 can handle up to 10K with HDR with audio. However, since the Sophia board uses 1536 x 960 or 1280 x 1024 resolution, both DVI and HDMI will have the exact same picture quality. However since 100% of all 8K and 4K flat panel screens in existence and many 1080P legacy computer monitors use HDMI inputs, I wish the Sophia board would have used native HDMI. Sure most the time a DVI to HDMI adapter cable will work. To bad there is not a switch on the Sophia board to switch between 960 pixels or 1024 pixels. They sell the 1024 version since it works best with computer monitors and the 960 version works best with televisions. Maybe sometime I might do the upgrade to DVI output but I wish the board could be configured for both resolutions since I may switch between a computer monitor and a large flat panel once and awhile.

If there was a HDMI version with more resolution support, this board would be more popular. However I guess Atari 5200 owners should be happy a DVI version exists.

 

https://thebrewingacademy.com/products/dvi-hdmi-for-atari-5200-sophia-rev-c-dvi-output?_pos=1&_sid=b1b58085e&_ss=r

Edited September 5, 2020 by HDTV1080P

[Osgeld]

HDMI is a licensed product dvi is not

 

so on top of member fees, a butt load of complience testing and a cost per unit

 

Ya you could ignore that for a small project but I dunno what thr penalties are for a "product" on sale to the public