Atari XL/XE vs ZX Spectrum... And the winner is...

[Faicuai]

3 minutes ago, youxia said:

Amstrad had the smallest userbase of the lot, but was still reasonably big in Europe (~3 million units).

 

This thread was surprisingly peaceful, tolerant and not at all ideological up till this point. I have a feeling it's about to change though...

 

By the smell of the rosy flowers... I think there's nothing to worry about it.

[+x=usr(1536)]

1 hour ago, youxia said:

Amstrad had the smallest userbase of the lot, but was still reasonably big in Europe (~3 million units).

 

If one wanted to stretch the point, it could be argued that both Amstrad and Sinclair's Z80-based machines should be lumped into the same category, at least after the Amstrad buyout of Sinclair.  It really would be stretching the point, though.

[Mazzspeed]

3 hours ago, Faicuai said:

And we already have brute-force examples on the A8-family (like Avery's video-player) that not only go really far on the host architecture, but most likely would make any other similar platform puke, if attempted in the same genuine and direct way as it runs on Atari.

The 16MB REU is essentially high speed storage via DMA and basically identical to original Commodore specs with the exception of capacity. C64 is stock otherwise.

 

 

 

[Mr Robot]

*fanboy mode* Atari XL with a rapidus can emulate the Speccy ? 
 

Ok with that out of the way I wanted a Spectrum when it came out but by the time I had saved the money the C64 was here and looked a much better machine.  The c64 was too expensive for my pocket money savings and aggressive price cutting got the XL into my price range and that was that. 
 

playing spectrum games now I don’t regret the Atari decision but some C64 games have been really outstanding. 
 

the CPC passed me by but looking back at it now it was amazing for the money. 

[Mazzspeed]

Didn't latter models of the CPC with inbuilt FDD's use some bizarre storage medium?

[Mr Robot]

3 inch floppy.

[Sinjinhawke]

6 hours ago, youxia said:

Amstrad had the smallest userbase of the lot, but was still reasonably big in Europe (~3 million units).

 

This thread was surprisingly peaceful, tolerant and not at all ideological up till this point. I have a feeling it's about to change though...

 

Waiting for the TI-99/4a, TRS80 and Coleco Adam thugs to come and crush the love fest.  

 

28 minutes ago, Mr Robot said:

3 inch floppy.

I think there is a pill for that.

Edited February 21, 2021 by Sinjinhawke

[+x=usr(1536)]

38 minutes ago, Mr Robot said:

3 inch floppy.

IIRC, the Spectrum +3 also used them.  This is why the 3-inch floppy achieved total market dominance, completely decimating Sony's 3.5" format.

 

I really never understood Amstrad's rationale behind using those; they must have been exceptionally cheap in volume.  3.5" disks were already on the market and picking up considerable steam.

Edited February 21, 2021 by x=usr(1536)

[Faicuai]

3 hours ago, Mazzspeed said:

The 16MB REU is essentially high speed storage via DMA and basically identical to original Commodore specs with the exception of capacity. C64 is stock otherwise.

 

 

 

 

The idea is 60ffps video, using only RAM accessible by CPU and GPU, and CPU+GPU sequencing and rendering encoded VIDEO and AUDIO by directly reading unlimited storage source accessible on system-bus, without the use of any dedicated RAM-access Hardware, other than the controller of such unlimited-storage device (which will come embedded on any chosen universal SD/CF, for instance). 

 

The REU concept involves not only the physical RAM space, but a also a dedicated access controller to enable DMA transfers, and moving 1 byte at roughly one cycle, after transfer has been setup. REU's address space is NOT directly accessible by (say) C64's CPU, which then makes you wonder how to read, split and sequence the encoded AUDIO tracks, besides the VIDEO frames.

 

It does not seem the C64 has the raw power to handle not just the I/O stream (which the REU does), but the actual crunching and sequencing of encoded Audio + Video, while it is being read from storage media (which is confined to RAM on the REU, and not really abstracted storage-media of arbitrary capacity). In other words, the whole equation gravitates around the REU's DMA controller (and whatever fits in 16 MB ram). Pull it out, and we are done.

 

In any case, this is just an architectural concept of how ALL of Atari 8bit moving parts can come together on this scenario.. with NO external aid of any kind, other than a universal storage device that can deliver 1-byte streams as fast as requested by Antic (and 6502 running desperately behind it... :-)))

 

 

 

 

Edited February 21, 2021 by Faicuai

[Mazzspeed]

13 minutes ago, Faicuai said:

 

The idea is 60ffps video, using only RAM accessible by CPU and GPU, and CPU+GPU sequencing and rendering encoded VIDEO and AUDIO by directly reading unlimited storage source accessible on system-bus, without the use of any dedicated RAM-access Hardware, other than the controller of such unlimited-storage device (which will come embedded on any chosen universal SD/CF, for instance). 

 

The REU concept involves not only the physical RAM space, but a also a dedicated access controller to enable DMA transfers, and moving 1 byte at roughly one cycle, after transfer has been setup. REU's address space is NOT directly accessible by (say) C64's CPU, which then makes you wonder how to read, split and sequence the encoded AUDIO tracks, besides the VIDEO frames.

 

It does not seem the C64 has the raw power to handle not just the I/O stream (which the REU does), but the actual crunching and sequencing of encoded Audio + Video, once it has been read from storage media (which is confine to RAM on the REU, and not really abstracted storage-media of arbitrary capacity). In other words, the whole equation gravitates around the REU's DMA controller (and whatever fits in 16 MB ram). Pull it out, and we are done.

 

In any case, this is just an architectural concept of how ALL of Atari 8bit moving parts can come together on this scenario.. with NO external aid of any kind, other than a universal storage device that can deliver 1-byte streams as fast as requested by Antic (and 6502 running desperately behind it... :-)))

 

 

 

 

You don't really want the CPU accessing that ram space in order to do this effectively, ideally DMA between the REU and graphics subsystem is what you want. As stated, the REU is as specified by Commodore themselves, right down to the DMA controller. Achieving similar on an A8 still requires a SIDE2/3.

 

In terms of raw IO, a 1541 with no more than S-JiffyDOS gets outstanding IO bandwidth results:

 

 

Accessing storage directly via the interleaved system bus and avoiding IEC protocol gets amazing results:

 

 

Essentially, comparing the A8 to the C64 is splitting hairs. They're both great systems.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 21, 2021 by Mazzspeed

[_The Doctor__]

snippets of videos and trailers versus whole shows... not much of a contest there...

[Mazzspeed]

5 minutes ago, _The Doctor__ said:

snippets of videos and trailers versus whole shows... not much of a contest there...

I'm not interested in turning anything into a competition. People claimed it can't be done easily on the platform in question, I highlighted it can with outstanding IQ for an 8bit machine. Considering what you get for the money, the 1541 UII+ is an outright bargain, it's the only device you need.

 

Both platforms trade blows. Use what you prefer, better still: Use both and enjoy the strengths of both platforms.

Edited February 21, 2021 by Mazzspeed

[Faicuai]

52 minutes ago, Mazzspeed said:

You don't really want the CPU accessing that ram space in order to do this effectively

Well, it really depends on your implementation aim.

 

If no externally-driven DMA (or memory-access controller) is required, and both CPU and GPU have direct acess, in-bus, that means we can bring the CF/SD into the system-bus via CARTRIDGE port... and that means an Atari 400, with stock system CPU, GPU, Sound and a puny amount of system ram will be able to playback 60 fps video all day long, with anything other than a storage device snuggly inserted on its existing cart. port. See how beautiful and universal the concept is? 

 

Also, even with the CPU doing all the heavy lifting, HD-storage transfers on Atari (right at Cartridge port) are actually faster than what you showed up there... Imagine the results with an externally-driven DMA block-transfer with no CPU involvement!

 

 

Cheers !

Edited February 21, 2021 by Faicuai
(accuracy)

[Mazzspeed]

1 minute ago, Faicuai said:

Well, it really depends on your implementation aim.

 

If no external DMA (or memory access is required), and both CPU and GPU have direct acess, in-bus, that means I can bring the CF/SD into the system-bus via CARTRIDGE port... and that means an Atari 400, with stock system CPU, GPU, Sound and a puny amount of system ram will be able to playback 60 fps video all day long, with anything other than a storage device snuggly inserted on its existing cart. port. See how beautiful and universal the concept is? 

 

Also, even with the CPU doing all the heavy lifting, HD-storage transfers on Atari (right at Cartridge port) are actually faster than what you showed up there... Imagine the results with an externally-driven DMA block-transfer with no CPU involvement!

 

 

Cheers !

The REU is a high speed storage device, that's all it is. This is really not too dissimilar to the Amiga with Fastram vs Chipram, you can't claim that everytime the Amiga uses Chipram it's not really doing work.

 

As far as I'm aware the A8 has DMA access with ANTIC providing memory access to CTIA/GTIA by halting the processor every time the graphics subsystem requires access, whether this is an ideal implementation is open to interpretation and really not worth an argument in anyway whatsoever. The way the 1541UII+ works, technically you could also stream quality video all day long if you wanted to with no more than a cart plugged into the cartridge port, the question is: Why would anyone want to? Furthermore, that would break Commodore's implementation of an REU from the perspective of a purist (which I am not).

 

These are all proof of concept, maintain that context and they're very interesting if not groundbreaking.

[_The Doctor__]

Proof of concept is a forever thing... it might be a tech demo etc... and never comes to fruition.. I'll stick with the groundbreaking already been there done that in it's entirety fully playable and working feature length stuff. To each their own.

[Mazzspeed]

Just now, _The Doctor__ said:

Proof of concept is a forever thing... it might be a tech demo etc... and never comes to fruition.. I'll stick with the groundbreaking already been there done that in it's entirety fully playable and working feature length stuff. To each their own.

A valid point. What games are using Avery's video player for 100% of the game?

 

Personally, I see these proof of concept demo's as a great way to provide cut scenes (AKA: Red Alert style) to traditional 8 bit titles - That would be cool. With the advent of the 1541 UII+, 16MB REU's are quite common among that other community now, being used to improve entire games and provide fast and effective NTSC support.

 

I think this is fantastic.

[Faicuai]

Well. hopefully the above parenthesis on this thread serves as a vivid, cross-platform example of the multitude of variables you could consider when evaluationg pros and cons of any given system... definitely well beyond some sprites flying around your screen, though...

 

We can certainly look at the individual parts, or at the system as a whole. And if we bring the Apple/II or the IBM/PC 5150 in the latter context, it will be an eye-opening, wake-up call for everyone here.  

Edited February 21, 2021 by Faicuai

[Mazzspeed]

1 hour ago, Faicuai said:

Well. hopefully the above parenthesis on this thread serves as a vivid, cross-platform example of the multitude of variables you could consider when evaluationg pros and cons of any given system... definitely well beyond some sprites flying around your screen, though...

 

We can certainly look at the individual parts, or at the system as a whole. And if we bring the Apple/II or the IBM/PC 5150 in the latter context, it will be an eye-opening, wake-up call for everyone here.  

The other thing you're failing to consider regarding the C64 is Ultimax mode, this is the mode exploited for freezer carts. It's the reason why the 1541 UII+ can run a cartridge, two REU's, and two emulated cycle accurate 1541's along with a replacement kernel all at the same time. You're also failing to consider the interleaved nature of the C64's bus using the AEC signal allowing the VIC-II to steal CPU cycles only when absolutely needed.

 

Both platforms (A8 and C64) are very impressive for their time, I consider the Sinclair devices and Apple II series devices in comparison very simplistic.

Edited February 21, 2021 by Mazzspeed

[Mazzspeed]

1 hour ago, Mazzspeed said:

Double post, deleted.

 

Edited February 21, 2021 by Mazzspeed

[youxia]

6 hours ago, Mazzspeed said:

Both platforms (A8 and C64) are very impressive for their time, I consider the Sinclair devices and Apple II series devices in comparison very simplistic.

Apple 2 was released in 1977, C64 in 1982. That's a fair comparison, then Sinclair 48k at launch was about 3 times cheaper than Atari 800 (not an XL even), and yet extremely capable as well.

 

That aside from the fact that as history has shown us over an over again, the tech specs are not always the most important factor in given platform's success and popularity. Just ask the MSX, Jaguar, or Dreamcast fans.

[Mazzspeed]

19 minutes ago, youxia said:

Apple 2 was released in 1977, C64 in 1982. That's a fair comparison, then Sinclair 48k at launch was about 3 times cheaper than Atari 800 (not an XL even), and yet extremely capable as well.

 

That aside from the fact that as history has shown us over an over again, the tech specs are not always the most important factor in given platform's success and popularity. Just ask the MSX, Jaguar, or Dreamcast fans.

As I stated earlier, I've never actually used the Spectrum, so it would be wrong for me to lay judgement on one when I've never used one. However, from an engineering perspective the Spectrum was a far more simplistic design than either the A8 or the C64 - Having said that, what they achieved under the platform considering such limitations was outright remarkable.

 

I was watching a video on the Mega 65 the other day, TBH the machine has me a little confused as I'm not too sure just what it's meant to be and I struggle to understand how you could base anything on the C65 when it was never officially released and I've only ever seen one working example. However, I saw that it has a Spectrum mode - May be something of interest to Spectrum users...

 

...Depending on the price? It looks like the Mega 65 is going to be expensive.

 

That machine the 8bit Guy is working on looks interesting.

[youxia]

Mega65 is going to be a FPGA based sort of reimagining (or sumthink) of C65. It sounds interesting but, yes, it will be very pricey. The devkits went out for 1000 Euro so I suppose the unit itself will cost upwards of 500E. The "ZX Spectrum mode" is an FPGA core ported from ZX Uno.

 

Sinclair has it's own modern "reimagining": ZX Spectrum Next.

 

8-bit guy's thing could be also interesting but I'm afraid it will suffer from lack of software, even moreso than Mega65. Even Next, which has been out for quite some time now, and a lot of buzz going on, hasn't got that big library.

[Mazzspeed]

14 minutes ago, youxia said:

Mega65 is going to be a FPGA based sort of reimagining (or sumthink) of C65. It sounds interesting but, yes, it will be very pricey. The devkits went out for 1000 Euro so I suppose the unit itself will cost upwards of 500E. The "ZX Spectrum mode" is an FPGA core ported from ZX Uno.

 

Sinclair has it's own modern "reimagining": ZX Spectrum Next.

 

8-bit guy's thing could be also interesting but I'm afraid it will suffer from lack of software, even moreso than Mega65. Even Next, which has been out for quite some time now, and a lot of buzz going on, hasn't got that big library.

I know it's FPGA based, the way older hardware can be recreated using real logic via FPGA is a godsend to the retro community IMO as old machines won't last forever.

 

The problem is: How can you recreate a device that was never released?

 

You may be right regarding the 8 bit guy's machine and software support, sadly. They may become expensive door stops.

[Mazzspeed]

23 minutes ago, youxia said:

 

Hmmm, another double post. What the...?

Edited February 21, 2021 by Mazzspeed

[Mclaneinc]

I worry when we start making Frankenstein machines ie machines that never saw the light of day bar far from finished design proto's. I just look the add on's for real machines that fail to get the support they deserve and then wonder who is really going to invest in one of these new / old creations let alone develop for them especially at the expected prices..