Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
6072 members 
Amiga Q&A /  Free for All /  Emulation /  Gaming / (Latest Posts)
Login

Nickname

Password

Lost Password?

Don't have an account yet?
Register now!

Support Amigaworld.net
Your support is needed and is appreciated as Amigaworld.net is primarily dependent upon the support of its users.
Donate

Menu
Main sections
» Home
» Features
» News
» Forums
» Classifieds
» Links
» Downloads
Extras
» OS4 Zone
» IRC Network
» AmigaWorld Radio
» Newsfeed
» Top Members
» Amiga Dealers
Information
» About Us
» FAQs
» Advertise
» Polls
» Terms of Service
» Search

IRC Channel
Server: irc.amigaworld.net
Ports: 1024,5555, 6665-6669
SSL port: 6697
Channel: #Amigaworld
Channel Policy and Guidelines

Who's Online
58 crawler(s) on-line.
 22 guest(s) on-line.
 2 member(s) on-line.


 kriz,  Gunnar

You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 kriz:  6 secs ago
 Gunnar:  33 secs ago
 kolla:  12 mins ago
 pixie:  26 mins ago
 Musashi5150:  28 mins ago
 MEGA_RJ_MICAL:  35 mins ago
 ppcamiga1:  55 mins ago
 cdimauro:  1 hr 54 mins ago
 RobertB:  2 hrs 36 mins ago
 matthey:  3 hrs 5 mins ago

/  Forum Index
   /  Amiga General Chat
      /  How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Register To Post

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 Next Page )
Poll : How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
10p Excellent (Best at 2D/3D, colors, and resolution, frame rate etc.)
5p Good / better than most computer.
0p Barely hanging in there.
-5p Below average / slow but usable
-10p useless / horrible
 
PosterThread
OlafS25 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 13-Feb-2023 12:44:28
#741 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 12-May-2010
Posts: 6305
From: Unknown

@V8

Users do not care about ISA. Most computer users today use devices and not even know what CPU is used. Mac users also already have changed from 68k to PPC to X86/AMD64 and now to ARM. They use Apples... Finally users are only interested in the result, what do I get for the money. If the CPU needs 1 command or 5 commands to do something and if something is more efficient per instruction than another CPU is completely irrelevant. Discussions about ISA is retro

@Hypex

"PC" was even used in C128 ads

Example the ad on this page:
https://www.zock.com/8-Bit/D_C128.HTML

Last edited by OlafS25 on 13-Feb-2023 at 12:49 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BigD 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 13-Feb-2023 13:04:56
#742 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 11-Aug-2005
Posts: 7275
From: UK

@OlafS25

Quote:
Finally users are only interested in the result, what do I get for the money.


You speak sense and with the PPC worship cult in attendance that is not a given!

THEA500 Mini and the PiStorm32 have convinced me that for the majority, the experience with Arm based emulation hidden underneath either Classic Amigas (accelerators) or Amiga themed branded hardware to evoke the original experience is more than good enough! I like owning temperamental Classic 68k hardware but not everyone will and that's fine to grow the retro market and undermine the scalpers!

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
ppcamiga1 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 13-Feb-2023 17:40:48
#743 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 23-Aug-2015
Posts: 702
From: Unknown

@BigD

As long as Amiga is only hobby cpu is important.
Amiga has to be something different than work.

olaf szonwejs provide working mui clone on x86 or arm or get lost.



 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
OlafS25 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 13-Feb-2023 18:03:42
#744 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 12-May-2010
Posts: 6305
From: Unknown

@BigD

pwcamina keeps talking nonsense. And who cares about MUI? Me not

I think the retro market will grow in future

And I look forward on combining aros components and desktop with linux, That offers something new. We will see what will happen

Last edited by OlafS25 on 13-Feb-2023 at 06:07 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Karlos 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 13-Feb-2023 19:18:55
#745 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 24-Aug-2003
Posts: 4337
From: As-sassin-aaate! As-sassin-aaate! Ooh! We forgot the ammunition!

@ppcamiga1

Quote:

ppcamiga1 wrote:
@BigD

As long as Amiga is only hobby cpu is important.
Amiga has to be something different than work.

olaf szonwejs provide working mui clone on x86 or arm or get lost.


You say "Amiga has to be something different than work", yet immediately go on to demand someone works on it

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Karlos 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 13-Feb-2023 22:07:47
#746 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 24-Aug-2003
Posts: 4337
From: As-sassin-aaate! As-sassin-aaate! Ooh! We forgot the ammunition!

@Hammer

Quote:
Amiga has chunky pixels with 1 bitplane. 


Exactly! And in this configuration, you can perform operations on 32 pixels with a single longword.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hammer 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 14-Feb-2023 6:54:11
#747 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 5088
From: Australia

@Karlos

Quote:

Karlos wrote:
@Hammer

Quote:
Amiga has chunky pixels with 1 bitplane. 


Exactly! And in this configuration, you can perform operations on 32 pixels with a single longword.

For AGA, Commodore didn't include a chunky pixel raster to interpret chunky pixel data format from RAM.

If AGA has chunky pixel raster mode, the 68EC020 @ 14 Mhz CPU is still gimped by the shared memory architecture.

Alice needs to be redesigned for a 68020 CPU since Alice still has 68000's 2-cycle memory access pattern. 68020 @ 14 Mhz has hardware barrel instruction that is gimped by Alice.

Commodore didn't have a proper graphics chipset designed for 14 Mhz 32-bit DRAM.

With a very fast CPU and Fast RAM, the AGA display adapter would be like an upper mid-range fast 16-bit VGA+ card while ET4000AX (16-bit ISA) is faster.

For my A1200, I have my Raspberry Pi 4 Model B has arrived and I'm waiting for the PiStorm32 Lite delivery.


Last edited by Hammer on 14-Feb-2023 at 07:03 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 14-Feb-2023 at 07:01 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 14-Feb-2023 at 06:59 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 14-Feb-2023 at 06:55 AM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BigD 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 14-Feb-2023 11:58:04
#748 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 11-Aug-2005
Posts: 7275
From: UK

@Hammer

Quote:
or my A1200, I have my Raspberry Pi 4 Model B has arrived and I'm waiting for the PiStorm32 Lite delivery.


How much was the RPi 4 Model B? They seem hard to get at the moment!

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
DiscreetFX 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 14-Feb-2023 21:36:27
#749 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 12-Feb-2003
Posts: 2467
From: Chicago, IL

Why did Commodore stick a 1984 CPU (68020) in a 1992 machine (A1200). That’s just lame! It could have had a least a 68030 which was a 1987 CPU. Still created 5 years before the A1200.

Last edited by DiscreetFX on 14-Feb-2023 at 09:38 PM.

_________________
Sent from my Quantum Computer.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
zipper 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 14-Feb-2023 23:23:41
#750 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 11-Jul-2005
Posts: 275
From: finland

@DiscreetFX

Money...

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
agami 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 15-Feb-2023 0:39:36
#751 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jun-2008
Posts: 1614
From: Melbourne, Australia

@DiscreetFX

Quote:
Quote:
DiscreetFX wrote:
Why did Commodore stick a 1984 CPU (68020) in a 1992 machine (A1200). That’s just lame! It could have had a least a 68030 which was a 1987 CPU. Still created 5 years before the A1200.

zipper wrote:
@DiscreetFX

Money...

Yep. As with most things, follow the money.
If the A1200 was going to retail for $599, then the cost of produced hardware had to be below $250 per unit in volumes of 100k+

Maybe they considered an EC030@25MHz, but just like a film editor trying to fit their story into 120min runtime, some good ideas end up on the cutting room floor.

Given the lack of profitability in 1993, I would say that C= did not get the cost below $250, even with the EC020@14MHz.

Which goes to show just how much they sucked at managing manufacturing and logistics.

Last edited by agami on 15-Feb-2023 at 12:45 AM.
Last edited by agami on 15-Feb-2023 at 12:41 AM.

_________________
All the way, with 68k

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
kolla 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 15-Feb-2023 4:29:18
#752 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 20-Aug-2003
Posts: 2805
From: Trondheim, Norway

There’s not much to benefit from an EC030 over an EC020, aside from how much fast ram one can add, and this was a time when having just 4MB of RAM was common, even on PC.

A1200 was not designed to last for decades, none of these systems were.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
ppcamiga1 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 15-Feb-2023 6:21:48
#753 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 23-Aug-2015
Posts: 702
From: Unknown

Many years ago I have Amiga with AGA.
It was interesting only if one forget about blitter and use it with cpu only.
But it made Amiga with AGA something like slower NG.
In this fake NG mode AGA was barely enough.
Not good enough but almost enough.



 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
ppcamiga1 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 15-Feb-2023 6:26:23
#754 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 23-Aug-2015
Posts: 702
From: Unknown

@Karlos

Amiga have to be either work or hobby.
If you want to use x86 or arm provide something decent
good enough to sell to people outside amiga community.
Or it should be hobby and stay on something other than x86 or arm.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BigD 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 15-Feb-2023 6:37:08
#755 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 11-Aug-2005
Posts: 7275
From: UK

@ppcamiga1

The RPi is built for industry plus hobby computer enthusiasts and that's Arm based so you make zero sense! Or are you saying the 'hobby' is making bespoke PPC computers for thousands of £s in a cottage industry?! Is it a hobby to build underperforming machines for the price point with chips that are unavailable and end of life? If so what a pointless hobby but I guess at least someone is passing the time whether we buy any computers or not!

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BigD 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 15-Feb-2023 7:01:41
#756 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 11-Aug-2005
Posts: 7275
From: UK

@Hammer

Quote:

BigD wrote:
@Hammer

Quote:
or my A1200, I have my Raspberry Pi 4 Model B has arrived and I'm waiting for the PiStorm32 Lite delivery.


How much was the RPi 4 Model B? They seem hard to get at the moment!


I ask because they seem to be about £140 + p&p on ebay right now! Did you manage to get it any cheaper?

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Karlos 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 15-Feb-2023 9:54:03
#757 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 24-Aug-2003
Posts: 4337
From: As-sassin-aaate! As-sassin-aaate! Ooh! We forgot the ammunition!

@ppcamiga1

Quote:

ppcamiga1 wrote:
@Karlos

Amiga have to be either work or hobby.
If you want to use x86 or arm provide something decent
good enough to sell to people outside amiga community.
Or it should be hobby and stay on something other than x86 or arm.


Amiga is a hobby. End of story. So anything goes.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Karlos 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 15-Feb-2023 10:00:21
#758 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 24-Aug-2003
Posts: 4337
From: As-sassin-aaate! As-sassin-aaate! Ooh! We forgot the ammunition!

@DiscreetFX

Quote:

DiscreetFX wrote:
Why did Commodore stick a 1984 CPU (68020) in a 1992 machine (A1200). That’s just lame! It could have had a least a 68030 which was a 1987 CPU. Still created 5 years before the A1200.


The performance difference between 020 and 030 is insignificant at the same clockspeed. You might be able to craft some hand assembler that is able to leverage the miniscule data cache to get better performance relative to 020 but it's not going to be a lot. The 030 differentiates itself by having an onboard MMU (if you don't cheap out), which AmigaOS didn't really need and by clocking up to 50MHz. So, unless they were going to go to those clockspeeds, the 030 was pointless in a machine aimed at reducing cost.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
fishy_fis 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 15-Feb-2023 11:15:05
#759 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Mar-2004
Posts: 2153
From: Australia

@DiscreetFX

Quote:
Why did Commodore stick a 1984 CPU (68020) in a 1992 machine (A1200). That’s just lame! It could have had a least a 68030 which was a 1987 CPU. Still created 5 years before the A1200.


Amiga has almost always used old cpus.
The Motorolla 68000 was released in 1979 for eg.

Commodore's Amiga was still much closer to current than any of the PPC clones though.
They can be up to over a decade old upon a machines release and ~1.5 decades old when it comes to performance.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
fishy_fis 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 15-Feb-2023 11:26:24
#760 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Mar-2004
Posts: 2153
From: Australia

@ppcamiga1

Quote:
As long as Amiga is only hobby cpu is important.


Usage dictates what is a hobby or not, not architecture/ISA.
Probably %95+ of x86/x64 users are computer hobbyists.

Just because something isn't obsolete doesn't mean it's not suitable for a hobby.
There's more people that use modern gear for their hobbies than those that use retro/obsolete gear by a huge margin.
Some enjoy both modern and retro.
There's no absolutes, rights or wrongs.

Repeating something over, over and over again in spite of evidence in the real world doesn't make you correct. It just makes you an idiot and/or nutjob.

Last edited by fishy_fis on 15-Feb-2023 at 11:27 AM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 Next Page )

[ home ][ about us ][ privacy ] [ forums ][ classifieds ] [ links ][ news archive ] [ link to us ][ user account ]
Copyright (C) 2000 - 2019 Amigaworld.net.
Amigaworld.net was originally founded by David Doyle