Atari v Commodore

[Lazarus]

All machines, also C64, were created to use RAM/ROM expansions. C64 freaks tend to deny RAM expansions, because the C64 doesn't take much benefit by this...

C64 doesn't benefit from a RAM expansion? The Commodore 17xx expansions have a DMA which can copy or fill 1 byte per clock cycle and it can even write directly to hardware registers. Imaging you have to clear buffers or render pre-scaled texture rows to a screen buffer, and that being done ~8-10 times faster than the CPU could do it.

[emkay]

All machines, also C64, were created to use RAM/ROM expansions. C64 freaks tend to deny RAM expansions, because the C64 doesn't take much benefit by this...

C64 doesn't benefit from a RAM expansion? The Commodore 17xx expansions have a DMA which can copy or fill 1 byte per clock cycle and it can even write directly to hardware registers. Imaging you have to clear buffers or render pre-scaled texture rows to a screen buffer, and that being done ~8-10 times faster than the CPU could do it.

 

But it won't help with more colours, more sprites etc. We already have seen the turbo boards working on the C64, even the fast CPU doesn't help there.

On the A8 you need 5 CPU cycles to switch 8K of RAM immediately (resulting in theoretical "billions" of bytes per second). It would be fast enough to point POKEY and ANTIC there. Showing 60fps 256 colour videos plus digi sounds at a recognizable rate.

[andym00]

On the A8 you need 5 CPU cycles to switch 8K of RAM immediately (resulting in theoretical "billions" of bytes per second). It would be fast enough to point POKEY and ANTIC there. Showing 60fps 256 colour videos plus digi sounds at a recognizable rate.

More of the "we could, but we haven't".. It's time to swap this around to "we could, and we have!!"..

Anyway, the Spectrum already has my vote for the 'lets play video on old'school hardware' award..

[atariksi]

...

C-64 on the top again. The disproportion in quality makes it so humiliating.... I think that words are needless here.

...

"humiliating" is really not needed there...

If you want people to take you seriouslly stay away from such phrases...

 

English is a beautiful language, there are so many more words you could use...

 

p.s. Never seen that game, really does look better on C64...

 

Popmilo, your posts and words are rational and reasonable to me, so all I can say you are right here. Probably I have gone too far with teasing and I am sorry for that. Anyway, soon I am going to prove that C-64 can handle iso 3D games better than Atari

 

Your reasoning was already refuted and rather than reply to that you go on with your same reasoning. You have NOT proven Atari is inferior with examples that show off wider sprites or color RAM of 40*25 of 16 colors force fitted to every object on earth. You need to find some other hardware aspect to show what C64 hardware can do. What goes into building a particular game is not necessarily what the hardware matches up with. You neither stick to original topic nor the general topic of "Atari vs. Commodore."

 

Funny, I don't remember you saying anything like that when Allas was doing exactly the same thing. Maybe because he was showing (example after example) games that look better on Atari ? You know, it is called a double morality

 

First of all, I don't think you even understood what I wrote above (re-read). Secondly, Allas has a right to do that in this topic as per original poster's request. Thirdly, I am arguing against the conclusions that you are drawing from your examples. Fourthly, ... I'll stop for now until you get the first three statements.

 

I understood you perfectly. You would like me to stop posting, since you don't like what you see. Anyway, if you are tough enough please scroll down, I am showing the other type of game that can be better on C64, even though a lot of atarians have said otherwise

 

You can speculate what you like. I stick by what I stated:

 

Your reasoning was already refuted and rather than reply to that you go on with your same reasoning. You have NOT proven Atari is inferior with examples that show off wider sprites or color RAM of 40*25 of 16 colors force fitted to every object on earth. You need to find some other hardware aspect to show what C64 hardware can do. What goes into building a particular game is not necessarily what the hardware matches up with. You neither stick to original topic nor the general topic of "Atari vs. Commodore."

 

Learn some English. You can't draw your conclusion of a machine's inferiority even if you put a million examples of wider sprites or restricted 40*25 color RAM pictures.

 

I'm sorry to say that atariksi, but I rank you among "special atarians from this forum" who are moaning about anything and everything ("ban him !!!","make him stop posting !!!", "you shouldn't and couldn't do this and that because of this and that !!!" etc). Sadly, if you lose an argument or you are presented with facts you don't like, the personal attacks start flying ("learn some English" etc). I hope someday you will realize how pathetic it is

 

Stop with your bullcrap. You haven't given any logical argument for your absurd conclusions. Many C64 people have posted game titles in this forum but didn't draw the absurd conclusions that you have. I never said "stop posting" or other mental concoctions that you have listed above. You are making STRAW-MAN arguments. Go figure out what I said before you reply. There's no personal attacks in the facts I presented. If I repeat the same point many times and you still don't understand then it's not a personal attack to say "Learn some English". Perhaps, your emotions are overtaking your rationality. You are misconstruing and misinterpreting the facts as personal attacks. You can stop your childish thumbs up and thumbs down bullcrap as well.

First off, I did not quote you but I said that I ranked you among atarians who say so. You encourage me to read with care, so maybe you should do the same ? Secondly, at last we have a clear picture here, you just don't like my "absurd" conclusions. Well, what can I say...maybe you simply shouldn't read them and everything will be OK. It is the easiest way, isn't it ? "You can stop your childish thumbs up and thumbs down bullcrap as well" wasn't a personal, either. BRAVO !

 

You are mislead and attempting to mislead others with your "absurd conclusions" that's why I spoke out. You are free to continue your mistakes.

[emkay]

On the A8 you need 5 CPU cycles to switch 8K of RAM immediately (resulting in theoretical "billions" of bytes per second). It would be fast enough to point POKEY and ANTIC there. Showing 60fps 256 colour videos plus digi sounds at a recognizable rate.

More of the "we could, but we haven't".. It's time to swap this around to "we could, and we have!!"..

Anyway, the Spectrum already has my vote for the 'lets play video on old'school hardware' award..

 

It's a matter of taste.

The colours may always impress. But for Movies it is better to have a good basement of greyshades available.

 

The movie was posted before, but it shows more detail on the screen than the charblocks of the speccy.

 

 

And this (graphics and sound) is done with simple data polling, no pageflipping or DMA is used.

Edited September 6, 2009 by emkay

[atariksi]

If people just agreed that DLIs are slightly faster, raster IRQs are slightly slower but more flexible, timer IRQs on A8 can mess with the POKEY but there are more timers available, then I'd be a happy bunny

A8 has four 8 bit timers, C64 has four 16 bit timers. A8 doesn't have more timers than C64.

 

Wrong (as usual). First of all, A8 has 16 bit timers. I just used it in the example posted. Second of all, the number of timers is not as important as the accuracy of the timers-- you can build other timers from a good accurate timer like Atari system does. Get your facts straight.

 

But using timers on A8 comes at a price of possibly/likely affecting the ability to play music?

 

 

Pete

 

You are generalizing. It affects the frequency register that you use for the timing. To affect music would mean all voices are affected.

 

Of course I'm generalising. If I ask you to give me some music now for my game can you guarantee it will work? I think if the answer is no then my "generalising" is pretty valid.

 

 

Pete

 

That's faulty logic. You are taking a specific case of porting some music and generalizing that atari timing will affect the music. If I am writing music and need one channel for timing, I can do my music without any side effects, and even if I were porting music over I know what I have to work with to do the convert.

 

It's the same logic you and other C64 fanatics have used before-- if it doesn't suit me, it's useless or if it's not like C64, it's useless.

[atariksi]

...

When did I say anything like that ??? :!: Unless you are one of these atarians who know what is on other people's mind

 

Reverse that-- it's you who are guessing what's in my mind (and being wrong). If you agree with the logic that showing some games that are better sprites/graphics than A8 doesn't prove C64 superior, then don't make such conclusions (or it's your English is wrong). Look at your post #7321 and some earlier posts about "Atari disadvantages" or something similar.

The problem is that "SOME" should be replaced by"MOST" and I am going to prove it, so my logic is pretty sound I would say. This thumb is is specially for you.

 

You can't even answer coherently. First you are denying you ever stated it and then admitting it and making it worse by drawing conclusions about hardware based on your limited perception of some games.

[atariksi]

interesting theories here to define "isometric" games.

 

in the real world outside of this fantasy land forum u live in, ISOMETRIC is used to describe the way an object (in this case a game screen) is drawn using 30 degree, 60 degree horizontal and vertical lines. there is nothing in the definition to say that u cant use any or all hardware at your disposal to do this.

 

do u nutters actually think that if the spectrum had got hardware sprite capability that Ultimate would have forgone its use to do their iso games?

 

if u do actually think this u are in fact stark raving bloody mad.

 

Steve

 

No need to generalize this forum to be a "fantasy land forum" because someone defined isometric differently.

[andym00]

But it won't help with more colours, more sprites etc. We already have seen the turbo boards working on the C64, even the fast CPU doesn't help there.

 

And also, I forgot to mention, that the REU can change the way things are done on a C64, quite radically.. One thing I've experimented with in the past it treating c64 sprites like your Atari players and splitting them full screen height, copying data into the strips, and loading colour, x-expansion and positions on each scanline.. The C64 gets overloaded with this technique (reloading so many sprites that is), but since you can now transfer memory into hwardware registers you can load all the sprite registers in a very short time now on each scanline directly from the REU

And you can also using it for transferring sprite definitions into the sprite strips when you order them..

 

You need to realise the REU is like a little blitter, except that it performs no logical operations between the source and destination, just copies.. Though it can perform memory compares for you..

 

It was only a test for a bullet hell game where I wanted 200+ sprites on screen at once, and the CPU is just overloaded by it all, well it'll manage the sprite display, but anything else is off limits.... But with a REU it's very very very doable..

 

I've never understood why you Atari guys don't put more effort into using your Players in a *very* multiplexed fashion.. You could do some killer stuff with them, and you've got the procesing power for a fast sort (I mean my radix sort takes a constant 38 cycles per sprite to be sorted) and don't see why you couldn't easily handled ~128 players on screen with colours per line.. I just don't get why you haven't gone down that avenue yet..

 

As for the Turbo boards ? Nobody develops for them, because hardly anyone will see what you write.. There's no emulators for them, and it's unlikely there ever will be.. I'm not about to buy a SuperCPU board for the absolutely mental prices their going for, especially when the only game out there is pretty shite given the acceleration its got.. That doesn't mean that the C64 can't benefit from it at all, it can, but I don't think anyone really cares to be honest..

 

In the C64 world it's all about reaching your largest audience.. And that's a C64+1541 pretty much what you bought 25 years ago.. And that's the fun of it as well.. A known limit to work with.. You all know this as well.. I don't get where the fun is in adding additional hardware to an old machine to make it perform new tricks.. I've done some 2600 stuff (first time around and this century) and I know that the bank switching stuff is essential to those, but with new stuff adding more and more to them I feel the spirit is being lost, which after all isn't that what it's all about ? I mean, much as I love Harmony and will get one of course, I'm nervous about what's going to come out of it.. It's not really a 2600 game anymore when inside the cart is sitting a 72Mhz ARM chip..

 

I really toyed with something similar on the 7800, but decided that it's just not a 7800 game when it's powered by an ARM chip and the Host is literally being used as a display device.. If you get some kick out of that then fine, but like VBXE + the new sound boards and the big new mem carts with RAM (and god knows what else will end up in there) it feels like you've lost the reason you loved the machine and want to turn it into something it's not.. And in some ways feels like it's cheating the machine itself..

 

Anyway.. The REU is a damn fine piece of kit, just there's not so many of them out there in the world, and what's the point of writing something that uses it when your audience is going to be mainly emulator bound ? If Commodore had put it's functionality into the 128 I suspect there would have been a far bigger uptake in its support, but they didn't and that's the end of the story really..

[PeteD]

It's only faulty logic to you because that suits your argument. We're talking facts here, facts in comparing one machine against another. Using timers on A8 for interrupts can effect the channel on pokey. Using timers on the C64 doesn't effect SID. The easiest way to get a scanline based IRQ is using timers on A8. On C64 timers aren't even needed for this. I never said you couldn't have 3 channel music in fact I said that would be fine for my purposes.

 

This is why I'll keep arguing because deepite the facts some of you Atarians will continue to twist the argument so you ALWAYS win, you'll never just admit that a point is valid.

 

It's nothing to do with being a C64 fanatic, I don't class myself one and you're gerneralising. It's to do with the capabilities of the machine and your stubborn refusal to admit that juuuuust once something might be even as good on C64, let alone better. I'll freely admit the A8 has a faster cpu, a better smooth scroll mechanism, LMS, a larger palette, etc etc but to you some of the far superior stuff on C64 like the sprites, nah, they're no better than what's possible on A8.

 

 

Pete

[andym00]

[quote name='emkay' date='Sun Sep 6, 2009 10:47 AM' timestamp='1252230421'

It's a matter of taste.

The colours may always impress. But for Movies it is better to have a good basement of greyshades available.

 

The movie was posted before, but it shows more detail on the screen than the charblocks of the speccy.

 

 

And this (graphics and sound) is done with simple data polling, no pageflipping or DMA is used.

 

I've seen that.. Too blocky and not-enough colour, and the sound isn't exactly amazing either.. The Spectrum looks better when it comes to displaying a convincing image.. More colour yes, but also since it's got the resolution under the attributes, it looks much more defined..

[Rockford]

Tell me please which horizontal shoot'em up on ATARI I should compare with Armalyte (it was published in 1988 on C64) ???

 

Not to tease you, just I like to know: Is there a shooter on the C64 which is comparable to 'Vanguard' (released 1983)?

 

Thanks

Irgendwer

Today is Sunday and I am short of time now, but I'll try to find something on Monday.

[Rockford]

...

Colours, ok but only of any use if you can "use" them properly, not colour bar splits like a demo, and if it was so easy then why don't many games look better?

...

 

Colours have also the underestimated advance that they allow variety and nice transitions.

Good example: '(The) Scrolls of Abadon'. If your are able to check both versions, I think you'll find it obvious that the A8-version is more polished and has the better effects, based on the bigger palette (level appearance, geometrical (char based) effects vs. colour effects when your character dies). This is independent from the total number of colours on screen.

 

Just to streamline this discussion: Wouldn't it be a good to have a list with titles which are available for both machines and less or more common sense tagging which version is better or if they are nearly equal? Just to have a reference if you like to play the best version available? Or would this to 'taste'-dependent? This could be a good playfield for all bulldogs in this thread?!?

 

Regarding 'Rockfords' conclusions: They are a little bit strange, just an example which would match:

"Please check both version of 'Kikstart'. It seems so, that the C64 is not capable to produce better looking clouds. An obvious advantage of the A8 !"

 

BTW: I dislike mixing of resolutions regarding 'players' / 'playfield'. It takes the actors out of the scene. (independent from this resolution advantage of the C64!)

Yeah, but just look at other things than clouds. They are bigger and simply look better on C64, so it's not a perfect example.

[Rockford]

OK there is another iso 3d game. Let's hope that this one is "real and proper". LOL

 

6 - HEAD OVER HEELS

 

C-64

C-64

C-64

 

This game works at the same speed on both computers, but the C-64 version has more colours and much better sound/music. C-64 wins again.

 

ATARI

ATARI

ATARI

 

Not fair, you know Atari 8bits always win when it comes to green screens

There's definitely was something on the pages of those programming manuals that led to a strange penchant for green, and to misquote De La Soul 'Green is the magic colour'

 

Edit: Can't believe I missed out this little green fella either

 

 

see pete i told u that fist should be done in green with just the players in colour.

 

Steve

ROTFL

[Rockford]

Today I am presenting another "obscure C64 nugget some of us haven't much heard"

 

7 - GREEN BERET

 

C-64

C-64

C-64

 

The C-64 version is a pure beauty, an instant classic. On ATARI we have got poor sound/music + eye hurting colours (less green this time )+ ugly graphics + even uglier blocky sprites = almost unplayable nightmare. C-64 strikes again.

 

ATARI

ATARI

ATARI

[atariksi]

My mind is perfectly fixed thankyou, obviously another mindreader What I've been saying over and over is that the raster is more flexible than the DLI, it may take more overhead but not much. You can make it match "modelines" and scroll with them if they scroll vertically, it's all just that extra little overhead which isn't much. I've also said over and over that I do agree the A8 is more capable than a lot of people think.

...

I agreed that you can mimic DLI functionality with raster IRQs using software overhead but having feature in hardware is better than in software otherwise you really have nothing on C64 that's better than A8. I wasn't reading your mind but going by what you wrote in flip-flopping between different views. Overhead isn't much if it's few cycles a frame but if you have many raster IRQs or DLIs, the overhead adds up quickly.

 

>As far as pokey and timers go you can't deny it's not the best situation. You'll say you can have 3 channels and a timer but then someone else will say the pokey is somewhat better than SID because it has 4 channels. Then what if you want a 16 bit timer? doesn't that lose yet another channel?

 

I am talking about timing things where timer accuracy is more important than number of channels. Atari timers are more accurate is a deductive fact.

 

>Not being familiar with the atari still doesn't mean a couple of lda sta for the vector, a raster irq line enable and a sta to the raster request isn't a hell of a lot less code than all of that.

 

You misunderstood my code. The IRQ routine itself is pretty small. The program is doing many things besides setting up an IRQ-- it's also doing a VBI and joystick I/O and trapping the reset key.

[atariksi]

It's only faulty logic to you because that suits your argument. We're talking facts here, facts in comparing one machine against another. Using timers on A8 for interrupts can effect the channel on pokey. Using timers on the C64 doesn't effect SID. The easiest way to get a scanline based IRQ is using timers on A8. On C64 timers aren't even needed for this. I never said you couldn't have 3 channel music in fact I said that would be fine for my purposes.

 

This is why I'll keep arguing because deepite the facts some of you Atarians will continue to twist the argument so you ALWAYS win, you'll never just admit that a point is valid.

 

It's nothing to do with being a C64 fanatic, I don't class myself one and you're gerneralising. It's to do with the capabilities of the machine and your stubborn refusal to admit that juuuuust once something might be even as good on C64, let alone better. I'll freely admit the A8 has a faster cpu, a better smooth scroll mechanism, LMS, a larger palette, etc etc but to you some of the far superior stuff on C64 like the sprites, nah, they're no better than what's possible on A8.

 

 

Pete

 

If you were to write that somewhere "using an IRQ timer will affect your music" you think it's a fair statement? I don't think so. I use 4 channels with a timer but leaving out the DAC, you still can do music and timers just fine. You should read my comments about C64 sprites before speaking. You have made a straw-man argument...

 

I'm not trying to win an argument but be truthful-- you made an erroneous statement that only CPU speed is superior and then asked what else was superior so I replied.

[PeteD]

My mind is perfectly fixed thankyou, obviously another mindreader What I've been saying over and over is that the raster is more flexible than the DLI, it may take more overhead but not much. You can make it match "modelines" and scroll with them if they scroll vertically, it's all just that extra little overhead which isn't much. I've also said over and over that I do agree the A8 is more capable than a lot of people think.

...

I agreed that you can mimic DLI functionality with raster IRQs using software overhead but having feature in hardware is better than in software otherwise you really have nothing on C64 that's better than A8. I wasn't reading your mind but going by what you wrote in flip-flopping between different views. Overhead isn't much if it's few cycles a frame but if you have many raster IRQs or DLIs, the overhead adds up quickly.

 

>As far as pokey and timers go you can't deny it's not the best situation. You'll say you can have 3 channels and a timer but then someone else will say the pokey is somewhat better than SID because it has 4 channels. Then what if you want a 16 bit timer? doesn't that lose yet another channel?

 

I am talking about timing things where timer accuracy is more important than number of channels. Atari timers are more accurate is a deductive fact.

 

>Not being familiar with the atari still doesn't mean a couple of lda sta for the vector, a raster irq line enable and a sta to the raster request isn't a hell of a lot less code than all of that.

 

You misunderstood my code. The IRQ routine itself is pretty small. The program is doing many things besides setting up an IRQ-- it's also doing a VBI and joystick I/O and trapping the reset key.

 

You really need to try harder to understand my posts instead of blaming me when you get something wrong. Now it's my fault for flip-flopping? Rasters are line accurate, DLIs (on char modes) aren't but STILL DLIs are better because the c64 CAN do the same and so much more with 1 interrupt type? what? Once again, of course A8 wins because you'll only compare a raster against doing exactly what a DLI does, if you want something more than that then that's not important because A8 coders never need that.

 

 

Pete

[PeteD]

It's only faulty logic to you because that suits your argument. We're talking facts here, facts in comparing one machine against another. Using timers on A8 for interrupts can effect the channel on pokey. Using timers on the C64 doesn't effect SID. The easiest way to get a scanline based IRQ is using timers on A8. On C64 timers aren't even needed for this. I never said you couldn't have 3 channel music in fact I said that would be fine for my purposes.

 

This is why I'll keep arguing because deepite the facts some of you Atarians will continue to twist the argument so you ALWAYS win, you'll never just admit that a point is valid.

 

It's nothing to do with being a C64 fanatic, I don't class myself one and you're gerneralising. It's to do with the capabilities of the machine and your stubborn refusal to admit that juuuuust once something might be even as good on C64, let alone better. I'll freely admit the A8 has a faster cpu, a better smooth scroll mechanism, LMS, a larger palette, etc etc but to you some of the far superior stuff on C64 like the sprites, nah, they're no better than what's possible on A8.

 

 

Pete

 

If you were to write that somewhere "using an IRQ timer will affect your music" you think it's a fair statement? I don't think so. I use 4 channels with a timer but leaving out the DAC, you still can do music and timers just fine. You should read my comments about C64 sprites before speaking. You have made a straw-man argument...

 

I'm not trying to win an argument but be truthful-- you made an erroneous statement that only CPU speed is superior and then asked what else was superior so I replied.

 

So I can ask you to write me some music using all the features of the POKEY and you can guarantee that it doesn't matter what my code does it will still work? This is the point you keep trying to get around with your twists and turns. using timers CAN effect the pokey's sound capabilities, or will you deny that? These are the points of fact we're arguing about as I posted earlier timers are too closely tied with pokey to guarantee nothing will go wrong.

 

 

Pete

[atariksi]

Wrong (as usual). First of all, A8 has 16 bit timers. I just used it in the example posted. Second of all, the number of timers is not as important as the accuracy of the timers-- you can build other timers from a good accurate timer like Atari system does. Get your facts straight.

Oh my, I didn't say anything wrong. In the same way I didn't mention that the Atari can join two 8 bit timers to a 16 bit timer I also didn't mention that on C64 you can join two 16 bit timers to a 32 bit timer.

 

It's still wrong because it implies that A8 is limited to 8-bit divisors. Have you even programmed a 32-bit divisor on the C64 or just reading off some spec?

 

Here's an example for you.. Using the timers, in '32bit' mode, where one timer counts the underflow of a second.. In this case being used to generate addresses of samples to be played at whatever rates you want, and takes care of looping and length for you too All you do is pull out the timer values, add the base page of your sample, and fetch and play

 

lda #0
sta $dc0e
; Load the sample length into the counter..
lda Sound_Len_Lo,y
sta $dc06
lda Sound_Len_Hi,y
sta $dc07
; Set Timer B to count Timer A underflows..
lda #01010001                  <<< Should be %, but the board software seems a bit mad..
sta $dc0f
; Set Timer A to run, continously and force load..
lda #00010001                   <<< And here too...
sta $dc0e

You'd also want to set up your base timer rate, since this is what Timer B counts underflows of, in this case, your desired sample replay rate.. Though usually this would come from your audio code..
; Timer A rate..
lda #<((63 * 1) - 1)
sta $dc04
lda #>((63 * 1) - 1)
sta $dd05

 

But with the one-shot, or continous modes, you have your looping taken care of, plus a nice flag when the samples finished Plus we have 2 timers to use for address 'generation'..

 

In your apparent A8 Timers are better world..

Using this mode, and setting Timer A to be 63 (or 65 cycles if in NTSC land), you can then just load a relative scanline value into Timer B, since Timer A is always counting scanlines for you..

So if I was using CIA IRQs to do pretend rasters I'd just do:

lda #RasterLine_Delta
sta $dc06

So your argument there fails as well..

 

And please, I beg you, quote properly, and use the code tags.. I skip half your posts because I can't figure out who the hell said what when you 'quote'..

 

Oh, maybe I've just found out why.. Trying to post that code with the correct #%xxxxxx values, the board changes #00010001 to #10001 for some reason.. Lol it won't post this right either will it

 

edit: Why does the board mess up completely with binary values ???

 

32-bit vs. 16-bit timers isn't that big of a deal. The reason is: suppose I have a 15Khz timer and 16-bit counter and want to count a 32-bit value, then every 4 seconds in the IRQ routine you decrement a Zero Page register (or even Absolute location). You can have as many bits as you want. Now 8-bit would require updating at a much higher frequency so that would build some overhead. The bigger deal with timers is the accuracy.

[atariksi]

My mind is perfectly fixed thankyou, obviously another mindreader What I've been saying over and over is that the raster is more flexible than the DLI, it may take more overhead but not much. You can make it match "modelines" and scroll with them if they scroll vertically, it's all just that extra little overhead which isn't much. I've also said over and over that I do agree the A8 is more capable than a lot of people think.

...

I agreed that you can mimic DLI functionality with raster IRQs using software overhead but having feature in hardware is better than in software otherwise you really have nothing on C64 that's better than A8. I wasn't reading your mind but going by what you wrote in flip-flopping between different views. Overhead isn't much if it's few cycles a frame but if you have many raster IRQs or DLIs, the overhead adds up quickly.

 

>As far as pokey and timers go you can't deny it's not the best situation. You'll say you can have 3 channels and a timer but then someone else will say the pokey is somewhat better than SID because it has 4 channels. Then what if you want a 16 bit timer? doesn't that lose yet another channel?

 

I am talking about timing things where timer accuracy is more important than number of channels. Atari timers are more accurate is a deductive fact.

 

>Not being familiar with the atari still doesn't mean a couple of lda sta for the vector, a raster irq line enable and a sta to the raster request isn't a hell of a lot less code than all of that.

 

You misunderstood my code. The IRQ routine itself is pretty small. The program is doing many things besides setting up an IRQ-- it's also doing a VBI and joystick I/O and trapping the reset key.

 

You really need to try harder to understand my posts instead of blaming me when you get something wrong. Now it's my fault for flip-flopping? Rasters are line accurate, DLIs (on char modes) aren't but STILL DLIs are better because the c64 CAN do the same and so much more with 1 interrupt type? what? Once again, of course A8 wins because you'll only compare a raster against doing exactly what a DLI does, if you want something more than that then that's not important because A8 coders never need that.

 

 

Pete

 

You are confused. I said DLIs are more optimized. That's a fact. You are claiming something I never stated-- that they are more flexibile. If I switch modes I can set colors or other features for the new mode using a DLI-- that's what the general use is. You WANT to use it for other purposes in CHAR mode and then claiming rasters are superior. Rasters are just a 15Khz timer nothing special about them and carry more overhead.

[STE'86]

But it won't help with more colours, more sprites etc. We already have seen the turbo boards working on the C64, even the fast CPU doesn't help there.

On the A8 you need 5 CPU cycles to switch 8K of RAM immediately (resulting in theoretical "billions" of bytes per second). It would be fast enough to point POKEY and ANTIC there. Showing 60fps 256 colour videos plus digi sounds at a recognizable rate.

 

how do u work that one out then? as by its very nature a faster cpu would allow the 64 to run software as well as hardware sprites together.

 

so basically yes it would help with more sprites wouldnt it? obviously

 

Steve

Edited September 6, 2009 by STE'86

[atariksi]

It's only faulty logic to you because that suits your argument. We're talking facts here, facts in comparing one machine against another. Using timers on A8 for interrupts can effect the channel on pokey. Using timers on the C64 doesn't effect SID. The easiest way to get a scanline based IRQ is using timers on A8. On C64 timers aren't even needed for this. I never said you couldn't have 3 channel music in fact I said that would be fine for my purposes.

 

This is why I'll keep arguing because deepite the facts some of you Atarians will continue to twist the argument so you ALWAYS win, you'll never just admit that a point is valid.

 

It's nothing to do with being a C64 fanatic, I don't class myself one and you're gerneralising. It's to do with the capabilities of the machine and your stubborn refusal to admit that juuuuust once something might be even as good on C64, let alone better. I'll freely admit the A8 has a faster cpu, a better smooth scroll mechanism, LMS, a larger palette, etc etc but to you some of the far superior stuff on C64 like the sprites, nah, they're no better than what's possible on A8.

 

 

Pete

 

If you were to write that somewhere "using an IRQ timer will affect your music" you think it's a fair statement? I don't think so. I use 4 channels with a timer but leaving out the DAC, you still can do music and timers just fine. You should read my comments about C64 sprites before speaking. You have made a straw-man argument...

 

I'm not trying to win an argument but be truthful-- you made an erroneous statement that only CPU speed is superior and then asked what else was superior so I replied.

 

So I can ask you to write me some music using all the features of the POKEY and you can guarantee that it doesn't matter what my code does it will still work? This is the point you keep trying to get around with your twists and turns. using timers CAN effect the pokey's sound capabilities, or will you deny that? These are the points of fact we're arguing about as I posted earlier timers are too closely tied with pokey to guarantee nothing will go wrong.

 

 

Pete

 

Both machines have chips designed where they put in many different features on different chips. If you think it's fine for you to say that timers affect music (in general) then you should also accept a perfectly valid statement that joystick input is erroneous on C64 due to keyboard interference or vice versa.

[andym00]

32-bit vs. 16-bit timers isn't that big of a deal. The reason is: suppose I have a 15Khz timer and 16-bit counter and want to count a 32-bit value, then every 4 seconds in the IRQ routine you decrement a Zero Page register (or even Absolute location). You can have as many bits as you want. Now 8-bit would require updating at a much higher frequency so that would build some overhead. The bigger deal with timers is the accuracy.

 

Well you asked, and you had your answer.. And now you twist the point around as usual.. We were talking about the hardware doing it, you had proof that it does it, and now it's not important since we can do it all in software anyway.. Nice

[emkay]

You need to realise the REU is like a little blitter, except that it performs no logical operations between the source and destination, just copies..

 

And you have to realize that everytime when ANTIC reads it's DMA, you can adjust the memory bank for every part of the screen.

You can used fixed pointers for the PMBASE, reading a new base every scanline aswell...

and so on. Just switching the memory bank will result in a different screen content immediately. The biggest problem then is the correct replay of the digis. But, hey. DLIs are 100% screen related, so use them in the screen range. POKEY timers are 100% time related, so use them in the VBI time so they cannot interfere each other...