Atari v Commodore

[atariksi]

and just to remind/help keep things on topic:

 

'Does anybody have any views on where any titles were launched on both Atari and Commodore - and the Atari version is the better of the two?

 

Steve'

 

so, within the context of the topic, I do not care about instances where the c64 is better. :-)

 

I have this Starleague Baseball which is very good playability and good sounds, although graphics are a bit rough. Never seen the C64 version so perhaps someone who has both can comment. I know that if I try to steal 3rd and the batter receives a walk, the game crashes. But it has all other elements like bunts, double plays, triple plays, fouls, etc.

[Bryan]

The ST, was designed by the same team that designed the C64, and in the end is a classic example of the universal truth that Jack Tramiel was an idiot.

Bullshit! The designer of the VIC-II (Albert Charpentier) and the designer of the SID (Robert Yannes) both left CBM after the C64 and build Ensoniq. They never had anything to do with Atari.

 

And concerning Tramiel: Ofcourse he destroyed Atari. He was running Commodore and ofcourse did everything to destroy his opponents during that time. When he left Commodore and bought Atari, Atari was already without money.

Fröhn is correct. The main engineer Jack tapped for the ST was Shiraz Shivji.

 

edit: looks like emkay beat me by a few posts.

Edited December 10, 2008 by Bryan

[Shannon]

22 - DEFENDER

 

But those 21 titles combined do not even surpass the greatness that is Turrican!!

Edited December 10, 2008 by Shannon

[Cybergoth]

22 - DEFENDER

But those 21 titles combined do not even surpass the greatness that is Turrican!!

 

True.

[Heaven/TQA]

Accolade's Hardball... how does this compare against the c64 counterpart?

[frogstar_robot]

Changing a few gates on the C-128 would have made it a much better computer. IMHO, the biggest problem was that there was no way to create an "enhanced" C64 mode which would allow the use of the C128 features. Given that the C128 left some extended goodies enabled (e.g. the display chip at $D600) I see no reason they couldn't have included a mode that left the MMU at $D500 but was otherwise C64-compatible. Such a mode could have made it easy to have programs that would run on either a C64 or C128, but would benefit from the extra features of the latter.

 

Isn't it possible to get up to a 20% CPU speed increase in C-64 mode by enabling FAST mode during the VBI, running a routine crafted for that interval and then shutting FAST down at the end of the VBI? That isn't as cool as what you want though it does close some of the CPU gap between a C-64 and other 8-bits.

[Heaven/TQA]

I guess Andrew Braybrook did it in that way?

[Rybags]

Yep.

 

You get an increase in the 112 non-display lines in PAL. Not sure of the exact amount, since you're obviously getting DMA hits on cycles that otherwise wouldn't have existed so far as the CPU is concerned.

[emkay]

22 - DEFENDER

 

But those 21 titles combined do not even surpass the greatness that is Turrican!!

 

?

Have you read the reviews of the "origninal" time then? Nothing against the Amiga version of Turrican, but the C64 game is all but "high standard".

It got 71% only. This means to the mainstream "not worth buying". The C64 version lacks in gameplay and that is the outmost point of a Game. Graphics 80% means to have a nice interactive graphics demo there. And I guess they gave the game a special C64 bonus, because the Amiga graphics - which look clearly better in all cases - got only 82% (should have been a 92% if fairly compared)...

[TMR]

You get an increase in the 112 non-display lines in PAL. Not sure of the exact amount, since you're obviously getting DMA hits on cycles that otherwise wouldn't have existed so far as the CPU is concerned.

 

If the sprites are staying out of the upper and lower borders there aren't any other reasons DMA'll be taking cycles there. There are decrunchers that disable the screen and kick up fast mode whilst they work but Andrew Braybrook was the only person to use it during play (at least as far as i'm aware) with everything from Alleykat onwards sniffling the hardware and adjusting themselves accordingly. i think Uridium 2 on the Amiga offered the "mayhem" mode for faster CPUs as well...?

[Allas]

22 - DEFENDER

 

But those 21 titles combined do not even surpass the greatness that is Turrican!!

 

What Turrican? .... Turrican 1? 2? ... maybe there is a Turrican 5 that i ignored. Because the Turrican I played on a C64, haven't nothing extraordinary over the possibilities of Atari. Maybe a lot of work, but there are good way how to improve the overrated C64 version.

[Bryan]

I wouldn't single out Turrican for comparison. The fact is that the C64 has many games that use 320 mode in ways the Atari can't. This allows the 64 to have ports of many games primarily developed for 16-bit systems.

 

The Atari was designed with very flexible hardware for its time. The 64's hardware was more streamlined and concentrated on the features that would become essential for 80's style gaming. The 64 doesn't do everything well, but it sure excels at the most important stuff.

 

I don't see any reason not to have both machines around. They are both giant computing milestones.

 

(kum by ya)

Edited December 10, 2008 by Bryan

[emkay]

What Turrican? .... Turrican 1? 2? ... maybe there is a Turrican 5 that i ignored. Because the Turrican I played on a C64, haven't nothing extraordinary over the possibilities of Atari. Maybe a lot of work, but there are good way how to improve the overrated C64 version.

 

Yes. And if all CPU power is less, just let's move the enemies interleaved (sneaking to the "Head over Heels" version on the C64)

[emkay]

I wouldn't single out Turrican for comparison. The fact is that the C64 has many games that use 320 mode in ways the Atari can't. This allows the 64 to have ports of many games primarily developed for 16-bit systems.

 

And, as we know, the Atari has enough colours to have games looking like 16 bit, even if a resolution step lower than the C64.

[Fröhn]

Bullshit! The designer of the VIC-II (Albert Charpentier) and the designer of the SID (Robert Yannes) both left CBM after the C64 and build Ensoniq. They never had anything to do with Atari.

The man in the the round is Shiraz Shivji....

Yes but what did he "design"? He basically did what everybody is doing these days when selecting components for a desktop PC: "Hmm what CPU? AMD or Intel?... Ok now GFX card, ATI or Nvidia?...". He had nothing to do with the actual design, he just picked a few components.

 

Which doesn't mean as much as you think. 1.77 MHz of A8 are 20-50% faster than the 0.985 MHz of the C64 due to the heavy A8 DMA load. In case of 256x192 hires (speccy res) it is ~40%. The raw numbers don't tell as much as you think.

I don't see how you get that range of 20-50%. At upper limit, you are losing 9 cycles for refresh per scanline for a total of 262*9 = 2358 cycles of the 29868 cycles available. That would drop you to about 1.65Mhz still 68% faster than 0.985Mhz.

That implies you don't have a display of something. Every rasterline of 40 bytes needs 40 bus cycles on A8. 40*200 (normal 320x200 or 160x200 mode) needs 8000 cycles already. On C64 those 40 cycles per rasterline are "hidden" to the CPU due to 1 MHz CPU but 2 MHz bus. Also, PAL has 312 rasterlines (1.77 = PAL, 1.79 = NTSC). And for character mode there is 40 extra cycles lost every 8th rasterline in the display zone which completely halts the CPU.

 

Changing a few gates on the C-128 would have made it a much better computer. IMHO, the biggest problem was that there was no way to create an "enhanced" C64 mode which would allow the use of the C128 features. Given that the C128 left some extended goodies enabled (e.g. the display chip at $D600) I see no reason they couldn't have included a mode that left the MMU at $D500 but was otherwise C64-compatible. Such a mode could have made it easy to have programs that would run on either a C64 or C128, but would benefit from the extra features of the latter.

Isn't it possible to get up to a 20% CPU speed increase in C-64 mode by enabling FAST mode during the VBI, running a routine crafted for that interval and then shutting FAST down at the end of the VBI? That isn't as cool as what you want though it does close some of the CPU gap between a C-64 and other 8-bits.

30% on PAL systems. You could also discard parts of the display area and have 2 MHz there and have even more speed gain. Btw, 2 MHz mode of the C128 shows one A8 phenomenon: The DRAM refresh cycles actually steal CPU time (5 cycles/line) but all other DMA is simply cut off the bus which means that the VIC will be reading CPU action from the bus and not gfx data. Funny enough you can display code as graphics then

[Bryan]

I wouldn't single out Turrican for comparison. The fact is that the C64 has many games that use 320 mode in ways the Atari can't. This allows the 64 to have ports of many games primarily developed for 16-bit systems.

 

And, as we know, the Atari has enough colours to have games looking like 16 bit, even if a resolution step lower than the C64.

It has enough colors, sure. But getting them where you want them requires that you be very proficient and write the game with the A8 in mind.

[Bryan]

Yes but what did he "design"? He basically did what everybody is doing these days when selecting components for a desktop PC: "Hmm what CPU? AMD or Intel?... Ok now GFX card, ATI or Nvidia?...". He had nothing to do with the actual design, he just picked a few components.

Umm... are you aware we're talking about the ST?

 

Shivji led the team that designed the MMU, GLU, DMA controller and video shifter for the ST. The sound chip and CPU were off-the-shelf parts.

[emkay]

Some comparision what they name "Turrican" on other systems:

 

Spectrum

 

Charmode scrolling and charmode movement.... commonly used for fast games on the Atari in Basic...

 

Amstrad

 

Very small gamescreen... coarse scrolling, raw movement, but real 16 of 27 colours.

Edited December 10, 2008 by emkay

[Heaven/TQA]

Jesus... the Speccy version "rule"... but can not judge on the technical aspect as Probe did the conversion...

 

and T2 is more uggly...

[emkay]

I wouldn't single out Turrican for comparison. The fact is that the C64 has many games that use 320 mode in ways the Atari can't. This allows the 64 to have ports of many games primarily developed for 16-bit systems.

 

And, as we know, the Atari has enough colours to have games looking like 16 bit, even if a resolution step lower than the C64.

It has enough colors, sure. But getting them where you want them requires that you be very proficient and write the game with the A8 in mind.

 

 

The only real thing a coder has to think about from the start is to use a software Sprite for the Protagonist. The rest can be handled via chamode, DLI colours and sprite multiplexing. It was also rather better to use the PM for the platforms where the protagonist jumps over, than for using them for the enemies...

 

Example: The Protagonist is moving through charmode clusters.... the platforms are created via PM.... now simply use vscrol and hscrol to move a "sprite" around which takes 3/4 of the screen. By only adjusting the protagonist's software sprite.

[peteym5]

Sega Genesis (MegaDrive) version blows them all away. Seeing some of the other versions I can see where they had limited CPU and limited Sound channels. Although the A8 may not be fully capable of the graphics, it would make up for it in CPU and having four sound channels. I always felt the Pokey chip are more flexible than anything else on other 8-bit computers. That is doing sound effects, music, and digital samples together. I wonder why 3 sound channels was a constant with anything designed by Tremial - Vic-20, C64, Atari 520 ST.

Edited December 10, 2008 by peteym5

[emkay]

Sega Genesis (MegaDrive) version blows them all away. Seeing some of the other versions I can see where they had limited CPU and limited Sound channels. Although the A8 may not be fully capable of the graphics, it would make up for it in CPU and having four sound channels. I always felt the Pokey chip are more flexible than anything else on other 8-bit computers. That is doing sound effects, music, and digital samples together. I wonder why 3 sound channels was a constant with anything designed by Tremial - Vic-20, C64, Atari 520 ST.

 

 

The Atari has 5 soundchannels. Thinking about the Space Harrier technique, it actually could allow a 4 channel Pokey tune while playing the speech through the GTIA.

[atariksi]

Changing a few gates on the C-128 would have made it a much better computer. IMHO, the biggest problem was that there was no way to create an "enhanced" C64 mode which would allow the use of the C128 features. Given that the C128 left some extended goodies enabled (e.g. the display chip at $D600) I see no reason they couldn't have included a mode that left the MMU at $D500 but was otherwise C64-compatible. Such a mode could have made it easy to have programs that would run on either a C64 or C128, but would benefit from the extra features of the latter.

 

Isn't it possible to get up to a 20% CPU speed increase in C-64 mode by enabling FAST mode during the VBI, running a routine crafted for that interval and then shutting FAST down at the end of the VBI? That isn't as cool as what you want though it does close some of the CPU gap between a C-64 and other 8-bits.

 

I think comparing newer 8-bit systems made after 16-bit machines flooded the market doesn't carry as much weight. You would then have to mix in comparisons between existing 16-bit machines. So targetting a 800XL vs. C64 is a fair comparison although even there you can see that C64 was a major upgrade from it's predecessor whereas 800XL is basically an Atari 800.

[emkay]

I think comparing newer 8-bit systems made after 16-bit machines flooded the market doesn't carry as much weight. You would then have to mix in comparisons between existing 16-bit machines. So targetting a 800XL vs. C64 is a fair comparison although even there you can see that C64 was a major upgrade from it's predecessor whereas 800XL is basically an Atari 800.

 

 

Hehe.... then you could kick the whole C64 out of the thread business

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellivision

 

1980

 

Intellivision was the first 16-bit game console, though some people have mistakenly referred to it as a 10-bit system because the CPU's instruction set and game cartridges are 10 bits wide. The registers in the microprocessor, where the mathematical logic is processed, were 16 bits wide.

[atariksi]

>>I don't see how you get that range of 20-50%. At upper limit, you are losing 9 cycles for refresh per scanline for a total of 262*9 = 2358 cycles of the 29868 cycles available. That would drop you to about 1.65Mhz still 68% faster than 0.985Mhz.

 

>That implies you don't have a display of something. Every rasterline of 40 bytes needs 40 bus cycles on A8. 40*200 (normal 320x200 or 160x200 mode) needs 8000 cycles already. On C64 those 40 cycles per rasterline are "hidden" to the CPU due to 1 MHz CPU but 2 MHz bus. Also, PAL has 312 rasterlines (1.77 = PAL, 1.79 = NTSC). And for character mode there is 40 extra cycles lost every 8th rasterline in the display zone which completely halts the CPU.

 

But the upper bound comparison is the best ratio where C64 screen is blank and Atari is blank for applications that only need to output say color codes or something or for higher quality audio. In that case Atari is 68% faster.

 

Now let's take the worst case where Atari uses the char mode and sprites to the C64's worst case where you also constantly read char data by manipulating the VIC registers and are also showing all sprites...

 

By the way, Atari can output sprite overlays without any DMA cycles using Grafn registers.