Commodore 64 vs Atari 800 Xl

[DimensionX]

@DimensionX -- Dude! You've got an ego the size of a planet man! Relax, have some fun, knock that chip off your shoulder, and you will be fine. I know I've said it once, but I'll say it again and clarify:

 

This is a good crowd! If you are constantly running afoul, it's your deal, not the many great members of AA. Think on that. On this matter specifically, it's not that you are not a programmer that is at issue. It's that you are not recognizing the programmers understanding of the hardware and computing in general that is.

 

Every single retro programmer I know, myself included*, loves to share stuff we know about these computers, because we think it's a lot of fun and a great challenge at times. If people are open to learning things, making friends, doing stuff, everybody is up for that, because that's how the hobby grows. You are among some very nice people here. More often than not, ask and 'ye shall receive. That's been my experience, more often than not.

 

*Still learning how to do stuff, probably always will.

 

At last, a posting that deserves at good reply.

 

I'm well aware of much of what you say. I'm also a sensitive person and react way more then most others would do. Yes, Atariage is a great community and all of you who writes new games deserves a big credit for keeping the old computers alive.

 

But still, i'm no programmer and better off posting in other parts of this forum.

[PeteD]

 

Not really. It was when you and some other people started to post crap like that when i got a bit tired. I thought, oh no, they think i must be totally stupid and unaware of just about everyting, we can trick a non programmer as much as we like, he will not know a thing anyway. And when you noticed that i wasn't that dumb, you changed your mind pretty fast.

 

That's not a honest discussion.

 

Besides that, this is a "programmers thread" and stupid me don't belong here.

 

Still showing your ignorance here as firstly the "crap" part of what you posted above is what YOU made from a bunch of FACTS other people posted. Some of the ones you posted are actually correct, things like "SID has more channels because they're 16 bit" was NEVER said by ANYONE. Therefore you are a liar once again.

 

Let's see how you like it..

 

DimensionX, Angry synaesthetic who thinks all Americans are dumb and can't count, thinks atari 800 is better than EVERY other computer, will quite happily threaten other forum members for perceived slights and promise retaliation. Anything dithered is ugly UNLESS it's on the A8. Anything without a rainbow is ugly. Pokey has 5 channels because you can combine 2 to make a bass and still have 3 left.

 

Shall I go on?

 

Then you call me a liar?

 

I think it speaks for itself. To all readers. Just read the thread to see who's lying and who's not.

 

LMAO don't you get it? I've posted a load of things taken out of context or things that you say were misunderstandings and turned it into a post making you look like the worlds biggest ass. which is EXACTLY what you did.

 

If you want to see who is the liar just go back to an earlier post of mine that you conveniently avoided replying to where I posted 2 quotes from you. One where you STATE you think the A8 is a BETTER computer than the C64 after a whole night of attacking me (the other quote) for saying I PREFER the C64 whilst you were high and mighty proclaiming you didn't think one was better than the other. THAT is lying.

[DimensionX]

 

Not really. It was when you and some other people started to post crap like that when i got a bit tired. I thought, oh no, they think i must be totally stupid and unaware of just about everyting, we can trick a non programmer as much as we like, he will not know a thing anyway. And when you noticed that i wasn't that dumb, you changed your mind pretty fast.

 

That's not a honest discussion.

 

Besides that, this is a "programmers thread" and stupid me don't belong here.

 

Still showing your ignorance here as firstly the "crap" part of what you posted above is what YOU made from a bunch of FACTS other people posted. Some of the ones you posted are actually correct, things like "SID has more channels because they're 16 bit" was NEVER said by ANYONE. Therefore you are a liar once again.

 

Let's see how you like it..

 

DimensionX, Angry synaesthetic who thinks all Americans are dumb and can't count, thinks atari 800 is better than EVERY other computer, will quite happily threaten other forum members for perceived slights and promise retaliation. Anything dithered is ugly UNLESS it's on the A8. Anything without a rainbow is ugly. Pokey has 5 channels because you can combine 2 to make a bass and still have 3 left.

 

Shall I go on?

 

Then you call me a liar?

 

I think it speaks for itself. To all readers. Just read the thread to see who's lying and who's not.

 

LMAO don't you get it? I've posted a load of things taken out of context or things that you say were misunderstandings and turned it into a post making you look like the worlds biggest ass. which is EXACTLY what you did.

 

If you want to see who is the liar just go back to an earlier post of mine that you conveniently avoided replying to where I posted 2 quotes from you. One where you STATE you think the A8 is a BETTER computer than the C64 after a whole night of attacking me (the other quote) for saying I PREFER the C64 whilst you were high and mighty proclaiming you didn't think one was better than the other. THAT is lying.

 

The best thing is to read the whole thread.

 

Good luck doing that.

 

Now i'm off.

Edited May 9, 2010 by DimensionX

[TMR]

Not really. It was when you and some other people started to post crap like that when i got a bit tired. I thought, oh no, they think i must be totally stupid and unaware of just about everyting, we can trick a non programmer as much as we like, he will not know a thing anyway. And when you noticed that i wasn't that dumb, you changed your mind pretty fast.

 

That, of course, is utter garbage because even if a despicable C64 coder like me (one who has, incidentally, written and completed more Atari 8-bit games than you have) were to lie and post false information about the Atari 8-bit as you're accusing us of, one of the Atari 8-bit programmers like Rybags or Bryan who knows the hardware very well indeed would correct that information. But they're correcting what you're saying.

Edited May 9, 2010 by TMR

[PeteD]

 

 

The best thing is to read the whole thread.

 

It certainly is. You seem to read the whole thread, pick out a load of stuff, re-word it, purposefully misunderstand it, post it as if it's what people have said and then act superior to everyone else.

[DimensionX]

Not really. It was when you and some other people started to post crap like that when i got a bit tired. I thought, oh no, they think i must be totally stupid and unaware of just about everyting, we can trick a non programmer as much as we like, he will not know a thing anyway. And when you noticed that i wasn't that dumb, you changed your mind pretty fast.

 

That, of course, is utter garbage because even if a despicable C64 coder like me (one who has, incidentally, written, completed and released three more Atari 8-bit games than you have) were to lie and post false information about the Atari 8-bit as you're accusing us of, one of the Atari 8-bit programmers like Rybags or Bryan who knows the hardware very well indeed would correct that information. But they're correcting what you're saying.

 

Yeah, A8's processor isn't "almost twice as fast".

 

I think that the Mhz will change when i'm a programmer.

 

Nuff said.

 

Have a good day.

Edited May 9, 2010 by DimensionX

[PeteD]

 

Yeah, A8's processor isn't "almost twice as fast".

 

I think that the Mhz will change when i'm a programmer.

 

Nuff said.

 

Have a good day.

 

LMAO, more ignorance. The fact that YOU don't understand the workings of the 2 machines and DMA etc doesn't mean it's not true. I don't think anyone has said what you claim they have without qualifying it with at least a basic explanation.

[+SpiceWare]

Yeah, A8's processor isn't "almost twice as fast".

 

I think that the Mhz will change when i'm a programmer.

 

It does change - ANTIC, GTIA and timing info

For each byte ANTIC reads from the bus causes main CPU to stop - this is called cycle stealing. ANTIC also does the DRAM refresh, this is also performed as a DMA task and steals the cycles too.

 

A stopped CPU is the same as 0 MHz, so the average MHz is less than the 1.7MHz

[PeteD]

Dear God, don't try to explain it to him, next thing you know he'll extract "0 MHz" from your post and claim somewhere down the line that someone said the A8 CPU doesn't actually run!

[DimensionX]

Yeah, A8's processor isn't "almost twice as fast".

 

I think that the Mhz will change when i'm a programmer.

 

It does change - ANTIC, GTIA and timing info

For each byte ANTIC reads from the bus causes main CPU to stop - this is called cycle stealing. ANTIC also does the DRAM refresh, this is also performed as a DMA task and steals the cycles too.

 

A stopped CPU is the same as 0 MHz, so the average MHz is less than the 1.7MHz

 

Oh no. Forget everything else, just concentrate on the Mhz on the processor itself. The "processor itself" "by itself" is almost twice as fast as the one in C64. And that was my point.

 

That's why i find it totally meaningless to post in this thread.

Edited May 9, 2010 by DimensionX

[+SpiceWare]

Dear God, don't try to explain it to him, next thing you know he'll extract "0 MHz" from your post and claim somewhere down the line that someone said the A8 CPU doesn't actually run!

Your right. Think I'll get back to work on my ARM demo for the Harmony Cart.

[potatohead]

*Still learning how to do stuff, probably always will.

 

Every progammer is in that boat, that's half the fun of programming and especially for the older machines.

 

Yep, just being humble. I like it better that way. Besides, you guys generally rock on 6502 ASM, and I'm still in hack stage. I enjoy the discussion and seeing the tricks very much

[PeteD]

 

 

Oh no. Forget everything else, just concentrate on the Mhz on the processor itself. The "processor itsel" "by itself" is almost twice as fast as the one in C64.

 

And did anyone actually say that? Flat out 1.77/8 isn't nearly 2x 0.98? OR, did they say something about DMA etc? The fact is you're in a programming thread (in case that didn't sink in yet) and WE all know the score with this stuff, some of the A8 guys (I'm not QUITE there yet) could off the top of their heads tell you EXACTLY how many cycles are free for the CPU on each scanline of each mode depending on DMA modes for PMGs etc. Just because you don't understand is no need to think everyone else is lying and then try to get out of it by saying the "processor itself" because that would mean someone (an American no doubt) cant divide 1.78 by 1.

 

*edit* for the "and that was my point" addition...

 

..because it WASN'T your POINT was it? You just stuck it in the middle of a load of stuff you'd made up from words from other people's posts saying none of the coders here know what they're talking about because they said....."your list"

Edited May 9, 2010 by PeteD

[GroovyBee]

Oh no. Forget everything else, just concentrate on the Mhz on the processor itself. The "processor itself" "by itself" is almost twice as fast as the one in C64. And that was my point.

 

Only if you switch the screen off then you can't see your rainbows .

[+SpiceWare]

Oh no. Forget everything else, just concentrate on the Mhz on the processor itself. The "processor itself" "by itself" is almost twice as fast as the one in C64. And that was my point.

But the processor couldn't draw those pretty rainbows w/out the rest of the hardware, so to look at it "by itself" is meaningless.

 

That's why i find it totally meaningless to post in this thread.

And yet you still do.

[potatohead]

Yeah, A8's processor isn't "almost twice as fast".

 

I think that the Mhz will change when i'm a programmer.

 

It does change - ANTIC, GTIA and timing info

For each byte ANTIC reads from the bus causes main CPU to stop - this is called cycle stealing. ANTIC also does the DRAM refresh, this is also performed as a DMA task and steals the cycles too.

 

A stopped CPU is the same as 0 MHz, so the average MHz is less than the 1.7MHz

 

Oh no. Forget everything else, just concentrate on the Mhz on the processor itself. The "processor itself" "by itself" is almost twice as fast as the one in C64. And that was my point.

 

That's why i find it totally meaningless to post in this thread.

 

Then just stop. Seriously.

 

Do you understand what happens on an Atari, when you focus on the processor itself? Let me tell you.

 

Read this carefully:

 

You get a big, one color screen. That's right! One of the excellent colors, filling the entire screen. You can, if you want to cycle it, maybe smoke something and rock on that, but that's about it. To get ANYTHING else, consumes the CPU.

 

And you've got two choices there too. If you want to, you can drive a lot of stuff on the CPU, so it's running your code fast, doing simple things to put crude objects on the screen, or you can turn on the other chips, and let them do it. When they do it, they stop your program, while they do it, slowing the whole works down.

 

The more you ask the Atari to do, the less time YOU have in YOUR program to get what you want done.

[TMR]

Oh no. Forget everything else, just concentrate on the Mhz on the processor itself. The "processor itself" "by itself" is almost twice as fast as the one in C64. And that was my point.

 

Which is of course wrong because the machine is what governs the processor speed, remove the machine from the equation and the MHz changes. If we took the CPU from a C64 and an Atari 8-bit and placed them into two identical testbeds that didn't have graphics or other hardware to worry about, the timing of that testbed would govern how fast both went and they'd be pulling almost identical speeds. Both machines use variants on MOS Technologies' 6502.

[DimensionX]

 

 

Oh no. Forget everything else, just concentrate on the Mhz on the processor itself. The "processor itsel" "by itself" is almost twice as fast as the one in C64.

 

And did anyone actually say that? Flat out 1.77/8 isn't nearly 2x 0.98? OR, did they say something about DMA etc? The fact is you're in a programming thread (in case that didn't sink in yet) and WE all know the score with this stuff, some of the A8 guys (I'm not QUITE there yet) could off the top of their heads tell you EXACTLY how many cycles are free for the CPU on each scanline of each mode depending on DMA modes for PMGs etc. Just because you don't understand is no need to think everyone else is lying and then try to get out of it by saying the "processor itself" because that would mean someone (an American no doubt) cant divide 1.78 by 1.

 

*edit* for the "and that was my point" addition...

 

..because it WASN'T your POINT was it? You just stuck it in the middle of a load of stuff you'd made up from words from other people's posts saying none of the coders here know what they're talking about because they said....."your list"

 

Please forget programming.

 

What's the Mhz?

 

C64 PAL - 0.985 MHz

Atari PAL - 1.78 Mhz

 

That's it, no matter what you say.

Edited May 9, 2010 by DimensionX

[PeteD]

 

 

Please forget programming.

 

What's the Mhz?

 

C64 PAL - 0.985 MHz

Atari PAL - 1.78 Mhz

 

That's it, no matter what you say.

 

Firstly, NO, we CAN'T forget programming.

 

Secondly, I just gave you those numbers in about 3 different posts. It's not like I don't know what they are. YOU have the problem that you don't understand what's going on with the rest of the machine. And if you want to play "top trumps" with numbers you can't have it your own way all the time, eg, 8bit sound channels vs 16 bit ones.

 

All you're doing now is picking the 1 fact that nobody has EVER denied and saying "that's all I was talking about" when it blatantly wasn't. You were accusing someone else of baselessly saying one isn't almost double the other.

[GroovyBee]

That's it, no matter what you say.

 

Not if you have cycle stealing DMA in operation. What's the point? You don't even know what DMA is because you are NOT A PROGRAMMER arguing with PROGRAMMERS in the PROGRAMMERS FORUM.

[DimensionX]

That's it, no matter what you say.

 

Not if you have cycle stealing DMA in operation. What's the point? You don't even know what DMA is because you are NOT A PROGRAMMER arguing with PROGRAMMERS in the PROGRAMMERS FORUM.

 

It's still the same processor no matter what programming or support chips.

 

C64 PAL - 0.985 MHz

Atari PAL - 1.78 Mhz

 

And the fact is that 1.78 Mhz is almost twice as fast.

Edited May 9, 2010 by DimensionX

[PeteD]

That's it, no matter what you say.

 

Not if you have cycle stealing DMA in operation. What's the point? You don't even know what DMA is because you are NOT A PROGRAMMER arguing with PROGRAMMERS in the PROGRAMMERS FORUM.

 

Of course he does, Direct memory access (DMA) is a feature of modern computers and microprocessors that allows certain hardware subsystems within the computer to access system memory for reading and/or writing independently of the central processing unit. [/endwikipediaquote]

 

oops, forgot to delete that last endquote!!

[PeteD]

That's it, no matter what you say.

 

Not if you have cycle stealing DMA in operation. What's the point? You don't even know what DMA is because you are NOT A PROGRAMMER arguing with PROGRAMMERS in the PROGRAMMERS FORUM.

 

It's still the same processor no matter what programming or support chips.

 

C64 PAL - 0.985 MHz

Atari PAL - 1.78 Mhz

 

And the fact is that 1.78 Mhz is almost twice as fast.

 

But that's not in debate here, what is is the fact you tried to say someone said that offhand as if 2 divided by 1 doesn't equal 2. If you can point to the post where someone said that I will personally call them an ass but even then, as I say, you're in an A8 coding thread, where EVERYONE apart from YOU knows that the CPU Mhz != the CPU cycles available.

[DimensionX]

Can you at least read my postings?

 

I never said that A8 was almost twice as fast, just the processor

 

No wonder that i leave this thread.

Edited May 9, 2010 by DimensionX

[GroovyBee]

It's still the same processor no matter what programming or support chips.

 

C64 PAL - 0.985 MHz

Atari PAL - 1.78 Mhz

 

And the fact is that 1.78 Mhz is almost twice as fast.

 

It doesn't matter how many times you repeat it, you aren't taking into account what happens to the effective throughput of the CPU when the display is active in a video system using support chips that use cycle stealing DMA.

 

A machine with no display isn't much fun for playing games on.