What COULD the 5200 have done?

[atariksi]

If Atari users fight this fiercely between the differences [and alleged] and superiority of various Atari platforms, there's no hope for the fanbois of the other non-Atari systems going up against them.

 

That is true ...

Worst case is when you've got a discussion with perople who love the A8+ST, others who love the A8+Amiga, and still others who love the C64+Amiga, and all of which have a tendency to look down upon one of the other platfomrs on there; those discussions tend to not stay "discussions" as such for very long, or very consistently at least.

 

 

 

Ofcourse, the 5200/atari 8-bit is the superior number one machine, nothing can beat it, ever.

Well... Except for the 7800 obviously .

 

That's true...if you duct taped a 5200 to it.

I think you mean duct take a 7800 to a 5200, I don't think it would work very well the other way around...

...

Well, actually you can enhance the VCS adapter to be a 7800 adapter and plug it into the 5200.

 

I'm sure adding RAMs/POKEYs back then made the cartridges more expensive for A7800.

 

It did, though it didn't always reflect in the price to the customer.

 

In terms of games with additional RAM, at the time, there were three games released with 8K (Impossible Mission, Tower Toppler and Jinks) and two with 16K (Summer Games and Winter Games). If I remember right, Rescue on Fractalus was supposed to have 2K RAM as well. The prices of those games varied even amongst themselves.

 

In terms of POKEY, only Ballblazer and Commando had it. Again, Ballblazer was priced similarly to many games that didn't have POKEYs. Ditto for Commando when it came out.

 

Most 7800 games from 1988 and beyond had bankswitching beyond 48K. Alien Brigade goes up to 144K.

With similar prices, there would be proportionally lower profits for such enhanced carts, of course. (that would be worth it if the enhancements made for significantly higher sales, or if the game was otherwise impossible)

 

I'd have though that Atari Corp wouldn't much care of the cost of carts if it was licenced 3rd parties publishing the games (it would be their loss, not atari's if things went wrong), but perhaps their distribution system wasn't set-up as such. Hell, it would have made sense for 3rd parties to use other sound chips too. (I'd immagine the SN76489 might have been an option for sound enhancement for 3rd parties, possibly cheaper than POKEY -simpler chip and much smaller package), or perhaps even the AY-3-8912 or AY-38912. (since there's no need for the I/O)

 

It's better to have standardized hardware that every machine has rather than each cartridge carrying its own hardware and high expense. Secondary storage, however, is a different story. That helps to distribute software through another means. So standard peripherals is a different story.

[GroovyBee]

They made the peripheral port for some reason and A5200 software is similar to A800 software so there's not much cost in making it work with existing A800 peripherals. So it's just your imagination; they already existed-- only the connector of the port was different.

 

And I am comparing stock machine capabilities-- adding hardware expansions can help any machine be better than it is. So either you allow for both to expand their hardware or neither.

 

The point is that carts with extra RAM and POKEY in existed at the time of the 7800. If Atari had wanted to get extra sales with a simple A8 to 5200 peripheral adapter they would have done so. In reality I suspect they didn't want to eat into the sales of the premium 400/800 range and so didn't bother.

 

Likewise, if carts for the 5200 had extra RAM, sound chips or even a hard drive interface during the active lifetime of the console they can be added into the system to system comparison. If not, they can't. There is no point comparing systems 24+ years later with all the bells and whistles that have been developed since they finished being commercially viable systems.

[kool kitty89]

It's better to have standardized hardware that every machine has rather than each cartridge carrying its own hardware and high expense. Secondary storage, however, is a different story. That helps to distribute software through another means. So standard peripherals is a different story.

From that respect, perhaps it would have been good to include an expansion port for such (say with 1 kB address space in it, cutting the cart bus to 32 kB instead of 48k flat mapped), especially from the 1984 standpoint that would make sense, and also could have better facilitated the planned computer/keyboard expansion (rather than using the joystick ports -after dropping the cart port plan due to FCC regs). That way, you could have a compact enhancment module for pokey and/or a nice chunk of RAM. (of course, they could have still doen that via the cartridge port with a passthrough expansion module -in a form factor like the high score cart- but that probably wouldn't be as cost effective -in terms of the cost of the expansion unit) The expansion connector early units did get were for audio and video input only iirc. (for the laserdisc player)

[atariksi]

They made the peripheral port for some reason and A5200 software is similar to A800 software so there's not much cost in making it work with existing A800 peripherals. So it's just your imagination; they already existed-- only the connector of the port was different.

 

And I am comparing stock machine capabilities-- adding hardware expansions can help any machine be better than it is. So either you allow for both to expand their hardware or neither.

 

The point is that carts with extra RAM and POKEY in existed at the time of the 7800. If Atari had wanted to get extra sales with a simple A8 to 5200 peripheral adapter they would have done so. In reality I suspect they didn't want to eat into the sales of the premium 400/800 range and so didn't bother.

 

Likewise, if carts for the 5200 had extra RAM, sound chips or even a hard drive interface during the active lifetime of the console they can be added into the system to system comparison. If not, they can't. There is no point comparing systems 24+ years later with all the bells and whistles that have been developed since they finished being commercially viable systems.

 

BountyBob did have banking. And 5200 doesn't need a POKEY chip. I was only talking about periperhal port which any third party could have used had they wanted to. And you should also only consider more RAM/POKEYs for the handful of carts that used it at the time. Because if you can build a cart now with extra hardware so can you for A5200 for about same price. So let's keep it fair.

[atariksi]

It's better to have standardized hardware that every machine has rather than each cartridge carrying its own hardware and high expense. Secondary storage, however, is a different story. That helps to distribute software through another means. So standard peripherals is a different story.

From that respect, perhaps it would have been good to include an expansion port for such (say with 1 kB address space in it, cutting the cart bus to 32 kB instead of 48k flat mapped), especially from the 1984 standpoint that would make sense, and also could have better facilitated the planned computer/keyboard expansion (rather than using the joystick ports -after dropping the cart port plan due to FCC regs). That way, you could have a compact enhancment module for pokey and/or a nice chunk of RAM. (of course, they could have still doen that via the cartridge port with a passthrough expansion module -in a form factor like the high score cart- but that probably wouldn't be as cost effective -in terms of the cost of the expansion unit) The expansion connector early units did get were for audio and video input only iirc. (for the laserdisc player)

 

Having SIO in keyboard isn't as efficient as on the mainboard since you would eventually have to transfer the data from the keyboard expansion to the main unit and that would make the keyboard more expensive. Perhaps, that's why it never took off.

[kool kitty89]

Having SIO in keyboard isn't as efficient as on the mainboard since you would eventually have to transfer the data from the keyboard expansion to the main unit and that would make the keyboard more expensive. Perhaps, that's why it never took off.

Had they used the cart slot (or a similar expansion connector with direct address/data connections to the CPU) wouldn't the interface be pretty much the same as a POKEY on th emain board providing SIO?

Since they apparently abandoned that in favor of interfacing with the joystick ports, it would be limited through that interface. (going though PIA's 8 I/O lines connected to those, possibly making use of the TIA trigger lines too)

 

Hey, doesn't the VCS only utilize 8 of the 16 I/O lines on RIOT, for the joysticks? (the other 8 lines would be another thing possibly useful to add to an expansion port) However, one issue with RIOT in general is the CPU has to drop down to 1.19 MHz while accessing it, right? (just as with accessing TIA)

Edited March 24, 2010 by kool kitty89

[GroovyBee]

Hey, doesn't the VCS only utilize 8 of the 16 I/O lines on RIOT, for the joysticks?

 

Nope! Where do you think that the BW/Colour, difficulty switches, Select and Reset buttons are read from?

[atariksi]

Having SIO in keyboard isn't as efficient as on the mainboard since you would eventually have to transfer the data from the keyboard expansion to the main unit and that would make the keyboard more expensive. Perhaps, that's why it never took off.

Had they used the cart slot (or a similar expansion connector with direct address/data connections to the CPU) wouldn't the interface be pretty much the same as a POKEY on th emain board providing SIO?

Since they apparently abandoned that in favor of interfacing with the joystick ports, it would be limited through that interface. (going though PIA's 8 I/O lines connected to those, possibly making use of the TIA trigger lines too)

 

Hey, doesn't the VCS only utilize 8 of the 16 I/O lines on RIOT, for the joysticks? (the other 8 lines would be another thing possibly useful to add to an expansion port) However, one issue with RIOT in general is the CPU has to drop down to 1.19 MHz while accessing it, right? (just as with accessing TIA)

 

Yeah, it's 1.19318Mhz same as timer on 8253, the standard timer on PCs. It's actually 14.318Mhz NTSC-based crystal divided by 3 to get the 4.77Mhz on original PCs and divide by 12 to get the 1.19318Mhz. And A2600 is exactly 1.19318Mhz as well. At least for A7800, it helps keep compatibility with Audio on A2600 by using same timer for TIA.

[CV Gus]

Man, oh man...

 

After seeing Opcode's games for the CV, and Newcoleco's fantastic Ghostblaster, I just wanted to know what a 5200 was actually capable of. It only had an effective life of about 18 months, so it's not as if it had a chance to "grow" the way the 2600 and NES did...

 

For example, can anyone here do working images or videos of a better-looking Pac-Man, Joust, and Missile Command, or Vanguard? A later game, perhaps? Operation Wolf, or a Street Fighter-style game, KLAX, or the like? The CV has Yi-Ar Kung Fu, so what would the 5200 have? Gun games are quite possible for both.

 

That's all I wanted to know. And don't any of you here forget all of the effort and the money (o.k., just $17.00, but right now that's something...) I went through to get my 5200 working again; most people might have just scrapped it. So just because I prefer a CV doesn't mean I don't like the 5200.

[roland p]

For example, can anyone here do working images or videos of a better-looking Pac-Man, Joust, and Missile Command, or Vanguard? A later game, perhaps? Operation Wolf, or a Street Fighter-style game, KLAX, or the like? The CV has Yi-Ar Kung Fu, so what would the 5200 have?

 

The 5200 would have a perfect conversion of Doom. I don't have pictures, so you just have to believe me. For existing software, please follow this link

[DracIsBack]

After seeing Opcode's games for the CV, and Newcoleco's fantastic Ghostblaster, I just wanted to know what a 5200 was actually capable of. It only had an effective life of about 18 months, so it's not as if it had a chance to "grow" the way the 2600 and NES did...

 

One could say the same of all the consoles. What Opcode, GroovyBee, Cafeman etc do is try to grow the consoles.

 

On your point of "how much better", I actually made that comment the first time I saw the NES. I thought the games were cool but didn't find them visually a huge step up compared to Smurf Rescue on the Colecovision. Certainly wasn't the jump that existed between the 2600 and the Colecovision.

 

Of course, look at the timing and put it in perspective:

 

Atari 2600 - released 1977

Intellivison - released 1979

Colecovision - released 1982

Atari 5200 - released 1984

Famicon (NES) - released 1983 in Japan, 1985 in North America.

7800 released 1984

[Crazyace]

This is what the 5200 could have done:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToIiWMf_XqU&fmt=6

 

and this:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cnHmVV2lPA

[kool kitty89]

Hey, doesn't the VCS only utilize 8 of the 16 I/O lines on RIOT, for the joysticks?

 

Nope! Where do you think that the BW/Colour, difficulty switches, Select and Reset buttons are read from?

 

Oh.. Duh!

 

Of course, look at the timing and put it in perspective:

 

Atari 2600 - released 1977

Intellivison - released 1979

Colecovision - released 1982

Atari 5200 - released 1984

Famicon (NES) - released 1983 in Japan, 1985 in North America.

7800 released 1984

5200 was 1982 . (and hardware was from 1979)

[Divya16]

Hey, doesn't the VCS only utilize 8 of the 16 I/O lines on RIOT, for the joysticks?

 

Nope! Where do you think that the BW/Colour, difficulty switches, Select and Reset buttons are read from?

 

Oh.. Duh!

 

Of course, look at the timing and put it in perspective:

 

Atari 2600 - released 1977

Intellivison - released 1979

Colecovision - released 1982

Atari 5200 - released 1984

Famicon (NES) - released 1983 in Japan, 1985 in North America.

7800 released 1984

5200 was 1982 . (and hardware was from 1979)

 

Someone may have asked this before, but which Atari 5200 games use the GTIA modes? It seems that was another thing unexploited in its games although it was a standard in all 5200 machines.

[DracIsBack]

 

5200 was 1982 . (and hardware was from 1979)

 

I actually knew that but typed too fast. :-)

[DracIsBack]

That Wolfenstein demo was REALLY cool!

 

Wasn't as impressed with BOMB JACK but looks good.

[Crazyace]

and this is also what the 5200 could have done

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmEFFp0lLzo

[DracIsBack]

Are you assuming that the memory in the 5200 gets expanded? I thought Space Harrier needed 64K or 128K to run?

 

I thought Crownland was nice as well.

 

[Crazyace]

I was just going to post that

 

My assumption is that bank switched 5200 cartridges are pretty trivial, so anything that could be done on an 8bit could be replicated exactly on a 5200 with a large enough cartridge. ( It's a pity there's no R/W line - but there's nothing stopping a 2600 style readonly/writeonly mapping of extra ram )

[kool kitty89]

I was just going to post that

 

My assumption is that bank switched 5200 cartridges are pretty trivial, so anything that could be done on an 8bit could be replicated exactly on a 5200 with a large enough cartridge. ( It's a pity there's no R/W line - but there's nothing stopping a 2600 style readonly/writeonly mapping of extra ram )

 

What about the expansion port? Anyway, isn't the lack of the phase 2 line more of a problem than read/write? (ont he VCS, usually an address line got sacrificed iirc) Phi2 is present on 2-port (and late 4-port) models though, plus any modified to support the VCS adapter, on the cart slot at least. (still no dedicated read/write line though)

Edited March 24, 2010 by kool kitty89

[Lynxpro]

and this is also what the 5200 could have done

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmEFFp0lLzo

 

 

 

I saw that at the recent Davis Atari Party and thought it was incredible.

 

My thoughts were "wow, I bet the 7800 version could've been better than the SMS port had the 7800 not had gimped memory [for 1986+] and assuming Atari or some other third-party had bought the rights to port the game..."

 

I do not recall the ST version playing so well... graphically better yes, but playability, no. I can say I preferred Xevious on the 7800 over the ST port [and yes, I owned both].

[Crazyace]

I was just going to post that

 

My assumption is that bank switched 5200 cartridges are pretty trivial, so anything that could be done on an 8bit could be replicated exactly on a 5200 with a large enough cartridge. ( It's a pity there's no R/W line - but there's nothing stopping a 2600 style readonly/writeonly mapping of extra ram )

 

What about the expansion port? Anyway, isn't the lack of the phase 2 line more of a problem than read/write? (ont he VCS, usually an address line got sacrificed iirc) Phi2 is present on 2-port (and late 4-port) models though, plus any modified to support the VCS adapter, on the cart slot at least. (still no dedicated read/write line though)

 

The expansion port has the extra signals, but you would need to use both connectors in a game. As the 2600 proves, clever engineering can even make up for the lack of a read line.

[kool kitty89]

 

The expansion port has the extra signals, but you would need to use both connectors in a game. As the 2600 proves, clever engineering can even make up for the lack of a read line.

 

Well, they could have released a RAM expansion module for the expansion port. (as a few later consoles did -namely N64 and Saturn)

[Lynxpro]

 

The expansion port has the extra signals, but you would need to use both connectors in a game. As the 2600 proves, clever engineering can even make up for the lack of a read line.

 

Well, they could have released a RAM expansion module for the expansion port. (as a few later consoles did -namely N64 and Saturn)

 

 

 

Are you sure the 5200 expansion port could have been used to increase the system's actual physical memory?

[kool kitty89]

Are you sure the 5200 expansion port could have been used to increase the system's actual physical memory?

 

http://pinouts.ru/Motherboard/ExpansionAtari5200_pinout.shtml The 5200 expansion port would be more capable than the cartridge port for adding RAM, not as good as the PBI on the XL series, of course (which included the full address range, clock signals, read/write line, select lines, and refresh line). The cart port had 14 bits addressed to it (16 kB), the expansion port had 15-bits (32 kB) of flat mapped address space. However, I'm not sure how DRAM could be managed with that, any cart based expansion would likely be SRAM like on the 7800, if DRAM could be used it all, it would mean including a DRAM controller on the board with the RAM chips.

Using the expansion port could have provided a total 48 kB flat mapped RAM, I think. (same as the 400/800)

 

This talk about the hack used for adding RAM to the VCS makes me wonder how David Crane managed to mix sound through the cart port from the DPC in Pitfall II. (the tricky nature of that might explain the noisy sound output in that game)

Edited March 26, 2010 by kool kitty89