RAM 320XE

[HiassofT]

Just my 2 (Euro-) cents on the memory size discussion:

 

Every software developer says there aren't many upgrades over 320kB.

 

Is this a vicious circle of a classic case of the chicken and the egg?

No. Software developer have for quite a long time realized that there's almost no practical use for more than 320k on the Atari 8bit.

 

The 6502 simply lacks the processing power to actually do anything with this amount of memory. You won't be editing megapixel pictures with your XL, even if there were some application to do this it would take ages to compute a zoomed-out view.

 

Even if you were doing megapixel image editing how'd you load and store the data? Using 5 double sided 5.25" floppy disks? Surely not.

 

We have now 2014 and there are better options to deal with large amounts of memory. Use a flash cart or a harddrive, for example.

 

I hear a lot of people saying they want a Space Harrier version that doesn't need a flash cart.

 

But why? How would you load the 1MB of data?

 

Certainly not via SIO (and especially not playing diskjockey with 10 5.25" disk sides) - this would be just as annoying as it was back then to load a 32k game from tape.

 

Ah, you'd say from a harddrive. Well, then I'd say if you could afford buying some harddrive solution you should also be able to afford buying a simple flash cart.

 

BTW: If I understand it correctly the RAM 320XL allows you to replace internal Atari memory with memory on the RAM 320XL. Now that is an excellent novelty, you can expand a 600XL from 16k to 320k without doing an soldering! IMHO this feature is worth a lot more than the (neglectable) difference between 256k and 512k of extended memory, it's a feature no other upgrade has provided so far.

 

so long,

 

Hias

[ctirad]

I hear a lot of people saying they want a Space Harrier version that doesn't need a flash cart.

But why? How would you load the 1MB of data?

The question is rather: "do we need to load 1MB data at once?" I belive both Space Harrier and Atari blast in fact use a fraction of the 1MB for the actual runtime. The "floppy" conversion should only load the data needed by the particular screen or level and not everything at once.

 

Look at the C64 folks, for example. They don't use any RAM expansions (expect some very rare REU stuff) and do very respectable things with only 64kB. Atari folks seems to rather spend money for a complicated internal RAM expansions and parallel storage that are fast enough to fill the RAM with data instead of writing a simple multipart loader.

 

BTW: If I understand it correctly the RAM 320XL allows you to replace internal Atari memory with memory on the RAM 320XL. Now that is an excellent novelty, you can expand a 600XL from 16k to 320k without doing an soldering!

Yes, that's correct. The same feature is suported on 320XE as well (excpet in the 576k mode), but it is useful only for machines with faulty or missing onboard RAM chips.

Edited September 28, 2014 by ctirad

[Mathy]

Hello Larry

 

@ Mathy -- did you buy a Freezer with it's 512K?

 

Yes. But no, I don't want to use that as a memory expansion.

 

Sincerely

 

Mathy

[Shawn Jefferson]

There are two things that I can think of off the top of my head where more memory is better, and both of them are OSes, where it's beneficial to have drivers, ramdisks, processes, etc.. in extended memory.

 

SpartaDOS X

flashjazzcat's Mutlitasking OS and GUI

[flashjazzcat]

And data: 32pt GOS fonts will easily be 16KB apiece.

Edited September 28, 2014 by flashjazzcat

[ctirad]

Do you think, that for an GUI similar to GEOS or Apple II desktop you need more RAM than Atari 520 ST or Amiga 500 had?

[Shawn Jefferson]

Well, I think that flashjazzcat's GUI and GEOS or Apple II desktop are "similar" in the same way a Ford Fiesta and a Ferrari are similar.

 

 

So the answer, I believe is "yes."

[flashjazzcat]

Indeed. Neither GEOS nor Apple II desktop are multitasking operating systems for one thing. And while not all resources (fonts, etc) are held in RAM at all times, the more memory available, the less time spent paging large files in and out from disk. Surely all graphical operating systems benefit from more RAM, even if said RAM is not an absolute requirement for basic operation. GEOS is a good case in point: note how nippy GEOWrite becomes on a 64KB machine when several non-resident fonts are used. Nuff said.

[ctirad]

But GEOS is not just a GUI, it's a complete operating system and applications.

[flashjazzcat]

Read this.

[ctirad]

The point is that there is not a reason why any 8bit OS should require more RAM than much advanced systems on Amiga, Atari or MAC.

[+MrFish]

The point is that there is not a reason why any 8bit OS should require more RAM than much advanced systems on Amiga, Atari or MAC.

 

It doesn't "require" it.

[+CharlieChaplin]

So we have one unfinished game that requires 1MB just because there is no loader routine present btween the levels yet.

 

 

 

Only the Prototype is the real demo (a subaverage one). All other is just a lot of precalculated crap which can actually fill any amout of memory.

 

BTW, the Prototype exists only because Poison wanted something that would utilize his new U1MB. Fandal (author of the code) said that with a little effort it could squeeze it maybe to 256kB, but it don't worth it. I fully agree with him.

 

 

Well,

 

the "Prototype" demo exists in various forms on the PC (and maybe other machines) as GIF animations. Since Poison and Fandal did not create all pictures or animation-sequences from scratch on the A8, the "Prototype" demo is also pre-calculated stuff from the PC and therefore similar to TIP-animations (converted + animated pictures on the A8 with the help of G2F). One can find the original topic here: http://atariage.com/forums/topic/170316-brand-new-1mb-and-stereo-demo-for-a8/?hl=Prototype

with some insight information from Poison in post 20. The discussion about the usefullnes of 1MB expansions for the A8 was also in this topic (and in many other topics here at AA). Some of the "Karate guy" GIF animations can be found e.g. here:

 

http://www.blingcheese.com/image/code/3/karate.htm

http://www.20cents-video.com/userdata/animated-gif/library/reverse3282yu7074.gif

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view1/1322293/karate-guy-o.gif

 

If I wanted to, I could also convert this animated GIF with the karate guy into a TIP animation that works with 320k or 576k RAM (e.g. by extracting 100% / 50% / 25% of frames from the animated GIF, convert them into TIP format and animate them with TIP animator)...

 

And err, afaik *most* A8 demos from the last 10-15 years were not coded on the A8 with 64kbytes RAM, an A8 Assembler and an A8 floppy drive. Instead most demo coders used a PC (16 Bit, 32Bit or 64 Bit) with lots of RAM (megabytes or gigabytes) and pre-calculated the stuff (e.g. sine, cosine waves and other stuff) there. So you can say the same thing ("precalculated crap") to most 320k demos, 128k demos, etc. Even a lot of the newer A8 games that utilize just 48k or 64k RAM have been coded and pre-calculated on the PC...

 

So in my eyes:

576k or 1088k RAM for the A8 is not really a must-have, but its a nice thing to have.

Playing, coding, etc. on the A8 is not a must-do, but its a nice thing to do.

[flashjazzcat]

The point is that there is not a reason why any 8bit OS should require more RAM than much advanced systems on Amiga, Atari or MAC.

 

Not a requirement, as MrFish says, and you're using (in the case of Atari ST and Apple Mac) two systems which were initially single-tasking. Despite this, the original Mac's miserly 128KB was soon quadrupled to 512KB. And not until some five iterations of the operating system did that platform become capable of (cooperative) multi-tasking, making more RAM desirable for optimal performance. Likewise, my Atari ST is equipped with 4MB of RAM, mainly to support aftermarket multi-tasking replacement operating systems. As for my A500+, it has a 2MB chip RAM upgrade and sidecar HDD capable of carrying a further 2MB of fast RAM, with upgrades of 8MB being supported, as I understand it.

 

As well as a clear correlation between multi-tasking and RAM requirements, we might also note that RAM was very expensive when those 16-bit platforms were first produced, while now it is very cheap, and indeed a "nice thing to have". 320 or 576KB upgrades are also very nice, but it seems a little specious to assert that 1MB upgrades have no conceivable use just because your upgrade provides a quarter or half that amount.

 

In the context of a multi-tasking OS, the argument mentioned earlier about hard disks also holds little water, since although modern HDDs for the A8 are very fast (faster than PORTB banked RAMdisks), this is still no substitute for having data in situ just when you need it.

 

It's really helpful to understand how operating systems work before making generalised assertions about what's necessary or desirable, and the ability to distinguish between - say - a system which single-tasks (GEOS) and one which multi-tasks (such as SymbOS, which supports up to 1MB of RAM) would be a basic pre-requisite there.

[kogden]

The point is that there is not a reason why any 8bit OS should require more RAM than much advanced systems on Amiga, Atari or MAC.

 

Last I checked the STs we had when I was a kid had 0.5-4MB of RAM. My Mac Plus had 4MB of RAM and things were still a squeeze later on in it's life when the II-series took off and apps got bigger.

 

A multitasking system will eat RAM quite quickly. FJC's efforts at this point don't REQUIRE 256K+ but life will certainly be easier. MacOS software started outgrowing the Mac 128/512 very early on. The Plus and SE were left behind fairly quick too.

[ggn]

Not a requirement, as MrFish says, and you're using (in the case of Atari ST and Apple Mac) two systems which were initially single-tasking.

The ST could have up to 7 tasks running (desktop or application plus 6 desk accessories) from its inception. I know that's not the post's (or thread's point), just saying .

[ctirad]

Not a requirement, as MrFish says, and you're using (in the case of Atari ST and Apple Mac) two systems which were initially single-tasking.

But Amiga wasn't and don't forget how big was the framebuffer, device buffers and other things loaded from the disk. Also the binaries were much bigger.

 

Likewise, my Atari ST is equipped with 4MB of RAM, mainly to support aftermarket multi-tasking replacement operating systems.

In what year? Until early nineties the RAM was so expensive one must had very good reason for upgrade. Even on PC the 4MB RAM was not standard until the DOOM was released in 1993.

 

but it seems a little specious to assert that 1MB upgrades have no conceivable use just because your upgrade provides a quarter or half that amount.

I can easily produce 2MB expansion, but it would require soldering as the 1MB. I just don't like the attitude the 1MB is a must for a 8 bit machine just because it can be done.

 

In the context of a multi-tasking OS, the argument mentioned earlier about hard disks also holds little water, since although modern HDDs for the A8 are very fast (faster than PORTB banked RAMdisks)

This is still pure academic discussion, becuase such OS does not exist and even you don't know if it will be capable of runnig couple of simple apps with a reasonable response.

 

However, once you write something new and completely incompatible with an existing atari OS, why to care about a PORTB RAM? Why to not design a completely new expansion that would use the cart address space and make a combined flash/RAM cart with your OS? It would be a beautifull and clean solution.

Edited September 29, 2014 by ctirad

[kogden]

However, once you write something new and completely incompatible with an existing atari OS, why to care about a PORTB RAM? Why to not design a completely new expansion that would use the cart address space and make a combined flash/RAM cart with your OS? It would be a beautifull and clean solution.

 

For compatibility with existing software that uses PORTB. I think the point was to be able to launch non-GUI software and have it run as-is with existing RAM expansions.

 

1MB is overkill in most situations but I can see why people go that route with internal expansions because it doesn't cost much more to do it. Presently I have a 512K Mega-Hz internal expansion in an 800XL and a RAM 320XL on my 600XL and I've been perfectly happy. I do plan on getting one of the RAM 320XE boards with ECI pass-through for my 130XE.

[ctirad]

There is nothing that would prevent to start existing software from a GUI OS running in its dedicted RAM. On the contrary, It would allow to skip back to the running OS after reset even from a running demo or game.

[576XE]

May be I can see hidden problem behind discussion...

 

We all say about ATARI but thinking about 640kb problem of DOS.

BUT...

We remember that this problem has decision in FULL HW PC PERESTROIKA!

 

Real problem stays in fact that we love our perfect and 'powerfull without price' ATARI!!!

It's real T-34. 'Powerful without price!'

 

All of us knows that there is memory linearizing programs. They are all absolutely absurd because of 1,79 MHz.

 

And... that's only little opinion...

[flashjazzcat]

This is still pure academic discussion, becuase such OS does not exist and even you don't know if it will be capable of runnig couple of simple apps with a reasonable response.

Don't you realize most applications in a multitasking OS are sleeping or idle much of the time, waiting for some event? If you remain sceptical or critical after properly acquainting yourself with what's been accomplished so far, then so be it. I have nothing but admiration for the plug-in 320KB RAM upgrades (I used to own the XL version, in fact, before I sold it), but I felt the need to counter an evident lack of insight regarding what's being done with the graphical OS. However, I can see it's futile to do so, so I'll just leave it there.

Edited September 29, 2014 by flashjazzcat

[Marius]

I would emphasize that I really 'adore' this 320XE upgrade. I have serious plans to buy a few of those. I'm completely fine with 320K in total, and although I responded a few times about the 576K, this does not mean I'm in the need of more than 320K.

 

If we can order and pay, let me know!

 

Thanks a lot

Marius

[kogden]

To be fair: FJC's efforts are basically implementing those "much advanced" systems on a 6502 in straight assembler and achieving better performance by not ignoring the last 30 years of Computer Science research and GUI implementations. This is no longer a simple GUI project, that's pretty obvious from an outside perspective. It's an OS. One with multitasking. In straight assembler. One that I'm pretty sure 320K would be enough to play with. IIRC, the target was still a stock 130XE for basic functionality.

 

Now, Ctirad's 320XE expansion is pretty awesome. Especially with ECI passthrough. That's so much better than butchering the 130XE mainboard. I don't mind soldering a few points for extra functionality but I don't want to go desoldering ICs if I can avoid it on XE's.

[576XE]

Me too. 320XE is awesome.

[ctirad]

Flashjazz, please, don't be touchy. It was don't meant as a critism from me. It is just and extemely hard work to make something that on a 1,79MHz machine. I fully respect your work.

 

BTW, to all. I'm going to try the TF trick with a /REF signal. I have all needed singals already routed to the CPLD from the very first prototype. I only need to change the firmware a bit. Perhaps it is time to rename it to RAM576XE?