Jump to content
IGNORED

RXB 2024 update


RXB

Recommended Posts

RXB 2024 update 

I was hoping to get RXB 2024 out before end of year but some routines have been a pain to rewrite from GPL to Assembly.

Anyway here is the latest one finished and results:

 

Well just finished conversion of XB CALL CHAR(character-code,pattern-identifier) i.e. CALL CHAR(65,"FFFFFFFF81818181")

Running a test program:

100 CALL CLEAR
110 OPEN #1:"CLOCK"
120 INPUT #1:A$,B$,C$
130 FOR C=1 TO 10000
140 CALL CHAR(65,"FFFFFFFF")
150 NEXT C
160 INPUT #1:D$,E$,F$
170 PRINT A$,D$:B$,E$,C$,F$
180 END

Times I get for XB 44 minutes 55 seconds, same for RXB 2020 and RXB 2023

 

Time for RXB 2024 is 4 minutes and 9 seconds

 

I believe that is a improvement.

  • Like 18
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great to see you still working on this RXB -- I myself looking at early new year (first or second week of Jan.) to finally get my things out of cold storage and moved into my condo, and am looking forward to digging back into GPL and Assembly full-time along with some new hardware projects.

 

It is interesting to see you converting alot of GPL to Assembly, reminds me of what Myarc did with their X/Basic, I always like the speed of their system, can you do a compare in time with it? (If you have Myarc XB setup?)

 

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gary from OPA said:

Great to see you still working on this RXB -- I myself looking at early new year (first or second week of Jan.) to finally get my things out of cold storage and moved into my condo, and am looking forward to digging back into GPL and Assembly full-time along with some new hardware projects.

 

It is interesting to see you converting alot of GPL to Assembly, reminds me of what Myarc did with their X/Basic, I always like the speed of their system, can you do a compare in time with it? (If you have Myarc XB setup?)

 

Thanks.

Yea except Myarc had serious issues with backwards compatibility and could not run Basic programs due to that problem.

It was fast, but very tough to remain backwards compatible, also unlike Myarc XB the RXB 2020/2021/2022/2023 & 2024

can run from Console only just fine with same speed with or without a 32K.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes, that is true, you basically had to write the your basic program for the Myarc system, still was a good idea at the time, also you had to use a 8k ram cartridge in the slot to get it to launch, would had been nice if they had designed it to run off their memory card totally via the DSR, freeing up the cartridge slot, since you needed their card to use it anyway. Oh'well. Looking forward to seeing RXB 2024 when its ready.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

90 A$=RPT$("F",255)
100 CALL CLEAR
110 OPEN #1:"CLOCK"
120 INPUT #1:A$,B$,C$
130 FOR C=1 TO 10000
140 CALL CHAR(32,A$)
150 NEXT C
160 INPUT #1:D$,E$,F$
170 PRINT A$,D$:B$,E$,C$,F$
180 END

Ran this using XB 2.9 GEM and RXB 2024

XB 2.9 GEM time: 22 minutes 3 seconds

RXB 2024: 3 minutes 53 seconds

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, TheBF said:

That's a big improvement Rich. Nice work.

 

So I would guess that the big difference in the code above is the CHAR() function re-write?

 

Yea, all the effort is to make GPL just interface with the program but any changes are done in Assembly.

Example normal XB CALL CHAR routine is in GPL and has to change the 16 bytes you input like CALL CHAR(65,"FE00000011FF3478")

into what goes in VDP memory which will be 8 bytes.

As the RXB changes are all in Assembly in FAST RAM it is way way faster as the fetch and conversion and returns are all assembly.

This is why it is so fast just like my CALL HCHAR(row,column,character-number,repetion) is about 9 times faster then XB.

RXB 2024 CALL CHAR is about 20 times faster.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, RXB said:
90 A$=RPT$("F",255)
100 CALL CLEAR
110 OPEN #1:"CLOCK"
120 INPUT #1:A$,B$,C$
130 FOR C=1 TO 10000
140 CALL CHAR(32,A$)
150 NEXT C
160 INPUT #1:D$,E$,F$
170 PRINT A$,D$:B$,E$,C$,F$
180 END

Ran this using XB 2.9 GEM and RXB 2024

XB 2.9 GEM time: 22 minutes 3 seconds

RXB 2024: 3 minutes 53 seconds

Do you have a console with 32bit 32K ram, i would like to see how much faster the timing would be with RXB on it. -- I also wonder how much more speed you get with a 4mhz cpu upgrade as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, hloberg said:

I think we may have a new standard for XB in the development here. Too bad TI hadn't figured this out 40+ years ago. :)

 

Rich, you were also talking about maybe having integer math. Still on the plate?

Yea after RXB 2024 I can work on RXB integer only XB.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gary from OPA said:

Do you have a console with 32bit 32K ram, i would like to see how much faster the timing would be with RXB on it. -- I also wonder how much more speed you get with a 4mhz cpu upgrade as well.

No I do most of my work on Classic99 with SAMS and 9 drives.

And behind me is my TI99/4A with a Shift838 PC (Pbox) with 1Meg SAMS, TIPI (PI 4+) and a CorComp Disk Controller and a CorComp RS232 card.

Using FinalGROM I test all my RXB on it.

 

I want to maintain backwards compatible with even Console only, but support SAMS too.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 12/17/2023 at 5:42 PM, RXB said:
90 A$=RPT$("F",255)
100 CALL CLEAR
110 OPEN #1:"CLOCK"
120 INPUT #1:A$,B$,C$
130 FOR C=1 TO 10000
140 CALL CHAR(32,A$)
150 NEXT C
160 INPUT #1:D$,E$,F$
170 PRINT A$,D$:B$,E$,C$,F$
180 END

Ran this using XB 2.9 GEM and RXB 2024

XB 2.9 GEM time: 22 minutes 3 seconds

RXB 2024: 3 minutes 53 seconds

Hmmm...I get 8 minutes, 32 seconds on XB 2.9.  This is on a 16-bit console, but I wouldn't expect that to make much difference to a XB-like environment running out of cartridge ROM.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Reciprocating Bill said:

Hmmm...I get 8 minutes, 32 seconds on XB 2.9.  This is on a 16-bit console, but I wouldn't expect that to make much difference to a XB-like environment running out of cartridge ROM.  

LOL well that is kind of impossible as RXB 2004 has not been released from my computer yet?

I planed on releasing RXB 2024 before March 2024 as announced in Dec 2023

 

And XB GEM I put into my FinalGROM and it will not even boot up on my console TI99/4A,

so the version I have on Windows PC that works with Classic99 refuses to boot up on my TI99/4A

with only Console or 32K turned on???

 

I am at a loss as to why XB 2.9 GEM will not boot on Real Iron using FinalGROM cart?

Edited by RXB
Spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RXB said:

LOL well that is kind of impossible as RXB 2004 has not been released from my computer yet?

...I am at a loss as to why XB 2.9 GEM will not boot on Real Iron using FinalGROM cart?

I've only run the program using XB 2.9.  And XB 2.9 is running from my FinalGROM without any problems (always with 32K expansion, as that is built into my console).

Edited by Reciprocating Bill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Reciprocating Bill said:

I've only run the program using XB 2.9.  And XB 2.9 is running from my FinalGROM without any problems (always with 32K expansion, as that is built into my console).

I have a AMS Card with 1 Meg, never had any issues with it and just tested it as it checks out fine.

 

So I copied the DOWNLOADED .bin file from AtariAge of XB 2.9 GEM and it runs like a charm for Classic99 with no issues.

Copy it into FinalGROM and it crashes, but RXB all version work fine and other games and files work fine?????

 

Is there something about FinalGROM and XB 2.9 GEM that is special I do not know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Reciprocating Bill said:

I haven't done anything special - just renamed the files appropriately and plunked them into the FinalGROM.

What name? Maybe there is a name limit of some kind of special name to make it work?

 

RXB is just RXB2024 or RXB2023 or RXB2001 or just RXB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Reciprocating Bill said:

From the documentation:

 

"To be able to use the Final Grom you need to rename the two files: XB29GEM_G.BIN should be XB29GEMG.BIN, XB29GEM_8.BIN should be XB29GEMC.BIN"

Hmm that is exactly how they are named except .BIN instead of .bin so will change that.

No difference at all still nothing, but same files work just fine in Classic99 with no issues?

 

XB29GEMG.bin and XB29GEM_8.bin 

Why? What is going on? Bad FinalGROM?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, RXB said:

Hmm that is exactly how they are named except .BIN instead of .bin so will change that.

No difference at all still nothing, but same files work just fine in Classic99 with no issues?

 

XB29GEMG.bin and XB29GEM_8.bin 

Why? What is going on? Bad FinalGROM?

Bad download? Try a different source for the files. Also try a fresh sdcard with only those files on it. I had issues the other day with flashrom99 and it was the sdcard. I ordered a finalgrom99 it arrives early next week I will try it myself and see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Reciprocating Bill said:

Hmmm...I get 8 minutes, 32 seconds on XB 2.9.  This is on a 16-bit console, but I wouldn't expect that to make much difference to a XB-like environment running out of cartridge ROM.  

Nice I was wondering how much more 16bit would make. Now I wonder how much more with 4mhz would be. I wish I still had my 4mhz and 16bit console that Richard bell made for me but it got damaged in Dominican Republic. I going to have to do another one up. But I would like to do a 16bit AMS version this time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just downloaded the last version of GEM posted and extracted and renamed the files as stated above, then dropped them into my FG99 and booted the TI, hit the letter for XB256 and GEM booted up. @RXB you may have a FG99 issue or an SD card issue, if the proper file rename doesn't work?

Edited by RickyDean
spelling, added content
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...