Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Is there any real use for 128MB on classic Amiga?  (Read 10027 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AmigaClassicRule

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2011
  • Posts: 956
    • Show all replies
Re: Is there any real use for 128MB on classic Amiga?
« on: November 27, 2012, 05:29:13 AM »
Quote from: motrucker;716517
I can't believe this thread! Sounds like you all only use your Amigas for playing games. No one works with graphics any more?

And Amiga's classic hardware valued for serious business? For education? For running servers? For used in government servers to maintain valuable secret data that is worth billions?

Uh....duh....of course it is only for games. When you stick C= there as an addition to it's record history and WHY at least *I* own it, I am surprised you call it computer in the first place and not a console?

Actually, I call mine a console regardless of your attempt to convince me otherwise, hehe.

As graphics wise I believe we go through the route of Macintosh!!!

So BRING OUT THE GAMES BABY FOR the Amiga!!!

I know Chaos Lord will love me for saying this, but, lately most of the time I spend playing on my A1200 is Total Chaos. I tend to play it for hours usually, because it is not registered, I tend to turn off the monitor and keep my A1200 on for days until I finish it. Of course when my Amiga 1200 decides to crash on me and I bit my nails from frustration that is when I turn her off.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2012, 05:39:42 AM by AmigaClassicRule »
 

Offline AmigaClassicRule

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2011
  • Posts: 956
    • Show all replies
Re: Is there any real use for 128MB on classic Amiga?
« Reply #1 on: November 27, 2012, 06:33:03 PM »
Quote from: Tripitaka;716588
Wow, I can't believe I've just read this thread through and more than once someone has stated that making Amiga games that don't run on an 80's spec Amiga is "leaving people out" or some other such comment.
 
Is that for real?
 
Own an original Amiga so can legally use the ROMs or have purchased them by buying Amiga Forever? Check!
 
Own a PC that can run UAE? Check!
 
Can download UAE for your OS for free or have purchased Amiga Forever? Check!
 
Then how the hell can you be left out? I just don't get that logic at all.
Plenty of us have 80's spec Amigas for classic stuff and a UAE install (or NG 'miggy of some type) for more needy software. No one is left out, let's be honest, that sort of comment is borderline troll food.

Sorry mate, but WinUAE and UAE or whatever letter combination that comes out as UAE is not a real Amiga or an Amiga. It emulates it. It is a software that tricks Amiga software on running on Windows. It tries to get as much compatibility as posisble and add things into it that the original Amiga hardware cannot provide like 8 MB CHIP RAM, but dude....it aint Amiga. It is an emulator running on Windows/Mac/Linux, but aint Amiga. If it was, I would not go huntin for 040 apollo and spending 400 bucks for it, I would save that cash for something else and instead go to WinUAE and select configuration and select 040 and run the emulator.
 
To imply that UAE is a real Amiga is an insult to people like me who ACTUALLY spending fortune on outdated hardware FOR THEIR REAL AMIGA to get their best experience.
 
I own a commodore 1084s monitor on a real Amiga 1200 and the experience of these CAN NEVER BE MIMICED on the best emulator on Earth.
 

Offline AmigaClassicRule

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2011
  • Posts: 956
    • Show all replies
Re: Is there any real use for 128MB on classic Amiga?
« Reply #2 on: November 29, 2012, 02:20:40 PM »
Quote from: ChaosLord;716860
But "The 040 option doesn't speed up anything, as it really doesn't emulate a 040.", right?
 
 
AHA! u cheated! :)
 
I appreciate ur test results and everything but as the NTFS dirs option has multiple bugs that corrupt the game, it does not count.
 
Unless Toni fixed the bugs in the intervening years (4?). It has been quite some years since I documented the bugs so it is possible. Yes it acted like more than one bug iirc.
 
All I can say is that until I can certify that all NTFS dir bugs have been fixed, timing tests have to be done from some kind of hardfile. FFS, SFS, PFS3, or some other more exotic one. Hardfiles are supposed to be pretty fast. I would be very interested to see your times from a hardfile, to see how much difference it makes, if any.
 
I am wondering how PFS3 compares to SFS compares to FFS 4k compares to FFS 16k.
 
I wanted to release Total Chaos on an FFS 4K hardfile way back before PFS3 was released for free. But I was in horrible pain and could do absolutely nothing but watch the world go by all these years.
 
I have now recovered just a little bit to the point that I can write a few forum msgs here and there, but I hafta be real careful not to over do it.
 
Anyway I figured a FFS 4K or 16K with a bunch of Addbuffers would really whoopass. :cool: But now PFS3 is out and that throws a monkey wrench into my plans for world domination :kitty:
 
 
 
 
 
Maybe later after I have my new 3.1Ghz quad-core WinUAE machine set up. I bought it for the purpose of performing as close to a 50Mhz real Amiga (or better) as possible. I would love for it to solidly go at 100Mhz speed but I have never seen it do that. I have a few ideas for making WinUAE go faster. We shall see.

Sometimes when I disable sound in WinUAE it goes SO fast that double clicking an icon no longer register.