Is there any real use for 128MB on classic Amiga?

[ChaosLord]

I have 256 on my A1200 and I ever use it all. But I do download to ram disk and use it for temp storage, so potentially I could use it all.

Do you consider your Amiga to have been "frankensteined"?

[yssing]

Well it is updated quite a bit
I would really like to have a Mediator solution installed as well.
So I could use all the goodies that the mediator provides.

[Linde]

Well tell me what you do mean.  I can't read your mind.

Are you saying PS3 version of Doom 3 uses more than 256MB?
Are you saying PS3 version of Doom 3 uses less than 256MB?

Are you saying PC version (which is a port of the PS3 or XBOX version) uses 256MB?

Or are you saying we should just drop this whole discussion since it doesn't actually matter how much ram DOOM3 uses?

No, I am saying that Doom 3, which is not a port of any PS3 or XBOX game, only needs 256 MB system RAM to run. It doesn't matter which system you run it (the official release) on. You don't have to read my mind because I wrote exactly what I meant.

To be perfectly fair, that's only a half-truth, since it also requires 64 MB of VRAM.

You are the one who brought up Doom 3 in the first place to compare apples to oranges, remember? When the comparison stops being in your favor you suddenly decide that it doesn't matter.

[ChaosLord]

You are the one who brought up Doom 3 in the first place to compare apples to oranges, remember? When the comparison stops being in your favor you suddenly decide that it doesn't matter.

Commodore John brought up Doom first.  CommodoreJohn compared apples to oranges.  He compred a game for a different genre (FPS vs TBS), made for a different platform, using a different engine, using a different type of gfx and produced in a different century.

If you want to compare 2 games then you need to compare the latest versions don't you?

Or at least versions from the same century?

Doom 3 came up because 1. he provided no size.  2. its the first thing in the list when I looked for Doom.  None of that is my fault.

Its 2012 not 1993

[Tripitaka]

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.

[Linde]

Commodore John brought up Doom first.  CommodoreJohn compared apples to oranges.  He compred a game for a different genre (FPS vs TBS), made for a different platform, using a different engine, using a different type of gfx and produced in a different century.

Commodorejohn never compared Doom to anything. He used it as an example of a game having high quality assets under quite heavy constraints. I'm not sure where he compares it to any other game, so maybe you can point it out.

If you want to compare 2 games then you need to compare the latest versions don't you?

Sure, but since when is Doom 3 a version of Doom? It's a sequel, for sure, but "3" is not a version number.

Or at least versions from the same century?

Yeah, let's see if that is favorable to you.

Doom 3 came up because 1. he provided no size.  2. its the first thing in the list when I looked for Doom.  None of that is my fault.

Right, so the fact that you didn't bother to look anything up before answering with an utterly invalid argument is not your fault. Fair enough, at least you agree that it was uninformed.

Either you are just playing dumb while painting yourself into a corner, or you didn't really read commodorejohn's post. Do you think the hundred-pixel tall sprites he wrote about was in a less than ten years old AAA title? It's 2012, not 1993.

[Linde]

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.

Yeah, what's the point in having an Amiga at all, really? I dismissed UAE for gaming a while ago on the basis that it has some slight issues with I/O delay. Sound is quite obviously delayed (and for obvious reasons, too!), and either graphics or HID input is also slightly delayed. The effect is minimal, but it detracts from the full experience in a way that I prefer to avoid.

I don't mean to say that UAE is bad. For all I know, this behavior might be inherent to emulators of this kind.

[AmigaClassicRule]

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.

[Linde]

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.

Where exactly was the implication that UAE is a real Amiga?

[strim]

Is there any real use for 128MB on classic Amiga?

For NetBSD/amiga 24MB is absolute minimum these days, but it will happily fill 128MB during normal usage (like expanding tar archive, compiling stuff, etc.).

[paul1981]

It can, yes. But who's editing "CD quality stereo audio tracks" on an A1200 these days?

I do. You can load a 6 minute song into 64MB. Most songs are under 6 minutes fortunately. Classical music tends to be much longer. Even 256MB wouldn't be enough for some classical pieces.

People use their Amiga's for all sorts of stuff. And like ChaosLord said - the majority of users aren't even forum members. I've been a hardcore fan for 20 years since Santa delivered me an A1200 and yet I didn't join an Amiga forum until 2009.

[darksun9210]

well... depends on what you're doing with it...
OS3.9 on an RTG screen ~4MB
TCP/IP stack ~1MB
USB stack ~1MB
other random stuff you like to run:- magic menu, something mui based, yadda yadda +2/4Mb?
and that's before we've even got going.
YAM email client with all the icons? I can't remember, but it's not going to be cheap
so even the basic 16MB on the 3k/4k mobo starts to look limiting.

a little bit of quake for sir/madame? as much ram as you want to assign

PPC based heretic2 wants at least 64MB.

I just like the idea of 128MB+ ram... means you don't worry about it and 256MB... well, that's just "infinite" as for as miggys go I guess

[commodorejohn]

I don't think anyone cares about the filesize of the Original Doom in 1993.  It is 2012.  By my reckoning that makes it 19 years ago.

As Linde has pointed out, I brought up the DOOM comparison because A. it's a solid example of a game working within the constraints of a smallish filesize to deliver something amazing, and B. it's also fairly well within comparability to an AGA Amiga game, time-wise.

For those who are obsessed with archive sizes:
Why can't we compare the archive size that today's Doom sequel is?

Nobody said we can't - but if we're going to, then we're going to compare everything else. Your game is so far removed from Doom 3 in all aspects that a comparison is basically meaningless, but TC-AGA requires twice (or, taking the 24MB situation, 1.5x) the RAM and 1.2x the disk space of the original StarCraft. Does it stack up favorably against StarCraft?

I have a hard time with comming up with anything.  Can you give me a concrete example of a hypothetical game that would  need 256 megabytes of ram?

Total Chaos RTG :roflmao:

[som99]

Are you saying PC version (which is a port of the PS3 or XBOX version) uses 256MB?

Not ranting but Doom 3 was written for PC and it uses the id tech 4 opengl engine it is not a port from any console and it was released 2004 so it was made before ps3 and 360 existed.

Also there patch so it can run on 2x sli voodoo 2 cards with 12MB vram but it looks crap but is quite cool since it needs 64MB vram

Just trivial facts.

I understand that some need more ram on their Amiga but I am happy with 64MB
But more would not hurt but I'm not in need of more atm.

[Tripitaka]

@AmigaClassicRule & Linde.

First off, as Linde pointed out, I did not imply UAE was a real Amiga. God forbid. That  would just lead us down the "what is a real Amiga?" path and let's face it we have had that debate on A.org countless times.

I also meant no insult to my fellow classic Amiga users nor did I imply that UAE made it worth ditching your real hardware, or anything else so insanely silly.

However, I did feel it needed pointing out that someone taking time and effort to make a high-spec Amiga game that required a decent CPU and/or a shed load of RAM should not be bashed for his efforts.

The point is (and this was the whole point of my post) that writing games for high end Amigas is a good thing, not everything needs to run on a 6800 or 68020. Even if the spec is too much for your 'miggy no one needs to be left out. If you have a classic Amiga with the spec needed ( because maybe you hunted down an 040 and payed hundreds of bucks) or a NG system, great, no problem. If not, use UAE, it's free.

ChaosLord was getting stick for his stance of making high spec games that required an upgraded machine on the grounds that he should aim at a lower spec, I was just pointing out that if you haven't got the spec another choice exists.

Just for the record, I loathe emulation and would rather use classic hardware anyday and with games like TotalChaos around buying all that RAM and CPU power becomes more worthwhile. Sadly, if it needs an 060, I still need UAE

[motrucker]

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.

I still use my Amigas for graphics, and DTP. I use the windows machine for games, more often than not. Thank god for ImageFX....