Amiga.org

Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: Anonymous MOS on June 05, 2007, 03:16:23 AM

Title: Pros of upgrading to Kick3.1 from 3.0?
Post by: Anonymous MOS on June 05, 2007, 03:16:23 AM
   I have an A1200 with Kick3.0, and I'm running Workbench3.1.

   Now, what I'd like to know is...  What are the pros of upgrading to Kick3.1 from 3.0 when you're running Workbench 3.1.  I've heard that you need it, but I guess you really don't, seeing how my system runs seemingly fine.

Just wondering,
Title: Re: Pros of upgrading to Kick3.1 from 3.0?
Post by: SamuraiCrow on June 05, 2007, 03:23:12 AM
Kickstart 3.1 was a bug-fix release.  Many of the bugs are quite subtle but you'll need 3.1 if you plan on upgrading to 3.5 or 3.9 .

The most obvious bug is that the AGA fetch rates in the custom chips don't take advantage of fast-page mode rates unless you're in super-high-resolution mode.  Kickstart 3.1 kicks it up to full-speed whenever it is possible to do so (and frees up a lot of bandwidth bottlenecks in the process.
Title: Re: Pros of upgrading to Kick3.1 from 3.0?
Post by: Anonymous MOS on June 05, 2007, 03:24:36 AM
Ahh, so a definite must for Gamers?
Title: Re: Pros of upgrading to Kick3.1 from 3.0?
Post by: SamuraiCrow on June 05, 2007, 03:26:23 AM
Absolutely!
Title: Re: Pros of upgrading to Kick3.1 from 3.0?
Post by: weirdami on June 05, 2007, 07:05:05 AM
I think I remember having an accelerator card for A1200 that needed 3.1 to autoconfig but 3.0 people had to run something from the startup-sequence.
Title: Re: Pros of upgrading to Kick3.1 from 3.0?
Post by: Piru on June 05, 2007, 07:55:04 AM
wb_31chg.lha (http://www.gregdonner.org/workbench/wb_31chg.lha) includes full changes from 3.0 to 3.1.

@SamuraiCrow
Quote
The most obvious bug is that the AGA fetch rates in the custom chips don't take advantage of fast-page mode rates unless you're in super-high-resolution mode. Kickstart 3.1 kicks it up to full-speed whenever it is possible to do so (and frees up a lot of bandwidth bottlenecks in the process.

Really? I don't see mention of this in the changelog above.