Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: AmigaClassicRule on February 01, 2012, 06:24:44 AM
-
I just wanted to ask one simple question. I am planning on selling my 68030 to do an upgrade as the 68030 is too slow or me and the 16 MB RAM will not cut it, even for the Amiga classic.
The question I am asking is...is the difference in speed that much high in a 68040 @ 33 Mhz over 68060 @ 50 Mhz that it is worth it to skip the 68040 all the together and attempt to get my hands on a 68060 @ 50 Mhz.
-
I just wanted to ask one simple question. I am planning on selling my 68030 to do an upgrade as the 68030 is too slow or me and the 16 MB RAM will not cut it, even for the Amiga classic.
The question I am asking is...is the difference in speed that much high in a 68040 @ 33 Mhz over 68060 @ 50 Mhz that it is worth it to skip the 68040 all the together and attempt to get my hands on a 68060 @ 50 Mhz.
68040 is very weak. Go for 68060. It is the best you can get for your Amiga.
-
What's your target machine? A1200 or A3000/4000? And what's your basic usage? I personally find that when primarily using Workbench and related applications are a little faster on a 060 than a good 040, but that it is not a huge difference.
For example a WarpEngine with 40MHz 68040 also provides a good SCSI controller. There definitely is a noticeable difference with the Phase5 Cyberstorm Mk2 when doing CPU intensive things (such making a LHA archive of your complete drive) but it's not stellar. Now given the price difference and availability I'd go for the WE...
-
The question I am asking is...is the difference in speed that much high in a 68040 @ 33 Mhz over 68060 @ 50 Mhz that it is worth it to skip the 68040 all the together and attempt to get my hands on a 68060 @ 50 Mhz.
If you can get an 060-accelerator for a decent price, then definitely go for that one. Why settle for anything inferior? :)
-
Having done the 68030-->68040-->68060 thing I can say that the biggest noticeable difference is from 68030-->68040 (about 6x times faster). Going from a 68040@40 Mhz-->68060@50 Mhz is quite noticeable as well, about 2-3x times faster again. Note the 68040 chips get HOT, so I question the reliability of 15-20 year old CPU's running inside A1200 trapdoors.
The thing with an A1200 though is that it has other bottlenecks: AGA, the IDE interface, but the upgraded CPU WILL also improve things here as well, if you use hacks and patches like FBlit, FText.
My advice if you can afford a 68060, buy it. If not a Warp Engine 68040 @40 Mhz with its SCSI (If its an A3000.A4000,) or an Apollo 1240 or Blizzard 1240 (I think these had recycled 68040's though) will still make you smile, a lot compared to the 68030.
-
Is a 68060 more reliable in a 1200 trapdoor? When I had a 68040, it was a bit of a nightmare stablility wise.
-
I use a Blizzard 1240/40MHz for 3 years or so.
Of course i have attached on it a heatsink and a cooling fan and i have no stability issues at all.
Although the 060 is the best solution, their prices are ridiculously high and barely affordable.
-
Depends on what you want it for. Yes an '060 is somewhat faster, but for some uses bottlenekcs will come from elsewhere so will give no visible improvements vs. '040.
-
Depends on what you want. A 68040, even at 28Mhz makes a huge difference over a 68030 at any speed.
Jumping from 68040 to 68060 you will also notice a speed difference. Also the 68060 is more ideal for desktop A1200s as it works on a lower voltage and has no issues with heat. You don't even need a heatsink / fan with an 68060.
Also there are quite a lot of games (even WhdLoad games) which don't run or don't run properly with a 68040. With a 68060 nearly (if not all) all games run fine in WhdLoad.
Then there is price to consider. A 68040 is considerably cheaper and still a very good processor.
I would go for a 68060 if you can but don't be put off. An 040 is brilliant and very very fast too.
-
Performance wise, there is no contest. The 060 is significantly faster per MHz and the slowest one available already starts at 20% higher clockspeed than the fastest non-overlooked 040.
That said, I find my humble 25MHz 040 adequately fast for my 68K needs. It's a lot faster than the stock 020 my machine shipped with.
-
There are quite many variables.
If you get Apollo serie 040/060 you get really fast unstandard chip ram access. It really makes you amiga 1200 feel faster than blizzard 060. With games like Quake/Doom/Napalm/Foundation biggest limitation is chip ram speed, so diffrence between 040/060 is not big
With FBlit you can promote Napalm/Foundation to Fast ram and get more speed.
With apollo you get 32mb ram, max 64 IF you have second sim slot installed. With Blizzard you get 128mb ram. Blizzard has also very good SCSI adapter, wich accepts another 128mb ram.
I've 060 66mhz and 040 40mhz on my desk all time :)
I haven't had big problems with WHDLoad and 040. My main WHDload machine is 040
-
Just go for a 060, they are better in all ways. 040's get hot (=needs heatsink/fan), have more unreliable WHDLoad-behaviour, are slower etc. Been there, tried that.
-
I dont know where this whole "'040 has trouble with whdload" thing comes from. Ive had no more problems with an '040 than I even did with an '030.
If your main interest is in running whdload though there's no need to go beyond an '030 anyway.
-
You won't be happy until you have an '060.
-
I dont know where this whole "'040 has trouble with whdload" thing comes from. Ive had no more problems with an '040 than I even did with an '030.
If your main interest is in running whdload though there's no need to go beyond an '030 anyway.
The '040 is missing some instructions that are found in '030 CPU's which is what cause some incompatibilities with whdload. I had an Apollo 1240 and I can confirm that about 20-25% of the games (which worked fine with an '030) i tried gave me problems.
'060 CPU's seem to have most if not all of these instructions not found in the '040. In fact every whdload game i threw at my '060 works fine.
As you said though, if all you care about is whdload then a 68030 is the way to go. Cheap, cheerful and ultra compatible.
-
And '060 is missing even more isntructions than '040.
The difference in your experiences may be due to the '060 being set up properly and the '040 not.
I currently use a 40mhz '040 and 9 out of 10 whdload games work just fine. Pretty much the same level of compatibility as an '030 when I used to use one.
-
I agree with fishy_fiz there - you might get away with Workbench type use with an 040 just bolted on and using the Commodore 68040.library, but an 060 will surely crash within minutes if they're not correctly set up. The 68040.library which is supplied as part of the OS is for the 040 cards manufactured by Commodore, but should be replaced by the appropriate library for your specific card. That will most likely flush out any residual issues with WHDload, and be equivalent to the 68060 as regards compatibility.
-
If you ask me I'm always going to say either stick with 030 for compability or go all out for speed and glory with the 060. There's realy 3 things to concider. Compability, Speed and Heat/Power
Compability: is less with 040/060 than 020/030, and you will at times run into issues with software that wont run on 040/060 but works on 030. The compability is about the same between 040 and 060 but the brand will be a much bigger factor here (stay away from Apollo if you ask me).
Speed: increase from 030/50 to 040/25 is for me is not worth it over the compability issue, however any faster and the speed factor makes up for it. The speed of the 040 is great over the 030 and the speed of the 060 is great over the 040, however we're talking sleek AmigaOS here so the extre CPU speed is not always felt that much... unless we're talking FPU speed where the 060 is miles ahead.
Heat/Power: is an issue with the 040. It is powerhungry and runs hot. In a bigbox Amiga this isn't a big problem but for the smaller A1200 (A500) it can lead to all sorts of stability issues and the 040 will requier a heatsink and likely a fan aswell.
030
- Quite Slow
+ Performance/Cost
+ Compatible
- No FPU
040
+ Quite fast
+ Performance/Cost
- Incompatible (compared to 030)
- Slow builtin FPU
- Runs hot/Powerhungry
060
+ Very fast
- Performance/Cost
- Incompatible (compared to 030)
+ Fast Buitin FPU
+ Runs cool
-
Whichever you choose I might put in an offer for your old '030 card! We have 3 A1200's in the house and only one with an accelerator.
-
Get the 68060 if you can, but a 68040 is still better than a 68030.
A 25MHz 68040 is fater than a 50MHz 68030 per the benchmarks I used to run, somewhere around 10 to 20% faster. I used to have the 68030 in my A1200 and the 68040 (A3640) in my A3000. I ended up finding a WarpEngine 040/40, no luck at that time with a used 060 board. The 68040 @ 40MHz would open modern JPEG files (somewhere around 1024 x 768) in about 15 to 20 seconds. Eventually I got a "new" GVP 68060 @ 50MHz from SoftHut, the same JPEG files now open in two or three seconds.
-
I loved my 030/50, and I never liked my 040/25 much. Then, I got an 060 + PPC. It really is in a different league. You will never look back. With or without the PPC, its good to know you have reached the 'limit', even though its quite an investment. If you are serious with your machine and use it more for productivity/workbench stuff than playing games, consider ppc+bvision. If not, or if on a big box machine, a 060 alone will provide plenty of fun.
-
I loved my 030/50, and I never liked my 040/25 much. Then, I got an 060 + PPC. It really is in a different league. You will never look back. With or without the PPC, its good to know you have reached the 'limit', even though its quite an investment. If you are serious with your machine and use it more for productivity/workbench stuff than playing games, consider ppc+bvision. If not, or if on a big box machine, a 060 alone will provide plenty of fun.
I am skipping Amiga classic PPC all together and I am intending big time in selling my 68030. I already sold the Amiga 1200 motherboard because of the clockport bug on the motherboard and ordered a new motherboard which is coming my way. I am intending to sell my 68030 and this 68030 have also a SCSI card expansion that comes with it.
But before I sell it I need to find my new expansion card, buy it, confirm it is shipped to me then I will sell the 68030 I have with scsi card.
I also have two Amiga 500 Commodore power supply that I plan to sell and and an Amiga Amiga mouse I am intending to sell as well.
I thank you all for taking your time and helping me decide. I have decided to go for the 68060 and I am hoping to get a 68060 with a 128 MB of Fast RAM.
-
I just wanted to ask one simple question. I am planning on selling my 68030 to do an upgrade as the 68030 is too slow or me and the 16 MB RAM will not cut it, even for the Amiga classic.
The question I am asking is...is the difference in speed that much high in a 68040 @ 33 Mhz over 68060 @ 50 Mhz that it is worth it to skip the 68040 all the together and attempt to get my hands on a 68060 @ 50 Mhz.
SO much misinformation being thrown around in this thread. the MYTH that 060's all run cool is not true and all 040's run hot is pure BS.
What determines is a 040 or 060 runs hot is its MASK in most cases,not that it is simply a 040 or 060.
The mask is generally what size the transistors are in the chip at the time of manufacture and probably how much gate resistance the transistors had at the time,(rudimentary explanation but this is the easy way to explain it). As the years went on,the manufacturing process managed smaller and more efficient transistors in the package which meant they ran cooler in most cases.
I have 060 chips here you could fry an egg on and 040 chips here barely that run luke warm .
many AMIGA accelerators used early mask 040's and 060's and they run hot. I have had warp engine 040/40mhz cards that ran pretty cool.I have had a new 4060dt 68060 from softhut in the last years that could heat the house(they really should have a fan/heatsink with the old 060 rev they come with-at least the one i had).
example. a XC68060 with the early mask of 01f43g will run quite hot.the slightly newer one with the 01g65v runs less hot,and a brand new mask of 71e41j on a MC68060 will run very cool.
same with the 68040's the chip i just desoldered off the 68040 apollo is a mask of 02E31F xc68040rc40M and runs very hot while the l88m mask 040 doesnt.There was even a 68040V that was 3.3v and ran fairly cool in its later masks but to my knowledge this was not used in any amiga accelerators.
So PLEASE quit spreading the nonsense that all 040's run hot and are unstable and all 060's run cool,. its simply not true.
Also many stability issues were caused by some Accelerators-*cough* apollo's *cough*(be it 040 or 060) having poor edge connectors and making bad connections. many 040 chips run no hotter than the some 030/50's.
To answer the original question: a 040/33 is good,but a 060 is better. go for the 060 if you can.
Mech
-
@amigaclassicrule
I never had a 33MHz 040, so I can't compare to that.
I have had a 40MHz 040 (Warp Engine 3040) and a 50MHz 060 (Cyberstorm MKII).
I ran them side by side in 3000D's and I kept the WE, and from a overall usability standpoint the WE was better. I have always used oxypatcher on the 040 and macrosystems 040.library and they are 100% stable. Ran the 040 for 15 years 24/7 with no issues.
My advice will depend on the card you can acquire and the usage of you system. If your doing lots of math functions really try to get an 060 with Oxy. Other than that, either processor will be just fine.
My personal cards of choice would be a WE 3040 or CS MK III. (for a 3000D).
What ever the used market will offer at any one time will present delays. Choose a card first and just wait, otherwise you will always kick yourself. The right card in the Amiga makes a significant difference.
Good hunting...
-
And '060 is missing even more isntructions than '040.
The difference in your experiences may be due to the '060 being set up properly and the '040 not.
I currently use a 40mhz '040 and 9 out of 10 whdload games work just fine. Pretty much the same level of compatibility as an '030 when I used to use one.
That explains why my Apollo 1240 only like 7/10 games worked. I used the 68040.library which came with Workbench 3.1.
-
68040 is not good enough for what you would expect these days from your amiga:
- not stable enough due to considerable heat and heavy 5V need
- not powerful enough compared to a 50MHz 68060 by a 3 or 4 ratio
- not compatible enough compared to 68020/68030
You amiga needs either 68060 or 68030 for a smooth experience.
-
I used an Apollo 1240 @ 40 MHz for a while and I have to say it ran everything perfectly well without any issues. It was also extremely fast compared to my previous card a 68030 at 40Mhz. An 040 blows any 030 clean out of the water.
If 68060's never existed, I'd still be happy with an 040 at 40MHz. But because they do exist I had to get one anyway.
I have to agree with Mechy though.... 060's with naff masks run just as hot as 040's with naff masks (ie fry an egg hot). I have a Blizzard 1260 & Apollo 1260, they could both quite easily fry an egg.
-
68040 is not good enough for what you would expect these days from your amiga:
- not stable enough due to considerable heat and heavy 5V need
- not powerful enough compared to a 50MHz 68060 by a 3 or 4 ratio
- not compatible enough compared to 68020/68030
You amiga needs either 68060 or 68030 for a smooth experience.
WRONG,WRONG,AND WRONG. there is absolutely nothing wrong with the 040.Read my previous message about whats hot and whats not.
Blame the poor A1200 design and voltage drop,blame poor A1200 psu's,blame bad apollo connectors and crappy accelerators,but quit spreading these myths that are not true.
See my explanation above debunking your heat sentence and the 040 does not use that much more power than a 030/50.have you even checked it?
I used a warpengine 040/40 for many years,blizzard 1240,and cyberstorm 040 MKII and they were all reliable,ran at a reasonable temp,and it i didn't have compatibility troubles.Many 030/50's run hot enough to burn you when going full blast. Games can always be a problem because many bang hardware directly. this is the games fault,not the 040.
If anything the 040 is caught in the middle much like 2.x roms were.
Mech
-
are not all the 060's but the last mask all bugged and not reccomended? I remember reading some of the bugs in the 01g65v mask.
I understand all cpu have errata but I thought I read somewhere that the older 060 masks had bugs that software workarounds for were very slow and penalty inducing..???
-
Agree with Mechy and Paul,
So many factors come into play with performance, application, and usability it is impossible to make blanket statements.
For my use, the 40MHz 3040 Warp Engine provided a better user experience that my 50MHz Cyberstorm MK II in a 3000D. I was using the 3k for word processing, web browsing, financial reporting, email, and light DTP. The 3040 delivered a faster overall experience then the CS for that usage, I tested them side by side and that is why I kept the the 3040 and sold off the CS. If I was ray tracing and doing lots of math as my main usage I certainly would have kept the CS and sold the WE.
The 060 is by itself isn't a great solution unless it is paired to it's own high performance local memory and has it's own Fast SCSI controller. I would trade a CS MKII in a heartbeat for a Warp Engine. Macrosystems did a better job in that case. Now if you were to bring a CS MKIII into play, I would clearly take the CS.
Truth be told, the step up to the 040 @40MHz from an 030 @25MHz (with the WE) was FAR greater then the move to the 040 to the 060 @50MHz. I remember says to other Amiga folks... "This is it???", it really was a dissapointment. Clearly the difference was with the packaging of the WE, and how good it was made.
-
WRONG,WRONG,AND WRONG. there is absolutely nothing wrong with the 040.Read my previous message about whats hot and whats not.
Blame the poor A1200 design and voltage drop,blame poor A1200 psu's,blame bad apollo connectors and crappy accelerators,but quit spreading these myths that are not true.
See my explanation above debunking your heat sentence and the 040 does not use that much more power than a 030/50.have you even checked it?
I 100% agree with that.
-
Well, there is someone who is going to sell me an Apollo 1260 running at 80 Mhz with 32 MB of RAM maximum (unless I get someone to soldier an additional 32 MB of RAM).
But a Blizzard 1260 @ 50 Mhz can see up to 128 Mb of RAM but is stuck with 50 Mhz.
Is Blizzard 1260 higher quality and better than Apollo 1260 or do you recommend I should go ahead and buy Apollo 1260. This is my Amiga usage:
1) Internet browsing, IRC, etc
2) WHDLoad games
3) Playing MP3
4) Developing on it as a developer's enviornment
5) Using AmiGift
and I want to be able to play the game total chaos and Napalm as well. I love playing a game called Trap so the question is 32 Mb FAST RAM more than enough?
I also want to be able to watch movies on my system. So should I stick with Apollo 1260 with 32 MB of FAST ram at 80 Mhz or go with Blizzard 1260 @ 50 Mhz that can see 128 MB of fast RAM.
-
Well, there is someone who is going to sell me an Apollo 1260 running at 80 Mhz with 32 MB of RAM maximum (unless I get someone to soldier an additional 32 MB of RAM).
But a Blizzard 1260 @ 50 Mhz can see up to 128 Mb of RAM but is stuck with 50 Mhz.
Is Blizzard 1260 higher quality and better than Apollo 1260 or do you recommend I should go ahead and buy Apollo 1260. This is my Amiga usage:
1) Internet browsing, IRC, etc
2) WHDLoad games
3) Playing MP3
4) Developing on it as a developer's enviornment
5) Using AmiGift
and I want to be able to play the game total chaos and Napalm as well. I love playing a game called Trap so the question is 32 Mb FAST RAM more than enough?
I also want to be able to watch movies on my system. So should I stick with Apollo 1260 with 32 MB of FAST ram at 80 Mhz or go with Blizzard 1260 @ 50 Mhz that can see 128 MB of fast RAM.
I am sorry,but i don't think you understand about the amiga here. The fastest 060 is still not going to exceed much more than pentium 1 90mhz performance(ok,overclocked boards may a bit). For watching movies like you do on the typical PC,divx,mp4,etc formats,a 68060 will not cut it. As a matter of fact one of Stans (stachu)Modified PPC cards would be the bare minimum. some exceptions for 060 are some Mpeg1 and 2 stuff,like video cd and svcd. You will need a board with good ram to do this more than likely.
I don't particularly care for the apollo design,but the boards do work and overclock far-some did suffer from bad edge card connectors though. the Blizzard 060's are rock stable in my experience and good quality.
On my cyberstorm PPC 060/66mhz 604e/233mhz with mediator and radeon i can almost watch a divx with sound,its like a fast slideshow though.
On a 1200 without a graphics card,you can forget it.The 1200 has many bottlenecks that slow it down compared to the typical A3000/A4000.
Mech
-
Well, there is someone who is going to sell me an Apollo 1260 running at 80 Mhz with 32 MB of RAM maximum (unless I get someone to soldier an additional 32 MB of RAM).
But a Blizzard 1260 @ 50 Mhz can see up to 128 Mb of RAM but is stuck with 50 Mhz.
Is Blizzard 1260 higher quality and better than Apollo 1260 or do you recommend I should go ahead and buy Apollo 1260. This is my Amiga usage:
1) Internet browsing, IRC, etc
2) WHDLoad games
3) Playing MP3
4) Developing on it as a developer's enviornment
5) Using AmiGift
and I want to be able to play the game total chaos and Napalm as well. I love playing a game called Trap so the question is 32 Mb FAST RAM more than enough?
I also want to be able to watch movies on my system. So should I stick with Apollo 1260 with 32 MB of FAST ram at 80 Mhz or go with Blizzard 1260 @ 50 Mhz that can see 128 MB of fast RAM.
Movie watching even with the fastest Amiga with the best video card and processor will yield poor results. If your looking to play videos on cheap hw in an Amiga Like OS, pickup AROS or MOS. They will be your best affordable bets and will play movies files.
For MP3 play, you need decent card, I'm not very knowledgeable on the 1200 here. I can say that Delfina had a great card that relieved the cpu and gave a great usable experience, but you will need a zorro card. People who use a 1200 can provide better response here.
Again, Browsing will be decent on an Amiga, esp. with a Cybervision, Retina Z3, or PIV. But you need a zorro slot for that. The best browsing experience now seems to be Fab's Odyssey browser on MOS. But a classic still gets the job done well enough.
You may want to switch to a 3000 or a 4000 for the most performance options... Just a thought to consider...
Good luck!
-
The thing with watching videos on a classic is that youre going to have to convert files to watch with good results regardless of which 680x0 cpu youre using. If you take it to the nth degree you'll get away with even an '030 + fast ram so long as you have enough storage space. Obviously a faster cpu has more chance of coping with industry standard formats (maybe mpeg1 for low res video will be ok on an overclocked '060), but end of the day its not the same as watching videos on a modern mac/pc/console/etc., you pretty much need to "amiga-fy" the video anyway.
The '060 will be faster, but due to the need to convert videos anyway, it'll be more of a case of the need to less "optimising" the video needed than better results.
-
I use a program called Rivo or something that even on a 68030 it is able to play the movie with sound and the picture is so slow though but it have a great potential of running the movie on 15 fps on a 68060 which is great experience for me.
I am going to get the Blizzard 1260 and I am going to enjoy the Amiga 1200 to the maximum.
I did not realize however that the Amiga 1200 is extremely different than the A4000, I did not know that the Amiga 4000 AGA is faster than the Amiga 1200 AGA's that I will be able to watch movies and do everything better on an Amiga 4000 than an Amiga 1200.
I really thought that the Amiga 1200 and Amiga 4000 are the same in everything.
-
I 100% agree with that.
Even at full CPU use, my 25MHz 040 on the BlizzardPPC is comfortably warm to the touch. My slightly OC 28MHz Apollo 040 is no warmer.
040 boards have a bad reputation, but as has been said, if you have an ample power supply they tend to work fine.
My oldest 040 board is a bit wrecked but that was mechanical rather than thermal ;)
-
I use a program called Rivo or something that even on a 68030 it is able to play the movie with sound and the picture is so slow though but it have a great potential of running the movie on 15 fps on a 68060 which is great experience for me.
I am going to get the Blizzard 1260 and I am going to enjoy the Amiga 1200 to the maximum.
I did not realize however that the Amiga 1200 is extremely different than the A4000, I did not know that the Amiga 4000 AGA is faster than the Amiga 1200 AGA's that I will be able to watch movies and do everything better on an Amiga 4000 than an Amiga 1200.
I really thought that the Amiga 1200 and Amiga 4000 are the same in everything.
Sounds like your really going to enjoy the 1260 for your experience. That is great, push the 1200 to the max and enjoy!
The buses and cpu slots for the 3000 and 4000, perform better and open the door for more powerful options... But, if you enjoy your 1200 who care :-)...
Viva Amiga!
-
On my cyberstorm PPC 060/66mhz 604e/233mhz with mediator and radeon i can almost watch a divx with sound,its like a fast slideshow though.
On a 1200 without a graphics card,you can forget it.The 1200 has many bottlenecks that slow it down compared to the typical A3000/A4000.
Mech
If you had a Delfina to decode the audio and you used the CyberstormPPC's scsi interface, you would have been able to watch lower resolution divx movies without any frame skipping.
I used to play divxs using the beta FroggerNG 2.08 WOS version.
-
Sounds like your really going to enjoy the 1260 for your experience. That is great, push the 1200 to the max and enjoy!
The buses and cpu slots for the 3000 and 4000, perform better and open the door for more powerful options... But, if you enjoy your 1200 who care :-)...
Viva Amiga!
Thank you so much! I really do love my Amiga 1200 and I enjoy her a lot and I find her a toy to play with in every regard of way! It is really a fun computer! Thanks :D
I can hardly to install the USB SUB into the A1200...so I can open doors for more devices, printers, storage, etc. It should be fun, but I am waiting patiently for my new motherboard to arrive :)
-
Well, an 060 will certainly give you the best performance, but expect to pay handsomely for it :D
-
I use a program called Rivo or something that even on a 68030 it is able to play the movie with sound and the picture is so slow though but it have a great potential of running the movie on 15 fps on a 68060 which is great experience for me.
I am going to get the Blizzard 1260 and I am going to enjoy the Amiga 1200 to the maximum.
I did not realize however that the Amiga 1200 is extremely different than the A4000, I did not know that the Amiga 4000 AGA is faster than the Amiga 1200 AGA's that I will be able to watch movies and do everything better on an Amiga 4000 than an Amiga 1200.
I really thought that the Amiga 1200 and Amiga 4000 are the same in everything.
AGA is slow regardless of it being a 1200 or a 4000. The advantage of a 'big box' Amiga such as the 2000/3000/4000 is that they can accept Zorro RTG graphics cards like the the Picasso IV. These graphic cards make all the difference.
When i had my A4000T which had a MKII Cyberstorm 68060 @ 50 Mhz i thought it was pretty fast until i bought a Picasso IV graphics card. Everything was sooo much faster, browsing the web, loading jpegs etc and looked a hell of a lot nicer too because it supported high resolutions (think 1024x768 and higher) with no flicker and true 24 bit color (16 million colors on screen at once) as opposed to AGA which only supports 256 colors and with any resolution higher than 640x256 @ 256 colors AGA slows things down and eats at your chipmem. Even with an '060.
-
If you had a Delfina to decode the audio and you used the CyberstormPPC's scsi interface, you would have been able to watch lower resolution divx movies without any frame skipping.
I used to play divxs using the beta FroggerNG 2.08 WOS version.
thanks for the info,i will look into that! I use fast cf's via acard adapters on the UWscsi,which works quite fast so i am set in that respect.Its definately not a issue with moving data,just seemed to be lack of cpu.
Mech