Amiga.org

Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Hardware Issues and discussion => Topic started by: spudje on July 30, 2015, 10:55:25 PM

Title: Help needed with CV64 CGX4
Post by: spudje on July 30, 2015, 10:55:25 PM

I recently got an A3000D with a nice 4MB Cybervision 64.

It runs fine with Picasso69 on OS3.9. Only 32bit screen modes are a bit tricky, some artefacts in the right side of the screen when dragging windows etc. And these windows won't all drag immediately. No problems in 16 bit screens at all.

I bought Cybergraphx 4 and thought. let's also try that. But I got overwhelmed by the installer and all the options. After installing it and straight after updating it to the latest update, on a new clean OS3.9 & BB1+2 partition I get this:

(http://s24.postimg.org/9scan95ut/IMG_20150730_232327.jpg)

Is it a matter of configuration? Should I check the chips being properly in their sockets or is something really wrong with the C64?

Some clear "dummy" guide on all the Cybergraphx install options would also come in handy. And I really don't fully grasp all the screen mode parameters (frequenties, sizes, etc.)

Thanks in advance!

Title: Re: Help needed with CV64 CGX4
Post by: danbeaver on July 30, 2015, 11:16:32 PM

It is not the hardware but the software.  CGX4 has an update (4.5?) to it that is good to apply, but I've done multiple installs (wiping "clean" each time) until I got one that worked.  On CGX4 use the standard defaults as they come up, but there are others that know that software better than I do.  Picasso96 is my usual choice as there is a guide to screen modes and adjustments on the web to get the sync perfect.  You will either find a good mode that works, or several that don't.

IMHO only.

Title: Re: Help needed with CV64 CGX4
Post by: zipper on July 30, 2015, 11:33:00 PM

http://powerup.amigaworld.de/download.php?id=9 updates CGX to the latest version. But wonder if your problem is related to this - usually you get no screenmodes at all.

Title: Re: Help needed with CV64 CGX4
Post by: spudje on July 31, 2015, 08:56:59 AM

Thanks both!

@danbeaver: where's that Picasso guide?

@zipper: I already updated to that latest version.

Title: Re: Help needed with CV64 CGX4
Post by: Cosmos Amiga on July 31, 2015, 09:01:45 AM

Try my bugfixed unofficial version...

Title: Re: Help needed with CV64 CGX4
Post by: zipper on July 31, 2015, 09:30:08 AM

Might be some patch clashing. Fblit?

Title: Picasso96 guide, applies to other cards than Radeon
Post by: danbeaver on July 31, 2015, 09:35:18 PM

http://www.amibay.com/showthread.php?31230-p96-new-res-rough-guide-(with-radeon-install)&highlight=Picasso96+guide

Title: Re: Help needed with CV64 CGX4
Post by: stefcep2 on August 01, 2015, 02:41:21 AM

You just need to get the r6 update installed: http://phase5.a1k.org/index.php?cgx

BTW, no matter what anyone else tells you, CGX on phase5 cards is much better than Picasso 96.  Faster, it actually feels like you're using a native amiga screenmode, so its worth the money and time to get it going.  

The thing is phase5 wrote the dumbest Installer in the history of computing with with a series of double negative type questions that will have you scratching your as to what, exactly, are you agreeing to or not.Some of the things you say yes to, or no to, do effect how some AGA only software runs eg scala.  

You can increase your clock speed up to 60 on some boards for more performance, it has support for the Roxxler chip which helps with re-drawing speed of wireframe 3D view in things like Cinema4D.

And it works beautifully with an Indivision.

Title: Re: Help needed with CV64 CGX4
Post by: spudje on August 17, 2015, 09:51:06 AM

Thanks all!! Tried it again over a clean 3.9 install and got it running in the end.

1024x768 32 bit however has the exact same issues as it has under Picasso, right half of the screen shows a lot of artefacts when dragging windows etc. So I guess that's an issue with the card or maybe the thing is not running at full zorro3. I didn't check the jumpers when installing the card. But is runs absolutely fine in 1024x768 16 bit. so I'll keep it to that.