Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Amiga Coldfire project dead?  (Read 31118 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Hattig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 901
    • Show all replies
Re: Amiga Coldfire project dead?
« on: November 17, 2010, 01:21:58 PM »
Also I believe that trapping 68k instructions (and the differently behavioured MUL instruction) made said 266MHz Coldfire perform like a 40MHz 68040.

As for using it for AROS ... I think I'd prefer a dual-core 1.5GHz ARM Cortex A9 based system...
 

Offline Hattig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 901
    • Show all replies
Re: Amiga Coldfire project dead?
« Reply #1 on: November 19, 2010, 12:10:05 AM »
Quote from: Amiga_Nut;592921
The real issue is that CD32 probably couldn't even manage Gauntlet IV from a Megadrive in even 128 colours despite being 13 years newer design!


You mean this? http://www.mobygames.com/game/genesis/gauntlet-iv/screenshots/gameShotId,314532/

An 8MHz 68000 versus a 14MHz 68020 - easy win for the CD32 in terms of performance.

Graphics - 64 colours on the Megadrive (16 colours per 8x8 tile), so easy to replicate, and 64 colours on AGA was quick enough. The CD32 could do overscan too, no fixed 320x240 resolutions here.

I think 2MB RAM beats 64KB too ... it was a while before Megadrive games were coming on 16 mbit cartridges.

Dedicated graphics hardware on the Megadrive did help a lot - mostly with the tiled graphics modes and sprites...
 

Offline Hattig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 901
    • Show all replies
Re: Amiga Coldfire project dead?
« Reply #2 on: November 19, 2010, 11:00:52 AM »
I agree that the CD32 should have had 1MB chip + 1MB fast, just to de-cripple the CPU, and for a console reducing chip ram for CPU speed is an good trade-off. The cost issue is always a factor, having 4MB RAM wasn't an option in 1993.

The A1200 should have had a SIMM slot for a 32-bit SIMM accessible via a separate trap-door, so people could add memory without buying a whole memory expansion for the trapdoor. However I think C= thought that people would buy PCMCIA memory expansions!

AGA clearly should have had a chunky graphics mode, nothing fancy - maybe just the hardware interpreting bitplane data differently - a 1280-wide 2-bitplane display could have been interpreted as a 320-wide chunky (but not quite linear) display. AB3D could have used a 1280-wide 1-bitplane display for a 160 pixel-wide linear chunky display...

Edit: Yes, the A1200 was £299 by that time, I remember buying mine for that price. I agree that a simple spec boost could have been done by C= to boost sales - a 4MB A1200 as a standard option for £399 would have been a good start in 1993. Then again I still think the A600 should have had a 14MHz 68000. Stupid C= cost cutters.

Edit: Mods - should the CD32/AGA stuff be split out into its own thread?
« Last Edit: November 19, 2010, 11:14:07 AM by Hattig »
 

Offline Hattig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 901
    • Show all replies
Re: Amiga Coldfire project dead?
« Reply #3 on: November 19, 2010, 12:42:20 PM »
Quote from: Karlos;593030
Actually, a friend had a first generation Acorn RiscPC. Was a nice system, no question, and the chunky based display a lot faster than AGA but the CPU performance was not that great, depending on the task. My first A1200 accelerator card (25MHz 040), for example, was considerably faster at decoding jpeg images than it was, for example.


To be fair the A3000 series used an 8MHz ARM2 processor, which was far faster than a 68000, but certainly couldn't compete with a 25MHz '040 ... maybe a 20MHz 68030...
 

Offline Hattig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 901
    • Show all replies
Re: Amiga Coldfire project dead?
« Reply #4 on: November 19, 2010, 12:47:44 PM »
Quote from: bloodline;593034
The RiscPC was actually released about '96ish :) it was Acorn's last machine


The BBC A3000 with 1 MB RAM came out in May 1989 for £799.

The Acorn A3010 with 1 MB RAM came out in September 1992 for £499.

The A1200 with 2MB RAM and about half the CPU power came out at the same time for £399, and soon reduced to £299. I guess CPU power was the tradeoff you got for the cheaper price.
 

Offline Hattig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 901
    • Show all replies
Re: Amiga Coldfire project dead?
« Reply #5 on: November 19, 2010, 01:25:48 PM »
Quote from: bloodline;593041
Karlos is referring to the "RiscPC", not the Archimedies... I appreciate those who didn't grow up with these machines might find this all quite confusing :)


Ah yes, I missed that, I just saw the A3000 stuff. And yes, the 1992 were 12MHz, and thus the CPU should have performed like a 25MHz 68030 ... but I don't think coders ever hit the peaks on this hardware.

RiscOS had some shortcomings (co-op multitasking, for example) which must have affected things. Also I don't think the graphics chip was up to much in terms of neat features apart from a funky 256 colour mode despite only having 16 colour registers, so simple things like scrolling would have been very CPU intensive.
 

Offline Hattig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 901
    • Show all replies
Re: Amiga Coldfire project dead?
« Reply #6 on: November 19, 2010, 01:37:42 PM »
Quote from: bloodline;593051
Sounds about right to me! I suspect the Amiga's more mature and more elegant DMA based gfx/audio architecture took a lot of pressure off the CPU... I think an A1200 with an ARM (in 1992) would have been a VERY nice beast!! :)


It would have been. The closest we'll know what it would have been like is the 3D0 console.