Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Is Amiga Emulation better than the real thing?  (Read 30734 times)

Description:

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline bloodline

  • Master Sock Abuser
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 12113
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.troubled-mind.com
Re: Is Amiga Emulation better than the real thing?
« Reply #29 from previous page: January 27, 2009, 02:43:07 PM »
Quote

ChaosLord wrote:
Quote
no double buffering will look like crap... All blitter ops will look nasty


Wrong.  It all depends on what you are blitting and if you are making use of the Amiga chipset's awesome features (Jay Miner rulez 4eva) and how you have written your code.  Some games require double-buffering and some do not.



I'm not going to be drawn into a debate as to the "correct" usage of the Amiga chipset, suffice to say if you want make a game that looks really good you need to use the blitter quite extensively, and the slowness of the blitter will need to be smoothed out with double buffering, which I might add the Amiga chipset was rather well suited to.

On topic, I could easily set up an Emulation that no one here would be able to tell from a real Amiga... I have just such a WinUAE set up on my MacBook Pro for running Shadow of the Beast II...

Offline bloodline

  • Master Sock Abuser
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 12113
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.troubled-mind.com
Re: Is Amiga Emulation better than the real thing?
« Reply #30 on: January 27, 2009, 07:33:08 PM »
Quote

amigaksi wrote:
>A modern gfx chip can redraw an entire screen, perform thausands of blitter operations and render a 3D scene... At many times the resolution of the Amiga in far less time than it takes for an Amiga to update the sprite registers...

You need to calculate this out and you'll see that modern graphics cards cannot redraw an entire screen (repaint).  If they have built-in similar hardware sprite-type stuff, they can probably keep up.


Sorry amigaski, I hate to use the phrase "you're wrong", but you really are... The weakest gfx card I own is able to push 3.4Gigabytes per second... The amiga struggles to keep up with 2megabytes per second and this is using AGA!!! The Amiga is Very Old technology, it is very slow and lacks the resolution and colour depth of modern hardware... It can't compare!

Offline bloodline

  • Master Sock Abuser
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 12113
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.troubled-mind.com
Re: Is Amiga Emulation better than the real thing?
« Reply #31 on: January 27, 2009, 09:47:29 PM »
Quote

ChaosLord wrote:
Sorry bloodline, I hate to use the phrase "you're wrong", but you really are... The weakest Amiga I own is able to push a lot more than 2 megabytes per second.


Ok, but even if we include your magical blitter engine that can push the Amiga's blitter beyond even its theoretical maximum transfer rate, you can't deny that a modern gfx chip can outperform the Amiga by several orders of magnitude!!! Honestly there is nothing the Amiga can do that I can't do faster with more colours and at a greater resolution on a modern chip... That is just simple physics! You can even prove it yourself using SDL!!!

Offline bloodline

  • Master Sock Abuser
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 12113
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.troubled-mind.com
Re: Is Amiga Emulation better than the real thing?
« Reply #32 on: June 05, 2009, 12:53:40 AM »
Quote from: amigaksi;439906
>by dammy on 2009/1/27 18:43:11

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry bloodline, I hate to use the phrase "you're wrong", but you really are... The weakest Amiga I own is able to push a lot more than 2 megabytes per second.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


>I'll bite, how many MBPS in what slowest Amiga?

>Dammy
 
We're not talking raw memory to graphics memory update speed.  Even if you consider without sprites, there's blitter and then there's the scroll/graphics memory pointer registers which can be updated in a few microseconds and those things are non-standard in modern graphics cards so you end up repainting the screen which would be slower.


But it isn't slower because of the faster memory bandwidth... in fact repainting the entire screen is faster.