Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Crappy comparison of Amiga 1200 vs Atari Falcon  (Read 22038 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Motormouth

Re: Crappy comparison of Amiga 1200 vs Atari Falcon
« on: September 09, 2015, 03:41:44 AM »
Quote from: gizmo350;795279
Yeah! We ROCK! :laugh1:
Hey Atari.... make like a fuse and BLOW! :lol:

Defender of the Crown (Top to Bottom: Amiga, Atari ST, DOS (CGA) )

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


Even the C64 graphics looked better than the DOS (CGA) version
 

Offline Motormouth

Re: Crappy comparison of Amiga 1200 vs Atari Falcon
« Reply #1 on: September 09, 2015, 01:09:39 PM »
Quote from: vince_6;795311
I always read that a 030 on a 16bit bus is not a good idea.
This might be true, although I did my tests on an A500+ with an ACA500 and my blizz030.
AIBB gave me the exact same results as on my A1200 except some results like Line test because of AGA.

Probably a 50MHz 030 is not fast enough to bottleneck a 16bit bus?


Just try running a VXL*30 without a ram32.  Or any other a500 or a2000 68030 accelerator without 32 bit ram.

The integer math and even the floating point go way up but all the custom chip transfers, the graphics and all the ram transfers stay slow.
You only get a 10-20% increase in speed from an 68030 without 32bit ram over a stock 7 mhz 68000.   The upside is you can run more things (requiring 68020+).

The Graphics in a500 or a2000 even with an accelerator stay slower than the A3000s graphics.  Check out AIBB tests over at amiga hardware database.
 

Offline Motormouth

Re: Crappy comparison of Amiga 1200 vs Atari Falcon
« Reply #2 on: September 09, 2015, 01:13:00 PM »
Quote from: vince_6;795311
... although I did my tests on an A500+ with an ACA500 and my blizz030. ....


That's a nice configuration!!!!! :D