Best graphics solution for an A2000.

[stefcep2]

You will find that phase 5 cards work better with CGX 4 than P96:  I've used both RTG systems on both a CV-3d and a CV 64 and CGX is faster, smoother than P96 (on an A4000)

[stefcep2]

@katmandew

caches on the 1240 are probably why you get compatiblity issues with whdload.  tweak some of the game icon tooltypes.

AGA wasn't really taken advantage of by games, but AGA versions still look better than ECS.

Serious software that runs much better on AGA than ECS and for which RTG won't work (or work well) include Dpaint, Brilliance, Scala, and playback of animations.  There isn't anything quite as good as these in RTG.  There are probably others.  

Sure you can use photogenics and ImageFx better on RTG machines, but then a PC will do it better still for less than an RTG Amiga

I still think an A1200 like you have is pretty cool: small form factor, composite out built in, easy to expand, heaps of games.  Its when people turn A1200's into Frankenstein machines- and really all thats being attempted is to create an A4000- that I think people lose it.  i presently have an A4000 with 68060, scsi, CV64, scan doubler, and i use an A1200 with just an 8 meg ram card and a flash card more often:  I love its fast boot off flash card, 100% comaptiblity with my whdload games, my son loves to play with dpaint and scala

[stefcep2]

-D- wrote:

stefcep2 wrote:
You will find that phase 5 cards work better with CGX 4 than P96:  I've used both RTG systems on both a CV-3d and a CV 64 and CGX is faster, smoother than P96 (on an A4000)

For some reason, CGX drivers are _dog slow_ with the CV64/3D in the A2000 for WB. Window and backdrop redraw especially. P96 is very fast in comparison, but has its own annoying quirk - the cgx emulation is bugged, rendering most RTG demos a slideshow. :/

That is strange.  It might be an A2000/Zorro 2 thing or maybe your CGX config.  CGX 4 is much more reliable and faster than CGX3, and in my experience on my A4000 both CGX 4 and CGX 3 outperformed P96.