Amiga Vs Neo-Geo (scaling and rotation)

[Psy]

I was wondering which system had the more powerful video chip the Neo-Geo or the Amiga, I heard the Amiga does its scaling and rotation in software instead of in hardware like the Neo-Geo if this is true was Commodore planning on giving the Amiga hardware scaling and rotation?

[Psy]

So was Commodore planning on hardware based scaling and rotation?

The SNES had hardware scaling and rotation (what Nintendo called Mode 7, yet as the name suggests the SNES only could do it in one graphical mode), the SegaCD had it too but was a tad clunky (look at the special stage of SonicCD).

[Psy]

bloodline wrote:
Not really a fair comparison, the NeoGeo was developed 5 years after the Amiga, and lets not forget that Commodore didn't bother to develop the hardware (ECS and AGA were nothing more than bug fixes really... if we are honest..).

The AGA was a bit more then a bug fix but anyway back the Amiga ECS chipset can kinda hold it own against Sega's System 16 arcade board (games like Outrun and Space Harrier were not on the System 16 boards but on dual 68000 boards were one 68000 did the scaling and rotation) so one would assume the Amiga in the 90's would be still be able to hold its own against arcade boards of the time as game consoles of the time was narrowing the gap.

[Psy]

cantido wrote:
Consoles and arcade platforms have always been closely related since consoles came about. The consoles usually being a slightly less powerful version of the arcade platform.

Always? slightly?

The Sega Master System is no where near as powerful as Sega's System 16 arcade board.  

The Amiga is a multimedia computer which can do games but isn't limited to just that and that is why the designs differ.

The Amiga is also a game console or did you forget about the CD32?

Also Commodore lasted for 4 years after the release of the Neo Geo, it says something if Amiga in 4 year couldn't at least catch up to the Neo Geo.

The Amiga also cost a fraction of what a MVS board + carts would have set you back when they were released.

Not if you are talking the high end Amiga models to the AES home console

[Psy]

cantido wrote:

Psy wrote:
The Sega Master System is no where near as powerful as Sega's System 16 arcade board.  

I'd say the System 16 is pretty close to the Megadrive..
The Master system uses a Z80 as it's main processor and is probably more closely related to Z80 based boards sega made, and specifically the System E which has the same VDP as the mastersystem, only it has two of them. Funnily enough they were both released in 1986.. weird that eh?

The MegaDrive was released in 1988 and quickly was out done by the NeoGeo and Sega's own System 32 arcade board but the gap was far more narrower then the Mater System and the System 16 board.

More recent consoles like the Saturn and Dreamcast are directly related to the STV and the Naomi hardware respectively.

Yhea that is when the gap pretty much vanished.

The CD32 was an afterthought not the original intention.

An afterthought that sold pretty well considering it was released just before Commodore went under.

The A500 was released at around 100 dollars less than the AES. Which is the more (generally speaking) capable machine?

You're comparing oranges an apples.. The neogeo was designed for games, and the amiga was designed for "multimedia", one has hardware rotation and scaling, the other has a keyboard and enough ram to run an OS and applications.

Yes but by since arcades were losing their edge shouldn't that means the Amiga should have closed the gap to arcades?