Is the Amiga architecture still relevant today?

[sim085]

I have been wondering about this question for a long time now. What I mean about this question is this; in todays world, the differences between the Amiga architecure and the x86 architure still make sense? In other words if a new machine based on the Amiga architecture gets out, then is it really needed? Or?

Regards,
Sim085

[shoggoth]

I have been wondering about this question for a long time now. What I mean about this question is this; in todays world, the differences between the Amiga architecure and the x86 architure still make sense? In other words if a new machine based on the Amiga architecture gets out, then is it really needed? Or?

Regards,
Sim085

The Amiga was neither the first nor the last machine to use dedicated graphics coprocessors and nifty DMA solutions. The concepts are very well alive today, though much more sophisticated.

[coldfish]

"...if a new machine based on the Amiga architecture gets out, then is it really needed?"

No.

[Effy]

A new machine with a fixed gfx processor and fixed cpu would mean that coders would have to do their very best to get the most out of it, these days however a lot of pc coders prefer to wait for faster hardware in order to get their stuff working at decent speed, it's easier than to "get the most out of it" like most Amiga coders do ....

[Speelgoedmannetje]

Oooh troll thread ahead!

But well, to be seriously, not really.
Though, custom chipsets, and an OS which takes full advantage of the hardware, and both being designed for nowadays purposes, is something desireable IMHO.

[Speelgoedmannetje]

A new machine with a fixed gfx processor and fixed cpu would mean that coders would have to do their very best to get the most out of it, these days however a lot of pc coders prefer to wait for faster hardware in order to get their stuff working at decent speed, it's easier than to "get the most out of it" like most Amiga coders do ....

It's kinda incomparable nowadays programming.
Lot more libraries have been created since. OpenGL, DirectX, and even, game programmers use todays ready-made engines like the Unreal engines.
To get the max out of the computer nowadays is to be concious as a programmer how the memory is used, and how you use the libraries you need.

[FrenchShark]

With today's technology (i.e. 64-bit DDR SDRAM at 143 MHz), you get 256 times the bandwidth of the ECS/OCS chipset.
The AGA was able to display 640x512 in 256 colors with 4 times the bandwidth of OCS/ECS chipset.
A new hardware with today's technology would be able to display 8 playfields with 256 colors each in 1280x1024 and would still have half the bandwidth available for Blitter, Copper and CPU.
This would be the most amazing 2D graphics engine ever created for games.
Of course, the Chip RAM size needs to be scaled the same way : 64MB is a minimum.

[hayashi]

I honestly haven't much of a clue, but I'm sure that a custom-chip approach like the Amiga's would still have its uses today. An entire computer system that has been designed so that every component works perfectly with every other component, no components have to resort to vague assumptions as to how others will act, and where the software has also been designed to make the most of the hardware, I'm sure, would reach a level of computing efficiency far beyond that, if at much higher cost.
 
I'm still amazed at just how much my A1200 can do with 2MB of RAM, a 14MHz processor, no active cooling (I hate massive CPU fansinks!), and an OS that fits in ~10MB of disk/ROM space. (And I can't wait to see what it can do with an accelerator board!) When you compare that to modern OSes that require about 100-1000 times those numbers (alright, they do much more than OS3, but not quite that much IMHO)... I'm sure that the Amiga's tight architecture was responsible in at least a small way for that.

[kvasir]

As far as integrating GFX/Audio w/ DMA on the motherboard, even most modern x86 boards do this, with a bypass ability to upgrade, which the Amiga didn't really have. (At the OS level, it did, but lots of "hardware banging" programs can't access enhanced GFX without the card doing wierd things, eg. I still need a VGA switch + scandoubler to play WHDload stuff) As far as proprietary GFX (eg. OCS/ECS/AGA being planar instead of chunky), API layers seem to make up the difference a bit, but the Classic systems are conceptually incompatible with the way other systems do it on a more specific level. But the overall concept is still sound, the only problem being with upgrading. The only problems I've had getting my A1200 towered and operating in a "modern" capacity, aside from cost, are the "fixed" nature of the custom hardware. While I still need AGA (in my case) for games and older software (DPIV can use RTG, but doesn't really like it), upgrading past the original specs. is a challenge when you have "native" hardware to bypass. The biggest prob is the KS ROMS, which I believe most OS4.x systems have opted for a system more similar to BIOS rather than kickstart, though I could be wrong. (Haven't had the pleasure of tinkering with an A1 or SAM, etc..) I use AOS 3.9, which required me to disassemble my 1200, swap out the 2 chips, and then run a ROM patcher on top of that. Been thinking of finding someone with a ROM burner and seeing if I can't bypass the whole boot, blizkick 3.9 rom, reboot process. If the ROMs are flashable, or more like NVRAM, it may be more convenient, and give the best of both worlds. (I know many x86 boards have flashable bios chips)
The biggest drawback to "Amiga" arcitecture (as I know it, the 680x0 based systems) is lack of expandability of the GFX/Audio in a more modular method, but between the flashable ROMs and less software being written to hardware (even windows has a hardware abstraction layer to code to rather than the CPU, would be interesting to see what would happen if HAL.DLL was ported to 6800x0 architecture) the Amiga's can (and does, considering lack of realization of an "apples to oranges comparison between kickstart and bios) model work.

Sorry if I'm a bit wordy on this post, the next task on my agenda for today involvles changing a cat litter box, when I live with 3 cats that apparently don't agree with the brand of cat food I recently bought.

[alx]

I have been wondering about this question for a long time now. What I mean about this question is this; in todays world, the differences between the Amiga architecure and the x86 architure still make sense? In other words if a new machine based on the Amiga architecture gets out, then is it really needed? Or?

Regards,
Sim085

By the "Amiga Architecture" do you mean a souped-up successor to AGA (think Natami) or something completely new that's inspired by the classic machines?  The former would be a great platform for demos and hobbyists, but isn't ever going to beat a modern systems for 3D graphics etc.  Tying AmigaOS to a custom architecture might not be the best idea either!

If CBM had carried on making Amigas to this day, they'd no doubt have been based on something very different to AGA anyway - look at the sorts of plans with the Acutiator architecture, which would itself have been ancient history by now.  Some sort of custom hardware is perhaps a more attractive proposition for a console these days (look at the PS3), but it'd be a very different architecture to AGA.

[AmigaHeretic]

As far as integrating GFX/Audio w/ DMA on the motherboard, even most modern x86 boards do this, with a bypass ability to upgrade, which the Amiga didn't really have.

Yeah, but there are lots of different motherboard chipsets, not to mention NVIDIA vs ATI chipset.  So trying to hardware bang like the old days and spread you code is much harder not to mention the complexity of the newer hardware.

What might be cool is like a base line spec (like A500 was sort the base line for a long time)  

Now, DirectX is pretty much the base line these days.  You right your code to that and then it takes care of what ever hardware you're on.  Or OpenGL might be similar.


The question would be would it be relevant to have a base line hardware spec (like A500) instead of a software one like D3D?  

Basically, either one motherboard is chosen and all software is written for that or you come up with a spec and all hardware is made to that spec.  


I'm guessing most the hardware banging days are gone.  Evertyhing abstracted through software is much easier to program to.  And there is so much power it hardly makes sense to do it any other way these days.

[AmigaHeretic]

I honestly haven't much of a clue, but I'm sure that a custom-chip approach like the Amiga's would still have its uses today.

I think they are still relevent today.  They are called the Wii, PS3, XBox 360...

These are basically like the A500.  A Wii is a Wii is a Wii.  You could write a hardware banging demo and know it will work on ALL the Wii's out there.

Problem is they are not like the Amiga in that anyone could program for an Amiga.  You weren't locked out of the hardware like most of these systems.

[tone007]

3 cats that apparently don't agree with the brand of cat food I recently bought.

Teach them to use the toilet, it's seriously easy.  Haven't had a litterbox here in months.

As for architecture and Amigas, I use one to hold up the desk in the garage.  I guess that makes it an architectural Amiga.

[Raffaele]

No Amiga architecture is no more relevant today...

But if you enjoy your pC today remeber that in PC world they were very inspired by Amiga technology.

Check diagrams of A3000 motherboards and how buses were conceived. It inspired all modern PC architecture diagrams...

Check diagram blocks of CD32... It is the same of Playstation1...

Sony copied the same technology of CD32 but wisely added in Playstation vector graphics and a first 3d engine...

PCI BUS technology of PCs was inspired by Amiga Zorro BUS

Audio section of DirectX engine in Windows was taken directly by Bars&Pipes Amiga software technology.

Micosoft buyed BlueRibbon Soundworks, the makers of Bars & Pipes to obtain that technology and incorporate it in Windows audio subsection in DirectX engine.

There is still an Amiga technology up to date and still unsurpassed:

AUTOCONFIG!

Plug and Play on PCs is nowadays a very stable and relying technology but in its early days it was called PLUG AND PRAY due to its instability...

Recognizing hardware peripherals it is the only modern techology were Amiga can teach a lesson to Peecees, because our Autoconfig System for recognizing and install on the fly hardware peripherals is still amazingly perfect... You can look at any ancient classic Amigas and take a look on how beautiful our system was....

PC engineers should take a look on Autoconfig so then they could improve Plug and Play technology more than usual and reach a new era even in hardware peripherals.

[alexh]

I used some ideas found in the Amiga chipset in my Set-top-box gfx core which is in tens of thousands of homes today.

The ideas behind 2D gfx manipulation, particularly sprites and blitting has not changed for decades. The Amiga did certain things very well

Mobile phones & set-top-boxes very much use yester-year technology due to price constraints and memory constraints.