3 more NatAmi's - Yippee!

[whiteb]

@ alexH

Of course I discount UAE as it's plain and simply got as much in common with "real" amiga as Amiga Forever has... (ie: sod all)

The MiniMig while a great product was never for me (took them too long to make it AGA and no AGA then no Amiga), quite simply the specs the NatAmi is offering is what I want & require from an Amiga and all the other reasons I've given before...

Minimig has *NEVER* had, nor will it ever have AGA, it simply has no room to put it in to the FPGA Bitfile.

I know people have been talking about FPGAReplay, and labeled it "Minimig AGA", but that was more built as a device to run Arcade Roms, it just so happens that because of the FPGA size, they have got a preliminary AGA chipset for the minimig core ported to it.  But again, due to the size of the Bitfile, it will NEVER fit in to the FPGA used in the Minimig, not only the size, but the number of I/O lines in the smaller FPGA chip too.

[HenryCase]

@Franko

Erm... here where it says "The Natami is compatible to the OCS/ECS/AGA AMIGA chipsets"

http://www.natami.net/amiga-compatible.htm

 So unless the term "compatible" is being used here to mean "ok it might be wee bit compatible and not exactly quite compatible" then I take that to mean it will be 100% friggin compatible...

Ah, I see where you've misinterpreted things now. Simply put, compatible != 100% compatible. Think about it like this, Minimig v1.1 has an OCS core, it's OCS compatible, but it's not 100% OCS compatible. The reason being, it's not the original chipset, it a recreation, a clone, based on available documentation and code.

The same is true with Natami. It won't include original OCS/ECS/AGA Amiga chipsets, it'll include clones of those chipsets.

Now I'm not knocking the Minimig or the Natami, I think both are great and will continue getting better, but I understand that achieving that fabled '100% compatibility' is a hard task. If you don't believe me, take a look at UAE, which has been in active development for 15 years. Even now, with the latest versions of WinUAE, you'll find minor fixes for games/applications. Part of the reason is that the documentation for the Amiga is incomplete, and even if we had the original design documents, this isn't enough, as there are undocumented features/bugs in the hardware that you have to emulate/recreate for 100% compatibility.

The interview I shared with you earlier gives a more realistic idea of what compatibility to expect. What I wouldn't want you doing is getting people excited about 100% compatibility on the Natami, only for them to find it's not the case when it's released. If I've burst your bubble of excitement then I'm sorry, it's not my intention, I believe you can still be excited about the Natami even if it doesn't run all Amiga software out of the box.

Big deal "you offered to join the NatAmi team"

I didn't offer, I was offered. PM from Gunnar back in March 2008, asking me whether I'd be interested in joining the team, helping out with Coldfire coding (back when they were considering Coldfire). I declined as didn't think my skillset quite fit (plus I didn't think I'd be comfortable dealing with all of the Amiga community in a diplomatic way, as this thread shows!), but took it as a recognition of my support (I helped keep the peace in early Natami threads on AW.net). So yeah, bit different from your Brownies example, but good luck with getting in! ;-)

You've got a strange way of showing your support, lets see... hmmm... you back up people who pop into a thread rattling their gums about other processor speeds that have sod all to do with the Natami, then you complain about folk saying how a happy they are about the NatAmi and tell them not to "hype" it up by saying things that have been clearly claimed on the NatAmi site and elsewhere...

You see disagreement, I see progress. The criticism in this thread has been fairly mild compared to what it was in the past. At the very least the criticism was focused on performance benchmarks. What I saw was that people saw elaborating on what the benchmarks mean as an attack on the project itself, which wasn't the case. I'm posting as a mediating influence to stop people making claims they can't back up to defend the project. The project stands on its own merits, it does not need to be called into question with dubious claims.

@whiteb

Minimig has *NEVER* had, nor will it ever have AGA, it simply has no room to put it in to the FPGA Bitfile.

I know people have been talking about FPGAReplay, and labeled it "Minimig AGA", but that was more built as a device to run Arcade Roms, it just so happens that because of the FPGA size, they have got a preliminary AGA chipset for the minimig core ported to it.  But again, due to the size of the Bitfile, it will NEVER fit in to the FPGA used in the Minimig, not only the size, but the number of I/O lines in the smaller FPGA chip too.

There are two (equal) definitions of Minimig:

1. The physical board known as Minimig.
2. The FPGA core known as Minimig.

Both are equally correct. Therefore, it is inaccurate to say there is not a Minimig AGA, as there clearly is (using definition 2).

[whiteb]

Erm... afraid your wrong there... when I first heard of the NatAmi last year and visited the site 100% backwards compatibility was clearly stated on it and is the main reason why I support this project so much...

NATAMI have *NEVER* boasted 100% compatibility.  Given you are using an FPGA to mimic the chipset, you are at BEST, an APPROXIMATION of the chipset.

You can get it *CLOSE*, but if you want 100% compatibility, then use a REAL amiga.

Even Minimig, does not boast 100% compatible, and lets face it, those working on the firmware have done an EXCELLENT job, there are some titles that will *JUST NOT* run, and the same will happen with NATAMI.

Topics on Compatibility:

The NatAmi is compatible to the OCS/ECS/AGA AMIGA chipsets.

It says "Compatible", not 100%.

Like I said, Minimig is Compatible, but not 100%.

AMIGA applications, games and demos that run on classic 68060-Systems,
will run on NATAMI as long as they have not any constrains to chipset timings/limitations.

SO they have openly admitted there will be some incompatibilities, therefor, not 100%.

[whiteb]

@whiteb

There are two (equal) definitions of Minimig:

1. The physical board known as Minimig.
2. The FPGA core known as Minimig.

Both are equally correct. Therefore, it is inaccurate to say there is not a Minimig AGA, as there clearly is (using definition 2).

Yeah thats right, Definition 2 (At least the AGA version), does not run on Definition 1.

[HenryCase]

You can get it *CLOSE*, but if you want 100% compatibility, then use a REAL amiga.

...or a CloneA (if/when released).

Yeah thats right, Definition 2 (At least the AGA version), does not run on Definition 1.

Yes. My point is that 'Minimig AGA' is not an inaccurate name for what it is, it perfectly describes what it is. Consider this, when Dennis was writing the Verilog for the Minimig before the first Minimig PCBs were produced, he still had a Minimig when he ran the Verilog HDL in a simulator. The name belongs to the HDL core, it just so happens one of the early Minimig platforms shared its name.

[unusedunused]

You missed my point. It's common knowledge that Pegasos2 G3 sucks in memory performance department. Pegasos2 G3 is particularly slow in memory operations, slower than some other G3 systems with some other chip sets. So it does not give you G3 600 memory performance benchmark to compare against.

And what about Pegasos 1 mem speed with G3.are they faster or slower as Peg 2 ?

as far i know we have in amiga land no 600 MHZ G4 system.so my guess is gunnar mean with his statement the G3 that is clocked with 600 MHZ on peg 1 or peg 2 or on some aone.and speed values of other old 600 MHZ g3 or G4 System i do not see.

Your Mac 1.5 GHZ values are not usefull, to verify if the statement that natami is faster as PPC 600 is correct or not

[whiteb]

...or a CloneA (if/when released).



Yes. My point is that 'Minimig AGA' is not an inaccurate name for what it is, it perfectly describes what it is. Consider this, when Dennis was writing the Verilog for the Minimig before the first Minimig PCBs were produced, he still had a Minimig when he ran the Verilog HDL in a simulator. The name belongs to the HDL core, it just so happens one of the early Minimig platforms shared its name.

Well, I have not read what methods Jens is using to reproduce the AGA chipset, you can use Technical manuals and write approximations in to VHDL, or you can use Reverse Engineering techniques, where you can use solvents to dissolve the ceramic of the chip and gain access to the core.  Either way, It is still using FPGA, but Jens is likely to have more accurate timings between the custom chips in his version..

Jens has only so far announced CloneA to implement OCS (That I can see).

I still think FPGAReplay is the one to watch.

[alexh]

you can use Reverse Engineering techniques, where you can use solvents to dissolve the ceramic of the chip and gain access to the core.

Eh? They don't do that in the case of ceramic chips. They take the ceramic off the chip mechanically and use solvents to remove layers of the chip itself. But this type of reverse engineer is unlikely to be used for Amiga. More likely observations on I/O.

Either way, It is still using FPGA, but Jens is likely to have more accurate timings between the custom chips in his version.

The fact that it uses an FPGA is irrelevant. You can make a 100% accurate recreation of the digital portions of the Amiga chipset using an FPGA.

MiniMig was/is the underlying HDL core. The logic definition files. The PCB which bares its name is just an FPGA board, nothing more. The fact you had MiniMig running on 3 different FPGA boards before it existed should point to this. Also the fact you can get MegaDrive, Spectrum, MSX and other cores which run on that PCB shows you that it is not tied to MiniMig.

[HenryCase]

Well, I have not read what methods Jens is using to reproduce the AGA chipset, you can use Technical manuals and write approximations in to VHDL, or you can use Reverse Engineering techniques, where you can use solvents to dissolve the ceramic of the chip and gain access to the core.  Either way, It is still using FPGA, but Jens is likely to have more accurate timings between the custom chips in his version..

Logic analysers are the main tool being used, from what I understand. Idea is to recreate the chipset(s) in a cycle-exact way, so that they behave in an identical way to the originals.

Jens has only so far announced CloneA to implement OCS (That I can see).

Not quite. Indivision ECS has HDL code from CloneA, and a completed AGA implementation has been hinted at, at least. See here:
http://eab.abime.net/showpost.php?p=712136&postcount=14

However, it is true that the OCS core is the only one to have been publicly demonstrated. For all those who haven't seen it already, torrent link for download here (used to be on Google Video, can't find it anymore):
http://breakpoint.untergrund.net/torrents/BP07_Seminar_JensSchoenfeld_Amiga_XViD.avi.torrent

I still think FPGAReplay is the one to watch.

Whilst I think interesting projects are happening all across the Amiga landscape, FPGAReplay is a great project, no doubt.

[DCAmiga]

NATAMI have *NEVER* boasted 100% compatibility.  Given you are using an FPGA to mimic the chipset, you are at BEST, an APPROXIMATION of the chipset.

You can get it *CLOSE*, but if you want 100% compatibility, then use a REAL amiga.

Even Minimig, does not boast 100% compatible, and lets face it, those working on the firmware have done an EXCELLENT job, there are some titles that will *JUST NOT* run, and the same will happen with NATAMI.



It says "Compatible", not 100%.

Like I said, Minimig is Compatible, but not 100%.



SO they have openly admitted there will be some incompatibilities, therefor, not 100%.

I agree with you but different Amiga models used different speeds of ROM/memory, so therefore even an A600 was never 100% cycle exact to say an A1000 or A2000. That why WHDLoad was invented

[DCAmiga]

Can you tell me where Cammy posted this? Did you quote her then change her post when you quoted her to attack Alex? A bit suspicious...

I swear it was there ask Cammy, it leaves 2 choices:
A) Deleted by Cammy herself
B) Deleted by a Moderator

No delusional drugs here buddy

[Franko]

@ whiteb

Name those titles you claim "will JUST NOT run" oh wise one...

Point is if all that is claimed on the NatAmi site is true and what the developers have said is true, then for me the NatAmi is the closest things we are ever going to have as being basically a brand new A1200 that you will be able to buy and easily add HD's etc too, without paying an arm & a leg on eBay to buy some 20 year old equipment that may or may not be working...

Put it this way if the NatAmi could run ALL Amiga software WITHOUT the need for patches or WHDLoad etc..., then it would actually be better than a real Amiga but it wont be and I'm not expecting it too...

I expect to have the same problems I would encounter on a real A1200 trying to run some really old stuff on it and that's what makes it truly comaptible...

Never cared for the MiniMig as it wasn't AGA as far as I knew but googling it you find stuff that claim it was, either way it doesn't matter to me personally as the MiniMig, Clone-A and FPGAReplay don't impress me but the NatAmi does so my only interest lies in the NatAmi...

All the talk about this is faster, that is better and all the rest such rubbish opinions mean diddly squat to me as well. I'll go by what the developers say and what I read on the NatAmi site and when the beta-testing is all said and done and it lives up to the hype, then I'll be first in line to buy one, then and only then will I know if it's all it's claimed to be but I'm quite prepared to take that chance...

So no matter how much all the armchair experts want to claim this and that about the NatAmi and what they THINK it can and cannot do, how it should have been done better and rattle their gums about the speed other processors can run at, or gibber jobbies about whether the MiniMig is AGA or not, I COULDN'T GIVE A SH!TE...

When the NatAmi is finally ready and promises to live up to what has been claimed of it by the developers, then they have at least one assured customer in me and THAT is all that matters to me...

[HenryCase]

Back on the topic of Natamis, saw this video on YouTube the other day, think it would be a good target for Natami to aim for to show off its performance:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02ZJNz3kt9o

If Quake 2 runs that well on a 68060 (admittedly with a Voodoo 3 card too) on a normal Amiga, I imagine you'd be looking at comparable (or possibly better, with the increased memory performance) results on a Natami. Worth a go at least, right? :-)

[Franko]

Back on the topic of Natamis, saw this video on YouTube the other day, think it would be a good target for Natami to aim for to show off its performance:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02ZJNz3kt9o

If Quake 2 runs that well on a 68060 (admittedly with a Voodoo 3 card too) on a normal Amiga, I imagine you'd be looking at comparable (or possibly better, with the increased memory performance) results on a Natami. Worth a go at least, right? :-)

Not having a go here... but... AAAARGH...

Why do people have to compare how good a computer is by talking about crappy games like Quake, Doom and all those other looky like pieces of junk... :confused:

The Amiga (and NatAmi hopefully) is far more than a games machine (and has far better games than Doom or it's clones for it anyway) so why do folk always have to judge a machine by how well it can play one of these poxy ruddy games... :confused:

Get right on my diddies that does... :rolleyes:

[HenryCase]

so why do folk always have to judge a machine by how well it can play one of these poxy ruddy games...

People use these types of games as yardstick of performance as they're fast paced action games, open-source and ported to many platforms that (in the case of the Quake series) have framerate capturing tools built in (maybe Doom does too, not sure).

If you know of a better game to measure 3D performance, please suggest it.

[Franko]

People use these types of games as yardstick of performance as they're fast paced action games, open-source and ported to many platforms that (in the case of the Quake series) have framerate capturing tools built in (maybe Doom does too, not sure).

If you know of a better game to measure 3D performance, please suggest it.

Think you missed the point I was making here..

Who cares about 3D performance on an Amiga... :confused:

26 years and since, I have never bought one Amiga just because of it's "3D performance"... I bought it because I saw what it was capable of back then and it had nothing to do whatsover with "3D performance" and that never will come into the equation for me...

It must be a modern generation thing where folk can only justify to themselves that a computer is good because of it's "3D Performance", if that's the case why not just stick with an XBOX or PS3 or whatever and leave the Amiga to folk who find them creative and useful and not just another box to play Doom ruddy clone on...

Gawd... sometimes I really feel sorry for todays generation of "computer users" if all that's important to them is how fast it can draw a frame in a ruddy "3D game"... :cry: