A quick A1200 Q

[Cyberus]

Hi guys,
What, in real terms, is the difference between a C= A1200 and a Amiga Technologies one, aside from the ROMS.
Or to put it differently, what's the difference between a C= A1200 upgraded with 3.1 roms and and an Amiga Technologies A1200?

Thanks!

[xeron]

Not a lot. Aside from the missing DISKRDY line on the floppy drive which causes an incompatibility with some games, the AT A1200 is basically the same as a KS3.1 C= A1200.

[Cyberus]

Thanks. So which one should I sell? :-)

[bloodline]

The Escom Floppy Drive in the Commodore A1200 :-)

[StevenJGore]

what's the difference between a C= A1200 upgraded with 3.1 roms and and an Amiga Technologies A1200?

Besides 3.1 ROM's and a PC floppy drive adapted for the Amiga, I believe that the AT A1200's motherboard is a later revision and fixes a few problems that Commodore never had chance to do.

Which one should you sell? IMHO, you should sell the Commodore A1200, simply because its an older motherboard revision. The floppy drive problem of the AT A1200 won't affect you unless you have lots of old games on non-DOS floppies which use strange methods of copy protection.

Steve.

[Cyberus]

Ah yeah, isn't the floppy drive a standard HD drive modded to work as DD....?

[StevenJGore]

Ah yeah, isn't the floppy drive a standard HD drive modded to work as DD....?

Yep!

[bloodline]

Cyberus wrote:
Ah yeah, isn't the floppy drive a standard HD drive modded to work as DD....?

Hense why you should put th eCommodore Folppy in the Escom A1200, and then sell the Commodore A1200 with the Escom floppy :crazy:

[mikeymike]

I think the processor in the Escom one was a bit cack, an EC version, which was cack in some way compared to the original?  (specific, aren't I? :-))

Aren't there also more mobo hacks that have to be done to the Escom A1200s?

[StevenJGore]

I think the processor in the Escom one was a bit cack, an EC version, which was cack in some way compared to the original?

No, don't think so. They were both 68EC020's in the Commodore and AT models.  :-)

What sort of motherboard hacks do you mean?  :-?

[mikeymike]

What sort of motherboard hacks do you mean?

Like the PCMCIA reset one.  I'm not saying "that one for definite is an Escom only problem", I know it isn't.  Just that as a potential example.

Is there anything sucky about the EC'020's?

[bloodline]

mikeymike wrote:

What sort of motherboard hacks do you mean?

Like the PCMCIA reset one.  I'm not saying "that one for definite is an Escom only problem", I know it isn't.  Just that as a potential example.

Is there anything sucky about the EC'020's?

They both used the same 020EC, and it only has 24bit address lines.

[vortexau]

Only the fact that MMU & FPU functions are missing!

IPOF, my first ever accelerator, a GVP GForce 030/40/4 in my A2000 also lacked those units . . . . but I gained them finally in the Blizzard A2060 that was the next upgrade!

My A1200HD-40 remains as I bought it . . . . . the A2000 was easier to expand in the mid-90s!

[mikeymike]

Is there anything sucky about the EC'020's?

They both used the same 020EC, and it only has 24bit address lines.

I'm surprised no-one went with the smartarse response:  "they don't compare to a P4/AthlonXP... 14MHz versus a couple of GHz..." :-)

[StevenJGore]

Is there anything sucky about the EC'020's?

Nothing that separates the Commodore A1200's from the AT A1200's. Obviously, full 68020 processors would have been more ideal because the 68EC020 only has a 24-bit address bus, rather than the 32-bit address bus of the full 68020, and a 68EC020 can only address 16Mb of memory... so I guess from those points-of-view the 68EC020's are sucky! But then how many true Amigans are running A1200's with just their stock processors?  :-)