What is the best Amiga in your Opinion?

[amiga-penn-wchester]

I have owned all models except for A3000T, so I can't speak to that model.

IMO the A2000 & A1200 were the best models.  The 2000 because of its expandability and reliability - a beast of a machine, the 1200 because of its price point (after its initial release cost was lowered).  You got AGA and soon after the ability to expand in many ways if you wanted.

The desktop A3000s and A4000s - they were nice, but weren't much of a departure from standard Amiga fare, really, other than the bus speed / processor slot architecture.

I had an A1200T/blizz060/ppc in a tower - was only zorro II, but I ran many of the same things comparably fast in relation to A3000/A4000.  Only thing that made it choke was that Picasso IV wanted more bus.

Even if you look at it from a Toaster standpoint - The A2000 sort of wins as the toaster 4000 wasn't that much of a different beast than toaster 2.0/3.x or what not.  Essentially a video switcher + effects. AGA aside, to me, you're basically in the same video land with the Toaster 2000 + some 030 or above processor.

Although the A3k and a4k offered easier access to graphics enhancements, 24bit was becoming commonplace around that time, and although Amiga had the upper hand with great gfx/paint software (TVpaint, many others), it was easy to see even as a user at the time that RTG and graphics addons for the amiga was a dead end.

[desiv]

T... then underpowered compared with the Saturn, Jaguar and Playstation.

To be fair.
CD32 - September 1993
Saturn - November 22, 1994
Playstation - 1994 (Japan)
Jaguar - November 23, 1993

So, only the cartridge based Jaguar was released around the same time.
And although "doing the math" showed it to have lots of BITS, not a lot of the games took advantage of it...
In fact, there are a lot of Amiga looking games on the Jag...

Without the XOR patent issue and if they would have just added 1M of true FAST RAM, who knows what would have happened...
(That and stopping those lazy ports..  Seriously, a controller like that, and you still have games that you have to press the joypad UP to jump  :rant: ).

The best Amiga to me is still the A1000.  The original.  It was a huge jump.
All of the others are incremental updates, and too slow and not enough for the time at that.  Doesn't mean they weren't great.  I love my A1200.  
But I gotta go with the 1000..

desiv

[LoadWB]

To be fair.
CD32 - September 1993
Saturn - November 22, 1994
Playstation - 1994 (Japan)
Jaguar - November 23, 1993

True.  I know this doesn't reference my post, but I do want to point out that while those machines were released later than the CD32, the development occurred during the same time-period.  For instance, what we know now as the Sony PlayStation actually started development around late-1992, with four years of prior concept and joint development with Nintendo.

The best Amiga to me is still the A1000.  The original.  It was a huge jump.
All of the others are incremental updates, and too slow and not enough for the time at that.  Doesn't mean they weren't great.  I love my A1200.  
But I gotta go with the 1000..

Yeah, I could see this.  The 1000 was definitely a giant leap forward in home computing (arguable against the Mac-heads.)  I would also say that the 500 and 2000 were also fairly good leaps forward: the 500 solidified the Amiga concept and the 2000 gave the Amiga a PC-worldly affect.

[WeiXing3D]

Your own one.....:drink:

[runequester]

With the CD32, I think the intention was just to get it to market, interest an existing audience and then work on something later.
 
From what I recall from an old post by Haynie, the CD32 basically sold out in the UK. Commodore's inability to build and sell enough was part of sealing the coffin.
 
 
So yeah, it'd have been doomed very shortly, but at the time, it was well received.

[lassie]

With the CD32, I think the intention was just to get it to market, interest an existing audience and then work on something later.
 
From what I recall from an old post by Haynie, the CD32 basically sold out in the UK. Commodore's inability to build and sell enough was part of sealing the coffin.
 
 
So yeah, it'd have been doomed very shortly, but at the time, it was well received.

Yes you are right for what i read i have 2 Amiga cd32 and i think they are some fine machines, sure they could not handle 3D very well, but still there are some cool games for it, i use mine a lot

[vox]

Hello everybody what is your favorite Amiga and why

i like my amiga 4000 and amiga 600 the best, i find that almost all games run good on them. but i also like my old amiga 2000 that old girl still keeps going :-)

A3000 with SCSI hard drive and deinterlacer.
Most PRO Amiga by standard, A4000 with IDE and no flicker was just tower A1200 with better CPU.

A3000 introduced ECS (Productivity) as well as AmigaOS 2.x which is most revolutionary. A3000T came as first real tower and A3000U with UNIX.

Sadly A3000+ was discarded - 040 CPU, DSP, AGA, KS 3.x

[lassie]

A3000 with SCSI hard drive and deinterlacer.
Most PRO Amiga by standard, A4000 with IDE and no flicker was just tower A1200 with better CPU.

A3000 introduced ECS (Productivity) as well as AmigaOS 2.x which is most revolutionary. A3000T came as first real tower and A3000U with UNIX.

Sadly A3000+ was discarded - 040 CPU, DSP, AGA, KS 3.x

I have never seen an Amiga 3000 in real life. Are you lucky to have one?

[vox]

I have never seen an Amiga 3000 in real life. Are you lucky to have one?

No. Now have a better one, at that time it was way too expensive.
http://www.efunzine.com/efnz.php?a=pro&id=95&sid=1f562b296860350decaa3e30f87706f7

http://www.efunzine.com/efnz.php?a=pro&id=215&sid=1f562b296860350decaa3e30f87706f7

CDTV was more revolutionary and stylish then cheap CD32

Out of Classic clone, DraCo is far superior (neva had one, too!)
http://amiga.resource.cx/mod/draco.html
http://www.gregdonner.org/workbench/wb_draco.html

From
http://anticusa.wordpress.com/amiga-resources-2012/

[Vlabguy1]

In my opinion the A4000T, best of the breed at the time.  Anyone know the details of the AAA chipset that was in development?  And any known future chipsets that were more or less just ideas or sketches etc..?  I wonder how far in the future Commodore was planning..

[vox]

In my opinion the A4000T, best of the breed at the time.  Anyone know the details of the AAA chipset that was in development?  And any known future chipsets that were more or less just ideas or sketches etc..?  I wonder how far in the future Commodore was planning..

Read Hombre and AAA articles on Wiki as orientation.
That WOULD NOT be Amiga in way Classics want it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_Hombre_chipset
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAA_chipset


Its good AmigaOS went PPC and they went busted knowing that.
CUSA calls on it as well as CommodorePC when needed to distance from Amiga, but forgot it contributed to fall of Commodore.

Best was supposed to be Falcon like scrapped A3000+
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_3000

An enhanced version, the Amiga 3000+, with the AGA chipset and an AT&T DSP3210 signal processing chip was produced to prototype stage in 1991. Although this system was never released, Commodore's negotiations with AT&T over the proper way to bundle their VCOS/VCAS operating system software in a personal computer environment helped Apple Computer deliver their AV-series Macintosh systems, two years later.[2]

[mechy]

So little love for the 1200?

With the humble 1200, you get:

AGA (you can use various tricks to run old software on your 1200, but nothing will get an AGA title to run on an ECS machine)

2 megs chip RAM built in.

A wealth of reasonably priced upgrade options for processors and RAM today.

Hard drive interface already in the machine

PCMCIA interface, making for extremely easy file transfers and networking.


On top of that, back in the day, the 1200 was quite affordable, even on a budget. Sure, a 3000 or 4000 was great but you'd pay through the nose.

the 1200 is a cut down machine with a ton of bottlenecks,bad psu stock,silly clock port and unbuffered ide. you got what you paid for.It was intended to be a simple machine without much expansion.

I own many amiga's and love them all BUT..the 4000 is a better value from the get go because you got a 040,could expand to 16MB ram,150watt psu,room for a cdrom,and Zorro3(room for a gfx card etc),easily switched pal or ntsc defualt with a jumper.  Its simply a matter of you get what you pay for. The 1200 even with a mediator has a tiny 8Mb window(bottleneck) compared to the 3000/4000 mediator which is 256/512 window.the pcmcia is handy however!. Even a fully expanded 1200 is about half the speed of a 4000 expanded and there is no real options for gfx cards other than the bvision which needed a ppc or a mediator(read : slow).The most max expanded 1200 is still slower than a max expanded 4000.By the time you expand a 1200 to 4000 specs you have spent a good deal of money and usually have a not so reliable machine with many dongles(because it doesn't have a proper expansion bus).  It all comes down to what you intend to do with it of course.
Someone mentioned the buster on the 4000 was not finished,but this applied to the 3000 also,they use the same buster. Many 3000's came with buster 7 which meant no working zorro3. changing to buster 9 or 11 solved this.The 3000 was a great machine(other than slow ecs),zip ram,case and the old now tarnishing sockets. The 3000T and 4000T are really great machines. The only upgrade a 3000T could of used is a engine and wheels to move it :rofl:

[mechy]

In my opinion the A4000T, best of the breed at the time.  Anyone know the details of the AAA chipset that was in development?  And any known future chipsets that were more or less just ideas or sketches etc..?  I wonder how far in the future Commodore was planning..

take a look at this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga_Hombre_chipset

Mech

[Damion]

I've had upgraded 1200's, but honestly have had the most fun with them when they're modestly expanded ('030 and large HD) and used for gaming. For any type of serious expansion, you'll be much happier starting with a 3000 or 4000, heck, even a 2000.

[lassie]

I've had upgraded 1200's, but honestly have had the most fun with them when they're modestly expanded ('030 and large HD) and used for gaming. For any type of serious expansion, you'll be much happier starting with a 3000 or 4000, heck, even a 2000.

Then i am lucky since i have 3 Amiga 2000 and 1 Amiga 4000

[Damion]

Then i am lucky since i have 3 Amiga 2000 and 1 Amiga 4000

Yes, very lucky. :pint: My first big-box was an A2000 I picked up some years ago, and spent a long while hunting down various expansions making it perfect for me. (The 2000 is definitely one of my favorites!) Up until that point, I had always had 500's and 1200's. I really enjoyed being able to buy cards, then plop them in the huge case without any fuss, or worry about cooling or power. My first RTG card was a CV64/3D, which was simply amazing compared to AGA.

Expanding the 1200 much beyond an accelerator and a few do-dads always felt like a complete hack-fest, not to mention the sheer terror of the clockport, and mounting challenges increasing the risk of frying something. Even the accelerator can be a pain, since most of them have the CPU facing down - I really despised having the 1200 "up on blocks" when I had the Blizz 1260 in there, simply ridiculous when you can't close the trapdoor and call it good.