Why C= never made a 65816 based machine?

[WolfToTheMoon]

And not talking specifically about Amigas, but as a C64/C128 successor. Seems like an obvious plan, full backwards compatibility with their 8 bit machines, plenty fast and cheap, up to 16 MB RAM, they were granted half of the licensing cost by WDC... Yet it never happend! And I think it would make for a very powerful entry level machine in the late 80s and early 90s... certainly more impressive than C65, which to me made little sense by 91'. A GUI based OS like GEOS could have been used/licensed by C=...

Perhaps it would be dangerously close to lower spec Amigas, but I think it made sense to try and build on the foundations of 20ish millions of C64 sold and the huge software library that existed.

[psxphill]

Perhaps it would be dangerously close to lower spec Amigas, but I think it made sense to try and build on the foundations of 20ish millions of C64 sold and the huge software library that existed.

A 65816 wouldn't have been compatible with alot of the existing software & commodore were happy to just keep milking the c64.

[rewlako]

The C64 Super CPU accelerator has a 65816 under the hood, running at a whopping 20MHz.

Not many programs utilize it, though.

[Hattig]

And not talking specifically about Amigas, but as a C64/C128 successor. Seems like an obvious plan, full backwards compatibility with their 8 bit machines, plenty fast and cheap, up to 16 MB RAM, they were granted half of the licensing cost by WDC... Yet it never happend! And I think it would make for a very powerful entry level machine in the late 80s and early 90s... certainly more impressive than C65, which to me made little sense by 91'. A GUI based OS like GEOS could have been used/licensed by C=...

Commodore couldn't have managed their way out of a hat.

Content to sit back on their money earners, they stopped innovating and, surprise surprise, a few years later they were bust.

Just this morning I was thinking that C= should have reduced the C64 to a single chip (including the VICII,SID,6502,Serial,etc) by the late 80s so that they could sell it for cheap in developing countries for a profit. It could also have been clocked higher because said chip would have been fabricated on a far more modern process than the original C64. Your idea of using the 65816 is similar. An enhanced C64 for the late 80s/early 90s, with the C64's flaws (relatively slow CPU, mud-inspired colour palette) designed out.

[psxphill]

Just this morning I was thinking that C= should have reduced the C64 to a single chip (including the VICII,SID,6502,Serial,etc) by the late 80s so that they could sell it for cheap in developing countries for a profit. It could also have been clocked higher because said chip would have been fabricated on a far more modern process than the original C64.

I think the 8 bit line was actually quite well managed. They did reduce chip count and cost & because they could run the chips on their own lines they were very cheap to make. Anything more would have involved a massive investment, which wouldn't have been a good gamble.

[mongo]

Commodore couldn't have managed their way out of a hat.

Content to sit back on their money earners, they stopped innovating and, surprise surprise, a few years later they were bust.

Just this morning I was thinking that C= should have reduced the C64 to a single chip (including the VICII,SID,6502,Serial,etc) by the late 80s so that they could sell it for cheap in developing countries for a profit. It could also have been clocked higher because said chip would have been fabricated on a far more modern process than the original C64. Your idea of using the 65816 is similar. An enhanced C64 for the late 80s/early 90s, with the C64's flaws (relatively slow CPU, mud-inspired colour palette) designed out.

By the late 80s the production cost of the C-64 was about $25. It wasn't going to get much cheaper than that. Clocking it higher would have caused a ton of the software for it to not work and screwed up the video timing.

[Hattig]

By the late 80s the production cost of the C-64 was about $25. It wasn't going to get much cheaper than that. Clocking it higher would have caused a ton of the software for it to not work and screwed up the video timing.

It could start up in compatibility mode, and switch to faster mode if the software desired it. It would have been a solvable issue. Anyway, all this proves is how much C= sat back on the C64 and then lost it all when the 8-bit market died overnight.

[LoadWB]

It could start up in compatibility mode, and switch to faster mode if the software desired it. It would have been a solvable issue. Anyway, all this proves is how much C= sat back on the C64 and then lost it all when the 8-bit market died overnight.

There was such a machine; it was called the 128.

[WolfToTheMoon]

There was such a machine; it was called the 128.

It was still 8 bit and pretty limited. .. I was thinking more of a next generation entry machine...a 16 bit CPU, expandable RAM, 3.5" floppy, GUI based OS...

[psxphill]

It was still 8 bit and pretty limited. .. I was thinking more of a next generation entry machine...a 16 bit CPU, expandable RAM, 3.5" floppy, GUI based OS...

Sounds like an a500

[WolfToTheMoon]

Sounds like an a500

yes it does, but it would be cheaper and have backwards compatibility with C64 software. Plus, a 20 MHz 65816 is faster than a 7 MHz 68000 so it could a very interesting package. Timeframe around the original C65, 90-91', A500 would be replaced with A1200 in a year, A600 would not be needed.

[desiv]

Plus, a 20 MHz 65816 is faster than a 7 MHz 68000 so it could a very interesting package..

I'm not sure "faster" == "faster" in this case...

desiv

[LoadWB]

I'm not sure "faster" == "faster" in this case...

desiv

IIRC, the 65816 is missing some on-chip registers compared to the 6500-series, and pales in comparison to the 68000's 16 registers.  This will drastically affect performance.  (If you really wanna learn some gritty stuff, check out a MIPS emulator.  It's fun!)

But, yeah, the 128 was still 8-bit but backwards compatible with a compatibility mode for (the dying) CP/M.  If Commodore had released the C65 (comparable to the Apple IIgs in terms of "next generation") I think that would have been the end-all-be-all.

[WolfToTheMoon]

I'm not sure "faster" == "faster" in this case...

desiv

Well, Wozniak did say Apple demanded that the 65816 in the II GS was clocked at only 2.8 MHz to make sure it didn't threaten the Mac performance and sales. In his own words, a 7 MHz 65816 is about as fast as a 14 MHz 68000 - but I'll stipulate that a 68000 is the more advanced and more elegant solution better suited to higher level languages.

[Dementhor]

LOL sounds like I haven't been the only one to have wet dreams along the lines of "If I were a Commodore CEO, the Amiga would be one of the major platforms in business as well as multimedia by now" (^__~ )