Crappy comparison of Amiga 1200 vs Atari Falcon

[Pyromania]

http://www.atarimusic.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=263:the-falcon030-vs-the-amiga1200&catid=60:atari-hardware&Itemid=214

It's on an Atari site so not sure what I was expecting. Conclusion was that the machines were pretty much equal which is false. The A1200 was much better of course except for the DSP on the Atari which had limited 3rd party software support.

[wrath of khan]

I thought I heard that the falcon was a more powerful machine than the a1200?
I could have heard wrong.

[wrath of khan]

Seems like a fair and balanced article to me and a solid read.

[mikrucio]

My goodness you Amigans are dumb sometimes.

Im an Amigan And i know the Falcon was WAY more powerful than a the A1200

[Crumb]

http://www.atarimusic.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=263:the-falcon030-vs-the-amiga1200&catid=60:atari-hardware&Itemid=214

It's on an Atari site so not sure what I was expecting. Conclusion was that the machines were pretty much equal which is false. The A1200 was much better of course except for the DSP on the Atari which had limited 3rd party software support.

Not bad comparison. I'd love that A1200 had a DSP like Falcon has (or that coders took advantage of Delphina's 56002 DSP as much as Atari coders do with their 56001).

Here you have some videos showing the work of a brilliant programmer running on a standard 16MB Falcon in action:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpwlZgQPCpk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjgWx3DE1CY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTxwfRl_I0U

[bloodline]

An extremely fair and balanced article. The Flacon was horribly crippled by its memory bus, but other than that it has the chunky gfx mode, the 16bit audio, a DSP and a 68030 which were all features missing from the Amiga 1200.

The A1200 was good in spite of its design, not because of it.

[paul1981]

Not sure why he keeps making reference to pc and mac sound cards too, saying that by the 90's the Amiga's sound was lagging behind. Maybe he doesn't know that 16-bit sound cards have always been around for the A1500/2000/3000/4000 machines. Even the wedge-cased Amiga's got 16-bit sound cards...these connected via serial/parallel, pcmcia, or clockport.

With the standard 68EC020 cpu onboard the A1200, the bus is 24 not 32-bit. Adding a cpu upgrade with fastram gives 32-bit. Unless he was referring to AGA? If he was then the falcon bus width should have been listed as 16 not 32.

Check this (very long) thread out if you fancy some Atari vs Amiga discussion/arguments/flame-wars. They talk about the Falcon vs. A1200 too later on in the thread IIRC:

http://atariage.com/forums/topic/29957-atari-st-vs-amiga/page-1?hl=fastrobplus  amiga  1000

Enjoy

[giZmo350]

Check this (very long) thread out if you fancy some Atari vs Amiga discussion/arguments/flame-wars. They talk about the Falcon vs. A1200 too later on in the thread IIRC:

http://atariage.com/forums/topic/29957-atari-st-vs-amiga/page-1?hl=fastrobplus  amiga  1000

Enjoy

I read a sampling from about 10 pages.... seems most liked the Amiga! You can watch the Amiga grow with great add-on's over the years in that thread while the Atari has pretty much stayed stagnant! But CRAP! That thread went on for 9 years! :rtfm: Thanks for the link Paul!

[Pyromania]

Amiga rules them all.

[Yasu]

Wasn't the Falcons 030 crippled by 16 bit bottle neck connections or something, making it slower?

[giZmo350]

Amiga rules them all.

Yeah! We ROCK! :laugh1:
Hey Atari.... make like a fuse and BLOW! :lol:


Defender of the Crown (Top to Bottom: Amiga, Atari ST, DOS (CGA) )

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Motormouth]

Yeah! We ROCK! :laugh1:
Hey Atari.... make like a fuse and BLOW! :lol:

Defender of the Crown (Top to Bottom: Amiga, Atari ST, DOS (CGA) )

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even the C64 graphics looked better than the DOS (CGA) version

[stefcep2]

A stock A1200 is a crippled machine.

You could easily spend three times its price on expansions alone.  Some say that's good design because it allows expansions to grow your system as you needs change.  I say it was nothing but a cash grab.

You'd think the CPU is a big let down.  But actually no, that wasn't the biggest brain fart decision.

Seriously: shipping with 2 MB chip RAM?  Not upgradable?  C'mon.  Even 2 MB of fast RAM revamps the performance and possibilities.  

Then adding even a 20 MB hard drive improves it further.  

Just those two changes as standard improves the software and OS  possibilities.

And sound: the same chip for 10 years?

Please.  Of course a stock ATARI was better than a stick A1200.

[agami]

On paper, and for specific audio workloads, the Falcon was better. But for all intents and purposes, in real world applications across a broad spectrum of workloads, the A1200 was better.
The article does not take into account the TCO of each system. Bang for buck the A1200 was a much better investment. The market dynamics proved it to be so.

[Drummerboy]

Even the C64 graphics looked better than the DOS (CGA) version

Yeah, Much Better!!.