Good Atari-vs-Amiga Blitter Info Inside

Good Atari-vs-Amiga Blitter Info Inside

Post by Thomas Hi » Sun, 30 Jun 1991 23:45:19



   I've kept this file around for a while as it has some very good solid
information on the Amiga blitter (and Atari blitter) in it. Because there
has been recent talk of the Atari blitter being somehow faster and/or better,
I'm reposting this here in comp.sys.amiga.advocacy.

Article #458 (538 is last):

Quote:>Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.emulations

Subject: Re: Amiga Emulator for the ST. Sounds Bogus.

Date: Tue Mar 12 17:58:07 1991


>>   What is this Amiga emulator your talking about? Sounds like vaporware
> Without wishing to start a computer war, a friend of mine has an
>Amiga emulator for his Atar 1040ST. It i commercial package, thats been
>around since 1987, released by Metacomco.

This is undoubtedly bogus.  First of all, there wasn't much Metacomco code in
the original AmigaOS anyway; what was there was simply part of the DOS
subsystem.  They might try to sell you a version of Tripos for the ST, but
it wouldn't be an Amiga emulator.

Quote:>The manual states that it runs around 7 times faster than a real amiga, disk
>drive i/o is much faster,

Again, not possible.  In pure CPU loops, the original ST would go a tad faster
than an A1000, may 11% maximum (the difference between 8MHz and 7.16MHz).  The
PC inspired floppy interface is slower on the ST.

Quote:>but the whole thing slows down when it comes to emulating the specialised
>chips (some of them not all).

To run the Amiga OS, you are by definition using most of the features of the
Amiga custom chips.  

Quote:>It requires the atari blitter to be installed, which runs approx 40 times faster
>than the amigas blitter which somewhat

Was the Atari blitter even available in '87?  In any case, this is pure ST
propaganda -- Stalin would have been proud.  The ST blitter is roughly 1/4 to
1/2 the speed of the Amiga blitter doing operations the ST blitter supports.
Amiga's blitter runs at double bus speed, 14.3 MHz, when cranked up.  If you
have fast RAM, the CPU and blitter can both be going at once.  The ST blitter
shares the bus with the 68000; it runs the same memory cycle as the 68000, and
you can have only one on the bus at any given time.  Additionally, the ST
blitter supports 16 operations between two operands to one destination.  The
Amiga blitter supports 256 operations between three operands to one destination
and additional tricks, like line draw.  What it does well, it does faster than
a 68020 at 14.3MHz.

Most of the copper tricks cannot be emulated on the ST at all.

Quote:>Can anyone confirm or deny that this Metacomco product really
>exists? Either someone is exaggerating ALOT, or Metacomco is
>falsly advertising, because I don't believe this.

This is the first I have heard of any such product.  I would consider that
very strange for any product of any significance to the Amiga market that's
supposedly been around since '87.  My guess is that this is totally bogus.
--
Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests"
   {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      PLINK: hazy     BIX: hazy
        "What works for me might work for you"  -Jimmy Buffett

[END]

   Tom

 
 
 

Good Atari-vs-Amiga Blitter Info Inside

Post by Peter da Sil » Mon, 01 Jul 1991 10:58:09



>    I've kept this file around for a while as it has some very good solid
> information on the Amiga blitter (and Atari blitter) in it.

What makes you think we care? Your flame war on c.s.a.st was funny for a day
or so (and I took my shots) but the Atari is a lost cause. Forget it.

Respect followups (and you folks on c.s.a.st might direct your own followups
the same place).
--

                   'U`    "Have you hugged your wolf today?"

 
 
 

Good Atari-vs-Amiga Blitter Info Inside

Post by Mike Schwar » Mon, 01 Jul 1991 10:11:26




>>The manual states that it runs around 7 times faster than a real amiga, disk
>>drive i/o is much faster,

>Again, not possible.  In pure CPU loops, the original ST would go a tad faster
>than an A1000, may 11% maximum (the difference between 8MHz and 7.16MHz).  The
>PC inspired floppy interface is slower on the ST.

Actually, all instructions on the ST must end in a modulo 4 # of clock cycles.
Anything that takes 6 cycles ends up 8 on the ST.

--
****************************************************
* I want games that look like Shadow of the Beast  *
* but play like Leisure Suit Larry.                *
****************************************************

 
 
 

1. More Atari-Vs-Amiga Music Info

   With all this talk of Atari-Vs-Amiga MIDI matters, I thought I'd reprint a
small part of an article in the latest issue of Amazing Computing. From the
July 91 issue, page 82...

Sound of Music

The Bandito told you a while back there were some hot audio cards coming.
Well, a company called Beta Unlimited is introducing a 16-bit audio processor
called AudioLink that provides up to 16 voices (eight in stereo) at sampling
rates of up to 48Khz (compact discs are only 44Khz!). And you can do 2x
oversampling, too, or 96Khz if you're sampling in mono. The board can have up
to 16 MB of memory on it, and includes MIDI ports. Of course, you get sound-
editing software, too.

 And they're not the only game in town. Sunrize Industries (creators of
PerfectSound) is introducing some new hardware and software to make the Amiga
a professional sound-editing box. Their Audition 4 software is a new IFF sound
editor, which sounds like fun. But their new audio cards, the AD1012 and
AD1016, give you 12-bit or 16-bit digital sound. The 12-bit card is fine for
video work, while the 16-bit card is a must for CD-quality sound- up to
100,000 samples per second, with sample length limited only by your hard disk
drive.

 Now the Amiga can take its rightful place in the musician's studio. Kiss it
goodbye, Atari. Your last market niche is gone.

[END OF TEXT]

   Tom

2. Usage screen on startup

3. Hmmm.. The Amiga Blitter vs. PC blitters..

4. Win98+cable?

5. Atari-VS-Amiga In Music

6. A really tough chess programme?

7. Not again ATARI-VS-AMIGA!

8. Not again ATARI-vs-AMIGA

9. Not again ATARI-VS-AMIGA!