Thread: Amiga Vs ST
View Single Post
Old 29 July 2009, 19:47   #173
Registered User
Goldrunner's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Formby
Posts: 44
Originally Posted by dlfrsilver View Post
I have frontier elite 2 on both amiga and atari STE. Where are the 25% more speed on ST ? Also, if Braben has choosed to make frontier rely only on CPU processor, it's an atari ST
programming port. An amiga coding means using custom chips or else it's crap
Frontier on the Amiga crap, well that is new to me since i played it extensivelly on the Amiga when it came out and it is was far from crap. The Amiga version is not a port from the ST, the Amiga version was developed first and then the ST (please see the scan I posted). Frontier was a pure 3D game meaning maths intensive calculations, so the blitter and copper would not have been used. Seeing as everything was done with the CPU it was bound to be slightly faster on the ST.

If you know a way of using the Amiga's custom chips for Frontier then I suggest you post your ideas here, I'm sure Amiga programmers would be very interested. Even David Braben may learn where he went wrong with his Amiga version.

Originally Posted by dlfrsilver View Post
Everything you do in software eats up your CPU power. That's why there's nothing better in the world than hardwired effects. They eats no cpu power at all. About the 512 colors, i will
only take a known example : Wings of death title screen / thalion. The title screen is a spectrum 512 picture on atari ST. But they made it too on amiga how ? By using the COPPER !!! No need to use ham on amiga to display 512 colors, use the copper instead
I may be wrong but I can't remember any copper paint package on the Amiga so that people didn't have to use HAM. If there is then I salute the Amiga once again for getting around the HAM problem when painting in high colour. Th ST managed a 512 colour at once by switching the palette every cycle, it amazing what you can do with crap hardware isn't it.

Originally Posted by dlfrsilver View Post
While having 4096 colors, the blitter on STE is really weak. In game coding, when the STE was out, some famous Atari ST coders like Paul Cuisset made some tests, and it appears that the A500 blitter is WAY faster and better.
I have seen you state this before on the Atari forums, but when people ask you to justify this claim you don't answer. So I will do the same and ask, please can you give me the technical reasons why the ST's blitter is weak. I can then conform your answer with ST programmers to see if your correct. Also, if Paul Cuisset made some test then please point me in the direction of his findings.

Originally Posted by dlfrsilver View Post
The amiga computer was great ; because it was light years ahead (15-20 years ahead) before everyone. The atari st is only a mediocre hardware that had some good and bad programs running on it. The amiga and neogeo have similar technology (M68000) but have nothing in common.
It's the same between amiga and ST. Sharing the same processor but the difference stops here. To me video games on 16/32 bits like amiga and ST
are seperated in 3 generations ; the 1 st generation where the 16 bits machines had just appeared, and the coders were not handling the computers at their best (8 bits lookish). this was the time where games appeared on atari ST and were converted badly on amiga, as straight port era going from 1985 to 1989. 2nd generation came with Shadow of the beast ; It was the first time the atari ST got deadly stabbed, beast coders made other coders eyes opened, the amiga was indeed more powerful, and consequently to a serious coding, some new possibilities in games arised.
Since the atari ST was the lowest platform, and as such used as the development machine (tools, etc...) ; it was now time to use the amiga as base machine, meaning more powerful tools, instead of ST limited ones in term of colors, etc.... this era was 1989-1991 ; The 3rd generation has seen games hardly or even not possible to convert on atari ST signing its own death on the market : Flashback, Monkey island 2, indy 4, Jim Power (with the results we know), Mr nutz, Lion heart to say the least.
period going from 1992 to the end of amiga life.
Yes the Amiga was and is a brilliant machine but you really should come down to earth with your blinkered view of other machines. For example, you stated the Atari ST was the lowest computer in 1989, erm what about the Spectrum, Amstard CPC, Commodore 64, etc, etc, that where still widely used at this date? The Amiga was 10 to 15 years ahead of everything else, what about the 32-bit Archimedes are you stating that this machine was 15 years behind the Amiga!?!? I won't even mention that by the year 2001 (1986+15 years) every PC and MAC available was more powerful. I wouldn't even say the Amiga was 15 years ahead of the ST, ahead yes, but 15 years is basically absurd.

OK, software support on the ST basically died out by 1993, there where a few releases in 1994 like Frontier, Transartica, the Ishar Trilogy, etc, but by the main most companies had left the ST market by 1993. The Amiga lasted another year before the companies started leaving it. But its decline was a lot slower and commerical products still trickled into the market well after its commercial highs of the early 90's. It really is a testament to its users that the Amiga struggled on against the consoles and PC's.

The Amiga golden age was the earlier 90's while the ST was the the mid to late 80's. You say the Amiga had crap ST ports at that time, maybe you would have preferred no port at all if you dislike the games of this period so much, in fact the Amiga would'nt have got the port at all if the ST wasn't around since the Amiga's market share was to small. This trend obviously reversed in the 90's since the Amiga was the dominant platform.

I really have no problem with the fact that the Amiga was more powerful than the ST, but please don't put it on such a lofty position and say everything else was crap. Everyting machine from the 80's had something to like and the ST is no exception. I am a devoted Amiga user and used the machine extensively is the early 90's, I even designed and developed a couple of commericial titles on the machine. But that doesn't mean I will bash other machines like the ST, in fact we all should embrace that golden age and stop sqabbling like children about our own favourites.

Last edited by Goldrunner; 29 July 2009 at 21:49.
Goldrunner is offline  
Page generated in 0.06102 seconds with 9 queries