Was anyone else disappointed with the A1200?

[sokolovic]

Originally Posted by oscar_ates

I would suggest to read the arstechnica's commodore history series instead of trying to re-write the history. Especially the part 10:

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/...-of-commodore/

"But a little shareware game came out in 1993 that made every single side-scrolling arcade game seem obsolete overnight. It was DOOM, and it used all 256 colors in VGA’s chunky modes (including a new undocumented 320x240x256 mode) to create a simulation of a 3D world. It wasn’t full 3D, of course, but it was a quantum leap for gamers. Games like DOOM used powerful 386 and 486 CPUs to make up for the lack of graphical acceleration"

I fail to see your point here.
What does it have to see with the discussion ? Doom wasn't released officially for the Amiga but we know by now that it wasn't because the machine couldn't handle it (at least Amiga machines at the same price range than december 93 PC able to run Doom), despite John Carmack allegations. It was just a third party choice.

EDIT : this is how Doom is running on a 386DX40 with 8Mb ram.
[ Show youtube player ]

Not astoundingly better than ADoom on a 1200 with 68030/50mhz with some fast ram

[hammer]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

I never saw that deal here, perhaps because most Macs were stupidly expensive

New Zealand is a tiny market.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

and you could only buy them from a small number of authorized resellers (which a friend of mine happened to be). Other factors include that they only ran it for one year, and you had to buy the dedicated (NOT cheap) Mac monitor to use it. Even though the main unit itself was 'cheap' you would be paying through the nose for extra stuff for it, and the Mac wasn't a great platform for gamers or hobbyists.

Apple Mac has a DTP niche which is a larger market compared to Amiga's "big box" only Video Toaster.

Since 1994, PowerMac with PowerPC CPU is competent enough for PC's 3D game ports.

From 1995's Shapeshifter, my A3000 acted like a Macintosh with a 68030/68882 at 25Mhz and I used Microsoft Office for Mac. LOL
This experience has almost led to Apple Mac ownership in 1996.

For my 1996 desktop computer purchase cycle, the breaker is the PC games library being superior over PowerMac.

I have run Shapeshifter on my A1200 with 8 MB Fast RAM for the "What If" situation.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The BBC micro wasn't cheap. The ZX Spectrum was 'cheap' but not that great (except in comparison to the ZX81, which was really bad. I have fond memories of both, but I am also a realist. Compared to the Amiga the ZX Spectrum is a joke).

ZX Spectrum is an early 1980s micro-computer. Jack Tramiel's Commodore was one of the major competitors.

ARM1 was a co-processor for Acorn's BBC Micro in 1985 and ARM2 CPU for Acorn's 1986-era Archimedes family of personal computers. Acorn wasn't satisfied with Jack Tramiel's Commodore 65xx CPU R&D roadmap, hence ARM's existence.

ARM Holdings plc's record speaks for themselves.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Raspberry Pi is from a different era.

Raspberry Pi's initial goals are similar to Acorn's BBC Micro i.e. education-focused low-cost micro-computers partly sponsored by the British government.

With this era, there's no Jack Tramiel and no Commodore.

ARM Holdings plc has a minority stake in Raspberry Pi Ltd.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The broadsom SoC it uses was designed in the US, and the Pi is basically just that chip with a few other components and connectors on a small PCB.

Broadcom SoC has ARM's CPU design IP.

My Raspberry Pi 4B is manufactured by Sony UK TEC. Broadcom's BCM2711 SoC is fabbed by TSMC.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Practically no design effort required, and the OS is just Linux - nothing innovative. The only remarkable thing is how they promised a very low price but were constantly out of stock, then raised the price so it's not such a bargain now.

Supply and demand issue.

Raspberry Pi has about 500,000 units per month production rates. https://au.pcmag.com/processors/9329...cial-customers

Most Raspberry Pi customers are B2B where other businesses are using Pi as part of their end-user solution.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

I love 2.5" hard drives, and hate the much larger, noisier, more power hungry and less reliable 3.5" drives. Capacity never bothered me much. In 1989 I bought a second-hand 20MB MFM drive for my A1000 and it was plenty.

Meaningless for desktops PC majority. Sales records speak for themselves.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The official speed of the ISA bus is 8MHz (6MHz in the original PC-AT). This limits the performance of any plug-in card, and DMA to them or onboard peripherals. This is the PC equivalent of AGA's 7MHz ChipRAM interface.

8.333 Mhz ISA is not an absolute limit for 1990s-era 386DX motherboards.

AGA's Chip RAM from the fast CPU still allows for +50 fps 320x200 256 colors Star Wars Dark Forces e.g. [ Show youtube player ]

AGA has no problems playing full-motion video being procedurally generated by a fast CPU.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Wow, that's amazing!

Now tell us about which 386SX boards supported a 386DX CPU.

That's your manufactured issue.

Like many others, I replaced my 386DX-33-based PC with a Pentium 150-based PC in 1996, which I overclocked to 166 Mhz with a simple 60 Mhz to 66 Mhz FSB jumper.

My Pentium 150/PCPartner MB520N mobo/OEM S3 Trio 64UV+ based PC has superior "bang per buck" when compared to Phase 5's Cyberstorm 060 @ 50Mhz and CyberGraphics 64 (S3 Trio 64U). Games like Quake and Duke-Nukem 3D were the triggers for purchase. Again, software sells the hardware.

I estimated 68060 @ 50Mhz wouldn't be smooth on it. My estimate was correct when Amiga's Quake port was released. I experienced Amiga's Quake with TF1260's 68060 Rev 1 @ 62.5 Mhz overclocked during the COVID-19 lockdown and my estimates are correct.

My TF1260 with A1200 is my "What IF".

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Yeah, there's a margin between how fast the chip can actually go and its rated speed - but how big is it? You don't know. Over temperature and voltage variations it may be nothing, or even worse after the chips age and motherboard caps dry out (a malady that almost all PCs eventually suffer from).

386DX-33 and related motherboards manufactured in the 1990s benefited from 1990-era refinements just as 68060 Rev 6 benefited from its refinement.

68060 Rev 6 is officially rated at 50Mhz and many can reach 75 Mhz to 100 Mhz.

My 68060 Rev 1 is rated at 50 Mhz and it has no problems reaching 62.5 Mhz overclock. 74 Mhz overclock is unstable. My 68LC060 Rev 4 can reach 74 Mhz stable.

My PGA 386DX-33's motherboard supports AMD's PGA 386DX-40.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

And they need to, because modern chips are pushed well beyond their power limit. Without constantly monitoring core temperatures and automatically throttling back they would burn up in seconds, despite having enormous actively cooled heatsinks.

Attach better cooling, a modern CPU will auto-boost to the temperature limit. No manual overclocking is required. This auto boost is less on embedded counterparts.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

I hate it. I hate the enormous power consumption. I hate how my Dell desktop PC sounds like a freight train when the load goes on and it speeds its enormous fan up. I hate how the case vibrates too. I hate the way my Windows 10 laptop pulses the fan in 10 second intervals, and pushes piping hot air out the side. I hate how the fans suck dust into the computer and clog up the floppy drive and heatsink fins (gave up trying to figure out how to dismantle my HP laptop to clean it and oil the fan bearings).

Refer to the 1990s SGI workstation's cooling solutions.

Modern PCs and NVIDIA have replaced SGI's RISC workstations.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

My A1200 is virtually silent and doesn't vibrate or get dirty inside.

Does it run Crysis?
Does it accelerate raytracing?
Does it run Genshin Impact?
Does it have fast 4K AV1 and H.265 NLE capabilities?

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

On the A3000 and A4000. Theoretical speed is much higher, but 12.5 MB/s is fast enough for most things.

Commodore didn't need to. If you wanted AGA you could just buy an A1200, like I did. If you wanted better graphics in your A3000 or A2000 you bought a graphics card, like I did.

1. Note that CGX RTG was released in 1995 which is too late for 1993's Doom, Star Wars X-Wing, IndyCar Racing, Wing Commander 2 and 'etc'.

I was playing Star Wars Dark Forces in 1995.

2. The "bang per buck" factor is important to attract new users i.e. Amiga's original "power without the price" mission.

During 1995, I was saving up for my Pentium 100Mhz+ based gaming PC.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by sokolovic

I fail to see your point here.
What does it have to see with the discussion ? Doom wasn't released officially for the Amiga but we know by now that it wasn't because the machine couldn't handle it (at least Amiga machines at the same price range than december 93 PC able to run Doom), despite John Carmack allegations. It was just a third party choice.

EDIT : this is how Doom is running on a 386DX40 with 8Mb ram.
[ Show youtube player ]

Not astoundingly better than ADoom on a 1200 with 68030/50mhz with some fast ram

The price for 68030 @ 50 Mhz accelerator + A1200 is roughly equivalent to a 486SX-25 or 486SX-33-based PC.


https://archive.org/details/amiga-world?and[]=year%3A%221993%22
Amiga World Magazine (November 1993), page 58 of 100,
A1200 price $379
A3000 5MB, 105HD, price $899
A3000T/030, 5MB, 200MB HDD, price $1199
A3000T/040, 5MB, 200MB HDD, price $1599
Cost for 040 card = $400

The cost estimate for a 68040 card, $1599 - $1199, hence the cost for 040 card is about $400
A3000 had obsolete ECS graphics in 1993.

A1200's $379 + 040 card's $400 = $779. Motorola wasn't the problem.

Commodore could have pre-configured "out-of-the-box" A1200 with 68LC040 at 25Mhz SKU for slightly above $779 (i.e. add 4MB fast ram, HDD) which could compete against $1000 range 486 33Mhz based PC and Apple's Macintosh Quadra 605 (68LC040 @ 25 Mhz)'s $975 USD.


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

https://vintageapple.org/pcworld/pdf..._June_1993.pdf
Gateway Party List, Page 72 of 314

4SX-33 with 486-SX 33Mhz, 4MB RAM, 170 MB HDD, Windows Video accelerator 1MB video DRAM, 14-inch monitor for $1494,

4DX-33 with 486-DX 33Mhz, 8MB RAM, 212 MB HDD, Windows Video accelerator 1MB video DRAM, 14-inch monitor for $1895,

Page 128 of 314
Polywell Poly 486-33V with 486SX-33, 4MB of RAM, SVGA 1MB VL-Bus, price: $1250


https://vintageapple.org/pcworld/pdf...ugust_1993.pdf
Gateway Party List, Page 62 of 324

4SX-33 with 486-SX 33Mhz, 4MB RAM, 212MB HDD, Windows Video accelerator 1MB video DRAM, 14-inch monitor for $1495,

4DX-33 with 486-DX 33Mhz, 8MB RAM, 212 MB HDD, Windows Video accelerator 1MB video DRAM, 14-inch monitor for $1795,

Remember Gateway?

Page 292 of 324
From Comtrade
VESA Local Bus WinMax with 32-Bit VL-Bus Video Accelerator 1MB, 486DX2 66 Mhz, 210 MB HDD, 4MB RAM, Price: $1795



https://vintageapple.org/pcworld/pdf...tober_1993.pdf
October 1993, Page 13 of 354,
ALR Inc, Model 1 has a Pentium 60-based PC for $2495. :-P



https://archive.org/details/amiga-wo...ge/n7/mode/2up
Amigaworld, October 1993, Page 66 of 104
Amiga 4000/040 @ 25Mhz for $2299 (WTF? price close to Pentium PC clone)
Amiga 4000/030 @ 25Mhz for $1599


Page 82 of 104
M1230X's 68030 @ 50Mhz has $349
1942 Monitor has $389
A1200 with 85MB HDD has $624
A1200 with 130MB HDD has $724

724+349 + 389 = $1,462


The Commodore solution is beaten by the Gateway solution.


Target sales period: XMas of 1993 Q4.. 1993 XMas sales period was Commodore's last chance.

[oscar_ates]

Originally Posted by sokolovic

I fail to see your point here.
What does it have to see with the discussion ? Doom wasn't released officially for the Amiga but we know by now that it wasn't because the machine couldn't handle it (at least Amiga machines at the same price range than december 93 PC able to run Doom), despite John Carmack allegations. It was just a third party choice.

EDIT : this is how Doom is running on a 386DX40 with 8Mb ram.
[ Show youtube player ]

Not astoundingly better than ADoom on a 1200 with 68030/50mhz with some fast ram

Missing 68030/50 and fastram were the problems. Base configuration was too weak. Even most users had still A500 in 1994. Mortal Kombat 1/2 games were released for OCS/ECS machines due to the base user numbers without AGA support even. Look at the Gloom on CD32 base machine, you will have glasses if you do not have myopia yet.

[sokolovic]

Originally Posted by oscar_ates

Missing 68030/50 and fastram were the problems. Base configuration was too weak. Even most users had still A500 in 1994. Mortal Kombat 1/2 games were released for OCS/ECS machines due to the base user numbers without AGA support even. Look at the Gloom on CD32 base machine, you will have glasses if you do not have myopia yet.

With 68030/50 and fast ram as a base machine, you would have an even lower user base, but for me it wasn't really a problem because I'm pretty sure that a Doom port released in early 1994 for the Amiga would have been probably the reason for many users to expand their machines.

But the user base wasn't the problem in fact. The Jaguar user base was much inferior to the Amiga AGA one yet it did had an official Doom port made by ID.
The machine wasn't the problem either as we all know that an expanded A1200 could run Doom. And by november 1994, the total number of people with an expanded Amiga was probably larger than Atari Jaguar users.

The only reason left is the developper choice. They just didn't wanted to make an Amiga port of Doom.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by PortuguesePilot

Indeed. And it was quite competitive with the PC all the way through. In the early days (1987 to 1990) the Amiga kicked the nuts of basically EVERY home PC in terms of gaming, even the 100,000€ VGA+386 ones that no-one had (people had IBM 5150 or similar clones.

That's an exaggeration.

Originally Posted by PortuguesePilot

5160 or similar at best). Go and check PC games of that period and specs and see for yourself the difference between the Amiga and the PC in terms of gaming (not only graphics, but also sound and fluidity).

Only after 1993/4 did the PC catch up and eventually surpassed the Amiga in terms of gaming. These are verifiable facts and not mere opinion.

Wrong with your "Only after 1993/4 did the PC catch up" assertion.

https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_h.../n603/mode/2up
PC Mag Aug 1992 , page 604 of 664,
Diamond Speedstar 24 (ET4000AX ISA) has $169 USD.

Commodore released A1200 in October 21, 1992. $599 in the US and 399 UKP in the UK.

https://dosdays.co.uk/topics/Manufac...tseng_labs.php
By 1991, according to IDC, Tseng Labs held a 25% market share in the total VGA market.

Your experience is based on locality.

My country (Australia) is closer to South East Asia and our Aussie currency wasn't as weak as New Zealand's.

There's a reason for the Euro currency.

Originally Posted by PortuguesePilot

But guys like Hammer always existed. They were few in number in 1989 but a lot more numerous by 1994.

Wing Commander's 1990 release was PC VGA's "Defender of the Crown" moment.

By 1991, according to IDC, Tseng Labs held a 25% market share in the total VGA market.

Fact: Commodore's critical 1991 to 1993 year range, the PC market is larger than Commodore's Amiga install base! Commodore didn't survive like niche players like Nintendo or Apple.

AMD's $1.6 billion revenue is larger than Commodore's 1991 peak revenue.
Intel's $5.4 billion revenue is larger than Commodore's 1991 peak revenue.

Unlike Motorola's 68K, Intel's and AMD's X86 CPUs are mostly unified in a common Wintel platform. Intel and AMD are the PC platform holders just as Commodore is the platform holder for the Amiga. Intel and AMD have reference designs for PC clones. PC vendors are the distribution channels for Intel's or AMD's reference PC clone designs.

Originally Posted by PortuguesePilot

They don't behave like us. I think they never had anything else than PCs.

Your head is in the sand. Apple's M series silicon is making inroads. Apple's M3 40-core GpGPU raytracing performance is pretty good i.e. beats every AMD mobile RDNA 3 GPUs including laptop RX 7900M (about RX 7800 XT level).

For discrete GPU-equipped laptops, it's a no-brainer as to why AMD didn't have the year 2024 design win during CES 2024.

Originally Posted by PortuguesePilot

They never had an 8-bit Spectrum or C64, they never had a 16-bit Amiga or ST. They never owned a console... They only ever had PCs. This shaped the way they view computing. For them, the numbers are what matters. It's the ONLY thing that matters. It's ALL that matters. The numbers. Their puny 8088 processors were 16-bit when most computers and consoles of the time were 8-bit. Aha! PCs have 8 more bits than everyone. It doesn't matter that the games suck on it, all that matters is that it has double the bits! The common PC of the time had 640KB of RAM. AHA! Most other computers have 48, 64 or tops 128KB! Let's not even talk about consoles that have 4KB or 8KB at best! The PC got them beat! It has waaaaay more KBs! Waaay more KBs! It doesn't matter that we play Bouncing Babies or Alley Cat, all that matters is that PC is MOAR POWAFUL!

In corporate America, Xenix is the best-selling Unix distribution that overcomes PC's 640K limit.

Xenix uses features in 286 and 386 feature sets. The OS/2's and later Windows NT's purpose was to replace Xenix on the PC.

Every 286 and 386 PC has the potential to run Microsoft/SCO Xenix or IBM OS/2. Microsoft Xenix has memory protection, preemptive multitasking multitasking, multi-user, and network.

MS slowly merges the use case requirements from Xenix with Windows 3.x and that's Windows NT 3.1.

1990s Linux was created on 386 PCs since PMMU's existence is guaranteed on the 386 CPUs.

Originally Posted by PortuguesePilot

Then came 1985/7 and the ST and Amiga joined the party. Suddenly other computers were 16-bit as well. Suddenly they had 256KB and quickly 512KB RAM. Suddenly they had strong, vibrant colours that made CGA and even EGA cower in the corner. Suddenly they produced sounds that weren't just beeps or bops. Oooops! What's this? Couold these computers be BETTER than the all-mighty PC? Clearly they were much better at gaming, especially that Amiga thing with its odious blitter that makes everything seems as fluid as a stream of water, but as we all know games don't count. Lets see what really counts: the NUMBERS!

You haven't quoted any statistical numbers.

There are 18 million install base for NEC's PC-98. IBM PC clone market is larger than NEC's PC-98's 18 million install base.

NEC's PC-98 can solo beat the entire Amiga's 4 to 5 million install base. Again, your experience is based on locality.

As a single country, Japan has a large population and market size when compared to the UK or Germany. During the early 1990s, Germany wasn't fully integrated due to West and East Germany's economic issues.

There are economic reasons for the EU and the Euro currency i.e. it's a numbers game.

I'm game for NUMBERS.

Originally Posted by PortuguesePilot

By 1991 several people already ditched their XT clones and had 386 processors and VGA cards and some times 1MB or even 2MB of RAM so yeah, our processors are 32-bit while you peasantry are still clinging to your 16-bit machines! VGA is capable of 256 colours on-screen while you sorrow-asses are still pulling 32, 64 or 128 at best. AHAH! PC wins again! Look at our RAM numers! Wanna compare? And we have HDDs while you still only use low-density floppies! HAHAHA! What does it matter that our games run slower than a slug or more jittery than a wild cat? Sound? Music? Who the heck needs that? We have double the bits, double the colours and double the RAM. PC rulez!

I'm game for the 386DX and 486 sales debate from 1990 to 1992. You already lost to NEC-98's 18 million numbers.

Originally Posted by PortuguesePilot

You get the picture.

In psychology we informally refer to these individuals as suffering from the "little dick syndrome". They need to overcompensate their perceived flaws with numbers. "Yeah, I have a small dick but I make 7 figures a year." or "yeah, I may be only 1,60m tall but I drive a Porsche 911" kind of guy. The PC übermensch of those days were this sort of guy. I always get reminded of them every time I read Hammer's post. It's kind of amusing, TBH.

You can't handle the truth.

Sales records speak for themselves.

[daxb]

Originally Posted by oscar_ates

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/...-of-commodore/

"But a little shareware game came out in 1993 that made every single side-scrolling arcade game seem obsolete overnight. It was DOOM [...] It wasn’t full 3D, of course, but it was a quantum leap for gamers.

Quantum leap is more or less the smallest status change that can happen. I fear that wasn't meant.

https://www.snexplores.org/article/e...ld-super-small

Still, some people use the word “quantum” to describe something surprisingly big. It’s especially true with the phrases “quantum leap” or “quantum jump.” But quantum doesn’t mean “big.” It’s the exact opposite. So, when something does undergo a quantum jump, its energy changes — but not by much.

[lmimmfn]

Originally Posted by TCD

The magical power of whatifism.

[Thorham]

What is all this about again?

[TCD]

Originally Posted by lmimmfn

Originally Posted by Thorham

What is all this about again?

Pretty much the same as all the other threads that go into 'loop mode'. With pretty much the same arguments from the same people... somebody play the Neverending Story theme song please.

[Gorf]

Originally Posted by lmimmfn

But what if the monster was blue instead?

[modrobert]

Originally Posted by TCD

Pretty much the same as all the other threads that go into 'loop mode'. With pretty much the same arguments from the same people... somebody play the Neverending Story theme song please.

(Limahl classic)

While risking another loop (might have mentioned it before), I think any discussions about pre-internet times by looking at old magazine ads is a bit flawed.

First off every country was a bit like an island back then (isolated), some products were launched at different dates (could differ like two years in extreme cases) in different countries, if launched at all. Second, prices differed a lot as well, which meant some products never gained mainstream popularity because it was sold too expensive in a certain country. For example, PC was a first and foremost a business machine back in the early days of Amiga in Sweden where I grew up, even the IBM clones were mostly sold to companies, it was not until mid 90s the concept of "building your own PC from parts" became popular during the end of 386 and beginning of 486 CPU era, and finally cheap enough for the masses. Third, distribution was flawed at best, bad marketing, and since people in general didn't know much about what was going on in other countries product wise there was no built-up demand before release. Sure, some of us went to international press centers and bought English magazines from abroad, went to computer fairs too see new hardware coming and such, but that was not common.

[TCD]

Originally Posted by modrobert

First off every country was a bit like an island back then, some products were launched at different dates (could differ like two years in extreme cases) in different countries, if launched at all. Second, prices differed a lot as well, which meant some products never gained mainstream popularity because it was sold too expensive in a certain country. For example, PC was a first and foremost a business machine back in the early days of Amiga in Sweden where I grew up, even the IBM clones were mostly sold to companies, it was not until mid 90s the concept of "building your own PC from parts" became popular during the end of 386 and beginning of 486 CPU era, and finally cheap enough for the masses.

Well, here in Germany 'gaming' PCs were a thing in the early 90s (90-92). I had quite a few friends that had their own PCs (not played on daddy's) to mainly play games on when I was still playing on my Amiga. In fact I bought my Amiga from another kid that bought a PC. You are right though that 'build your own PC' wasn't a thing back then, but there were quite a few companies that advertised PCs to private households, not companies.

[modrobert]

Originally Posted by TCD

Well, here in Germany 'gaming' PCs were a thing in the early 90s (90-92). I had quite a few friends that had their own PCs (not played on daddy's) to mainly play games on when I was still playing on my Amiga. In fact I bought my Amiga from another kid that bought a PC. You are right though that 'build your own PC' wasn't a thing back then, but there were quite a few companies that advertised PCs to private households, not companies.

Yes, Germany was definitely ahead of Sweden. A friend bought the first C64 with 1541 drive I saw in Sweden, he got it from Hamburg, long before it was launched locally. You also got ISDN (lucky bastards) way ahead of Sweden where it came years later and offered only to companies at first from the phone company (Televerket, later Telia).

[TCD]

You made a very good point about local perception. In 1993 if people got a PC here it would have been a really beefy 386 or a 486, so games like X-Wing would have a 'wow' factor when it ran on those machines. I get that this wasn't the case in most other countries and that would make a difference how you perceived the time when the A1200 finally was available.

[PortuguesePilot]

Originally Posted by hammer

You can't handle the truth.

You never fail to deliver, baby! Keep on rockin'!

Seriously, I do agree with some of the things you say. I just think you go on a tangent too many times. You frequently mix apples with oranges. We're talking flying ducks you mention fire trucks... Hence why I find you amusing.

Originally Posted by TCD

You made a very good point about local perception. In 1993 if people got a PC here it would have been a really beefy 386 or a 486, so games like X-Wing would have a 'wow' factor when it ran on those machines. I get that this wasn't the case in most other countries and that would make a difference how you perceived the time when the A1200 finally was available.

In Portugal it was, for a generalization (i.e., what MOST people had) about a year later. By mid-1994 almost everyone had SVGA 486DX2 systems, moi included. A year before that (mid-1993) a few people had 386, many had Amiga 500 and a lot more had ZX Spectrums. The home PC market really took flight here from 1994 onwards and the fall of Commodore probably played a role in it. We were nowhere near as rich as Germany back then (still aren't, though the differences have mitigated a lot ever since the Schengen Free Trade laws and the common currency) so an investment on a PC was a lot more onerous than on an Amiga or an ST. Except they died out and people were left with little alternatives but to adopt the expensive (but progressively more affordable) PC line.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by hammer

New Zealand is a tiny market.

I didn't say anything about the NZ market.

From 1995's Shapeshifter, my A3000 acted like a Macintosh with a 68030/68882 at 25Mhz and I used Microsoft Office for Mac. LOL
This experience has almost led to Apple Mac ownership in 1996.

The Amiga has been emulating other systems since day one. This ability was always one of its strengths (I used my A3000 to develop PC programs using PC Task).

8.333 Mhz ISA is not an absolute limit for 1990s-era 386DX motherboards.

It is if you want to ensure that all ISA bus cards work in it.

68060 Rev 6 is officially rated at 50Mhz and many can reach 75 Mhz to 100 Mhz.

The MC68060 was officially rated at 40, 50, and 66MHz on release in 1994. Rev 6 was officially rated at up to 75MHz, but was often clocked at 80MHz and has been overclocked at up to 133MHz. If Motorola wanted to they could have selected the higher speed chips and sold them as 100MHz or 120MHz parts - with a heatsink and fan - like Intel did. But there was little point doing so because there was no pressing demand for faster 68k chips.

My 68060 Rev 1 is rated at 50 Mhz and it has no problems reaching 62.5 Mhz overclock.

I ran my rev 5 68060 at 66MHz and it was stable most of the time after I put a fan on it (not easy in the A3000 due to the floppy drive tray being just above it). Still wasn't fast enough to run Quake well, but I wasn't that keen on 3D shooters anyway.

This has nothing to do with the A1200, except to say that I preferred using the A1200 for games because it was installed in the living room with a big screen TV and powerful stereo system, and it was a lot more compatible with A500 titles (as well as AGA titles of course).

A modern CPU will auto-boost to the temperature limit. No manual overclocking is required. This auto boost is less on embedded counterparts.

Correct. So if your cooling system isn't working at peak efficiency the CPU may slow down dramatically, and with adaptive fan speed control the machine may get a lot louder when it's working hard.

The A3000 had a noisy fan too, which I hated. Steve Jobs also hated noisy fans. That's why the Apple III failed - literally. It would get so hot that chips popped out of their sockets. But I liked how quiet his Mac designs were. It's surprising how much the constant whine of a noisy PC can affect you.

Does it run Crysis?
Does it accelerate raytracing?
Does it run Genshin Impact?
Does it have fast 4K AV1 and H.265 NLE capabilities?

An FPU will accelerate raytracing. Most A1200 RAM boards had one (or a socket for one). As for the rest, why should I care? I don't even know what 'Crysis' and 'Genshin Impact' are.

4K was introduced in 2005 and the H.265 standard in 2013. I think it's a bit much to expect a low-end home computer designed in 1992 to support standards that wouldn't exist until over a decade later and required far more powerful hardware than was available back then.

Note that CGX RTG was released in 1995 which is too late for 1993's Doom, Star Wars X-Wing, IndyCar Racing, Wing Commander 2 and 'etc'.

A good thing IMO. One of the advantages of the Amiga was that it attracted a wide variety of game genres. The obsession with texture-mapped 3D didn't help.

There are tons of great Amiga games that I haven't fully explored because I didn't have the time, and many more that I never even tried. Now that I'm retired I hope to get enough time to appreciate some of them. That won't include Wing Commander because I already watched it on YouTube and wasn't impressed. Same for Star Wars: X-Wing (even less impressed).

I played the wire-frame vector graphics Star Wars game at the arcades a lot, and was very impressed with the Amiga port which came out in 1987. It was about as close to the original arcade version as you could get, apart from not have to feed quarters into the machine to play it! I love how they did the wire-frame graphics - simple but very effective, and easy to control with the mouse. Texture mapped 3D would have spoiled this game.

Yesterday I fired up an old gaming PC that my friend gave me a while back, and tried out the 'Settlers' game he had installed on it. Expecting something like the original Amiga game, imagine my disappointment to find out it was in 3D with a 3rd person perspective. "What the hell, this isn't The Settlers!" I cried, and uninstalled it.

I was playing Star Wars Dark Forces in 1995.

Just another 3D shooter. From what I saw on the YouTube it looks like a cross between Doom and Gloom. Boring!

The "bang per buck" factor is important to attract new users i.e. Amiga's original "power without the price" mission.

Yep, and you can't deny that the A1200 gave a lot more 'bang for the buck' than any PC costing £295.

"Hey, check out my spanking new £295 PC with Pentium 66 CPU. Awesome huh?"

"I only see a CPU, where's the rest of it?"

"Couldn't afford any more than that. Maybe next month I'll have enough to buy a motherboard..."

[hammer]

Originally Posted by PortuguesePilot

You never fail to deliver, baby! Keep on rockin'!

Seriously, I do agree with some of the things you say. I just think you go on a tangent too many times. You frequently mix apples with oranges. We're talking flying ducks you mention fire trucks... Hence why I find you amusing.

[ Show youtube player ]
PC 286 at 16 Mhz with fast VGA that delivered A500-level gaming. Certain VGA games are 256 colors AGA level e.g. Pinball Fantasies AGA.

From 1987 to 1990, the A500 had "power without the price" attraction.

IBM PS/2 Model 55SX (386SX-16 with IBM 16-bit MCA VGA) does not deliver fast VGA performance like my cited Youtube link.

MCA addon cards are generally higher priced compared to PC clone counterparts. IBM PS/1 with ISA slots), PC Series (with PCI/ISA), IBM PS/ValuePoint (with ISA and VLB/PCI slots), and Aptiva product lines are attempts to restore IBM's market share.

IBM's MCA-enabled PS/2 PC line was declining along with the rapidly declining Commodore.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

I didn't say anything about the NZ market.

The Amiga has been emulating other systems since day one. This ability was always one of its strengths (I used my A3000 to develop PC programs using PC Task).

I also have PC Task JIT and it was slowish on A3000's 030 @ 25Mhz.
I also have the Transformer on the A500 before the PC Task.

PC Task's ISA card support requires a Bridgeboard with big box Amigas. This has a similar problem with Commodore's TIGA-based A2410 addon card since they don't advance Amiga's chipset architecture.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

It is if you want to ensure that all ISA bus cards work in it

It depends on the ISA card's manufacturing year since components are shared with higher-clocked MCA, VLB, and PCI add-on cards.

MCA addon cards have 10 Mhz design refinement.

I wouldn't overclock an ISA card before MCA's release.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The MC68060 was officially rated at 40, 50, and 66MHz on release in 1994.

Phase 5's CyberStorm MKI comes with 68040 at 40 Mhz (released in 1994) or 68060 at 50Mhz (released in 1995).

Phase 5's CyberStorm MKII comes with either 68040 at 40 Mhz or 68060 at 50Mhz.

Phase 5's 1260 has 68060 at 50 Mhz was released in 1995.

Apollo 1240 & 1260 (Winner 1240) was released in 1997.

Consider the platform issues for 68060 CPUs.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Rev 6 was officially rated at up to 75MHz, but was often clocked at 80MHz and has been overclocked at up to 133MHz. If Motorola wanted to they could have selected the higher speed chips and sold them as 100MHz or 120MHz parts - with a heatsink and fan - like Intel did. But there was little point doing so because there was no pressing demand for faster 68k chips.

Factor in the timeline and end-user product offerings during 1995 and 1996 intervals.


From 1994 to 1996, the 060 (at 50, 60 & 66 MHz) was produced in 3 versions and manufactured with a 0.60 um process :

- XC68060RCxx that contains a PMMU and a FPU (Floating Point Unit = Coprocessor).

- XC68LC060RCxx that contains a PMMU but NO FPU.

- XC68EC060RCxx that contains NO PMMU and NO FPU.

These first 060 are manufactured with the 1F43G mask (Rev.1) and accept up to 66 MHz (70% of them).

TF1260's software overclock feature didn't exist in 1995 and 1996.

....
In 1999, the XC68060RCxx is qualified and the prefix changes to MC with the new 71E41J mask :

This last mask (Rev.6) is manufactured with 0.32um process and has the particularity to be able to run up to 100 MHz !

From https://exxosforum.co.uk/atari/last/CT60/fake/index.htm

https://techmonitor.ai/technology/mo...0_next_quarter
Date: April 19, 1994.
Motorola Inc yesterday finally launched the long-promised 68060 follow-on to the 68040, claiming that it matches the performance of the Intel Corp Pentium at less than half the price – it costs $263 at 50MHz when you order 10,000 or more and will sample next month

From the A3000T/030 vs A3000T/040 difference, it's $400 for a Commodore A3640 card.

A4000T/060 uses Quikpak's 68060 @ 50Mhz card in 1996.
https://amiga.resource.cx/adcoll/adc...=eagle060&pg=1
The asking price for A4060T is $2699 USD.

https://amiga.resource.cx/adcoll/adc...0&pg=2&lang=en
Quikpak's 68060 @ 50Mhz A4060D offer.


https://amiga.resource.cx/adcoll/adc...0&pg=3&lang=en
For 1997, Quikpak's 68060 @ 50 Mhz accelerator card's asking price $999 USD.

No Amiga "game machine" design was for a dedicated 68060 i.e. Commodore didn't transition the baseline Amiga platform into a 68040 socket infrastructure.

Escom didn't help when in 1996 Amiga Walker remained with the 68030.

Apollo-Core's AC68080-only mindset didn't exist during the 1990s.

There are crazy price markups.

For year 1999, my gaming PC had the infamous Celeron 300A (with 450 MHz overclocked). Celeron 300A "Mendocino" and Pentium II 450 "Deschutes" were released on August 24, 1998, hence there's a high chance for 450 Mhz overclocked for Celeron 300A.

PiStorm is the 68060 crazy price breaker and offers an exit from Motorola/Freescale influence.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

I ran my rev 5 68060 at 66MHz and it was stable most of the time after I put a fan on it (not easy in the A3000 due to the floppy drive tray being just above it). Still wasn't fast enough to run Quake well, but I wasn't that keen on 3D shooters anyway.

Quake is also a 3D engine for other games.

I didn't need a fan for my 68060 rev 1 @ 62.5 Mhz on TF1260. I have installed an additional heatsink on it. I prepared for the heat pipe cooling solution before PiStorm32 e.g. the copper plate and heat pipe are connected to A1200's metal shield.

If I had my A3000, I would use a heat pipe solution to transport heat away from the 68060.

I have experience with modifying PNY GTX 1660 Super's heat pipe/heat sink/fan cooling solution that replaced ASUS's crap Phoenix GTX 1660 Super's cooling solution. GTX 1660 Super has 125 watts consumption. My GTX 1660 Super cards are for office PCs.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Correct. So if your cooling system isn't working at peak efficiency the CPU may slow down dramatically, and with adaptive fan speed control the machine may get a lot louder when it's working hard.

On modern PC, there are negative power curve settings and 65 watts mode.

I use Lian Li O11 Dynamic XL case for Ryzen 9 7950X with 360 mm AIO and RTX 4090 OC. A many fans at lower RPM build.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The A3000 had a noisy fan too, which I hated. Steve Jobs also hated noisy fans. That's why the Apple III failed - literally. It would get so hot that chips popped out of their sockets. But I liked how quiet his Mac designs were. It's surprising how much the constant whine of a noisy PC can affect you.

It depends on the noise pitch.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

An FPU will accelerate raytracing.

It's too slow. RTX's raytracing acceleration is a fixed-function ASIC.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Most A1200 RAM boards had one (or a socket for one). As for the rest, why should I care? I don't even know what 'Crysis' and 'Genshin Impact' are.

You're out of touch. The Genshin Impact test is important in East / South East Asian markets.

Genshin Impact is a multi-billion dollar (USD) franchise from China. The international version comes from Singapore.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

4K was introduced in 2005 and the H.265 standard in 2013. I think it's a bit much to expect a low-end home computer designed in 1992 to support standards that wouldn't exist until over a decade later and required far more powerful hardware than was available back then.

I used MPEG 2/Fire Wire video NLE during the Athlon XP/GeForce 4 Ti during the year 2002.

The Amiga NG and Amithlon are largely MIA (missing in action) with NLE.

Amiga's MPEG2 NLE transition wasn't good for the majority. I'm aware of MacroSystem V-Lab Motion (boat anchor) and DraCo.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

A good thing IMO. One of the advantages of the Amiga was that it attracted a wide variety of game genres. The obsession with texture-mapped 3D didn't help.

It's about delivering a "new 32-bit 2.5D/3D" gaming experience above the late 16-bit SNES's strong 2D gaming experience.

The sales record speaks for itself.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

There are tons of great Amiga games that I haven't fully explored because I didn't have the time, and many more that I never even tried. Now that I'm retired I hope to get enough time to appreciate some of them. That won't include Wing Commander because I already watched it on YouTube and wasn't impressed. Same for Star Wars: X-Wing (even less impressed).

That's very centric of you.

I have Starfield and Elite Dangerous. I played Elite II Frontier.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

I played the wire-frame vector graphics Star Wars game at the arcades a lot, and was very impressed with the Amiga port which came out in 1987. It was about as close to the original arcade version as you could get, apart from not have to feed quarters into the machine to play it! I love how they did the wire-frame graphics - simple but very effective, and easy to control with the mouse. Texture mapped 3D would have spoiled this game.

If the Amiga can run Doom at 386DX-33 /ET4000AX level, it would have run Star Wars X Wing or Wing Commander II or IndyCar Racing.

The problem is the install base.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Yesterday I fired up an old gaming PC that my friend gave me a while back, and tried out the 'Settlers' game he had installed on it. Expecting something like the original Amiga game, imagine my disappointment to find out it was in 3D with a 3rd person perspective. "What the hell, this isn't The Settlers!" I cried, and uninstalled it.

I have Settlers II, III, and The Setters Heritage of Kings - History Edition.

3D with non-first perspective shooter examples

StarCraft 2
Surviving Mars
Total War: Shogun 2
Homeworld / Homeworld Remaster
Roller Coaster Tycoon 3
Cities Skylines
Pillars of Eternity

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Just another 3D shooter. From what I saw on the YouTube it looks like a cross between Doom and Gloom. Boring!

That's very centric of you.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Yep, and you can't deny that the A1200 gave a lot more 'bang for the buck' than any PC costing £295.

[ Show youtube player ]
PC 286 at 16 Mhz with fast VGA that delivered A500-level gaming. Certain VGA games are 256 colors AGA level e.g. Pinball Fantasies AGA.

From 1987 to 1990, the A500 had "power without the price" attraction.

It's about delivering a "new 32-bit 2.5D/3D" gaming experience with "bang for the buck" that is above the late 16-bit SNES's strong 2D gaming experience.

There's very little point in competing against SNES's strong 2D game library. The sales record proves my point.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

"Hey, check out my spanking new £295 PC with Pentium 66 CPU. Awesome huh?"

"I only see a CPU, where's the rest of it?"

"Couldn't afford any more than that. Maybe next month I'll have enough to buy a motherboard..."

Absurd.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by Thorham

What is all this about again?

Was anyone else disappointed with the A1200?