English Amiga Board


Go Back   English Amiga Board > Coders > Coders. General

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 15 July 2017, 21:35   #1
sandruzzo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Italy/Rome
Posts: 1,105
Blitter vs Cpu on Aga

I know that Aga Blitter is the same as ECS, but due to more memory bandwidth
Blitter can go full speed.

What CPU is Blitter worth? 020, 030?
sandruzzo is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
Old 16 July 2017, 02:29   #2
Samurai_Crow
Total Chaos forever!

Samurai_Crow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ft. Collins, CO USA
Age: 43
Posts: 904
Send a message via Yahoo to Samurai_Crow
According to the GameSmith documentation, for making bobs it is equivalent to an 040.
Samurai_Crow is offline  
Old 16 July 2017, 02:45   #3
Galahad/FLT
Going nowhere

Galahad/FLT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 44
Posts: 6,578
030 will be faster than blitter in most things, especially if real fast memory is available as well.
Galahad/FLT is offline  
Old 16 July 2017, 10:08   #4
sandruzzo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Italy/Rome
Posts: 1,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galahad/FLT View Post
030 will be faster than blitter in most things, especially if real fast memory is available as well.
030 50mhz or even 28 mhz?
sandruzzo is offline  
Old 17 July 2017, 01:17   #5
ReadOnlyCat
Code Kitten

 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Montreal/Canadia
Age: 46
Posts: 1,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandruzzo View Post
030 50mhz or even 28 mhz?
Assuming the 030 accesses RAM using the same number of clock cycles as the 68k (which is false, it uses less), at 28MHz it will have a RAM bandwidth around four times higher than the 68k (28 = 7 * 4, 7mHz = original clock frequency).

If you run a mem copy in a tight loop which fits into the cache, this means that it is not slowed down too much by instruction fetches and will almost have this full bandwidth available for data reads and writes. This is grossly the same speed as the blitter with its four (3 read, 1 write) channels.
(If you write to chip RAM you would have to take into account that that its bandwidth is limited in addition to being used by the chips as the Galahad kitten hinted.)

Sure, this is just a back of the envelope approximation but this gives a reasonable idea of what to expect.

Hope this helps.
ReadOnlyCat is offline  
Old 17 July 2017, 09:29   #6
sandruzzo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Italy/Rome
Posts: 1,105
@ReadOnlyCat

I'm not talking about Memory acces only, but real operation like direct copy D = A, and cookie cut blit operation, Assuming that blitter and cpu can run at full memory speed
sandruzzo is offline  
Old 17 July 2017, 11:17   #7
Samurai_Crow
Total Chaos forever!

Samurai_Crow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ft. Collins, CO USA
Age: 43
Posts: 904
Send a message via Yahoo to Samurai_Crow
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandruzzo View Post
@ReadOnlyCat

I'm not talking about Memory acces only, but real operation like direct copy D = A, and cookie cut blit operation, Assuming that blitter and cpu can run at full memory speed
In a direct copy the 020 is the same speed if Fast RAM is available. Cookie cutting is more like an 040 unless you can avoid shifting bits.
Samurai_Crow is offline  
Old 17 July 2017, 11:18   #8
zero
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandruzzo View Post
I'm not talking about Memory acces only, but real operation like direct copy D = A, and cookie cut blit operation, Assuming that blitter and cpu can run at full memory speed
Depends on the operation... The blitter can shift bits left/right faster than an 030 I think.

However, if you are reading graphic data from fast memory and only writing to chip, the 030 can be faster because fast RAM has more bandwidth than chip.

The ideal scenario would be to use both the blitter and CPU, with the CPU reading from fast memory and only doing the final write into chip.
zero is offline  
Old 31 July 2017, 17:14   #9
Photon
Moderator
Photon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hult / Sweden
Posts: 4,451
"Normal" code: (max-optimized general-purpose function) Linedraw and cookie-cut should still beat the 020/030. All other operations, or small blits, say 32 words or less, use the CPU.

In special cases there will always be some tricks to pull to at least give the visual impression that the CPU has beaten the Blitter.

In all cases it will be up to screen size+depth and intelligent fighting with the DMA for the coveted slow chip RAM.
Photon is offline  
Old 31 July 2017, 20:44   #10
sandruzzo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Italy/Rome
Posts: 1,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Photon View Post
"Normal" code: (max-optimized general-purpose function) Linedraw and cookie-cut should still beat the 020/030. All other operations, or small blits, say 32 words or less, use the CPU.

In special cases there will always be some tricks to pull to at least give the visual impression that the CPU has beaten the Blitter.

In all cases it will be up to screen size+depth and intelligent fighting with the DMA for the coveted slow chip RAM.
So blitter wasn't so bad. If we had 32bit 14mhz on aga....
sandruzzo is offline  
Old 31 July 2017, 22:11   #11
TEG
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: France
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandruzzo View Post
So blitter wasn't so bad. If we had 32bit 14mhz on aga....
TEG is offline  
Old 06 August 2017, 21:47   #12
Samurai_Crow
Total Chaos forever!

Samurai_Crow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ft. Collins, CO USA
Age: 43
Posts: 904
Send a message via Yahoo to Samurai_Crow
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandruzzo View Post
So blitter wasn't so bad. If we had 32bit 14mhz on aga....
Actually, 16 bits at 14 MHz would saturate the fast page access if buffered properly. Some parts of the AGA Alice were clocked at 28 MHz so the blitter could have been miniaturized to 8 bits for a smaller die and a single chip solution at that clock speed.
Samurai_Crow is offline  
Old 07 August 2017, 10:18   #13
sandruzzo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Italy/Rome
Posts: 1,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samurai_Crow View Post
Actually, 16 bits at 14 MHz would saturate the fast page access if buffered properly. Some parts of the AGA Alice were clocked at 28 MHz so the blitter could have been miniaturized to 8 bits for a smaller die and a single chip solution at that clock speed.
Yes mate! Blitter with few changes would had ben so powerfull!
sandruzzo is offline  
Old 26 September 2017, 08:00   #14
ReadOnlyCat
Code Kitten

 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Montreal/Canadia
Age: 46
Posts: 1,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandruzzo View Post
Yes mate! Blitter with few changes would had ben so powerfull!
It needed more than a few changes. As has been hinted, the bus bandwidth is not that great and even a slightly faster blitter would have been hampered by that. The system needed a whole redesign rather than an evolution here or there.
ReadOnlyCat is offline  
Old 26 September 2017, 14:08   #15
sandruzzo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Italy/Rome
Posts: 1,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReadOnlyCat View Post
It needed more than a few changes. As has been hinted, the bus bandwidth is not that great and even a slightly faster blitter would have been hampered by that. The system needed a whole redesign rather than an evolution here or there.
Of course. The problem is the bus bandwidth. It should be doubled on Aga machine. At least have 2 bus: one for bitplanes and another for the other chip
sandruzzo is offline  
Old 26 September 2017, 20:35   #16
AnimaInCorpore
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Willich/Germany
Posts: 149
The Amiga Blitter haven't been improved for the Amiga 1200 for only very reason to keep up the compatibility to the Amiga 500.

However, the time since 1990 was an era for a paradigm shift. The advent of new and more powerful CPU generations wasn't a matter of decades anymore but more like years and months; so it was the "system upgrade" time. In fact, supporting obsolete custom hardware, just to justify the compatibility to older software, was simply too expensive.

The CPU was the new "replacement" for proprietary graphics devices and so the MS-DOS system had a clear advantage, especially due to the cheap hardware components and the fact that the 3D games were on the rise.

Also, in respect of this matter, having a clear but simple graphics interface was economically better than relying on old and too complicated devices only for compatibility reasons.

So in conclusion there was no reason to improve the Amiga Blitter, except to provoke problems for later generations.
AnimaInCorpore is offline  
Old 19 November 2017, 14:59   #17
Miggy4eva
Amiga warrior

Miggy4eva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 57
Aga blitter should be faster than '040
Miggy4eva is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CPU Filling vs. Blitter Filling Routine victim Coders. General 18 26 January 2014 03:15
Linedraw blitter vs. CPU on 68000 pmc Coders. Asm / Hardware 17 29 February 2012 16:02
Blitter fighting the CPU h0ffman Coders. General 5 05 April 2011 14:18
A500: max blitter+cpu throughput zaz Coders. General 2 30 March 2010 19:52

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 20:40.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Page generated in 0.22322 seconds with 12 queries