Quote:
Originally Posted by pandy71
Obviously you are playing fool using this argument as i explicitly told you earlier that i'm not put equation mark between Amiga HW graphic acceleration and IBM 8514 - they are designed with completely different target - Amiga was STANDARD and as such software commonly USE HW acceleration (except poorly done software ports) - 8514 was not standard but per se begin standardization process (this process took in PC almost 10 years). 8514 is important on PC as foundation of some process - process started by 8514 never created standard HW acceleration on PC but created different, software centric approach where standard software API allow to use different HW.
|
[ Show youtube player ]
Hardware smooth scrolling on an 8086 with a VGA upgrade with Double Dragon 3. VGA has a page flip function and four ALUs (Arithmetic Logic Units) to assist the CPU during display memory writes.
VGA clones can improve these hardware functions further than IBM VGA.
PC would need CPU power for the Blit function. 3.5 Mhz Blitter is not a hard target to hit.
With MIPS like a coprocessor, Rendition Verite v1000 emulates VGA and it's not performance-competitive with other SVGA cloners with 3D acceleration.
VGA is more than Atari ST's graphics capabilities.
For these kinds of 2D game experiences, the Amiga 500 has the "power without the price" entry point. Amiga 1200 extends these kinds of 2D experiences beyond 32 colors without tricks, but it doesn't have a large install base e.g. Lion King AGA sales are limited by A1200's install base and attachment rates.
While the port is good, Lion King AGA wasn't a PC VGA /SNES version.
[ Show youtube player ]
For 256-color artwork from PC VGA, Turrcian 2 AGA needs Fast RAM.
[ Show youtube player ]
Final Fight AGA Alpha v1.5 from EAB ABIME from Leathered. Final Fight AGA Alpha v1.5 needs Fast RAM.
https://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=81505
Leathered has passed away.
A1200/CD32 with Fast RAM has the foundation for a strong 2D gaming experience, but the under 1 million install base is a major problem and Commodore doesn't have 1st party game developers to solve the chicken vs egg problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pandy71
|
DavidP executes his role is good for Commodore UK and it's Amiga's strongest Commodore division.
Escom and Amiga Technologies GmBH stacked ex-Commodore Germany personnel didn't advance the Amiga when the Amiga custom chipset's technical effort was from the USA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pandy71
Perhaps - but real life is sometimes nasty "beach".
|
Escom's Amiga Technologies GmBH was in partnership with Phase 5's PowerPC direction. Phase 5 is not proven for low-cost mass production and it shows.
Raspberry Pi Foundation has shown its competency in mass production with a good business plan.
Competency is a major factor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pandy71
https://www.reddit.com/r/GraphicsPro...han/?rdt=53051
HW acceleration using same technology as CPU will be always faster than CPU. Your observation can be true only in case where HW acceleration (and overall system architecture) is severely delayed technologically when compared to CPU.
Today we observe that GPU's are more powerful than CPU's (simple transistor count, silicone area etc shows this).
So yeas we all know that Amiga HW severely lagged behind overall technological progress.
|
It depends on the use case and market segment e.g. gaming GPUs are less suitable for FP64.
RTX 4090's FP64 has 1409 GFLOPS from ADIA 64's benchmark. It doesn't have performance/watt and performance/dollar for such a use case when compared to the Ryzen 9 7950X's AVX-512's 1375 GFLOPS.
AIDA64 benchmark
Double Precision FLOPS
RTX 4090 = 1400 GFLOPS
Ryzen 9 7950X = 1357 GFLOPS
AES-256
RTX 4090 = 154,603 MB/s
Ryzen 9 7950X = 379,724 MB/s
Double Precision Mandel
RTX 4090 = 341.9 FPS
Ryzen 9 7950X = 635.1 FPS
GpGPU runs on OpenCL. X86-64 version runs on native.
For FP64 acceleration, there's NVIDIA's costly H100/H200/B100.