Was anyone else disappointed with the A1200?

[hammer]

Originally Posted by pandy71

This topic is about A1200 criticism. Stay on topic.

Wrong, the topic's context is from the 1st post Read https://eab.abime.net/showpost.php?p...24&postcount=1

A1200 criticism vs the world e.g. SNES example.

Selected SNES games used the platform vendor's math co-processor accelerators which is the same argument made by Commodore UK's MD.

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

Gilbert's 1st post:

Was anyone else disappointed with the A1200?

Most Amiga users and magazines seemed to be very happy with the A1200 when it came out. I wasn't at all, and a look at the first games pretty much ended my association with Amiga gaming. I just saw the same games with more colours and a bit smoother. There was no wow factor. After that I stuck with the Amiga 500 (with half meg memory expansion) and my Super Famicom (Jap SNES).

Here's what Commodore got wrong in my opinion

1. Too much focus on creating higher-res screen modes with more colours (and also making the blitter work in these different screen modes) and not enough on enhancing gaming(8 or maybe 16 sprites when the comparitively old Megadrive and SNES could manage 64 and 128 respectively). It's a bit like the original Amiga - yes it can display 4096 colours on screen, but the majority of the games for the system were 16 colours (Albeit some had added some Copper magic) and most didn't even run at 50/60 fps. That was fine back in 1985 but 7 years(!) later you expect a significant upgrade.

2. There was a mild improvement to dual playfield mode. Great!... when the SNES had 5(?) playfields and could scale and rotate whole screens. Commodore seemed to have no sense they were competing here....

2. Sound chip needed 6 channels to get a decent track playing with sound effects. Again SNES and Megadrive have 6 channels each. Using the same sound chip from 1985 was ridiculous!

3. Like the original Amiga, if you wanted to get a good number of objects on screen with a lot of colours and scrolling, you had to spend ages using hardware tricks or specific techniques. Time = money and developers aren't going to want to spend 2 years making an arcade quality game on the A1200 when simpler systems exist....

I do have a CD32 now, but it's not very impressive from a technical point of view, even the mighty Banshee is bettered on both the SNES and Megadrive. The reason I like it is because it offers something a bit different and it's an Amiga It's fairly obvious it had no hope of competing long term. I just find it hard to see what Commodore was thinking with the AGA architecture??

[hammer]

Originally Posted by pandy71

Nope, you simply spreading misinformation:

Nope.
https://www.os2museum.com/wp/the-851...s-accelerator/

" Microsoft and IBM also shipped sample 8514/A drivers in their various DDKs for Windows and OS/2; these were often used as a basis for developing accelerated drivers for other boards."


https://minuszerodegrees.net/video/I...%20187-054.txt
From 1987 (document taken from http://www-01.ibm.com)
IBM offered documented publication for the following items:

1. Display Adapter 8514/A Adapter Interface Application Developer's Tutorial (S68X-2279).

2. IBM Personal System/2 Display Adapter 8514A Technical Reference Manual (S68X-2251).

You simply spreading misinformation!

Originally Posted by pandy71

IBM design was relatively low cost accordingly to IBM prices - also it is relatively cheap from engineering perspective , one ASIC, RAM, ROM, RAMDAC, bit of glue logic - cheaper than CGA or MDA in mass production.

It wasn't low enough.

IBM VGA card
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_...phics_card.jpg

https://www.vgamuseum.info/images/pe..._adapter_f.jpg

https://www.vgamuseum.info/index.php...isplay-adapter
Retail price: $595

vs

https://thandor.net/data/object/529/1258.jpg
ET3000AX 8 bit ISA card.

https://i.ibb.co/gv6gbMv/ET3000-AX-ISA.png
ET3000AX 16 bit ISA card.


IBM was pushed out of the PC market for valid reasons.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by pandy71

No one defend Mehdi Ali but you obviously never worked in large company producing mass selling goods... people trying to cut design by using 3..4 cents cheaper part and you suddenly propose 3$ - in large company those 3$ is multiplied immediately by at least 1 million and convince management to accept 3 million $ loss - good luck with this...

This topic is about A1200 criticism. Stay on topic.

Originally Posted by pandy71

Are you share owner? stock investor with loss on Commodore papers? then sue them...
Most of those you are blaming are probably from very long time decomposed... you could try if you wish to repeat something like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadave...useskin=vector good luck with this...

This topic is about A1200 criticism. Stay on topic.

Originally Posted by pandy71

PCI killed Tseng...

Nope, You simply spreading misinformation!

Originally Posted by pandy71

Once again - big corpo works and thinks differently and for sure they usually don't care about customer needs - this is like Apple - "We know better what do you need and how to make you happy and if you don't agree with this then sod off".

This topic is about A1200 criticism. Stay on topic.

Originally Posted by pandy71

3$ is large difference in mass production when you need to take risk and made pre-orders and this is more than just 3$ as you need to use faster memories or add cache or both... You need to take from pocket some money with risk of no profit... This how life works... In single peaces 3$ are fine, low risk 30..300$ loss well non one like to lose but hey - worst things happen everyday...

This topic is about A1200 criticism. Stay on topic.

Commodore UK's MD argued for an upgraded CD32 with minimal cost increase. UK had the strongest Amiga AGA market with Germany's market coming second.

Originally Posted by pandy71

There is many ways to speedup Agnus/Allice but they need complex design and may ruin legacy compatibility - i can understand lack of will to take risk...

There are management issues.

Originally Posted by pandy71

Ranger was also killed (as Jay leaving CBM said clearly it is READY to be produced) - CBM management was poor - we all share this opinion -

I agree on this point.

Originally Posted by pandy71

but they are DEAD and you can't turn time back.

This topic is about A1200 criticism. Stay on topic.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Dave Haynie was on the engineering team that was developing AGA.

They were working on it at the same time the ECS-based 'A1000Jr' was being developed. So while it may be true that 6 months work was wasted on that machine, it didn't delay the introduction of AGA.

Nope.

From https://www.landley.net/history/mirr...re/haynie.html

1. Dave Haynie:

He and Ali also decided that AA wasn't going to work, so they canceled both AA projects (Amiga 3000+ and Amiga 1000+, either one better for the market than the A4000 was), and put it all on the backburner, intentionally blowing the schedule by six+ months.


------
Where's your counter-evidence to debunk Dave Haynie's "put it all on the back burner, intentionally blowing the schedule by six+ months" claims?


------

2. Dave Haynie:
They canceled the A500, which was the only actively selling product ever canceled in C= history, to my knowledge, and replaced it with the A600. The A600 was originally the A300, George Robbins's idea of a cheaper-than-A500 Amiga; a new line, not a replacement. Sydnes added so much bloat, the A600 was $50 more than the A500, $100 over the goal price.


---
The information from David Pleasance's "Commodore the Inside Story, The Untold Tale of a Computer Giant", Commodore Germany pushed for a hard drive capable A300 model which caused other problems e.g. A600's sales flop and A500's cancellation.

A500's cancellation caused Commodore's 1992 revenue to tank.


3. Dave Haynie:

Now, this is ready to go in April. You have to understand Commodore's working to know what happened here, but basically, C= was run like a cellular company. Each cell did it's thing, and ran fairly independently of the parent (CIL, Commodore International Limited). This is why every company did marketing differently; different independent marketing companies. So now, to get their product, each marketing company places orders, and C= fills them as best as they can. But guess what absolutely no one ordered.

If you said the "A1000jr" (real name as Amiga 2400 or something like that), you win the LBM Effigy, to be burned later. Nope, no one wanted a stripped-down A3000 without AA graphics (or SCSI, or flickerfixer, or Zorro III, etc).

So now Sydnes is in a panic. So he calls on Greg again to start up the next thing, the A4000. Fast. This command came in May, they wanted to ship in September. So Greg takes the A2400 design, drops in the AA stuff from my A3000+ design, gets me in to fix it to run Zorro III, etc. Sydnes mandates IDE (ATA-1, I think is all you get), so that's done, poorly, with a PAL (you couldn't do good ATA in a cheap programmable part back then; you can today), so goodbye SCSI. Anyway, no joy, but there's an A4000.


---------
AGA's introduction was delayed by "more than 6 months".

There was an Amiga chipset R&D disruption after the original Los Gatos Amiga team was dismantled in 1987. The R&D 2 MB Chip RAM ECS capable design occurred before the A500 Rev 6A's 1989 and A3000's 1990 releases. "No new chips" directive was applied for A3000's R&D phase.

Meanwhile, PC VGA cloners started to release their 256 color display capable VGA clones around late 1987 e.g. ET3000.


http://ftp.bambi-amiga.co.uk/amigahi...ggebrecht.html

Question: Tell me about AAA - it's been worked on since 1989?

Lew Eggebrecht: "Yes, we worked on it from an architectural point of view for a long time but it's only been serious for about a year. It was obvious that AAA was not going to meet our cost targets for the mid to low end systems. We wanted to continue that development and we also had to have an enhancement quickly so, AA was the solution to that problem. It would have been nice to have AAA at the same time as AA but we just couldn't get there."

----

1 year of serious AAA R&D wouldn't be enough time. Developing 256 colors display chipset in 1989 was late when competitors like ET4000AX were released in 1989.

Commodore's R&D committed to two 256-color display chipsets i.e. C65 and AGA.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Good policy. Commodore was an early adopter of IDE so they wouldn't have any trouble putting it into new models, despite the IDE standard not arriving until 1993. They way they implemented it in Gayle was so simple that any hobbyist can reproduce it with a few standard logic chips.

FYI, 8-bit XT-IDE is not compatible with 16-bit IDE. Commodore mucked around with released 1988 XT clones like IBM PCJr (XT) while Compaq released the 1986 16-bit IDE.

Commodore PC30-III has a 16-bit AT-IDE interface on the motherboard and it was reviewed by Australia's Your Computer Jan 1990 issue on page 108.

It wasn't a good policy to tank the year 1992 revenue with an A600 sales flop and cancel the best-selling A500.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

They way they implemented it in Gayle was so simple that any hobbyist can reproduce it with a few standard logic chips.

A1200 also needs the Budgie chip which is a cost-reduced Buster and Ramsey 32-bit memory controller for 020/030 CPUs.

AGA + Budgie is required for the A500-type model without Gayle's IDE and PCMCIA. Gayle replaced Gary in the A600 and A1200.

TF1260's fast IDE used an XC95288XL-10TQG144C AMD-Xilinx CPLD chip.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The CDTV's (optional plugin card) SCSI controller is not 'cutdown'.

For CDTV, https://amiga.resource.cx/mod/cdtv.html
The CD-ROM interface is a crippled SCSI-I connector

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Amiga adopted SCSI early on because it was a standard which had a lot of support from the industry, as well as having wider application (IDE only worked with hard drives, and wasn't available until 1987 - by which time SCSI was well established on the Amiga).

https://d1yx3ys82bpsa0.cloudfront.ne...-ata-drive.pdf
The timeline for 16-bit IDE.

Fall 1984 – Bill Frank of WD develops the initial IDE concept and it is shown to IBM, DEC, and Compaq that winter and spring [1]

May 1985 - Compaq Deskpro 286 announced, apparently containing a conventional AT controller and ST506 drive.

July 1985 - WD IDE business plan includes a “40 pin, single cable connection for IBM PC compatible card” and states that WD “is negotiating a custom project with Compaq Computer. The product will be a 20 megabyte Integrated Drive possibly using either a Microscience or a Tandon head/disk
controller.”

February 1986 - Compaq Portable II announced, containing an IDE drive comprising a WD IDE controller mounted on a 3½-inch drive by from MiniScribe

September-October 1986 - Ken Hallam of WD presented a paper on IDE at Buscon East.

Late 1986 - Compaq Deskpro 386 ships, containing an IDE drive comprising a WD controller and a 5¼-inch CDC drive.

February 1987 - Compaq Portable III announced, containing the Conner 40MB 3.5” CP341 IDE drive.

June 1987 - Conner announces the CP342 IDE drive as an OEM product

April 1989 - CAM Committee releases first draft of the ATA and EATA specifications.

Late 1989 – Compaq announces SystemPro PC server, using IDE drives in a RAID configuration.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

However by 1991 IDE was becoming a de-facto standard on PCs due to its lower cost, while SCSI was only being used in servers. Therefore it made sense to put IDE into the Amiga, especially the low-end models.

FYI, Commodore PC30-III has a 16-bit AT-IDE interface on the motherboard and it was reviewed by Australia's Your Computer Jan 1990 issue on page 108. I can provide the scanned PDF.

Commodore PC30-III Select Edition 286 https://ancientelectronics.wordpress...t-edition-286/

Commodore is known to have selected AT-IDE with Jan 1990 PC30-III.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Commodore US engineers preferred SCSI due to its higher performance and because it was an Amiga 'standard'. This is just another illustration of how they were concentrating on the high end rather than than making machines for the market. They designed the stuff they themselves wanted and didn't care how much it cost. This is one reason the A3000+ was cancelled - a good call IMO.

A3000/A3000T and A4000/A4000T SKUs are numbered in a few thousands regardless of hard disk controller type.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

Design of thee A1000+ was assigned to Joe Augenbraun, who developed the A590. He put IDE in the A1000+ because it was cheaper. But the A1000+ wasn't completed because the AA chipset wasn't ready for it.

FYI, A1200's IDE is provided by the Gayle chip. Hard disk capable only Amiga models was demanded by Commodore Germany.

Where's your counter-evidence to debunk Dave Haynie's "put it all on the back burner, intentionally blowing the schedule by six+ months" claims?

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

There was talk of making an A500 with AA too, but they had already begun work on the A500+ with ECS chipset and KS2.0 in July 1990.

"ECS Denise" is a drop-in replacement for OCS Denise. 1989 released A500 Rev 6A already has ECS Agnus.

AA3000+ is missing the Budgie chip for A1200's cost-reduced target. A1000Jr has 68EC020-25 CPU, Super Buster Rev 7, Fat Gary, and Ramsey Rev 7 chips. https://bigbookofamigahardware.com/b...t.aspx?id=2015 A1000Jr project doesn't have the Budgie chip for A1200's cost reduction.

A1000Jr is just a cost-reduced A3000 with Zorro II slots, 68EC020-25 CPU, IDE, and missing Ambre and SCSI controller.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

This was supposed to come out in January 1991, but was delayed by Agnus chip production problems. The PCB design was finalized by April 1991, but the machine wasn't released until 1992. This timeline was typical for Commodore, and custom chip design/production was a constant problem. Even the C64 suffered from it. Though it only took a year to develop, several bugs were still there on launch and it took another year to fix them.

1 MB ECS Agnus A was mass-produced with the 1989 released A500 Rev 6A. There was a hard disk controller directive.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by Dunny

Yeah but as Sokolovic said "Dont over exagerate 1993 players expectations."

I played many many months of Frontier on a stock 1200 and loved every minute. Framerate just wasn't that big of a deal because I'd never seen it running any better than that.

The rest of the world sees it differently.

[Dunny]

Originally Posted by hammer

The rest of the world sees it differently.

The rest of the world doesn't invalidate mine or anyone else's personal experience.

[sandruzzo]

Don't forget that Amiga is an actual Home computer, and not only a game console...

[pandy71]

Originally Posted by hammer

Wrong, the topic's context is from the 1st post Read https://eab.abime.net/showpost.php?p...24&postcount=1

A1200 criticism vs the world e.g. SNES example.

Selected SNES games used the platform vendor's math co-processor accelerators which is the same argument made by Commodore UK's MD.

I don't understand - if this topic is about A1200 vs SNES so why you constantly flooding thread with PC and TSENG - stay on topic, please.

Originally Posted by hammer

Nope.
https://www.os2museum.com/wp/the-851...s-accelerator/

" Microsoft and IBM also shipped sample 8514/A drivers in their various DDKs for Windows and OS/2; these were often used as a basis for developing accelerated drivers for other boards."


https://minuszerodegrees.net/video/I...%20187-054.txt
From 1987 (document taken from http://www-01.ibm.com)
IBM offered documented publication for the following items:

1. Display Adapter 8514/A Adapter Interface Application Developer's Tutorial (S68X-2279).

2. IBM Personal System/2 Display Adapter 8514A Technical Reference Manual (S68X-2251).

You simply spreading misinformation!

[ Show youtube player ]

Unless you provide those documents then i'm right and you are wrong - check what is inside IBM document titled exactly same as yours for 8514 but about XGA:
http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/p...ence_Sep90.pdf

No registers there!

And other document (also seem to be unobtainum) covers AI i.e. software interface but no registers...
So unless you provide IBM document covering internal 8514 registers then you are providing nothing but misinformation - obviously you are not checking sources, instead purely relying on some random information's provided by google... We are aware how to use google...

Originally Posted by hammer

It wasn't low enough.

IBM VGA card
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_...phics_card.jpg

https://www.vgamuseum.info/images/pe..._adapter_f.jpg

https://www.vgamuseum.info/index.php...isplay-adapter
Retail price: $595

vs

https://thandor.net/data/object/529/1258.jpg
ET3000AX 8 bit ISA card.

https://i.ibb.co/gv6gbMv/ET3000-AX-ISA.png
ET3000AX 16 bit ISA card.


IBM was pushed out of the PC market for valid reasons.

It was low enough - if you can afford for PS/2 50 or higher then you can easily buy VGA.

Now technical part to show how you manipulate with data.

IBM card is MCA so automatically market for this product is limited, then it has IBM quality (way superior) vs Asia clones and seem overall design is cleaner and probably faster than ET3000 but anyway this is completely unrelated to main topic so please stop flooding thread with random pieces about PC and TSENG.

Originally Posted by hammer

This topic is about A1200 criticism. Stay on topic.
This topic is about A1200 criticism. Stay on topic.

Agree, let's stay on topic and no more Tseng

Originally Posted by hammer

Nope, You simply spreading misinformation!

Already proved at least two times that you have no clue about yet you claiming things without justification, this was on e of your claims about ET4000 being compatible with 8514 (despite ET4000 having no hardware acceleration, not even hardware cursor) - any SVGA card can be 8514 compliant if you provide 8514AI driver but this not make it 8514 - native implementation of graphic functions will be probably faster than trying to implement 8514AI.

Originally Posted by hammer

This topic is about A1200 criticism. Stay on topic.
This topic is about A1200 criticism. Stay on topic.

Agree, let's stay on topic not on superiority of ET4000 over other VGA/SVGA chips.

Originally Posted by hammer

Commodore UK's MD argued for an upgraded CD32 with minimal cost increase. UK had the strongest Amiga AGA market with Germany's market coming second.
There are management issues.

Count me too, i also argued for better A1200 and CD32.

Originally Posted by hammer

This topic is about A1200 criticism. Stay on topic.

Agree, let's stay on topic and stop talking about VGA card prices.

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by pandy71

I don't understand - if this topic is about A1200 vs SNES so why you constantly flooding thread with PC and TSENG - stay on topic, please

He did not say the topic is about A1200 vs SNES. "Eg" means example given. And since this topic is indeed A1200 vs everything else (at least from nearby time-frame) then all the hardware is fair game. And so is mentioning Mortal Kombat, etc.


I get that this kind of arguing is exhausting, but you signed up for it, so there's no excuse to be disingenious.

[Thorham]

The topic is in the thread title

[pandy71]

Originally Posted by dreadnought

He did not say the topic is about A1200 vs SNES. "Eg" means example given. And since this topic is indeed A1200 vs everything else (at least from nearby time-frame) then all the hardware is fair game. And so is mentioning Mortal Kombat, etc.


I get that this kind of arguing is exhausting, but you signed up for it, so there's no excuse to be disingenious.

Well - he says many things to get exclusive right to flood thread with some unrelated pieces of information and at the same refuse other participant to debunk his arguments claiming that this is totally topic unrelated.
If there is no sane limit then why we not discussing A1200 vs SGI or Cray?
Topic is on people disappointment about A1200 but not about superiority of ET4000W32p over ATI Mach32 or some TIGA boards.
Btw e.g. from my perspective is exampli gratia but it has exactly same meaning example given.

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by pandy71

If there is no sane limit then why we not discussing A1200 vs SGI or Cray?

I think you totally should! This is page 184, so any "sane limit" (if there ever was one) has been exhausted long, long time ago.

[sokolovic]

Originally Posted by dreadnought

And so is mentioning Mortal Kombat, etc.

But Mortal Kombat wasn't even released on the A1200....

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by sokolovic

But Mortal Kombat wasn't even released on the A1200....

Exactly! Isn't that disappointing?

[pandy71]

Originally Posted by sokolovic

But Mortal Kombat wasn't even released on the A1200....

Originally Posted by dreadnought

Exactly! Isn't that disappointing?

Worse - GTA was never released on Amiga! GTA 1 shall be released on Amiga somewhere around 1992! Shame on Mahdi Ali, Irving Gould and DMA design!

[d4rk3lf]

I remember, playing a lot Mortal Kombat 2 on my friends Amiga 500, 1MB
Sure, it was a bit tedious swapping disks, and waiting like 30-40 seconds between rounds (but not as terrible as many claim).
But when the round started, it was a joy.
Very smooth animation, awesome gameplay feel, fantastic sound, all in all AAA title, and AAA conversion.
I had no issues playing on joystick with one button, and could execute very quickly pretty much any move I wanted.

After maybe a year later, I tried it on my other friend 386DX 40Mhz, 4MB Ram (minimum to run), with colored 14'' monitor.
First of all - the huge like house ugly sharp pixels, as opposed to nice CRT TV smooth look.
Second, the frame rate was totally inconsistent. It goes from fast to slow, and opposite. which really affects (in worst way) the gameplay aspect.
Third, you can forget about 2 player mode (unless if you had expensive joysticks for PC's), because if both players are on keyboard, each of them needs to use 9 buttons for the game, and keyboard doesn't accept more then 3 buttons pressed simultaneously.
I can't even remember if my friend had Sound Blaster, or PC speaker.

[oscar_ates]

Amiga mortal kombat was missing background animations only. Rest was spot on. I think they could do arcade perfect on A1200 but then could sell significantly less, due to user base number etc.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by d4rk3lf

I remember, playing a lot Mortal Kombat 2 on my friends Amiga 500, 1MB
Sure, it was a bit tedious swapping disks, and waiting like 30-40 seconds between rounds (but not as terrible as many claim).
But when the round started, it was a joy.
Very smooth animation, awesome gameplay feel, fantastic sound, all in all AAA title, and AAA conversion.
I had no issues playing on joystick with one button, and could execute very quickly pretty much any move I wanted.

After maybe a year later, I tried it on my other friend 386DX 40Mhz, 4MB Ram (minimum to run), with colored 14'' monitor.
First of all - the huge like house ugly sharp pixels, as opposed to nice CRT TV smooth look.

Commodore 1084S's dot pitch is 0.42 mm. Many SVGA monitors are in the 0.28 mm dot pitch.

For DOS gaming, 386DX-33 or 386DX-40 PC needs to be paired with something like fast ET4000AX.

For PC's DOS Mortal Kombat 2's minimum
386DX/40 Mhz
4 megabytes of ram (8MB recommended)
10 megabytes of free space
https://www.neoseeker.com/mortal-kombat-ii/

[hammer]

Originally Posted by oscar_ates

Amiga mortal kombat was missing background animations only. Rest was spot on. I think they could do arcade perfect on A1200 but then could sell significantly less, due to user base number etc.

OCS limits colors on Mortal Kombat 2.

[ Show youtube player ]
Simultaneous Colors of Mortal Kombat (Sega Genesis vs Arcade vs SNES) Color Comparison
Sega Genesis reaches 50 colors. 39 to 50 color gameplay range.
SNES reaches 139 colors. 104 to 139 gameplay range.

Reusing SNES's colors artwork, AGA's 128 colors (7 bitplanes), and ganged 64-bit wide sprites (16 colors) for the background would have done the job. Fast RAM would help. "8 bitplanes" is pushing the limits on the stock A1200, and it's already troublesome for "8 bitplanes" Turrican 2 AGA.

Delivering a Mortal Kombat 2 like the Mega Drive version is not ideal since Mega Drive's "16-bit" experience mocks Commodore's "32-bit" marketing.

Mega Drive has a discrete 16-bit system and 8-bit video (fast VRAM) memory split, unlike Amiga OCS's shared 16-bit Chip RAM (DRAM).

SNES has discrete 8-bit system memory and 8-bit fast VRAM.

Both game consoles targeted fast low resolution with 64 KB of fast VRAM.

For CPU:
A1200/CD32 with Fast RAM and 68EC020 @ 28 Mhz is about 8X compared to the stock A500.
A1200/CD32 with Fast RAM and 68EC020 @ 25 Mhz is about 7.1X compared to the stock A500.
A1200/CD32 with Fast RAM is about 2X compared to the stock A1200.
A1200/CD32 with Fast RAM is about 4X compared to the stock A500.

With Fast RAM, there's a less shared bus issue and it improves AGA.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by Dunny

The rest of the world doesn't invalidate mine or anyone else's personal experience.

Sales numbers matter unless you want Commodore to remain in the bankrupt timeline.