Looking forward to the Vampire 4?

[Gorf]

Originally Posted by coder76

This USB is no ideal thing to have for mouse and keyboard, a USB interface is designed to handle a wide variety of input devices...

For the standalone version this makes perfect sense, since virtually every keyboard or mouse you can find out there is now USB.
What do you want them to do? Manufacture new oldstyle keyboards for 500$ each?

One other thing that bothered me in Vampire is the use of CPU to emulate blitter function, because they haven't implemented a blitter in FPGA. So, no parallell use of CPU and blitter, which would otherwise increase performance.

Where does all this misinformation come from?
That is nonsense.
Of course there is Blitter and Copper and so on implemented in FPGA (core 3.x) and they work in parallel as you would expect.

[NovaCoder]

Originally Posted by Amicol

I initially loved the idea of Vampire 'accelerator' but started to feel it was a 'step too far'. It's replacing the computer rather than enhancing it.

Really wish someone would do a version that is an accelerator/memory and fast SD interface only. The old Motorola chips are getting a bit 'long in the tooth' and a faster replacement would be welcome.

Don't get me wrong Vampire accelerator fans, I used to feel the same as you. But over time I've changed my mind and rather appreciate the original hardware.

However, I may be tempted to buy a 'stand alone' version to compliment my collection. A totally new Amiga rather than a 'Body Snatcher'

Yep these are exactly my thoughts. I'd never want to plug a vampire into a classic Amiga but the standalone V4 is more appealing to me.

[Ledfoot]

Originally Posted by NovaCoder

Yep these are exactly my thoughts. I'd never want to plug a vampire into a classic Amiga but the standalone V4 is more appealing to me.

Why??? With the V2 and the 2.11 core, all it's providing is the CPU and IDE interface (and network if you get that module, which I did)... Any old Amiga software that runs on it's own screen (not Workbench) outputs through the Amiga's display output, and is generated from the Amiga's chipset.



For example, my A500 has only the original OCS Agnus, so I only get 512KB chip ram, and that's still the case even with the V2+ Vampire installed.



Now once they get the Gold 3.x core out, then it'll basically bypass all that and embed the AGA chipset directly in the Vampire FPGA.



So if you want to keep using the old chips, you can...


Yeah, with the V4, that's not the case, it's doing it all - which I think is why they focused on the standalone - no need for any old Amiga hardware to make it work.

[puppypc]

Well, for me it's because I don't need my original-hardware Amiga to have IDE, WiFi, or an accelerator. So, we get to have more than one machine: one that is stock, one that is bitten by the Vampire.

Do you wonder the same thing to people on here that have 5 Amigas of the same model, two stock, one with a '30 accelerator, one with a '60?

[Amicol]

Originally Posted by NovaCoder

Yep these are exactly my thoughts. I'd never want to plug a vampire into a classic Amiga but the standalone V4 is more appealing to me.

Thanks NovaCoder, at least someone understands what I was trying to say

However, my order for a Vampire 500 V2+ (placed years ago) status has changed to Allocated. So I may be getting one for my A500 soon.

No email received from the Apollo team as yet though....

For V4, if I decide to get one, I'll wait for a Stand Alone version. My A1200 stays as it is

[sean_sk]

Quite a few in this thread have raised very valid points about how they would like to use a Vampire.

Some have have suggested they would not like to use it with existing hardware. Others have suggested that they would like to have it in a machine but use the AGA chipset thereby bypassing the machines original chipset. Still others would like a Vampire in an original machines and still be able to use as much of the original chipset as possible, ie still be able to play games via the RGB out into a CRT monitor or TV, along with other reasons.

Well the beauty with the Vampire project is that it is versatile enough that everyone can do what they want with it. I think that when someone expresses a desire to use it in a particular hardware configuration or manner, we should embrace that rather than being puzzled as to why they would want to do things that way.

I think it's an awesome way of propelling the platform moving forward while still allowing some Amiga users to continue to enjoy the legacy aspects of it if they chose to do so. Those that want to move beyond that can do so with the V4 standalone. The Vampire in all it's forms has certainly been partially responsible for my renewed interest in the Amiga.

[Welshieinnz]

Originally Posted by sean_skroht

Quite a few in this thread have raised very valid points about how they would like to use a Vampire.

Some have have suggested they would not like to use it with existing hardware. Others have suggested that they would like to have it in a machine but use the AGA chipset thereby bypassing the machines original chipset. Still others would like a Vampire in an original machines and still be able to use as much of the original chipset as possible, ie still be able to play games via the RGB out into a CRT monitor or TV, along with other reasons.

Well the beauty with the Vampire project is that it is versatile enough that everyone can do what they want with it. I think that when someone expresses a desire to use it in a particular hardware configuration or manner, we should embrace that rather than being puzzled as to why they would want to do things that way.

I think it's an awesome way of propelling the platform moving forward while still allowing some Amiga users to continue to enjoy the legacy aspects of it if they chose to do so. Those that want to move beyond that can do so with the V4 standalone. The Vampire in all it's forms has certainly been partially responsible for my renewed interest in the Amiga.

I think this sums my sentiments completely.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by Amicol

I initially loved the idea of Vampire 'accelerator' but started to feel it was a 'step too far'. It's replacing the computer rather than enhancing it.

This is certainly not true of current Vampires.

Unlike most other 'home' computers, the Amiga has always been associated with accelerators - every model except the CDTV and A600 was designed to take one. Most of my friends had accelerated A2000s or A1200s, and I myself had an A3000 with 50MHz 68060 and RTG card. Nobody thought that what we put in our machines was 'replacing the computer' rather than enhancing it.

I also had an A600 with 3.1 ROM and Viper630, which was the fastest accelerator you could get for it at the time. Around 5 years ago I had a big clean-out and threw away my A600 because the Viper card was too limiting, not fast enough and a bit flaky, and I couldn't imagine that anyone would produce a much better replacement. If only I had known!

The Vampire 600 is a similar-sized card which operates in a similar manner to the Viper630 - just with a much faster CPU, more RAM and RTG graphics if you want it. It has brought my current A600 up to the specs of the A3000 I used to own (with a somewhat faster CPU). All of the original A600 is still there and being used - same ECS graphics, same Paula sound, same Chip RAM, same disk drives and PCMCIA slot etc. For a while I was still booting it from floppy because I hadn't yet set up a CF drive, and I didn't try using RTG for several months. So apart from having a faster CPU and more RAM, it was exactly the same as a stock A600!

One thing I know for sure - if someone had come up with an FPGA design for the Amiga in 1992, most of us would have embraced it. The only reason this technology wasn't used in Amigas back then is that it wasn't available.

[ShK]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

One thing I know for sure - if someone had come up with an FPGA design for the Amiga in 1992, most of us would have embraced it. The only reason this technology wasn't used in Amigas back then is that it wasn't available.

Not a full Amiga design, but late 1995 Walker used 33 MHz Xilinx FPGA (XC4013). It played the role of the DRAM memory system bus management controller, serial port FIFO and other inputs / outputs. The chip's name was TONI.

[ptyerman]

@ Bruce Abbott
FPGA's was available back then but was far too expensive!
The first commercially available FPGA was the Xilinx XC2064 which hit the market in 1985.
Before that there was PROM and PLD devices which led to FPGA's.
Altera was founded in 1983 and delivered the industry's first reprogrammable logic device in 1984, the EP300. (Info taken from Wikipedia).

[swinkamor12]

Some vampire propaganda crap should be corrected.
68k in vampire was made from scratch and is not extension or "reimplementation" of original 68k by Motorola (later Freescale) chips.
AGA in vampire was also made from scratch and is not extension or "reimplementation" of original Amiga chips.
WinUAE is hundred times faster than vampire and has AGA implementation more compatibile.

[Megol]

Originally Posted by swinkamor12

Some vampire propaganda crap should be corrected.
68k in vampire was made from scratch and is not extension or "reimplementation" of original 68k by Motorola (later Freescale) chips.
AGA in vampire was also made from scratch and is not extension or "reimplementation" of original Amiga chips.

Their design implements the 68k and the AGA interfaces but do that with a new design - a perfect match for the definition of "reimplementation".

WinUAE is hundred times faster than vampire and has AGA implementation more compatibile.

Of course it's faster and probably more compatible, but hundreds times faster?

[Welshieinnz]

Originally Posted by swinkamor12

Some vampire propaganda crap should be corrected.
68k in vampire was made from scratch and is not extension or "reimplementation" of original 68k by Motorola (later Freescale) chips.
AGA in vampire was also made from scratch and is not extension or "reimplementation" of original Amiga chips.
WinUAE is hundred times faster than vampire and has AGA implementation more compatibile.

Have you seen the videos of A600’s with vampire installed? The performance is incredible.

I have a high end PC but never had that performance with WinUAE.

[AMIGASYSTEM]

Originally Posted by Welshieinnz

Have you seen the videos of A600’s with vampire installed? The performance is incredible.

I have a high end PC but never had that performance with WinUAE.

You probably do not know well the great potential of WinUAE, try to do this on a Vampire (same quality and fast):

WinuUAE AfA-OS [ Show youtube player ] (See Video MP4, MUI5, Icon Dual-PNG, RTG 32Bit, Play Video Youtube)

WinuUAE Quake3: [ Show youtube player ] (experimental test)

WinuUAE Quake2: [ Show youtube player ] (Resolution 1204x768)

WinUAE Player more mp3 contemporaneously: [ Show youtube player ]

There are so many Demo AGA that are not fun for the Vampire, on games RTG in many almost does not work audio, others do not work in window (test comparative)

[Welshieinnz]

Originally Posted by AMIGASYSTEM

You probably do not know well the great potential of WinUAE, try to do this on a Vampire (same quality and fast):

WinuUAE AfA-OS [ Show youtube player ] (See Video MP4, MUI5, Icon Dual-PNG, RTG 32Bit, Play Video Youtube)

WinuUAE Quake3: [ Show youtube player ] (experimental test)

WinuUAE Quake2: [ Show youtube player ] (Resolution 1204x768)

WinUAE Player more mp3 contemporaneously: [ Show youtube player ]

There are so many Demo AGA that are not fun for the Vampire, on games RTG in many almost does not work audio, others do not work in window (test comparative)

But the performance on those videos is terrible! It’s barely reaching 8 FPS.

Here’s Dan reviewing the Vampire 2:

[ Show youtube player ]

[AMIGASYSTEM]

Originally Posted by Welshieinnz

But the performance on those videos is terrible! It’s barely reaching 8 FPS.

8 FPS where did you read it? i used an old dual-core PC, the PC recording program that slows down the flow.
You have to see the speed opening programs, the speed play mp3 constant even if you open other players, all this is not on the vampire, watch the videos well

[Welshieinnz]

Originally Posted by AMIGASYSTEM

8 FPS where did you read it? i used an old dual-core PC, the PC recording program that slows down the flow.
You have to see the speed opening programs, the speed play mp3 constant even if you open other players, all this is not on the vampire, watch the videos well

I was pulling a number out of thin air. But the quake performance was awful, you have to admit

I have a high end PC I’ll try later and check it out. I did try doom the other day and it was really bad.

[AMIGASYSTEM]

Originally Posted by Welshieinnz

. I did try doom the other day and it was really bad.

Look at these mine DOOM on WinUAE: [ Show youtube player ]

[Welshieinnz]

Originally Posted by AMIGASYSTEM

Look at these mine DOOM on WinUAE: [ Show youtube player ]

It’s good, but not great!

This is an A600, with vampire, running Doom at 35fps

[ Show youtube player ]

[AMIGASYSTEM]

Originally Posted by Welshieinnz

It’s good, but not great!

This is an A600, with vampire, running Doom at 35fps

On WinUAE you can also overcome even higher resolution, see video

http://eab.abime.net/zone/Test-Doom.avi