SNES Doom Amiga Back-up Disks

[Retro1234]

It might use a custom format but I'd be very surprised if they weren't converted from WADs in the first place.

I.e I'd be very surprised if they took the time to redraw every single level from scratch.

[Karlos]

Originally Posted by trixster

Nope, far from it.

I have a 25mhz 040 nextcube and doom runs about as fast on that as the 50mhz 030 video shown in post #91

This should come as a surprise to noone, really. It was developed on the machine along with lots of the other tooling. The initial x86 port doubtless ran like turd too, but once all the algorithm improvements had been made in C, the slow bits were reimplemented in assembler for the PC version.

[Karlos]

Ironically, the reverse is happening in TKG. We have started with hand written, mostly completely undocumented ASM code and rewritten various bits of it in C, which eventually will make it easier to make algorithmic improvements that can be more impactful. It also allows easier implementation of new things.

[sokolovic]

Originally Posted by x-vision

Is it Doom a better game than Dread? Yes. Because of many reasons I won't go into right now. But even if it wasn't, this is not "There can be only one", diversity is good

How can you be so sure that Doom is better than an unreleased and still in development game ?

Originally Posted by x-vision

Can we actually play Doom on OCS/ECS machines?

The answer is NO*
(*except with a Pistorm or Vampire)

Of course you can play Doom on OCS/ECS. You just need enough processing power for that, like in every supports it was ported for.

But you do not necessarily need a PiStorm or Vampire.

Cf here with a 68040
[ Show youtube player ]

Or here with a 68030
[ Show youtube player ]

[Retro1234]

Another thing I remember hearing about Doom SNES is a number of calculations were pre calculated and stored in a table.

Seems maybe hard considering the free roaming style of the game but would of taken pressure off the CPU.

[Thorham]

Originally Posted by sokolovic

How can you be so sure that Doom is better than an unreleased and still in development game ?

They can't, it's just speculation.

Originally Posted by sokolovic

Cf here with a 68040Or here with a 68030

That would be much more playable in low detail mode.

[trixster]

Originally Posted by Karlos

This should come as a surprise to noone, really. It was developed on the machine along with lots of the other tooling. The initial x86 port doubtless ran like turd too, but once all the algorithm improvements had been made in C, the slow bits were reimplemented in assembler for the PC version.

Yup, and the nextcube also has pretty slow ram access, so it’s not entirely dissimilar to running doom on an A3640 and wondering why its crawling compared to a similarly clocked WarpEngine.

[x-vision]

Originally Posted by sokolovic

How can you be so sure that Doom is better than an unreleased and still in development game ?

[ Show youtube player ]

Cause we've seen it? specs won't change, and even it's amazing and probably the best engine to use for a (low specced) Doom port, there are many areas in which it can't stand comparison.

Originally Posted by sokolovic

Of course you can play Doom on OCS/ECS. You just need enough processing power for that, like in every supports it was ported for.

But you do not necessarily need a PiStorm or Vampire.

Cf here with a 68040
[ Show youtube player ]

Or here with a 68030
[ Show youtube player ]

OMG

Yeah, and also with a 68020

[ Show youtube player ]

It seems I forgot to mention "with a playable framerate".

[trixster]

One of the reasons I shoved a 66mhz blizzard 1260 on my ACA500plus was because I wanted to run Adoom on my old A500 it plays beautifully

[d4rk3lf]

@x-vision

So what is the point you're try to make?

Don't you think that it's quite impressive that Amiga is capable of running Doom on very nice speed on higher 68k processors, and considering that Amiga hardware is totally not suitable for these type of games.
Especially now with Dread running on lowest specs Amigas (find me an equivalent game for 286).

I mean, expecting Amiga to run Doom, is like expecting car to drive like boat on water. It's not built for it... but still.. it runs! It runs great on many Amigas.
It runs million times better then some 2D scrolling game would run of average 286/386.

Do you expect that Amiga 500 with 7Mhz and 1MB Ram should run Doom in 30fps?

What is, that you expecting from Amiga?

[abu_the_monkey]

I do believe this thread started as a 'look at this piece of neat Amiga history' which I liked.

the rest of it. Yawn

[utri007]

Originally Posted by x-vision

Yeah, and also with a 68020

[ Show youtube player ]

It seems I forgot to mention "with a playable framerate".

That gotta be something like TF520 which didn't have a fast ram. Here is my version of Doom with 68020 accelerator. Doom wad used is remake of Atari Jaguar's Doom wad. It plays much faster than PC version's wad, with ADoom from Aminet. [ Show youtube player ]

[utri007]

Originally Posted by abu_the_monkey

I do believe this thread started as a 'look at this piece of neat Amiga history' which I liked.

the rest of it. Yawn

There are many people for whom it is important that other people are wrong.

[hammer]

Originally Posted by d4rk3lf

@x-vision

So what is the point you're try to make?

Don't you think that it's quite impressive that Amiga is capable of running Doom on very nice speed on higher 68k processors, and considering that Amiga hardware is totally not suitable for these type of games.
Especially now with Dread running on lowest specs Amigas (find me an equivalent game for 286).

I mean, expecting Amiga to run Doom, is like expecting car to drive like boat on water. It's not built for it... but still.. it runs! It runs great on many Amigas.
It runs million times better then some 2D scrolling game would run of average 286/386.

Do you expect that Amiga 500 with 7Mhz and 1MB Ram should run Doom in 30fps?

What is, that you expecting from Amiga?

Your "average" argument is flawed when annual PC sales beat Amiga's entire install base.

According to Dataquest November 1989, VGA crossed more than 50 percent market share in 1989 i.e. 56%.
http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/c...lysis_1989.pdf

Low-End PC Graphics Market Share by Standard Type
Estimated Worldwide History and Forecast

Total low-end PC graphic chipset shipment history and forecast

1987 = 9.2. million, VGA 16.4% market share i.e. 1.5088 million VGA.

1988 = 11.1 million, VGA 34.2% i.e. 1.51 million VGA.

1989 = 13.7 million, VGA 54.6% i.e. 3.80 million VGA.

1990 = 14.3 million, VGA 66.4% i.e. 9.50 million VGA. Dual Windows 3.0 and Wing Commander release.

1991 = 15.8 million, VGA 76.6% i.e. 12.10 million VGA.

1992 = 16.4 million, VGA 84.2% i.e. 13.81 million VGA.

1993 = 18.3 million, VGA 92.4% i.e. 16.9 million VGA.

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

From https://www.intel.fr/content/dam/doc...ual-report.pdf
Intel reported the following
1. In 1994's fourth quarter, Pentium unit sales accounted for 23 percent of Intel's desktop processor volume.
2. Millions of Pentiums were shipped.
3. During Q4 1993 and 1994, a typical PC purchase was a computer featuring the Intel 486 chip.
4. Net 1994 revenue reached $11.5 billion.
5. Net 1993 revenue reached $8.7 billion.
6. Growing demand and production for Intel 486 resulted in a sharp decline in sales for Intel 386 from 1992 to 1993.
7. Sales of the Intel 486 family comprised the majority of Intel's revenue during 1992, 1993, and 1994.
8. Intel reached its 6 to 7 million Pentiums shipped goal during 1994. This is only 23 percent unit volume.
9. Intel's primary home market is the USA.

By the end of 1994, Intel's Pentium PC install base crushed the entire Amiga install base of 4 to 5 million units!

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



https://archive.computerhistory.org/...-05-01-acc.pdf
Page 119 of 981

For 1992
68000-12 = $5.5
68EC020-16 PQFP = $16.06, it's $15 in 1993 Q1.
68EC020-25 PQFP = $19.99, it's $18 in 1993 Q1.

68EC030-25 PQFP = $35.94,
68030-25 CQFP = $108.75, Uncompetitive pricing against AMD's 386-40 with MMU!

68040-25 = $418.52, Uncompetitive pricing against 486DX-33.
68EC040-25 = $112.50, Not functional for DMA'ed equipped desktop 68K computers and not competitive against Intel's 486SX-20 with MMU! For desktop computers, Intel's 486SX-20 is functional with DMA'ed devices.
---
Competition

AM386-40 = $102.50
386DX-25 PQFP = $103.00

486SX-20 PQFP = $157.75
486DX-33 = $376.75
486DX2-50 = $502.75

X86 world's mass MMU deployment allowed memory-protected OS to be mass deployed on the PC platform. Motorola's policy of putting a price premium on MMU has bitten them in the ass in the handheld market e.g. ARM9T (e.g. ARM925T with MMU displaced 68000 based Dragon Ball VZ).

BOM cost for 68040-25 and 68EC040-25 is the same since they use the same chips, hence the problem is Motorola's pricing policy. Note why many Unix vendors have exited Motorola 68K!

[ Show youtube player ]
When there's sufficient math power, Amiga 500's HAM6 mode is fast enough to display Quake.

Despite Amiga's full motion video framebuffer capability, the Motorola factor remains a problem for CPU-accelerated Amigas.

[Cobe]

Hmmm... If you cant yell than copy paste absurd amount of data to make opponent deorientated..

[TCD]

Originally Posted by Cobe

Hmmm... If you cant yell than copy paste absurd amount of data to make opponent deorientated..

I knew one day it would spill over from that one thread, but did they listen?

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by TCD

I knew one day it would spill over from that one thread, but did they listen?

I'm usually against draconian moderating rules, but if there was a proposal to contain hammer just to that one silly thread I feel I'd maybe vote "yes"

[NovaCoder]

Originally Posted by Calabazam

It is all related to that childhood trauma :
John Carmack : "the Amiga is not powerful enough to run DOOM."

So we never get enough of Doom. Now i would like to run multiple Dooms at once on my Amiga to show to that guy.

If you want to run multiple Dooms at once, I can recommend Chocolate Doom for the job


[ Show youtube player ]

[Karlos]

Originally Posted by utri007

There are many people for whom it is important that other people are wrong.

[Cris1997XX]

Well...I guess when the mods are away, the hammer will play