C128 better than Atari 520 ST?

[Flash951]

Originally Posted by amilo3438

You know what usually happens if you like to appeal everyone? (No one will take it seriously.)

Gaming and serious business obviously do not go together.

EDIT:
Can you imagine the productivity in the office where they were installed c128?

Of course I can imagine, many offices before had CP/M computers and systems with Z80 or Intel 8088. C128 has CB/M and can use all the CP/M business software.

Elite 128 is actually running in C64 mode with C64 graphics and not in C128 mode with C128 graphics. The advantage of this version is using 2 MHz instead of C64 1 MHz CPU, or maybe only 20% faster, because some limitations with using C64 graphic chips and 2MHz?. "Many" C64 games that required CPU could run a little bit faster on the C128 in C64 mode, I think.

Originally Posted by PeterJ

i think this videos sum it up pretty nice, showing the power between those 2 computers

Elite C128
[ Show youtube player ]

Atari ST
[ Show youtube player ]

Originally Posted by Megol

So the CPM mode doesn't support 4MHz mode with the VDC? Always thought it did.
Learn something new every day, even about old systems

I think CP/M had few programs with graphics, CP/M lacked a "common" graphics library between platforms I think, and was made for running business software and not for games. I have played a version of "snake" on a CP/M in graphic mode before. Someone know if there is written some good games for CP/M in any platform?

But there were also some cool "hacks" that were quite outstanding:

- A company from Switzerland developed a software called "Graphic Booster" that used interlacing tricks to enable higher VDC resolutions of up to 752 x 700 pixels and thousands of possible colors. Such graphics specs were usually only available on high end graphics workstations back then, and the C128 running this software offered better graphics than Macs, Amiags or STs back then (but as there was almost no software supporting the Graphic Booster the impact remained quite low).

- In July 1986, COMPUTE!'s Gazette published a type-in program that boosted the global CPU performance by up to 20% when using the VIC video controller. This was possible by switching to fast mode (2 Mhz) during the "vertical blank period" (when the signal reached the bottom of the visible screen fast mode was enabled, the software switched back to slow mode when screen rendering began again at the top).

- Some people tried to make better use of the multiple CPUs. There were algorithms that were faster on the MOS 8502 while others showed better performance on the Zilog Z80 (due to the different architecture of the two CPUs), and there were a few programs that switched between the two CPUs for different tasks to perform better (in fact even CP/M 3.0 used the MOS 8502 in some BIOS routines). I also remember that there was at least one attempt to do multiprocessing with a C128D by using the MOS 8502 and the disk controller which was in fact a MOS 6502 and had its own RAM.

Bill Herd, the man behind the C128:

Hi Joe,

Your pretty much right on the money with the attributes of the hardware including shortcomings such as speed limits. I figured I would take a moment and describe the expectations that we had for the C128 as far as market performance.

Simply put, we didn’t have any expectations for opening any new markets with the C128, that was to be the job of the Amiga which was right around the corner. We did a computer that year pretty much because we were expected to, to not do something new would invite the appearance of complacency if not actual reduction in sales.

I wasn’t told what kind of computer to make, we pretty much had something working before management became overly involved. We did have our own ideas that included C64 compatibility as a minimum. The original reason for compatibility was in part due to my experience at the previous CES show in Vegas. I was new to Commodore and inherited a project called TED, later called the Plus 4. Originally it was supposed to be a $49 semi-business machine, TED meant Text Display. After Jack Tramiel left Commodore, the computer spiraled out of control and instead of a minimal system like the C116 that was released in limited quantity, we ended up with the $299 monstrosity courtesy of CBM Marketing.

At that CES show I met someone who showed me the educational software that she had spent a good deal of time writing and said point blank that our new computer wouldn’t run the output of her hard work.

So after that I viewed C64 mode as a way to support the people who had supported us, _if_ we sold some C128’s they would be more possible customers for this woman and others like her, not less. Like most things in the 128, there was no single reason for C64 mode, another reason would be that it did offer a chance to resale a C64 type machine to someone that already did have a C64. It also might prove to be the additional little nudge with the other features to get someone to buy a CBM when they hadn’t been one of the previous 30 million who had.

The 80 column chip was something we threw in because it was left over from the (failed) Z8000 project. That chip almost cost us the CES show with some problems it had, and it’s performance fell way below what I would have expected had I asked if it ran as it should be expected to.

As far as the “half speed” 1mhz mode, we actually couldn’t believe that we might actually be able to make it run at twice the speed in 80 column mode. As part of the snowball effect of adding the 80 column chip we realized that you didn’t NEED the 40 column chip to use the system and that we just might be able to use the VIC’s memory cycles for our own as at the end of the day, the speed of the C128 was limited by our interface to the DRAM’s. We took a chance and opened the VIC chip (source of clocks as well as video), created the double clock mode, and threw it back in the short pipe in time for CES. (This was done by a chip designer named Dave DiOrio)

There were similar experiences with the Z80; I added the Z80 for several reasons including the fact that there were 40,000 CPM cartridges in production that didn’t work reliably with the C64 and so the C128, and the cartridge would have required that the switching power supply be made to supply an additional .5 amp that wouldn’t otherwise be needed. The Z80 was installed between 1AM and 4AM one morning by a technician named Kim who was working the late shift with me. We didn’t even tell management for a couple of weeks, after the PCB’s were almost done so they couldn’t change my mind for me. The Z80 almost sunk us a couple of times: we tried to slip the Z80 clock source into a rev of the VIC chip, again in time for CES, and basically failed. The NMOS process couldn’t drive to within a few tenths of a volt in the time required and I had to fix it with a transistor and a tap from the 9V line for the SID chip to drive the clock really fast (and yet stop at the right voltage). This is why the C128 won’t boot if the 9V fuse is blown, the Z80 doesn’t run right.

The Z80 was limited in speed by sharing the clock cycles with the VIC chip and the way DRAM cycles occur preset times instead of on-demand. Why CPM? I answered why not, maybe it will catch on, maybe not, but I knew that there would be more 80 column programs such as word processors available on the very first day of release if I put it in then if I didn’t. Easy choice in spite of the massive grief of trying to add a processor with CES less than 2 months away. Later the Z80 saved my ass when it came to booting some of the stranger C64 cartridges.

Another area that could have been better, but at least worked good enough was the MMU. Possibly the first home computer with a Memory Management Unit, I blew it and didn’t put in a supervisor mode that would have made it a “real” MMU.

I only expected the C128 to be sold for about a year, we figured a couple of million would be nice and of course it wouldn’t undercut Amiga or even the C64 as if you were interested in a game machine, the C64 didn’t look any worse for the appearance of the C128 to the family. I have heard that it sold between 4 and 6 million if you count every market and model and that it did create in excess of a billion dollars in revenue. Not bad for a guerilla design effort that started because we felt that we of all people were the only ones that could actually pull of a C64 compatible system.

By the way, we didn’t set out to be 100% C64 compatible; we didn’t think anyone knew what that actually meant to say that. I do remember the day that I heard that it had become 100% compatible… it seems that Marketing thought that that would look good in print. I remember just kinda grinning at the thought and took it as a challenge.

BTW, I used to refer to the 128 as 9 pounds of s**t in a 5 pound bag, I couldn’t quite get 10 pounds to fit… and I would never ever have thought that anyone would even know what a C128 was 22 years later. Thanks for remembering the good and the bad.

Regards,

Bil Herd

[Supamax]

Originally Posted by Flash951

EDIT: I'll put it another way. Is there a C128-only software which would make you buy a C128 instead of an Atari ST?

ANSWER: Maybe the 15000+ games (30 000 registered in C64 database) you can use in C64 mode would count for some owners?

NO, they wouldn't count at all, this is a comparison between C128 and Atari ST.
C64 games are at lower resolution and generally worse than the ST ones.

Originally Posted by Flash951

Even some C64 games wins over both Amiga and ST ports

Even so, how many will they be? 10 out of 30.000?

Originally Posted by Flash951

Elite 128 is actually running in C64 mode with C64 graphics and not in C128 mode with C128 graphics.

Then write a link showing us a 128 game in 128 mode... so we can judge.
But the C128 simply doesn't have the capabilities to have Elite with equal (just equal, I'm not writing "better") quality.

[Hewitson]

Originally Posted by Supamax

C64 games are at lower resolution and generally worse than the ST ones.

They may look worse in some (or most) cases, but overall, the C64 is a far more capable and enjoyable machine for gaming purposes. I wish everyone realised graphics aren't everything. We wouldn't be playing games at 720p and/or 30fps on brand new console hardware if they did.

[Flash951]

Originally Posted by Supamax

Even so, how many will they be? 10 out of 30.000?

Then write a link showing us a 128 game in 128 mode... so we can judge.
But the C128 simply doesn't have the capabilities to have Elite with equal (just equal, I'm not writing "better") quality.

I was asked if there was "any" game that was better. Answer: Yes.

Elite: Atari ST has much better graphics, big palette. C64 games uses 320x200 some times, but the C64 320x200 is more limited than ST 320x200. Elite is a vector game that depends mostly on CPU power, in that type of graphics, the ST will always be better, as it has a much more powerful CPU.

*C64 is a far more capable and enjoyable machine for gaming purposes.*
I agree on this 100%.

[Supamax]

Originally Posted by Hewitson

They may look worse in some (or most) cases, but overall, the C64 is a far more capable and enjoyable machine for gaming purposes. I wish everyone realised graphics aren't everything. We wouldn't be playing games at 720p and/or 30fps on brand new console hardware if they did.

OK, nonsense for me to comment any further.

Please everyone has an Atari ST, sell it now and buy a C64! It's a true deal, do it even if you lose money in the exchange!

[Zippy Zapp]

Originally Posted by Hewitson

...I wish everyone realised graphics aren't everything...

Exactly. Some games that were ported to Amiga later down the road, from the 64 seem to have lost out in the translation. They had better graphics, yes but they didn't "feel" the same way. I remember saying this a few times after I got my Amiga. Don't ask me for specifics because that was 26 years ago or more.

EDIT: Forgot to add, that wasn't the case most of the time as obviously the Amiga was more capable at games. But I always had both so I could play my favorites on 64 and Amiga.

[Flash951]

Originally Posted by Supamax

OK, nonsense for me to comment any further.

Please everyone has an Atari ST, sell it now and buy a C64! It's a true deal, do it even if you lose money in the exchange!

Actually, here in Norway, even an C64 without disk drive change hands for more money than 520 ST, and sometimes for more than an A500.

[Supamax]

Originally Posted by Hewitson

I wish everyone realised graphics aren't everything.

Yes, I agree with that.

Originally Posted by Flash951

Actually, here in Norway, even an C64 without disk drive change hands for more money than 520 ST, and sometimes for more than an A500.

Ah...!

[PeterJ]

It is the same in Denmark then price of a C64 is around the double of an ST

[pandy71]

Ok - glad to see that everyone confirm that ST is better than C128. Remain part of discussion looks like bunch of desperadoes whipping mysterious cream... Good Luck Guys, from my side over&out.

[amilo3438]

Originally Posted by pandy71

Ok - glad to see that everyone confirm that ST is better than C128.

Not only better, it is also a much cheaper! (according to posts #107 & #109)

[Supamax]

Originally Posted by amilo3438

Not only better, it is also a much cheaper! (according to posts #107 & #109)

Maybe because in Denmark and Norway the 520 ST was much more common than the C64?
Strange, the C64 was sold in millions of units...

[PeterJ]

don't know by Norway, but in Denmark i think is the other way around, we where very few that had Atari ST, so today nobody want them, it is also very seldom that they are up for sale, but then they are, they are about half price of a C64.
the most stupid thing that i have ever done (computer vice) is about a year or two ago, there was a falcon for sale, i have never seen other for sale new of use in Denmark, and i was put for sale for around 134 euro, and i did not buy it...

[Flash951]

The same in Norway, the C64 was very common and also very cheap compared to other computers. In early 90s, a brand new C64 in the shop costed about the same as an second hand today. But I've read that Atari ST was much more popular in Europe than in US after all.

[Megol]

Originally Posted by Flash951

Of course I can imagine, many offices before had CP/M computers and systems with Z80 or Intel 8088. C128 has CB/M and can use all the CP/M business software.

Elite 128 is actually running in C64 mode with C64 graphics and not in C128 mode with C128 graphics. The advantage of this version is using 2 MHz instead of C64 1 MHz CPU, or maybe only 20% faster, because some limitations with using C64 graphic chips and 2MHz?. "Many" C64 games that required CPU could run a little bit faster on the C128 in C64 mode, I think.

There are two graphics chips in the C128 mode: the VIC IIe and the VDC.

The VIC IIe is an ordinary VIC II with one significant exception: it have a test bit available that can, with some difficulty, be used to produce interlaced and/or otherwise tweaked video signals.
This can be used to produce more colors and/or higher resolution graphics. However this isn't something practical for game use - for games it still is the old VIC II from the C64.

The VDC is a graphics chip with a separate graphics memory. To access the graphics memory one have to use an indexed register mechanism (one port for the register index, one port for reading/writing the specified VDC register). This is slow. The VDC is asynchronous to the rest of the computer and this makes it even slower. The VDC have no sprites, it isn't really designed for graphics but does support it. It is a lousy chip for text mode applications and an extremely lousy one for games!

So what advantage does the C128 provide over the C64 one for games? It allows the CPU to run twice as fast in VDC mode and somewhat faster in VIC II mode. It allows programs to use more RAM. And that's it.

[frank_b]

Originally Posted by pandy71

So you have your answer, ST side to this have better graphics (and lack of HW scrolling or HW sprite is not so painful in business usage scenario, also SW on ST showing that it is capable to overcome most of C64 advantages).

Some models of ST (STE, Mega STe) have both hardware scrolling and blitter for sprite rendering.

I suspect the c64 would find it difficult to put 31 32*30 2 plane objects on screen in a single VBL? As for the 6502 (lovely wee chip though it is), the 68k is considerably superior.

[Flash951]

C128: demo using two monitors at once
[ Show youtube player ]

C128 hires modes:
[ Show youtube player ]

Wheels 128 (GEOS 4) (With SuperCPU)
[ Show youtube player ]

C128 demo using VDC
[ Show youtube player ]

[Photon]

Originally Posted by frank_b

Some models of ST (STE, Mega STe) have both hardware scrolling and blitter for sprite rendering.

Well, that's not the comparison. The comparison is between C128 and ST. Silly as the thread is, it helps if the arguments revolve around the original platforms.

Originally Posted by pandy71

So you have your answer, ST side to this have better graphics (and lack of HW scrolling or HW sprite is not so painful in business usage scenario, also SW on ST showing that it is capable to overcome most of C64 advantages).

Except scrolling and sprites for games, then.

Regarding Elite:
Elite for C64 and C128 would have been a port from BBC, while the 16-bit port would have been a port from ST to Amiga. In other words, if the inference is that filled vectors are impossible on C64, it's obviously untrue. And with the quite simple visuals of Elite, if someone made a filled vector version on C64, it wouldn't be hard to make it run similarly to ST. Elite is lovely to play but hardly showcases what the ST or Amiga can do

The soul-killing sadness of quick ports and singling out games to compare platforms has already been addressed by me in other threads.

While my score obviously matches reality in the C128 vs ST comparison and makes the ST almost twice as good generally, the fact the ST [ Show youtube player ] equally matches reality. Go ahead, use both for "business work". But games have a tendency to reveal overall hardware performance.

One interesting aspect is that adding hardware features to make a computer game-capable at all, in no way hampers its performance for all other uses. That Atari didn't is therefore consistent with Tramiel's philosophy of Rock Bottom Price and not much else, and interestingly inconsistent with Atari's history in the games industry up until the release of the ST.

[Flash951]

C64 Armalyte ...
[ Show youtube player ]

Atari ST
[ Show youtube player ]

Read the comments to this video:
"How does this not only LOOK worse on the ST, it's even got worse music than the c64 version?"

[freehand]

Originally Posted by Photon

Regarding Elite:

if someone made a filled vector version on C64, it wouldn't be hard to make it run similarly to ST.

Am I correct in reading your saying that a vector filled version of elite on the c64 is possible to match the ST version speed wise or close ?