home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!das.wang.com!ulowell!m2c!bu.edu!stanford.edu!ames!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!yale!gumby!destroyer!cs.ubc.ca!van-bc!tvbbs.wimsey.bc.ca!Alex_Topic
- From: Alex_Topic@tvbbs.wimsey.bc.ca (Alex Topic)
- Newsgroups: alt.sys.amiga.demos
- Subject: Re: PAL or NTSC?
- Message-ID: <Alex_Topic.05um@tvbbs.wimsey.bc.ca>
- Date: 26 Jan 93 20:03:39 GMT
- Organization: Tunnel-Vision BBS!
- Lines: 76
-
-
- MV> No, in NTSC, you'll get 16% (if I calculated it correctly) less time
- MV> to
- MV> create your display, as NTSC runs in 60 Hz compared to PAL's 50 Hz.
- MV> On top
- MV> of that, PAL has a higher resolution. I don't know if the processor
- MV> runs
- MV> faster on a NTSC machine (for timing purposes), but the difference is
- MV> so
- MV> small compared to the difference between 20 ms/frame and 17 ms/frame.
- MV> So there is no reason to use NTSC for demos.
-
- Okay NTSC may have 16% less time for scanning, however our CPU runs
- abit faster, which may make up the difference... NTSC 7.16MHZ PAL 7.09MHZ..
- the minute difference may in the end result in let the NTSC rate do more
- bus cycles, than in pal in the give time.
-
- 262 - 200 = 62 lines.. 60 lines, plus maybe 10 at the top of the frame.
- 70 scan lines. 70 scanlines... with a 200 line display..
-
- 312 - 256 = 56 lines.. + 10... 66 scan lines.. heh we have 4 extra scan
- lines in NTSC. Not only that our CPU clock rate is abit faster..meaning
- we can more done even in the same amount of time.
-
- Yes PAL is great for display, and better than NTSC in my opinion. However
- NTSC is faster, in the long run.
-
- I'm confused I may enter a demo in that AmeriCon... and everything must
- be in NTSC, 1 meg chip.. I really want to do it in PAL, but I may have to
- stick with NTSC. If I do, I will must likely use the speed for my
- advantage. Yes demos can be done in NTSC...
-
- MV> Sure that the flickering isn't simply because the refresh rate is
- MV> lower in
- MV> PAL? Americans are perhaps bothered by it because they are used to
- MV> the
- MV> higher frequency of NTSC.
-
- Well I think I'm in between. I always use PAL in most cases. I do not
- notice the flicker that much anymore, and seem to have adjusted. I like
- both PAL and NTSC..
-
- MV> I still use an old TV set. I'm not as rich as all americans seem to
- MV> be.
- MV> Rich capitalist pigs! :-)
-
- No not all Americans are rich... I'm actually a fairly poor student.
- I had to work hard for my system, and do not think I will get an A1200
- for atleast 1-2 years... unfortunatly money does not grow on trees.
-
- Yeah I used a TV for 2 months when I first got my Amiga, back in 1990..
- Real good for HAM pictures...but lousy for text...
-
- MV> Actually, there seems to become three different standards for HDTV
- MV> (for America, Europe and Japan I think). They never learn, it
- MV> seems...
- MV> Right now, bigger TV projects are recorded on film (16 or 35 mm, I'd
- MV> guess), to be able to show on HDTV's. (At least, Swedish television
- MV> does.)
- MV> --
-
- That is so stupid how America, Europe, and Japan have to be so
- different from each other. We should all try to have the same standard.
- In Europe you guys drive on the passenger seat..heh how strange. Is it
- like that all over europe? I'm not sure in Japan if they are the same..hmm
- I think Japan uses NTSC...
-
- There should be 1 HDTV standard, geez it will make life easier..heh
- I guess the source of the problem is the amount of HZ the power is.
- We have 60hz, and you guys 50hz... Any reason why the difference?
-
- Catch you later...
-
- -ALex
-
- -- Via DLG Pro v0.995
-