NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #20/NN_1992_20.iso/spool/comp/sys/acorn/8643

Internet Message Format | 1992-09-14 | 1.8 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!pipex!warwick!str-ccsun!strath-cs!sproven
From: [e-mail] (Simon B Proven IE91)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.acorn
Subject: Re: A3010 views
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 14 Sep 92 12:26:34 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Comp. Sci. Dept., Strathclyde Univ., Glasgow, Scotland.
Lines: 30
Nntp-Posting-Host: lister-08

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (TMOTA) writes:
>It really depends what you are doing. The Amiga 500, when compared to the
>ARM-2 (8MHz) powered Arcs is pitiful in processing power, but if you compare
>almost any *graphics* based application, the Amiga holds its own because of
>its graphics hardware. Thus, demos and games on the Amiga are about equivalent
>to those on an 8MHzArm2. (leaving aside little matters like being able to
>plot to different bitplanes, 32-colour mode (amiga) or 256 colour mode (arc)
>that make obvious differences in some areas)

Hmmmmm

For games, it really depends what type of game you're running...

for instance, MiG29 on an ARM2@8MHz is MUCH faster than the same game on the
Amiga 500 - simply because on the 500, the CPU is doing all the work as the
blitter can't draw polygons.  I've heard that the Amiga programmers are
chuffed with 400 polygons/sec, but IMHO MiG29 on the Arc must be doing more
like 1000/sec

And of course, programmers on the Arc are really only now showing what can be
done - for instance, many Amiga owners drool on about the "copper" chip which
does "raster bars" and they think that because the Arc has no copper the
Arc games will never have raster bars...

strange, I must have been imagining that Archimedes screen shot with raster
bars....

:)

mad@bike