24 replies to this topic

[pixelmischief]

Would anyone care to comment on what practical impact an FPU will have on everyday use of my Atari STe, TT, and Falcon computers? I play games, use some applications, do some tracking, and just generally enjoy the desktop.

[simonsunnyboy]

pixelmischief, on Thu May 5, 2011 8:39 AM, said:

Would anyone care to comment on what practical impact an FPU will have on everyday use of my Atari STe, TT, and Falcon computers? I play games, use some applications, do some tracking, and just generally enjoy the desktop.

Hardly any software makes really use of an FPU. For the Falcon there are some demos but for the ST there is no real gain IMHO.

[Shredder11]

Yeah I agree with the ST there is very little benefit apart from CAD, but surely there are other genres of software that benefit? I mean the audio sample editor Zero X has a specific version for the FPU for instance. Also there must be some video and DTP apps that use it? It's time we had a thorough and accurate list of software that supports or requires the FPU.

[Shredder11]

Oh and there is the Zview software to view PDF files that will not work unless a FPU chip is installed. Another app on there is Ztask, a taskbar and running tasks manager.

Zorro - Coder At Work - Website to download Zview and Ztask and more

[Lynxpro]

Some audio programs on the Falcon can use the 68882.

[DarkLord]

POV-Ray and DynaCAD spring to mind...

Hmm, just like the mono/hi-res games list, looks like we need an FPU enhanced software list as well.

[Lynxpro]

DarkLord, on Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:25 AM, said:

POV-Ray and DynaCAD spring to mind...

Hmm, just like the mono/hi-res games list, looks like we need an FPU enhanced software list as well.

And games modified to include support for FPUs...

[DarkLord]

Lynxpro, on Tue Jan 31, 2012 10:21 PM, said:

And games modified to include support for FPUs...

Absolutely!

[rdemming]

Lynxpro, on Tue Jan 31, 2012 10:21 PM, said:

And games modified to include support for FPUs...

Although some games could benefit from an FPU, most Atari ST games use only integer arithmetic. There are no floating point calculations needed for shoot-em-ups, platformers etc.
A good candidate for FPU are 3D games. But even 3D games do not necessarily need floating point calculations. On platforms without an FPU, 3D games are often done using fixed point calculations. Fixed-point calculations can be done efficiently with integer instructions.

Robert

[DarkLord]

No argument there.

My question isn't is it needed, but what a game like Frontier Elite 2 *could* be like, if it supported, as in took full
advantage of, the 50mhz 68882 in a PAK 68/3 accelerator board?

[Lynxpro]

rdemming, on Wed Feb 1, 2012 3:12 AM, said:

Lynxpro, on Tue Jan 31, 2012 10:21 PM, said:

And games modified to include support for FPUs...

Although some games could benefit from an FPU, most Atari ST games use only integer arithmetic. There are no floating point calculations needed for shoot-em-ups, platformers etc.
A good candidate for FPU are 3D games. But even 3D games do not necessarily need floating point calculations. On platforms without an FPU, 3D games are often done using fixed point calculations. Fixed-point calculations can be done efficiently with integer instructions.

Robert

Starglider. Star Wars the Arcade Game. Wolfenstein [or that derivative German game] on the Falcon.

DarkLord, on Wed Feb 1, 2012 3:16 AM, said:

No argument there.
My question isn't is it needed, but what a game like Frontier Elite 2 *could* be like, if it supported, as in took full
advantage of, the 50mhz 68882 in a PAK 68/3 accelerator board?

Great, now I'm going to have to look up what the PAK 68/3 board is...

[ParanoidLittleMan]

rdemming, on Wed Feb 1, 2012 3:12 AM, said:

Although some games could benefit from an FPU, most Atari ST games use only integer arithmetic. There are no floating point calculations needed for shoot-em-ups, platformers etc.
A good candidate for FPU are 3D games. But even 3D games do not necessarily need floating point calculations. On platforms without an FPU, 3D games are often done using fixed point calculations. Fixed-point calculations can be done efficiently with integer instructions.

Robert

Fixed point ? Thats not the point :-) By 3D trigonometric calculations are crucial. Sin, cosinus, tangens. If FPU performs such operations fast, it is great help. I don't know how old FPUs are good with it. In any case, 3D games on old machines used tables with precalculated results for faster calculations. Look files of Elite - there are even named sin and cos - precalculated tables.
And of course, if bus, RAM in machine is slow, FPU will not help too much, so don't expect 50 Fps with fullscreen in 3D .

[Lynxpro]

ParanoidLittleMan, on Wed Feb 1, 2012 9:32 AM, said:

rdemming, on Wed Feb 1, 2012 3:12 AM, said:

Although some games could benefit from an FPU, most Atari ST games use only integer arithmetic. There are no floating point calculations needed for shoot-em-ups, platformers etc.
A good candidate for FPU are 3D games. But even 3D games do not necessarily need floating point calculations. On platforms without an FPU, 3D games are often done using fixed point calculations. Fixed-point calculations can be done efficiently with integer instructions.
Robert

Fixed point ? Thats not the point :-) By 3D trigonometric calculations are crucial. Sin, cosinus, tangens. If FPU performs such operations fast, it is great help. I don't know how old FPUs are good with it. In any case, 3D games on old machines used tables with precalculated results for faster calculations. Look files of Elite - there are even named sin and cos - precalculated tables.
And of course, if bus, RAM in machine is slow, FPU will not help too much, so don't expect 50 Fps with fullscreen in 3D .

I don't think anyone is looking for a miracle in FPS performance but it would be nice to see some mods to show us what would've been capable from our old systems had Atari [and also Amiga] made more concerted effort to market FPU upgrades if not offering them as standard gear.

To be fair, the PC world didn't really market well the 8087, 80287, or the 80387 either. Then again, the PC world also was slow to embrace custom chips too...

[guus.assmann]

The question is more what a numeric processor would have brought in relation to the cost.
In the current time, a lot of applications use the number-cruncher.
But if real fast calculation is needed, the graphics processor is used nowadays.
And a cluster of Nintendo-game machines can even beat a super-computer like the Cree....

The point? We're looking whit the knowledge of today. (In Dutch there's a proverb. Translated it says that you can look in a cows arse from behind..... :-) )

BR/
Guus

[DarkLord]

Lynxpro, on Wed Feb 1, 2012 8:47 AM, said:

Great, now I'm going to have to look up what the PAK 68/3 board is...

Its an add on board for the ST line of computers, produced in Germany in the 80's and 90's. Quite rare now.
It adds a 68030 CPU, running at 32-50mhz, 32 bit version of TOS (TOS 3.06), optional 68882, memory board
up to 64 megs...lots of cool stuff. Quite expensive originally.

Here is the advertisement from Toad Computers:



I was lucky enough to pick up a damaged, abused board of Ebay UK for a fair price. Even luckier
that I've been able to get it running (with *tons* of help from the worldwide Atari community!),

What kind of difference does it make? Check this out:

http://www.atariage....t-does-go-zoom/

[Lynxpro]

DarkLord, on Thu Feb 2, 2012 4:16 PM, said:

Lynxpro, on Wed Feb 1, 2012 8:47 AM, said:

Great, now I'm going to have to look up what the PAK 68/3 board is...

Its an add on board for the ST line of computers, produced in Germany in the 80's and 90's. Quite rare now.
It adds a 68030 CPU, running at 32-50mhz, 32 bit version of TOS (TOS 3.06), optional 68882, memory board
up to 64 megs...lots of cool stuff. Quite expensive originally.

Here is the advertisement from Toad Computers:



I was lucky enough to pick up a damaged, abused board of Ebay UK for a fair price. Even luckier
that I've been able to get it running (with *tons* of help from the worldwide Atari community!),

What kind of difference does it make? Check this out:

http://www.atariage....t-does-go-zoom/

Amazing. Dare I ask if there's a 68040/060 version?

[ParanoidLittleMan]

Lynxpro, on Thu Feb 2, 2012 10:50 AM, said:

I don't think anyone is looking for a miracle in FPS performance but it would be nice to see some mods to show us what would've been capable from our old systems had Atari [and also Amiga] made more concerted effort to market FPU upgrades if not offering them as standard gear.

To be fair, the PC world didn't really market well the 8087, 80287, or the 80387 either. Then again, the PC world also was slow to embrace custom chips too...

The problem with old FPUs, regardless from manufacturer, computers using it was high price. So, only professionals bought them. True that it could help little in 3D games, but true us too that little more RAM spent on tables can do the same (considering math speed), so normal that developers went on that way.
Example: No Second Prize has fastest 3D among Atari ST games, but it requires min 1MB RAM.

Yes, PC world was slow in past with custom chips, but when started with it seriously, it was also start of the end of Atari ST and Amiga

[DarkLord]

Lynxpro, on Thu Feb 2, 2012 11:16 PM, said:

Amazing. Dare I ask if there's a 68040/060 version?

I wish! The PAK originally started out as a 68020, then moved up to
the 68030. I'd hazard a guess that if things had went better for Atari
overall, maybe they would have continued development and we might
have seen an '040 or even an '060. I could start salivating just thinking
about that!

Of course, I'm no expert but I'd think by the time you got to an 060,
you'd see severe performance penalties and bottlenecks if nothing was
done to the ST's 8mhz bus...

Wouldn't you guys agree?

[Lynxpro]

ParanoidLittleMan, on Fri Feb 3, 2012 3:48 AM, said:

The problem with old FPUs, regardless from manufacturer, computers using it was high price. So, only professionals bought them. True that it could help little in 3D games, but true us too that little more RAM spent on tables can do the same (considering math speed), so normal that developers went on that way.
Example: No Second Prize has fastest 3D among Atari ST games, but it requires min 1MB RAM.

Very true yet prices were a funny thing back then. The Motorola 56K DSP was touted as costing more than $1,000 which was supposedly why it was only used in the NeXT Cube* until it showed up in the relatively low-priced Atari Falcon as standard gear. The 68881 itself shouldn't have been all that pricey going into 1990+.






*Granted, if I recall correctly, the NeXT Cube started out with a Motorola 68030, a Motorola 56K DSP, and a Motorola 68881 all when it originally debuted at $5,000+ although the cost was mainly attributed to the CD burner in the later 1980s...

Edited by Lynxpro, Fri Feb 3, 2012 9:29 AM.

[Keatah]

ParanoidLittleMan, on Fri Feb 3, 2012 3:48 AM, said:

Lynxpro, on Thu Feb 2, 2012 10:50 AM, said:

I don't think anyone is looking for a miracle in FPS performance but it would be nice to see some mods to show us what would've been capable from our old systems had Atari [and also Amiga] made more concerted effort to market FPU upgrades if not offering them as standard gear.

To be fair, the PC world didn't really market well the 8087, 80287, or the 80387 either. Then again, the PC world also was slow to embrace custom chips too...

The problem with old FPUs, regardless from manufacturer, computers using it was high price. So, only professionals bought them. True that it could help little in 3D games, but true us too that little more RAM spent on tables can do the same (considering math speed), so normal that developers went on that way.
Example: No Second Prize has fastest 3D among Atari ST games, but it requires min 1MB RAM.

Yes, PC world was slow in past with custom chips, but when started with it seriously, it was also start of the end of Atari ST and Amiga

And good riddance. I hated the Amiga.

[Lynxpro]

Keatah, on Fri Feb 3, 2012 8:26 PM, said:

And good riddance. I hated the Amiga.

Don't say that. After all, it was "a brother from another mother" considering it had Atari DNA in it through and through. Granted, the GUI left a lot to be desired [IMHO], although that's definitely not the case with the "modern" AmigaOS 4.x...

Edited by Lynxpro, Sat Feb 4, 2012 12:56 AM.

[dark willow]

Lynxpro, on Sat Feb 4, 2012 12:55 AM, said:

Keatah, on Fri Feb 3, 2012 8:26 PM, said:

And good riddance. I hated the Amiga.

Don't say that. After all, it was "a brother from another mother" considering it had Atari DNA in it through and through. Granted, the GUI left a lot to be desired [IMHO], although that's definitely not the case with the "modern" AmigaOS 4.x...

I agree. The Amiga hardware had a lot of Atari design philosophy and know-how in it, and it was only the vagrancies of corporate horse-trading that led to it bearing the Commodore name. I have to agree about the user interface as well. I had an Amiga 600 briefly, and Workbench and the whole disk-based nature of AmigaOS was a deal-breaker, and really gave me a renewed appreciation for TOS.

[Keatah]

I honestly saw very little atari in it. While I don't doubt there are design philosophies in it, hardware wise, the software was a different matter altogether. It had the typical "slowness" just like all systems of the era did. The 8-bit snappiness was gone.

I believe this had to do with the complexity of the o/s, somehow.

[dark willow]

I think the OS does get in the way to some extent, though that doesn't make the Lorraine a worthy successor to the GTIA, and I for one wouldn't have minded having some of Lorraine's eye candy in the ST

The first version of WorkBench / AmigaOS was designed externally by Metacomco, and was a last minute dash so I am inclined to see it as being another MultiTOS, trying to undertake a project that was too ambitious, in too short a space of time, and outsourcing the work to people who haven't been involved in the project and the hardware design team from the start.

[Keatah]

IDK.. IDC.. I just so much wanted the Amiga to succeed. Again, it was the empty promises of marketing. AND I got "caught" copying the "transformer" disks in the computer store. Assholes. They **knew** what I was doing, but let me finish first. Then they confiscated *MY* disks and then threw me out.

So, to me, the amiga was just a series of promises of this coming out and that coming out. And never getting closer to anything except for long load times of a 2-floppy-drive based operating system. Ughh.

While the digi-view thing was cool. It wasn't nearly as easy to use as depicted in the advertisements. I had delusions of grandeur of taking pictures of airplanes at the airport and then making a slideshow at home. Imagine having to set up a 20 pound camera on a tripod and spin this little color wheel thingy. and then, hoping the car battery would last long enough to power the monitor and computer bolted in the trunk.

Each picture became an exercise in patience-testing.

Forget taking pictures at parties, unless you did the freeze frame on the vcr thing, and then you could only get it in black and white. Or you'd have to do freeze frame in R,G,B, and edit and manually line up the pictures.

About the only thing this was good for was use with the copy stand. AND then you needed the stand, lights, and other paraphernalia to make it all work.

A far cry from the $199.95 price tag for the digi-view device itself. What a tedious state of affairs, AND THEY SAID IT WAS FAST AND EASY! BULLSHIT!!