| Subject: RE: OK, ok... |
Author: Fat Rakoon (host62-7-79-240.btinternet.com)
Date: 11-23-2001 20:01
Only Joking.
Which CPU is better?
Yes, I agree, the 680x0 is far superior to the x86, but we must face the facts that the 68k just isnt supported,m and the x86... well, its no longer an x86, but what there is, is a much better architecture ( Sorry for the use of a wank word )
I would prefer 68k myself, but like you, I am working with what I have... And that it pissy... I mean PC stuff.
>Could say that again
Its hard to know what to do! ( Happy? )
Ok, its back to the age old story...
You have on board GFX and sound, and by the time you have released the board, its out of date, not to mention slow, even slow compared to same chip if used on PCI bus.
If you had a PCI slot, with the graphics on that, when you wanted it to go faster, you have a choice... Get a new card for a few pennies, or get a new board for a lot of pennies... Yes, have onboard stuff of course, it would be so much better for a basic setup, I am not even going to bother to argue there as I agree that onboard extras are something that should be in everything, but to just avoid having some kind of slots ( I say slots, not slot ) is just cutting your own throat - you need future compatibility or your invention will only serve to be yet another failed attempt.
Ok, so for general use, for such things as apps etc, there is no real need for the fastest bugger card in the universe, of course there isnt, and lets face it, games are not exactly cutting edge on any atari, but then why is that? because there isnt the hardware to do these things... Now, if there was the hardware... Its only a matter of time until someone does develop some amazing software, and once we start to see that software, running on an ATARI....
See what I mean?
bugger you then ;)
SoundSystem will beat most PC cards?
I have 2 schools of thought here, as I have tried to get my to get something like as good as my Atari, and basically, it fucking stinks util I spend on the bloody thing.
I have a SoundBlaster Platinum in the AMD400, its bollocks until I give it a 128MB or better soundFont, and then its brilliant.
My father has just bought an SB Aureal, which is supposedly, the current best in the wworld, but I have to admit, while its certainly far superior to anything I have seen before, its still a bit on the shyte side compared to the Atari.
I have to say though, that while the falcon is ok, for sound...it stops there!
Its ok.
To say though, that whatever sound you develop will be anything near what a PC Card can do, then I am afraid you are just dreaming!!!
I live to hope though.
Another reason to have PCI is so that you can use SoundBlaster cards, which by the way, there already is Atari Drivers for ( Milan Blaster etc )
Do you want a copy?
Oh, and because the slots would link directly to the board ( CPU,DMA etc ) there is no need for it to be patched... Just buffered ( erm? )
Clones are like a PC?
Yes, and no.
They are as upgradable as a PC, but they are Atari Machines.
Oh, and by the way, dont for gods sake even bother to try to use VME as the slot.... I can build an AMD athlon for less than it would cost me to buy the cheapest VME card.
Comer to think of it, I am probably right?
Ok, this has been a little rushed, so its a bit crap, the kids are fighting all the time, I will have to go and sort them out rather than give them nasty looks, and the occasional "JOSH!!!! - Behave!!!!!!!"
Jordan... Put that down, dont throw it or I will throw it back. I mean it, leave the telly alone, put that back, stop that, shut up, calm down, was that the door?, let me do this, Ive had enough now!
etc etc etc etc etc etc
|
| Topics |
Author |
Date |
 The TOSTer!!!!!!!! new |
Facundo |
11-21-2001 20:25 |
 RE: The TOSTer!!!!!!!! new |
Fat Rakoon |
11-21-2001 22:25 |
  RE: The TOSTer!!!!!!!! new |
Facundo |
11-22-2001 02:18 |
  RE: The TOSTer!!!!!!!! new |
Fat Rakoon |
11-22-2001 20:07 |
| OK, ok... new |
Flash |
11-22-2001 04:50 |
| RE: OK, ok... new |
Fat Rakoon |
11-22-2001 19:46 |
| RE: OK, ok... new |
GokMasE |
11-22-2001 22:58 |
| RE: OK, ok... new |
Flash |
11-22-2001 23:57 |
| RE: OK, ok... new |
Flash |
11-22-2001 23:52 |
| RE: OK, ok... new |
Fat Rakoon |
11-23-2001 05:13 |
| RE: OK, ok... new |
Flash |
11-23-2001 08:03 |
| RE: OK, ok... new |
Elliot |
11-23-2001 13:59 |
| RE: OK, ok... new |
Fat Rakoon |
11-23-2001 19:39 |
| RE: OK, ok... |
Fat Rakoon |
11-23-2001 20:01 |
| RE: OK, ok... new |
Scott |
11-27-2001 10:16 |
| RE: OK, ok... new |
Scott |
11-27-2001 10:11 |
| RE: OK, ok... new |
Flash |
11-27-2001 18:49 |
| Some minor details... new |
Flash |
11-22-2001 22:22 |
| RE: Some minor details... new |
Mintboy |
11-22-2001 23:11 |
| RE: Some minor details... new |
Flash |
11-23-2001 19:38 |
| RE: Some minor details... new |
Elliot |
11-23-2001 14:16 |
 |
|
|
