I thought this would warrant a topic on its own, though I saw it here (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum/news-events/*fr*-fenixinformatique's-news-phenixinformatique-com-amstrad-eu/msg75627/#msg75627)
A CPC successor. What do you think? I skimmed through the site (http://www.opcone.fr/), for the time being it sounds like a lot of talking and not much of substance?
You have loved the CPC? You love my project? Now, do it for me...
(I post again here if you wan't to delete the other...)
Sorry, but this project sound like making a PC and I don't see any affinity with the CPC.
I don't dream for it, like I have dreamed for the "Natami" project for example.
We are also talking about the OPC in a Facebook group.
It seems, the goal is to have a new CPC backwards compatible hardware, what is able to be programmed as simple, as the CPC, is, as I mentioned before, 100% backwards compatible to the 6128, and supports many new features like 3d acceleration, more colours, more all...
Yes, I have read all. May be, you can add a poll? :)
Poll for what?
About the Gryzor sentence : "A CPC successor. What do you think?"
Checked it... I can edit it (Gryzor's post) but cannot add a poll, sorry...
GRYZOOOORRRRR!!!! POLLution please :P
Could somebody provide more thorough information? Does that OPC already exist (hardware or drawing board) or is it at the moment just an idea?
looking the blank task page, ... It's just an idea.
Hmmmm...no.
Oups sorry... The guy is writing the manual[nb]That mean, just an idea[/nb]. :-\
Well, I like the idea much, so why not give this a chance instead of talking it bad?
When the hardware is there I will support it with my software... meanwhile back to CPC (Plus) and KCc.
Because I know those sort of projects since years and years.
Because the most serious and advanced was never released.
Because, reading the french page, it look not serious.
Because the CPC community is not enough big to support the CPC+. (so, a new one...)
Because, I think that it will be far better to support the CPC2013 project! :)
Well, we will see what happens ;)
An English page is under construction...
Hmmmm, backwards compatible with CPC, but with features of a modern PC...
What is is you cannot achieve with emulation on a mini Pc or a Raspberry Pi, for example?
Now, if we were talking on creating a perfect clone of the CPC in a RPi format, and with support for modern TVs, that would be something worthy.
That's my two cents.
What's really needed is a CPC PCI card or USB device that offers all the real CPC ports, so that the box could accept real expansions / Joysticks etc. That way you could use any kernal you liked - PC or Raspberry Pi running an emulator with drivers to access them like a CPC would.
Bryce.
Quote from: TotO on 21:04, 17 February 14
Because, I think that it will be far better to support the CPC2013 project! :)
What's that? Link? (Agree with deleted part of your post, just remember CPCnG and so on).
Quote from: TFM on 22:21, 17 February 14
What's that? Link? (Agree with deleted part of your post, just remember CPCnG and so on).
The great ralferoo's project.
(the board is printed CPC2013)CPC FPGA (http://ralferoo.blogspot.fr/)
Ah got it. Well, there is also the T-Rex1 and the C-One. The C-One with CPC core runs the fast by far (about 50x the origninal speed), but the board is huge and actually not made for the CPC. So meanwhile I stick with the original.
A hardware clone would be interesting IMHO when it would provide:
- 99% compatibility to CPC (and also the PLUS if possible)
- including RAM, ROM expansion (and maybe some more standard expansions)
- significant higher speed
- eventually new features (like planned for the ANT II)
Ok, now I'm officially a dreamer :laugh:
Quote from: TFM on 23:17, 17 February 14
A hardware clone would be interesting IMHO when it would provide:
- eventually new features (like planned for the ANT II)
What features would they be?
In short.. enhanced GFX and SFX.
I was thinking FPGA as well, since the TREX is indeed rather big and rather old and limited by now. There are newer FPGAs, much smaller and much more powerful that could accommodate nice stuff, like joystick ports, USB devices, HDMI/DVI, perhaps audio feedback to load tape images, stuff like that.
But Bryce's idea is fantastic indeed, a PCI card would be really great.
As for reinventing the CPC and moving forward... Meh. Would anyone really work with it? I mean, it'd be nice, but I really, really, really doubt it people would create the software to make it a PC replacement of sorts.
My problem with this project is that it seems like this guy (anyone knows him?) seems to have come out of nowhere, with lots of talking and nothing concrete. He's doing it the wrong side up - instead of drumming up interest in the various communities and asking for ideas, he builds a site proposing some vague specs and asks for people to do the work...
T
PS what should the poll be? Yes/No?
PS2 Ah... a PCI card indeed...
- Only a stock CPC count for me (CPC w/o expansion)
- My CPC with new expansions will be fine (CPC with expansions)
- An FPGA based mini CPC with RAM/ROM/SD to be "up-to-date" (CPC FPGA)
- A new powerful computer to replace my CPC with big enhancements (OPC)
- My PC with emulator is enough, no more CPC at home (PC)
Quote from: TotO on 21:04, 17 February 14
Because I know those sort of projects since years and years.
Because the most serious and advanced was never released.
Because, reading the french page, it look not serious.
Because the CPC community is not enough big to support the CPC+. (so, a new one...)
Because, I think that it will be far better to support the CPC2013 project! :)
CPC2013, OPC???
I will support CPC, KCC and Plus.
(My KCC don't get much love at the moment :( )
Quote from: arnoldemu on 10:37, 18 February 14
(My KCC don't get much love at the moment :( )
You have my address? :)
Bryce.
To be honnest , let's exploit first the possibilities of CPC stock and with expansions, maybe after we'll have a place for super mega hyper ultra CPC....
I'd be curious how OPC would be fully compatible with 6128 except using emulation....
Quote from: arnoldemu on 10:37, 18 February 14
CPC2013, OPC???
I will support CPC, KCC and Plus.
When my CTM will be dead and my CPC can't more display on TV properly... I will be happy to own a "CPC2013".
Sure, I hope that will occur as far as possible.
@Bryce: LOL
I think that a lot of guys are working on CPC because of it's limitations and the challenge they generate.
So, removing these limitations = removing our interest in programming on it...
Quote from: Gryzor on 09:21, 18 February 14
... since the TREX is indeed rather big ...
Yes, the T-Rex1 is: 15,15 * 15,13 cm.
How big is the cpc2013 or the opc?
15x15 is rather large compared to the 14x8 that my MiST FPGA measures...
Quote from: Hicks on 19:22, 18 February 14
I think that a lot of guys are working on CPC because of it's limitations and the challenge they generate.
So, removing these limitations = removing our interest in programming on it...
I agree, that's why the CPC2013 is primarily about emulating the CPC in the best way possible, only adding modern features rather than fundamentally changing the machine.
e.g. I emulate a large ram pack, but that's something you could get back in the day, I'll emulate floppies on an SD card because that's easier for most people, I emulate the monitor response so a modern LCD can be used, I might add a turbo mode in the future but it's low priority over accurately emulating a normal speed CPC, etc...
It's just a shame nobody can have one yet... ;)
I don't know it by the name CPC2013.
To me I know it only as Ralf's own-made cpc.
Quote from: ralferoo on 13:38, 19 February 14
I emulate the monitor response so a modern LCD can be used
This is such an excellent idea, can't wait to see it in action!
Indeed, that's probably the project I'm most anxious to see, probably!
Quote from: redbox on 16:10, 19 February 14
This is such an excellent idea, can't wait to see it in action!
It already work.
He posted the Relentless video some weeks ago... It's great. :)
Quote from: ralferoo on 13:38, 19 February 14I emulate the monitor response so a modern LCD can be used, I might add a turbo mode in the future but it's low priority over accurately emulating a normal speed CPC, etc...
This is why i found your hardware emulation so interesting, emulating correctly the CTM too.
Btw, i hope you'll leave possibility to update FGPA and will release your source for that ;)
For me it makes no sense to replace the original CPC by an hardware emulator, which does more or less the same (and can't be 100% perfect anyway), except so save the original hardware. But for this case a software emulator would be my choice, because I can run it more quick, a defined advantage for assembling etc.
An hardware emulator becomes interesting in the moment it provides advantages over the original hardware. That can be saving space (expansions f.e.) or new features. C-One and T-Rex1 do that. Sadly their time seem to be a bit over.
To see the CPC2013 runing, come to the next Revision ;)
Quote from: TFM on 19:15, 19 February 14
An hardware emulator becomes interesting in the moment it provides advantages over the original hardware. That can be saving space (expansions f.e.) or new features.
But that's precisely the point. Save space, have extra features.
Quote from: Hicks on 23:17, 19 February 14
To see the CPC2013 runing, come to the next Revision ;)
In fact, come to Revision anyway... ;)
.
Yeah, that's quite busy isn't it! I think some inspiration has been taken from AMOS on the Amiga too.
I don't understand this project at all. He wants to create a new system and OS that does all that and yet is *somehow* binary compatible with the CPC? First, what's the point? I can understand minor upgrades, like CPCNG, but this is something else, it wouldn't even remotely be a CPC any more. Second, I don't see the hardware out there that could actually achieve it - seen any > 1GHz Z80s around lately?
I think I'd prefer the Symbiface 3 to happen. 1Mb memory, HD IDE, V9990 graphics card & Net connectivity. Can a CPC want more than that?
The V9990 is not a good VDP is used for sprite/tiles display. (only 256x192 screens with 4x16 colors palettes)
But, it may be a nice choice for bitmap display. (more screen modes, blitter and hi colors)
Quote from: TotO on 16:26, 28 February 14
The V9990 is not a good VDP is used for sprite/tiles display. (only 256x192 screens with 4x16 colors palettes)
But, it may be a nice choice for bitmap display. (more screen modes, blitter and hi colors)
Im not sure how you quantify not good? Its an astonishing bit of hardware IMHO that would make some awesome CPC games
The V9990 was done for MSX specifications and can't display the P1 and P2 screen modes with a CPC if you use an overlay.
But, can be great if used in B mode. (I don't speak about the IC graphic power)
If the CPC cant use the P modes I dont see that as being a bad thing really. Its not as if we've ever had tiles/patterns/sprites. The ability to have 256 or 32k colours at 512x212 and tonnes of Vram running with minimal z80 use is a desirable things considering we've been stuck at 4 or 16 for 30 years.
It also has the advantage is that if it plugs into a CPC its still a CPC isnt it?? :)
It would be neat, but it would be a different computer in the end.
Maybe if the firmware was hacked to use the new chip...
Some MSXs could overlay external video sources. Maybe is not a VDP direct option, and is made on external hardware (External from the VDP)
If the external VDP is initialited on a full black screen, then can be mixed with the CPC output, at RGB level, because the VDP also generates RGB signals.
When using the VDP, the CPC's screen is configured to full black, and you have an unique RGB output. Same as first Voodoo 3D cards :D
And because both should be sharing the CPCs clock, the images maybe will be easily genlocked...
You could mix both images, for a game you could make the scores-lives on the CPC side and the full resolution HD colour game on the VDP... lol
Quote from: Trebmint on 17:02, 28 February 14
If the CPC cant use the P modes I dont see that as being a bad thing really. Its not as if we've ever had tiles/patterns/sprites. The ability to have 256 or 32k colours at 512x212 and tonnes of Vram running with minimal z80 use is a desirable things considering we've been stuck at 4 or 16 for 30 years.
The V9990 was released in 1992... So more than 20 years ago but stillborn as the existing video games systems does better.
You can't display 512x512 mode and any other modes that can't match with the CPC display clock.
Like I said, yes bitmap modes are fines. But that don't make me dream at all. Better to use an other computer.
Quote from: Trebmint on 14:26, 28 February 14
I think I'd prefer the Symbiface 3 to happen. 1Mb memory, HD IDE, V9990 graphics card & Net connectivity. Can a CPC want more than that?
Yes. Finally to move on and have 4 MB as standard (compatible to RAM7 and Jareks expansions of 2 MB and 4 MB). :)
Quote from: TotO on 19:16, 28 February 14
The V9990 was released in 1992... So more than 20 years ago but stillborn as the existing video games systems does better.
You can't display 512x512 mode and any other modes that can't match with the CPC display clock.
Like I said, yes bitmap modes are fines. But that don't make me dream at all. Better to use an other computer.
I dont pretend to be an expert of video cards or compatibility. Personally I'd just like to see an enhanced CPC graphics capabilities via an addon card (so its just an upgraded CPC). Just a lot of VRam, Some form of blitter and 256 colours at 320x200 would do me.
So are there any cards that are better suited to the amstrad... ive not heard of any so the 9990 sounded perfect. If it doesnt work with the cpc hardware thats another thing
I got some V9990 for tests, some years ago. I was more disappointed about what it allow for it's time... :'(
But, I think that modes B0[nb]Not official[/nb], B2 and B4 may work great with the CPC and allow to use overscan easily.
All other modes are not suitable. (no tiles, no sprites so)
Mode B0 can display in 50Hz a 192x288 screen:
16bit = 5RGB = 32768 colors. (128K VRAM)
8bit = 4x4bit palette = 64 colors.
4bit = 1x4bit palette = 16 colors.
Mode B2 can display in 50Hz a 384x288 screen:
16bit = 5RGB = 32768 colors. (256K VRAM)
8bit = 4x4bit palette = 64 colors.
4bit = 1x4bit palette = 16 colors.
Mode B4 can display in 50Hz a 768x288 screen:
4bit = 4bit palette = 16 colors.
Each time you double the VRAM, you get more virtual screens for double/triple buffering.
But, you really need a harddrive (or big ROM) to store all data to display the 16bit modes.
In clear, with 128K VRAM you may expect something usable on CPC like:
- MODE 0 64 colors / 32768 and 32768 colours splash screens.
- MODE 1 64 colors / 32768
- MODE 2 16 colors / 32768
It's just a shame to not be able to display 16x16 colors in 8bit Bitmap mode and using Plane mode in 384 witdh. :(
But, sure... its blitter is enough fast for doing cool stuff if well interfaced with the CPC display. :)
After, the problem is always the same... Need programs. ;D
Quote from: TotO on 16:14, 03 March 14
After, the problem is always the same... Need programs. ;D
Indeed software is always the issue. And I dont think Im allowed to say 2014 is the year of Symbos am I?
I hope for peoples supporting it. 8)
But.. It's not a new Symbiface that will made more programs for it.
And think about peoples who have already put 129€ in it? Need to change it? An upgrade will be available?
Don't confuse the SF2 with SymbOS. One is hardware, one is software.
I confuse nothing. If a program use the special features related to the V9990, it will not run without.
Except if SymbOS avoid to directly access to the hardware...
But in all cases, you can't make a VGA program running on a CGA computer w/o big display problems, making them unusable. :)
May be, it will be better to offer the display board alone and usable by all existing users?
Relax ;) Trebmint and TotO talked about SymbOS and SF2. I was driving at that. Also the SF3 got mentioned. Sorry, but in this thread everything get's mixed up.
Further... for non CPC GFX imho a Terminal should be used, and I say terminal, because it should be a kind of 'smart' card that relieves the CPC, else where would be the gain?
Quote from: TotO on 20:21, 03 March 14
I confuse nothing. If a program use the special features related to the V9990, it will not run without.
Except if SymbOS avoid to directly access to the hardware...
But in all cases, you can't make a VGA program running on a CGA computer w/o big display problems, making them unusable. :)
May be, it will be better to offer the display board alone and usable by all existing users?
Symbos already allows 16>4 colour conversion without the coder having to change anything. Its possible at some point symbos might support 256 or 32k for the 9990 and the apps will be the same as run at 4 colour on the cpc, even if that means 2 colour varieties of the graphics have to be generated. Just better quality visuals with the same gameplay
Poor CPC... Already slow and need to decrease from 32K to 4 with that.
Sorry, but better to release an stand alone GfX expansion for the existing board and all users.
Quote from: TotO on 21:08, 03 March 14
Poor CPC... Already slow and need to decrease from 32K to 4 with that.
Sorry, but better to release an stand alone GfX expansion for the existing board and all users.
Which nobody will code for :(
It's not because the V9990 is embedded on a new Symbiface that peoples will program more for.
Peoples interested by this OS already got the board. That will only force them to buy again, or not support the V9990.
But, if peoples see what is possible by using SymbOS with it, they may be interested to buy a video card.
(but not again a full board, in my opinion)
Quote from: TotO on 21:08, 03 March 14
Poor CPC... Already slow and need to decrease from 32K to 4 with that.
Sorry, but better to release an stand alone GfX expansion for the existing board and all users.
Totally agreed! For all CPCs! ;)
Quote from: Trebmint on 21:15, 03 March 14
Which nobody will code for :(
Like a new driver for SymbOS. Or does it _already_ support the 9990?
Quote from: TFM on 21:49, 03 March 14
Like a new driver for SymbOS. Or does it _already_ support the 9990?
Symbos already supports the MSX GFX9000 which is the vdp9990, but only at 16 colours (like using a ferrari to go to the shops). MSX users are always wanting more 9990 software, and seem to be far more interested in developing symbos apps/games as a whole. If symbos were ever to make the jump to 256/32k colours (which probably wont happen just for the gfx9000 without the symbiface 3 existing imho) it would be a terrible shame if CPC didnt benefit from the improved visuals.
SymbOS running on a MSX turbo-R with Tetris! - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfR0yQks2Hs&feature=youtu.be&autoplay=1&rel=0&showsearch=0&showinfo=0&fmt=18&fs=1)
Actually have a look at this video which shows a few of prodatrons existing apps, and some the guy that made the video has developed on an MSX2 using SymBasic. Its all runs on the CPC too, just in 4 colours. Upgrade to 256 colours and wow? ???
Anyway I feel I've dragged this off topic so I will shut up now :)
For an OS, the real interest is to use the true-color in 16 bit (5R5G5B) or 8 bit (3R3G2B) offered by the V9990.
So, no need to manage a 16 color palette. And decrease is faster to manage for displaying anything on screen.
Ok, Symbos can do the job. Cool! :)
Now... there is a small problem. The hardware is missing on the CPC side! And the SF3 (in case it will get ever released) is already finished. It was shown in Spain years ago. I seriously doubt that Dr. Zed will start it's design from scratch to integrate a VDP. And honestly, as I know him, (and I know him quite a while, it was me who brought him in contact with the CPC back the day), so as I know him, he would choose more modern hardware for a VDP. Sorry.
Also me here hijacked the thread long enough. :) But on the other hand we got time since there is no OPC built yet. ;)
Quote from: TFM on 22:51, 03 March 14
Ok, Symbos can do the job. Cool! :)
Now... there is a small problem. The hardware is missing on the CPC side! And the SF3 (in case it will get ever released) is already finished. It was shown in Spain years ago. I seriously doubt that Dr. Zed will start it's design from scratch to integrate a VDP. And honestly, as I know him, (and I know him quite a while, it was me who brought him in contact with the CPC back the day), so as I know him, he would choose more modern hardware for a VDP. Sorry.
Also me here hijacked the thread long enough. :) But on the other hand we got time since there is no OPC built yet. ;)
Well I personally doubt that DrZed will finish the sf3, so its moot but a shame. Though prodatron told be a few weeks ago the intention was to support a v9990. Additonal hardware is the way to go imho... and even so people will argue its not a CPC anymore. We argue about everything else :)
My intention is to support 256 and 32k in the future builds of symstudio and symbasic, so I hope CPC and not just MSX supporters benefit from these better visuals somewhere down the line
It's just sad that the CPC expansion port not out the RGBS signals. :-\
If you are building a completely new video system for the CPC you don't need access to the RGB signals, just the address bus and data bus and a few control signals (all available on the expansion port). The new graphic card would have it's own RGBS signals. The old ones would be unused.
Bryce.
I'm building "nothing" :D
Ok, grammar expert :)
I meant "Si on fait" not "Si tu fais". But English grammar doesn't tend to use the word "one" anymore (unless you happen to be a member of the royal family).
Bryce.
Sure, english is not accurate for that... You mean: "Si vous faites". ;D
I just though that you have answered to my previous post, has I was speaking about the expansion port.
Quote from: TotO on 14:55, 04 March 14
Sure, english is not accurate for that... You mean: "Si vous faites". ;D
I think we know each other long enough to say "Tu" :)
Bryce.
Just for your information, here are two VDP9990 videos, which demonstrate its capabilities:
X-Tazy intro 1.2 on openMSX for MSXturboR/GFX9000 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwu3nWT3N7I#)
X-Tazy Level 1 (pre-version) on openMSX - game for MSXturboR/GFX9000 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2iSGXSs5b4#)
X-Tacy, a game project which hasn't been finished unfortunately. Oh, it's using the MoonSound soundcard as well :)
SymbOS supports the bitmap modes 2 (384x240x16), 3 (512x212x16), 4 (768x240x16) and 7 (1024x212x16) and virtual X resolutions of up to 1024px
SymbOS on a MSX TurboR + GFX9000 (2) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eK7r1EkSOKs#t=0m20s)
I think for implementing fast arcade games the 256, 19268 and 32768 colour modes doesn't make much sense, but it would be cool for stuff like Lucas Art Adventures etc :)
Dr.Zed wasn't planning to integrate the VDP9990 into the SF3 but to create an own graphic hardware. The VDP9990 already has advanced blitter features compared to the MSX2 graphic, but it would make much sense to implement even a more usefull blitter
CU,
Prodatron
Obviously the new card is going to require its own VRAM, but could the CPC fill this effectively to create anything faster than really good still pictures? The CPC won't be running any faster than normal and the 6845 will still be running in the background even if it's not being used.
Bryce.
Quote from: Bryce on 15:51, 04 March 14
Obviously the new card is going to require its own VRAM, but could the CPC fill this effectively to create anything faster than really good still pictures? The CPC won't be running any faster than normal and the 6845 will still be running in the background even if it's not being used.
Bryce.
If it has a blitter then all the z80 has to do is tell it copy graphics from one place to another, so in theory it could be insanely quick.
Quote from: Bryce on 15:51, 04 March 14
Obviously the new card is going to require its own VRAM, but could the CPC fill this effectively to create anything faster than really good still pictures?
Yes, plotting bitmaps on the screen is about the same speed. You send the rectangle definition to the blitter and then do a lot of INC B:OUTI commands until the full rectangle is filled with the bitmap. As you don't need to take care about line jumps you don't loose much speed here. Such a blitter can also handle things like transparency or XOR stuff.
But as Trebmint said, best way is to keep all graphics, fonts etc. already in the external VRAM and let the blitter do the whole stuff without the Z80.