If you had to choose 1, 8 bit micro as the best all around?

Started by JimmyChan2022, 16:36, 03 July 22

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mage

Quote from: Gryzor on 08:20, 04 July 22I know people who wrote their PhD thesis on a cpc.
The LaTeX source file of mine would'nt fit in CPC 128K  :o

Mage

Of course I would choose CPC 6128 (maybe "+"), but i'm quite unaware of other 8bits abilities. CPC could be used in so many situations : programming, playing, working...

Gryzor

Quote from: Mage on 20:46, 09 November 22
Quote from: Gryzor on 08:20, 04 July 22I know people who wrote their PhD thesis on a cpc.
The LaTeX source file of mine would'nt fit in CPC 128K  :o
Just put in some white space and fill it in by hand like normal people 😀

BSC

It has to be the CPC464 with disk drive and dk'tronics 64k extension. The original, the best! :D

ZbyniuR

Do you remember "Computer of the Year" from Chip Magazine? Smart gays whole 80s was choosing best machine by parameters, available software and of course by price. In few category, with most interesting for us "home computer".
1982 - Vic20
1983 - C64
1984 - C64
1985 - CPC 464
1986 - CPC 6128

And in 1987 they let 16bits starts in this category.
1987 - A500/520ST+/SpectravideoSV738/CPC6128/C128.
1988 - 1040ST/Archimedes/A500/PanasonicMSX2.
1989 - A500/AtariST/PanasonicMSX2/Archimedes.

I was read about it and I wonder what MSX2 must have to be better than CPC?  Now I know more, colors resolution sprites, but slower Basic. I never had MSX2, and I still wonder what I loose because of that. :)
In STARS, TREK is better than WARS.

Prodatron

Yes, the MSX2 is better than the CPC.
(which doesn't mean, that the cpc is bad :) )

The MSX was one of the most succesful 8bit machines ever (sold >=8 millions) and even created the most powerful 8bit machine, which has been sold on a regular base (the MSX TurboR).
The MSX had one of the most clean and scaleable design ever created for an 8bit system.

GRAPHICAL Z80 MULTITASKING OPERATING SYSTEM

TotO

The MSX2 is better on the paper, because the V9938 VDP for games. The best usage is not the sprites modes, but the 256 colours blitter mode (like for the Knight Lore remake). If the user require a 640 pixels display for any reason (CP/M ?), it is not appropriated.
"You make one mistake in your life and the internet will never let you live it down" (Keith Goodyer)

eto

Quote from: McArti0 on 19:25, 09 November 22Enterprise 128, excelent but slow basic with procedure and local variable. 256colors, fantastic ram configurator , 640x512 resolution and native CPC simulator.
Was there ever anything that really shows that the Enterprise is better? I struggle to find any app or game that is not a direct CPC rip with almost exactly the same appearance. OK, some more colours, agreed. but e.g. I have never seen the high res resolution in action. 

Sykobee (Briggsy)

Quote from: JimmyChan2022 on 16:36, 03 July 22Im going to say C64, it has the speed, more colors than Speccy, best sound imo, and scrolls well.

I love 464, but I think if someone had asked me out of the 3, (Speccy, C64, 464) would have to recommend C64.

It doesn't really have the speed, the tilemap graphics and sprites help a lot (although they still have to manually scroll the Colour RAM), but it's only a 1MHz 6502 (2MHz would have beaten the Z80 though). Audio-wise it's very strong. But yes, for games overall the C64 was a good choice, if you could bear the disk loading time, if you could afford the disk drive.

It's less than ideal for serious work because of the screen - MODE 2 made the CPC more versatile in these areas. Sure, there was serious software on the C64 simply because of the sheer sales of the device in the US particularly, but it had to deal with the limitations of the hardware. 

Personally I'd want to limit this to devices that sold well - which excludes the Enterprise devices, despite their cool looks and marginally improved graphics over the CPC. 

MSX2 was a far later device that could benefit from more modern graphics hardware, hence it was very strong in games. If we include the Plus range then the MSX2 is valid, and wins.

BBC Micro was very strong - the hardware could withstand some real abuse, graphically okay (resolution choice, colour depth choice, text modes, but awful 1-bit RGB palette because of the TTL Microvitec CUB displays commonly used in schools), expandable. Very expensive, a cost reduction for homes didn't occur unless you count the Electron which had a lot of compromises.

McArti0

CPC 6128, Whole 6128 and Only 6128, with ........
TYPICAL :) TV Funai 22FL532/10 with VGA-RGB-in.

TotO

The Enterprise 64/128 could have been a formidable line of 8-bit microcomputers...
If the hardware had been sold by Amstrad as CPC 464/6128 with the Locomotive BASIC. :)

People complain because the CPC had only one "gray" to display, but the Entreprise had one less.
"You make one mistake in your life and the internet will never let you live it down" (Keith Goodyer)

rexbeng

Here's a thing to compare two of the said micros if you feeling like it!



rexbeng


eto

Quote from: McArti0 on 13:29, 10 November 22
Quote from: eto on 11:46, 10 November 22Was there ever anything that really shows that the Enterprise is better?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOPnCRmnBuo

Sorry, I didn't mean that I don't know that it has better hardware and of course specific demos exist. It's 100% clear, that the Enterprise has better specs than the CPC. I am more wondering why in real life, most people (including me) would not see a big difference. Why doesn't it show it superiority in games and apps? Is it just because of the small community and straight CPC games/apps are just easier - a problem similar to the Speccy ports on the CPC? Or is it on paper much better - but at the same time too limited show it in real world applications?

When the Enterprise appeared I was super curious and eager to get my hands on one. On paper it sounded so great. With its specs it should have wiped the floor with the CPC. When a friend got one, he was of course also a bit bragging with that - but when I visited him I was really unimpressed as there was absolutely nothing, that was not very, very similar to the CPC. Either identical or not so much better, that I would have wanted to get one. Ok, sure, here and there a demo, that shows an effect that would be hard or impossible to replicate on a CPC. But in the actual games and applications, there was not much noticeable difference.

rexbeng

I would say that the enterprise suffered from Amstrad ports the same way the Amstrad suffered from Spectrum ports.

Prodatron

Quote from: Sykobee (Briggsy) on 12:09, 10 November 22MSX2 was a far later device that could benefit from more modern graphics hardware, hence it was very strong in games.
The MSX2 appeared in 1985, the same year like the 6128.

Quote from: TotO on 13:55, 10 November 22People complain because the CPC had only one "gray" to display, but the Entreprise had zero.
IIRC it has 8 values for Red and Green, and 4 for Blue. So you can still mix two greys (but not exactly that grey of the CPC).

GRAPHICAL Z80 MULTITASKING OPERATING SYSTEM

TotO

Quote from: Prodatron on 14:40, 10 November 22IIRC it has 8 values for Red and Green, and 4 for Blue. So you can still mix two greys
Hum, you are right... It has the two greys like from a 6bit palette. I beg pardon! :-\
"You make one mistake in your life and the internet will never let you live it down" (Keith Goodyer)

rexbeng

Quote from: Prodatron on 14:40, 10 November 22The MSX2 appeared in 1985, the same year like the 6128.


Yeah but while the MSX2 was a different (/upgraded) enough machine compared to MSX1, the 6128 was just a 464 with the external drive and external ram built into one package. 6128 wasnt a 'CPC2'.

McArti0

Wikipedia say ... "Entersoft, modeled after Amstrad's AMSOFT, was set up to ensure a steady supply of software for the new machine."

It was faster that way, but it didn't save the company anyway.

Wiki...
"After the initial manufacturing run of 80,000 units, it is believed that no further units were made, so the Enterprise is among the rarer home computers of the 1980s. The company shipped 20,000 units to Hungary on its closure, and a strong user community formed there."

Who, when and where was to write this new better software.... ::)

CPC 6128, Whole 6128 and Only 6128, with ........
TYPICAL :) TV Funai 22FL532/10 with VGA-RGB-in.

eto

Quote from: Prodatron on 14:40, 10 November 22IIRC it has 8 values for Red and Green, and 4 for Blue. So you can still mix two greys (but not exactly that grey of the CPC).

I don't think you will ever get a clean grey from a 332 RGB DAC. The blue levels and the R and G levels are at least 10-12% off. The colours will be "grey-ish" but not grey. Probably still better than just a single grey.

TotO

Quote from: rexbeng on 14:46, 10 November 22Yeah but while the MSX2 was a different (/upgraded) enough machine compared to MSX1, the 6128 was just a 464 with the external drive and external ram built into one package. 6128 wasnt a 'CPC2'.
The MSX2 is mainly a MSX with an upgraded VDP (and not the best). So, it is just a point of view.
The Amstrad Plus is a "CPC2". Nobody considerate the 6128 as.
"You make one mistake in your life and the internet will never let you live it down" (Keith Goodyer)

rexbeng

Regardless how someone might think 'the vdp in MSX2 could be better' it still is a significant improvement. New resolutions, new modes, more colours, improved sprites etc. You could say the same about the soundchip, although by a smaller margin. There are no such core changes to the 6128 compared to the 464. Comparing the MSX1 and MSX2 for me is like comparing the original 464 to the 6128 plus.

Edit: scratch the 'somewhat better soundchip'; I had it mixed-up in my mind! ;D

andycadley

I think the Enterprise mostly suffered from being so late to market that any confidence in it had ebbed away, it's not surprising many didn't sell. 

And, like the MSX, it probably suffered from an over-engineered attempt at future proofing the system, with lots of aspects being designed such that programs had to work with the OS in an effort to ensure they could continue to work on future hardware revisions. The Speccy and Amstrad proved, to some extent, that level of forethought wasn't really necessary within the boundaries of an 8-bit system and the overheads of doing so tended to be costly on such resource constrained systems.

The 90's era 8-bits, like the SAM Coupe, CPC+ and ill fated C65 (had it come out) should probably be the theoretical best, they're certainly more powerful than most. They did suffer from trying to retain compatibility with older machines though which probably constrained the designs in less than optimal ways.

Gryzor

Quote from: andycadley on 19:01, 10 November 22I think the Enterprise mostly suffered from being so late to market that any confidence in it had ebbed away, it's not surprising many didn't sell.

And, like the MSX, it probably suffered from an over-engineered attempt at future proofing the system, with lots of aspects being designed such that programs had to work with the OS in an effort to ensure they could continue to work on future hardware revisions. The Speccy and Amstrad proved, to some extent, that level of forethought wasn't really necessary within the boundaries of an 8-bit system and the overheads of doing so tended to be costly on such resource constrained systems.

The 90's era 8-bits, like the SAM Coupe, CPC+ and ill fated C65 (had it come out) should probably be the theoretical best, they're certainly more powerful than most. They did suffer from trying to retain compatibility with older machines though which probably constrained the designs in less than optimal ways.
Excellent points. 

ZbyniuR

I think all candidate for best 8bit, like C128, CPC+, MSX2, Apple IIc+, etc... have 4 problems:
1. Too late...
2. not strong enough, 
3. and too expensive - compare to 16bits like A500, 520ST, Tandy 1000 or Schneider EuroPC.
4. And very little software to show power of new features. Because compatibility with old one wasn't enough for that price.
In STARS, TREK is better than WARS.

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod