Of course it's not a 3D object it's running a 1.79Mhz 8 bit computer.
From my knowledge of this computer I would say the checkerboard background is built using hardware sprites at 4 x width (Atari's are like Amiga, tall and skinny). The ball is probably built in a series of 2d buffers (One for each frame) and the fine scroll registers and display pointers are used to move the ball (The graphics window is moving over a series of static 2d objects, giving the impression that the ball is moving.
8 bit ataris were designed by the same person who did the amiga chipset - Jay Miner. It has some similar features...eg tall sprites, display-list co-processor etc...
@bswain9999 I think the chessboard background is created from the 4 players at quadruple width, with the remaining missiles used for the left and right edges. The ball is draw on the playfield which is animated using page flipping and manipulation of the vertical and horizontal scroll registers. This would allow the text window at the bottom to appear to move over the display by manipulating the ANTIC display list.
An 8 bit Atari had about a quarter of a MIP, and an Amiga 1 MIP processing power. For its time, the Amiga had a lot of custom hardware, but nothing that helped with vector processing, the same with the early Atari proving how the demo is possible. People go on about using a bitter in the Amiga, but it sucks for 3D or Vector graphics, hence why all 3D games are slightly faster on the Atari ST over the Amiga. These demo's are based on sheer processing power.
@meowmmmmm Actually the 8-bit's 1.79 MHz 6502 is more like .9 MIPS while the Amiga is somewhat less than 1 MIPS (it makes no sense to leave the S off, it's like leaving the H off MPH).
They're totally different architecture though, so instruction speed is not the only issue. (short instruction times is one of the main reason the 6502 -or 6800- series is sometimes referred to as the forerunner to RISC)
@koolkitty8989 I am talking about instructions taking average clock cycles per processor for a task. No way is a 6502 close to 1 mipS. Even more, no way is a 68000 processor slower than the 6502. Years ago, I wrote code for both processors to run a benchmark called 'Evolve', and the 68000 was over 4 times faster than the 6502. Only a few of the 6502 instructions use a few clock cycles.
>>>For its time, the Amiga had a lot of custom hardware, but nothing that helped with vector processing<<<
Completely wrong statement. The Amiga Blitter can draw lines and fill areas at a very fast speed. Demos like "Hardwired" (Logo Zoomer, Glenz Vectors) make extensive use of this feature to reach 50fps frame rate drawing filled (and even translucent) vectors.
So, even in the field of 3D graphics, the Amiga clearly beats the Atari ST.
@porcorosso81 HAHAHAHAHAHA The Amiga Blitter can do very primitive lines and even less primitive shading. It however cannot do them on every clock cycle and is very very slow.
Check out: ST-Niccc 2000 on a ST. How about 'EPIC', much more detail, and smoother.
"Translucent Vectors" Wow, thats like that special order of see through glass I bought. Not.
Idiot. To draw one line, one needs two blitter channels. When the blitter has full DMA slots (up to 4 bitplanes in lores), it operates at 1.78 Mhz. That means, using two channels (2 cycles per pixel), the blitter can draw 890.000 line pixels using Bresenham Algorithm. I dare say that no 8Mhz 68000 can achieve the same speed. Filling is even faster. Again: 2 channels. The Blitter can fill up to 16 Pixels per operation using xor fill. This amounts to 14.2 million pixels per secons.
@porcorosso81 14.2 Million Pixels per second? Hmm, the Amigas common 320 x 200 res only uses 3.2 million pixels per second, so why do we not see full screen 3D at 50 FPS (you know like dooom, or quake), and then still have 11 Million Pixel possessing power left in reserve by your calculations?
You have no idea about computer processing, about hardware or anything. So sad.
@meowmmmmm no, what's sad is you talking about your shitty little games when there's a lot more important things going on if only you'd leave your mom's basement once in a while.
So it's more than clear that you are just an Atari ST fanboi who knows nothing about how the Amiga works (or does know, but willfully ignore the facts). If translucent vectors are not fancy enough for you, then trash both Atari ST and Amiga and buy a modern game console or PC.
Considering ST-Niccc 2000: smooth? The demo I have referred to does transparent vectors on the Amiga at > 50fps <. Plus, the samplerate is quite low. Though I admit that it is impressive for STE.
If you wanna impress me, show me something like Sanity: ARTE on the ST (or STE, for giving you a slight advantage ;) . Which means: full screen wall and ceiling texturemapping, again at 50fps, on a stock 7.15Mhz machine. Otherwise, get bent and stop talking shit about a machine where you probably did not produce any single line of code for, or even read the hardware reference manual. ;)
@porcorosso81 This demo is crap. The screen is output at 50 FPS to the TV by the modulator, but the actual FPS is only 9 FPS. You call that Texture mapping? Snes mode 7 is way more impressive than this.
@porcorosso81 You have no idea about anything do you. In the demo you mentioned 'Sanity: ARTE', are you going to say that the Mandelbrot's are calculated on the fly? Not! Blah Bah Blah
That being said, that ball is too big and has too many colors/facets to be a hardware sprite. It could be several software sprites, possibly combined with hardware sprites. More likely, it's an actual example of blitting without any special hardware.
How can someone say that an Atari can be even do 1% of an AMIGA can do, it's ridiculous, the Amiga do a wayyyy better boing ball anim at the time in fully multitasking and the hardware based on 4 or more cpu cooperating between them its only starting to explore on PC GFX cards this days and Next Gen consoles, but Atari was like a PC with VGA gfx card, no more, no MM hardware, the boing ball was not only done one time, the Amiga, the first A1000 can do it many times, limited only by memory !
Well, you obviously have a limited knowledge about what custom chips brings to the equation.
Both the Atari ST and Amiga are running at (roughly) 8 mhz, and the bus is shared between all the components that need to use the memory. Custom chips helps doing things in parallel, they can do operations faster, but in the end if an Amiga is faster than a ST its not by an order of magnitude. That's why you can add Fast Ram on an amiga, without the processor speed is limited when other chips run.
Maybe Amiga broke the contracts with Atari, maybe they didn't. (Did you mean contacts?)
But from what I've heard, Jack Tramiel was the type of guy who would screw another company over if he could get away with it, regardless of what he'd agreed. According to Steve Hales (one of Synapse software's programmers), Tramiel's failure to meet an agreement that should have been legally binding on him led to the downfall of one of the 8-bit Atari's leading and most innovative supporters.
And legal or not, I heard that he was quite happy to exploit the situation which would have led to the Amiga hardware going to him. Commodore paid back the money Amiga owed Atari, Tramiel didn't get his forfeiture, tough ****!
BTW, I have way more fanboy loyalty to Atari than to Commodore, but when it comes down to it, it's just business, and Tramiel was in it for that reason. No different from than a lot of other people in the industry, but no-one owed him **** when he lost out either!
I heard in an interview he'd commision companies to make commodore hardware and not pay them for it, then use the money he made from selling it to buy the company when they filed for bankruptcy! If only he and the Amiga team had been under the same roof, at Commodore or Atari, without their rivalry either one might have been able to present a more united front against the PC market :(
that's ridiculous, the real Amiga Demo could perform that movement in multitasking... that is: you see the ball moving while you grab different screens, or formatting a disk, the program you are running is nothing, and can be done on a C64 too... perhaps you never had an Amiga and you dont know what are you talking about.
Cool
mobobber 1 month ago
The Amiga and the Atari 800 - two of Jay Miner's finest inventions.
TheInformalstyle 6 months ago 2
bien jouer
Daytonstars 9 months ago
Cool :) now comes the time for realtime rendered Juggler ;)
D6Film 1 year ago
Of course it's not a 3D object it's running a 1.79Mhz 8 bit computer.
From my knowledge of this computer I would say the checkerboard background is built using hardware sprites at 4 x width (Atari's are like Amiga, tall and skinny). The ball is probably built in a series of 2d buffers (One for each frame) and the fine scroll registers and display pointers are used to move the ball (The graphics window is moving over a series of static 2d objects, giving the impression that the ball is moving.
R6502A 1 year ago
@R6502A my my, we are up our own arse aren't we? Sanctimonious, moi?
andymerrett 6 months ago
Maybe it's just me, but I think the "bouncing ball" in this video isn't a 3D object. It looks more like a 2D sprite.
gerodinis 1 year ago
This is a demo from the Atari 8 bit computer line.
R6502A 1 year ago
Finally Atari is good for something :D
amigapoika 1 year ago
8 bit ataris were designed by the same person who did the amiga chipset - Jay Miner. It has some similar features...eg tall sprites, display-list co-processor etc...
kimosaaaabe 1 year ago
Haha! The Amiga users were WRONG! =)
Thorzanek 1 year ago
@Thorzanek
Yes, now i'd like to see Jim Power running on the Atari 800. ;)
porcorosso81 1 year ago
Easily done using the 4 players 4 missiles of the 8 bit Atari 800 (a little too complex in the detail variation for simple page flipping).
Also, it doesn't have to worry about multi-tasking.
bswain9999 1 year ago
@bswain9999 I think the chessboard background is created from the 4 players at quadruple width, with the remaining missiles used for the left and right edges. The ball is draw on the playfield which is animated using page flipping and manipulation of the vertical and horizontal scroll registers. This would allow the text window at the bottom to appear to move over the display by manipulating the ANTIC display list.
R6502A 1 year ago
An 8 bit Atari had about a quarter of a MIP, and an Amiga 1 MIP processing power. For its time, the Amiga had a lot of custom hardware, but nothing that helped with vector processing, the same with the early Atari proving how the demo is possible. People go on about using a bitter in the Amiga, but it sucks for 3D or Vector graphics, hence why all 3D games are slightly faster on the Atari ST over the Amiga. These demo's are based on sheer processing power.
meowmmmmm 1 year ago
@meowmmmmm Actually the 8-bit's 1.79 MHz 6502 is more like .9 MIPS while the Amiga is somewhat less than 1 MIPS (it makes no sense to leave the S off, it's like leaving the H off MPH).
They're totally different architecture though, so instruction speed is not the only issue. (short instruction times is one of the main reason the 6502 -or 6800- series is sometimes referred to as the forerunner to RISC)
koolkitty8989 1 year ago
@koolkitty8989 I am talking about instructions taking average clock cycles per processor for a task. No way is a 6502 close to 1 mipS. Even more, no way is a 68000 processor slower than the 6502. Years ago, I wrote code for both processors to run a benchmark called 'Evolve', and the 68000 was over 4 times faster than the 6502. Only a few of the 6502 instructions use a few clock cycles.
meowmmmmm 1 year ago 2
@meowmmmmm
>>>For its time, the Amiga had a lot of custom hardware, but nothing that helped with vector processing<<<
Completely wrong statement. The Amiga Blitter can draw lines and fill areas at a very fast speed. Demos like "Hardwired" (Logo Zoomer, Glenz Vectors) make extensive use of this feature to reach 50fps frame rate drawing filled (and even translucent) vectors.
So, even in the field of 3D graphics, the Amiga clearly beats the Atari ST.
porcorosso81 1 year ago
@porcorosso81 HAHAHAHAHAHA The Amiga Blitter can do very primitive lines and even less primitive shading. It however cannot do them on every clock cycle and is very very slow.
Check out: ST-Niccc 2000 on a ST. How about 'EPIC', much more detail, and smoother.
"Translucent Vectors" Wow, thats like that special order of see through glass I bought. Not.
meowmmmmm 1 year ago
@meowmmmmm
Idiot. To draw one line, one needs two blitter channels. When the blitter has full DMA slots (up to 4 bitplanes in lores), it operates at 1.78 Mhz. That means, using two channels (2 cycles per pixel), the blitter can draw 890.000 line pixels using Bresenham Algorithm. I dare say that no 8Mhz 68000 can achieve the same speed. Filling is even faster. Again: 2 channels. The Blitter can fill up to 16 Pixels per operation using xor fill. This amounts to 14.2 million pixels per secons.
porcorosso81 1 year ago
@porcorosso81 14.2 Million Pixels per second? Hmm, the Amigas common 320 x 200 res only uses 3.2 million pixels per second, so why do we not see full screen 3D at 50 FPS (you know like dooom, or quake), and then still have 11 Million Pixel possessing power left in reserve by your calculations?
You have no idea about computer processing, about hardware or anything. So sad.
meowmmmmm 1 year ago
@meowmmmmm no, what's sad is you talking about your shitty little games when there's a lot more important things going on if only you'd leave your mom's basement once in a while.
andymerrett 6 months ago
@meowmmmmm
(2nd part)
So it's more than clear that you are just an Atari ST fanboi who knows nothing about how the Amiga works (or does know, but willfully ignore the facts). If translucent vectors are not fancy enough for you, then trash both Atari ST and Amiga and buy a modern game console or PC.
Considering ST-Niccc 2000: smooth? The demo I have referred to does transparent vectors on the Amiga at > 50fps <. Plus, the samplerate is quite low. Though I admit that it is impressive for STE.
porcorosso81 1 year ago
@porcorosso81 I own both for the record. While it does have some good hardware, the ST/E has positive stuff too.
meowmmmmm 1 year ago
@meowmmmmm
If you wanna impress me, show me something like Sanity: ARTE on the ST (or STE, for giving you a slight advantage ;) . Which means: full screen wall and ceiling texturemapping, again at 50fps, on a stock 7.15Mhz machine. Otherwise, get bent and stop talking shit about a machine where you probably did not produce any single line of code for, or even read the hardware reference manual. ;)
porcorosso81 1 year ago
@porcorosso81 This demo is crap. The screen is output at 50 FPS to the TV by the modulator, but the actual FPS is only 9 FPS. You call that Texture mapping? Snes mode 7 is way more impressive than this.
meowmmmmm 1 year ago
@meowmmmmm grow up. People with lives are way more impressive than you.
andymerrett 6 months ago
@meowmmmmm
Lol, just found out that all graphics in ST-Niccc 2000 are precalculated. And then this shitty framerate? XD How embarassing...
porcorosso81 1 year ago
@porcorosso81 You have no idea about anything do you. In the demo you mentioned 'Sanity: ARTE', are you going to say that the Mandelbrot's are calculated on the fly? Not! Blah Bah Blah
meowmmmmm 1 year ago
That being said, that ball is too big and has too many colors/facets to be a hardware sprite. It could be several software sprites, possibly combined with hardware sprites. More likely, it's an actual example of blitting without any special hardware.
OneEyedJack1970 2 years ago
Granted, the CTIA/GTIA could do hardware sprites, which are similar to bit blits in many ways.
OneEyedJack1970 2 years ago
The Atari 800 didn't have a blitter -- just ANTIC and GTIA (CTIA for the originals).
OneEyedJack1970 2 years ago
@OneEyedJack1970
The Atari actually has a line-blitter . Tats why Space Harrier runs in that high framerate....
Look at:
tmEFFp0lLzo
It's also the base for some really stunning fast 3D on an 1.79MHz machine...
vv9zY6ei8vI
olynxmano 1 year ago
Good work!
MKatoPG 2 years ago
How can someone say that an Atari can be even do 1% of an AMIGA can do, it's ridiculous, the Amiga do a wayyyy better boing ball anim at the time in fully multitasking and the hardware based on 4 or more cpu cooperating between them its only starting to explore on PC GFX cards this days and Next Gen consoles, but Atari was like a PC with VGA gfx card, no more, no MM hardware, the boing ball was not only done one time, the Amiga, the first A1000 can do it many times, limited only by memory !
Dafama2k7 2 years ago
Well, you obviously have a limited knowledge about what custom chips brings to the equation.
Both the Atari ST and Amiga are running at (roughly) 8 mhz, and the bus is shared between all the components that need to use the memory. Custom chips helps doing things in parallel, they can do operations faster, but in the end if an Amiga is faster than a ST its not by an order of magnitude. That's why you can add Fast Ram on an amiga, without the processor speed is limited when other chips run.
Dbhug 2 years ago
wwo, kewl :) I wasn't surprised when I saw it :) What makes nowadays demoscene, it just don't fits in the head ;) Amiga rulez! Atari rulez!
D6Film 2 years ago
Maybe Amiga broke the contracts with Atari, maybe they didn't. (Did you mean contacts?)
But from what I've heard, Jack Tramiel was the type of guy who would screw another company over if he could get away with it, regardless of what he'd agreed. According to Steve Hales (one of Synapse software's programmers), Tramiel's failure to meet an agreement that should have been legally binding on him led to the downfall of one of the 8-bit Atari's leading and most innovative supporters.
NotATube 2 years ago
And legal or not, I heard that he was quite happy to exploit the situation which would have led to the Amiga hardware going to him. Commodore paid back the money Amiga owed Atari, Tramiel didn't get his forfeiture, tough ****!
BTW, I have way more fanboy loyalty to Atari than to Commodore, but when it comes down to it, it's just business, and Tramiel was in it for that reason. No different from than a lot of other people in the industry, but no-one owed him **** when he lost out either!
NotATube 2 years ago
I heard in an interview he'd commision companies to make commodore hardware and not pay them for it, then use the money he made from selling it to buy the company when they filed for bankruptcy! If only he and the Amiga team had been under the same roof, at Commodore or Atari, without their rivalry either one might have been able to present a more united front against the PC market :(
niatona 2 years ago
that's ridiculous, the real Amiga Demo could perform that movement in multitasking... that is: you see the ball moving while you grab different screens, or formatting a disk, the program you are running is nothing, and can be done on a C64 too... perhaps you never had an Amiga and you dont know what are you talking about.
Gaesatae 2 years ago
Look at this :
Search for : yqFElndQoK0
Atari can do multitasking there aswell.
olynxmano 2 years ago
@Gaesatae or perhaps none of us really care what you're talking about, we're just humouring you. Go and grab a multitasking life.
andymerrett 6 months ago