Zamuel_a wrote:Every Amiga owners always says that the Amiga is best on playing tracker music and ok, it got 4 channels, BUT the Atari has a higher processor speed so I wonder how much the difference are? The Amiga can only play in 28kHz to, while the STE can do it in 50.
I know the Lance tracker can play 50kHz mods in about 30% processor time, so shouldn't a 25kHz (which is similar to Amigas 28kHz) be able to run in maybe 20% processor time? And the Atari is about 13% faster so maybe it can compensate for the lack of 4 channel output? Atleast it sounds to me that the difference isn't so big as many people thinks, and I prefer to listen to 50khz mods if I can choose
A Amiga mod player routine must take some time to? There is alot more than just output audio data in a mod player so it must take some time there to.
Zamuel_a wrote:Didn't know that about the Paula chip, but if it's then you have a VGA resolution I guess you need a Amiga 1200 or higher? I was just comparing a standard Amiga 500 and a standard STE, or else we can compare a A1200 to a Falcon and see who is best
Zamuel_a wrote:It's the same thing with Amigas Cooper. Raster effects are easily done on the Atari to with Timer B interrupts and I think the higher clockspeed can compensate for gain you get from the Cooper.
Zamuel_a wrote:I think the STE sounds better than Amiga since it can run in 50kHz
By the way, 28 khz is even higher than the maximum frequency limit the human ear can hear. 50 khz is a nonsense since the human can't make any difference between a music at 20 khz and 44,1khz
to playback an 8 bits 44,1Khz, you need an A1200 with a 68040+FPU. This gives an idea about the 50Khz on STE.
Zamuel_a wrote: or else we can compare a A1200 to a Falcon and see who is best
To main the main difference for quality in playing module is that STE has only a STE 8bits dac, so you have to mix 4 voices in 8bits (it means 6bits per sample). AMIGA has really 4 voices so all voices really use 8 bits of the samples. You can do things better on STE by mixing only 2 voices on right channel, and 2 on left, the quality is better.
coze wrote:Zamuel_a wrote: or else we can compare a A1200 to a Falcon and see who is best
I don't want to bring this a Amiga vs Atari flame war but I have to add that comparing 1200 to falcon is not fair. Falcons retail price more than twice the 1200 I think. They were designed for different markets, if commodore wanted to produce a high end machine, they could have put a DSP and 030 to a1200 too, and they would be selling a similar prices then.
Frank B wrote:Of course it uses the CPU on the Amiga. Maybe not for mixing the channels but it still has to interpret the tracker data to tell Paula what to do. From memory the raster time taken for the Protracker replayer on the Amiga is about 15-20 scanlines. Wouldn't be surprised if it has some interrupt overhead too.
leonard wrote:Frank B wrote:Of course it uses the CPU on the Amiga. Maybe not for mixing the channels but it still has to interpret the tracker data to tell Paula what to do. From memory the raster time taken for the Protracker replayer on the Amiga is about 15-20 scanlines. Wouldn't be surprised if it has some interrupt overhead too.
what i meant was that the CPU get no charge. Of course it has to interpret data so that paula takes it next, but overall the 68000 on amiga doesn't take 30% or more CPU for this task.
Yes it use CPU, about the same CPU as a standard "chip" music driver on atari, so it's about between 8 and 12 raster line for protracker.The funny part is that amiga coder are not "CPU" expert
Mainly because of the difference between both machines Everything must be made in soft on atari, which led the coders to work out tight code, when on amiga coders just use the 68000 to drive the hardware.
Amiga coders thinks and breath "custom chips" programming when ST coders thinks "68000 coding".so if you look at the protracker original replay code, you will see tons of awfull things such as DIV, etc. Add to this some AMIGA music driver use wait-loop to setup the next loop sample adress. (so the CPU is waiting for nothing). Best player use timer to setup the loop adress few rasterline after without "hanging" the CPU. And some other good player just setup the loop adress on the next VBlank, so it does not need interrupt at all. The fastest MOD player on AMIGA 500 takes about 5 raster lines I guess.
interestingAgain, for quality, saying that "STE is 50khz so it's better than CD" is just a mistake. There is tons of other stuff to consider for audio quality (raw sample instrument quality, 8bits depth MOD sample, original instrument sampling frequency, volume-table emulation, 8bits sound mixing, etc...). 50khz sounds a bit too "marketing" to me (ATARI could say "hey, 50khz is better than 44.1Khz").
Yes, 50 khz on STE is all relative.AMIGA hardware is definitvely better than ATARI hardware to replay protracker module But you can emulate it on STE quite well if you take care about quality and don't bother about your CPU (because it takes a huge amount of CPU to emulate PAULA with good quality).
The amiga 500 doesn't use main CPU, paula can be used independantly
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests