A1200/Falcon comparison

Atari talk, or the life and the universe and things. Just keep it clean!
KyleB
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 7:08 pm

Re: A1200/Falcon comparison

Post by KyleB » Sat Aug 04, 2018 5:22 pm

EvilFranky wrote:
Sat Aug 04, 2018 4:33 pm
Petari wrote:
Sat Aug 04, 2018 4:05 pm
But my comment was mostly because that "1MB Falcon is the slowest computer ever made" - huh - why it would be slower than Falcon with 14 MB ?
Because it fits their narrative, even though it's factually incorrect :mrgreen:
I already said why 1MB Falcon is slowest computer ever. Because that config is ideal for use with tasks where it's switched off and can't run gembench, like propping open doors, stopping bits of paper getting blown away by breezes, something to stand on to feel taller, etc.

It's an insult to the base machine, not intended as a factual statement. Falcon with 1MB Is like if a body builder had a massive torso but toothpick arms.

Petari
Trusted Guru
Trusted Guru
Posts: 558
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2017 1:32 pm

Re: A1200/Falcon comparison

Post by Petari » Sat Aug 04, 2018 7:01 pm

And again, total shallow conclusion by KyleB. If GB6 can run on Atari ST with 512KB RAM why it should not run on Falcon with 1 MB RAM ? There is more free RAM. With same speed as 14 MB Falcon. And of course, who will run it at 8 MHz - except cases when it is too fast with 16 MHz (some games) . Additionally, we have no real tests of Falcon CPU speed, only tests with blitter.
Stop insulting Falcon - because you insulting it, not who sold it with 1 MB RAM.
There is 2 kind of people: one thinking about moving to Mars after here becomes too bad, the others thinking about how to keep this planet habitable.

KyleB
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 7:08 pm

Re: A1200/Falcon comparison

Post by KyleB » Sat Aug 04, 2018 11:07 pm

Okay, so a 1MB Falcon, if it's plugged in, is capable of loading and running gembench. Never said it couldn't.

What else can you do with only 1MB in a falcon, that a 1040ST can't? As you said yourself, they didn't even bother to sell such a low config where you live. You didn't even believe it existed until I scanned a magazine advert in.

The reason for that is Falcon with 1MB isn't practical, all the interesting falcon stuff needs more ram, best to leave in the cupboard until money is saved up for 4MB card. When a computer is unplugged and in a cardboard box in the cupboard it can't run gembench. Get it? A joking dismissal?

Anyone else would understand what I said to mean "Kyle doesn't think 1MB is enough to be worthwhile" and immediately move on to talk about something else. I don't understand why you have interpreted it as a statement that a 1MB falcon is somehow incompatible with some old 520ST software. Describing using it as a paperweight, doorstop, footstool etc is a clear indication.

Perhaps you're someone who has trouble with non-literal speech, expressions and such. It happens.

User avatar
exxos
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5027
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:19 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: A1200/Falcon comparison

Post by exxos » Sat Aug 04, 2018 11:38 pm

I think this topic is just getting nowhere other than getting on insulting machines or people. Thread was started with machines comparisons but clearly not anymore. What people use machines for isn't much open to debate. I used my machine for years with just 1MB and did much more than on a ST. So This thread is done and locked.
4MB STFM 1.44 FD- VELOCE+ 020 STE - 4MB STE 32MHz - STFM 16MHz - STM - MEGA ST - Falcon 030 CT60 - Atari 2600 - Atari 7800 - Gigafile - SD Floppy Emulator - PeST - HxC - CosmosEx - Ultrasatan - various clutter

https://www.exxoshost.co.uk/atari/ All my hardware guides - mods - games - STOS
https://www.exxoshost.co.uk/atari/last/storenew/ - All my hardware mods for sale - Please help support by making a purchase.

Locked