Falcon 030 vs STE

Benchmark screenshots for various boosters & machines.
KyleB
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 7:08 pm

Re: Falcon 030 vs STE

Post by KyleB » Fri Aug 03, 2018 2:37 pm

Cyprian wrote:
Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:41 am
yep, figures are not so impressive, but when we compare Falcon with similar solutions from the same era, it doesn't look so bad:

Code: Select all

                                        Read LW (MB/s)   Write LW (MB/s)
Amiga 1200, 020/14, Chipram                      4.500             6.900
Falcon 030/16, ST-ram                            5.345             6.488
TT 030 32MHz, ST-ram                             7.867             7.867
TT 030 32MHz, Fastram                           12.615            15.772

Here we can see that Falcon with it's 16 bit bus has better memory (read) performance faster than Amiga 1200 with full 32bit bus.
The A1200 is about 88% underclocked compared to falc, that read result likewise 84%. So it's understandable. Not to resurrect decades old feud but 4MB Falcon vs 4MB 1200 is surely going to look very different?

Cyprian
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 9:16 am

Re: Falcon 030 vs STE

Post by Cyprian » Fri Aug 03, 2018 6:36 pm

Atually would be understandable if both had the same, 32bit data bus. But A1200 had twice wider data bus than Falcon.
Lets say that "falcon was a mess", then what we could say about slower A1200?

I would not go in that direction. Both machines could be faster but IMO they were great anyway.
Jaugar / TT030 / Mega STe / 800 XL / 1040 STe / Falcon030 / 65 XE / 520 STm / SM124 / SC1435
SDrive / PAK68/3 / CosmosEx / SatanDisk / UltraSatan / USB Floppy Drive Emulator / Eiffel / SIO2PC / Crazy Dots / PAM Net
Hatari / Steem SSE / Aranym / Saint
http://260ste.appspot.com/

KyleB
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 7:08 pm

Re: Falcon 030 vs STE

Post by KyleB » Fri Aug 03, 2018 7:06 pm

What's the read MB/s of A1200 fast ram? So we know where we stand between both machines with a realistic config, 4MB each.

Cyprian
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 9:16 am

Re: Falcon 030 vs STE

Post by Cyprian » Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:43 pm

yep, obviously fastram is faster than chipram.
Both machines can be extended with more ram, better cpu. e.g CT60 or Vampire.
Jaugar / TT030 / Mega STe / 800 XL / 1040 STe / Falcon030 / 65 XE / 520 STm / SM124 / SC1435
SDrive / PAK68/3 / CosmosEx / SatanDisk / UltraSatan / USB Floppy Drive Emulator / Eiffel / SIO2PC / Crazy Dots / PAM Net
Hatari / Steem SSE / Aranym / Saint
http://260ste.appspot.com/

User avatar
DrF
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 1:18 pm

Re: Falcon 030 vs STE

Post by DrF » Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:45 pm

According to my plain Amiga 1200 fast ram only card boxes (Hawk 8Mb and some 4Mb card),no cpus, they claim that just by adding the card performance jumped 2x to 2.5x
Adding 1 to a plain A1200 makes a huge difference.

Now about them PC card slot memory cards that used to be about... adding one of those slows the A1200 down, I presume because its a 16bit bus?

KyleB
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 7:08 pm

Re: Falcon 030 vs STE

Post by KyleB » Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:02 pm

^ yep. PC Card slot only made sense for ethernet or squirrel scsi on 1200. though I briefly had a 600 with PC Card fastram and it did me no harm (accidentally wiring up the power connector in mirror image did though). A proper trapdoor fastram card releases an incredible amount of power.

Really Commodore should've made it 28Mhz, and heavily promoted fastram. EC020s cost next to nowt. But they were saving that for The Greatest Amiga Never Sold.
Cyprian wrote:
Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:43 pm
yep, obviously fastram is faster than chipram.
Lets say that "A1200 was a mess", then what we could say about slower falcon? :D

No point going into CPU upgrades, overclocks etc just stock vs stock with equal amount memory fitted, it's the only way. When you start going into CT60SUPERVIDEL or A1200 towers or whatever it no longer has anything to do with what Atari corp or CBM were trying to do.

Cyprian
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 9:16 am

Re: Falcon 030 vs STE

Post by Cyprian » Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:23 pm

KyleB wrote:
Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:02 pm
Lets say that "A1200 was a mess", then what we could say about slower falcon?
KyleB wrote:
Fri Aug 03, 2018 1:09 am
I always imagined the falcon was a mess, but here we are...

well, maybe "falcon was a mess" but still stock 16bit Falcon is faster than stock 32bit A1200.

if you wish, we can also compare expanded machines.
and yep, till now, expanded Falcon (CT60/100) is still faster than expanded with A1200.
Jaugar / TT030 / Mega STe / 800 XL / 1040 STe / Falcon030 / 65 XE / 520 STm / SM124 / SC1435
SDrive / PAK68/3 / CosmosEx / SatanDisk / UltraSatan / USB Floppy Drive Emulator / Eiffel / SIO2PC / Crazy Dots / PAM Net
Hatari / Steem SSE / Aranym / Saint
http://260ste.appspot.com/

User avatar
exxos
Site Admin
Posts: 3510
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 11:19 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Falcon 030 vs STE

Post by exxos » Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:28 pm

I think we getting a bit off topic now :) Thread was Falcon vs STE.. Please open a new thread if talking about other machines etc :)
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.

Post Reply