MSX1 vs C64

Page 9/11
2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | | 10 | 11

By gdx

Enlighted (4632)

gdx's picture

28-07-2020, 02:14

I never compare computers/consoles with demos because they use often specifics of the components. We can do MSX1 demos infeasible on other more powerful machines and we can do infeasible C64 demos on MSX turbo R. And especially, the techniques used in the demos are often unusable in the games.
The demos are nice and sometimes beautiful to watch but they are just demos.

By Metalion

Paragon (1426)

Metalion's picture

28-07-2020, 10:17

msxlover wrote:

This is because their MSX BASIC language makes it easy for users to do the fundamental things, such as drawing lines, and playing simple little tunes, even in three channel polyphonic sound, but the C64 makes it so difficult to do these things that most C64 owners just gave up trying.

This is exactly why I choose MSX at the time. It had the most powerful BASIC of all home computers. You could do anything with MSX BASIC. We tend to forget that, but a lot of us just knew BASIC and nothing more. And I had no intention of learning assembly language at the time, so that powerful BASIC was one of the most important argument for me.

By hamlet

Scribe (3624)

hamlet's picture

01-06-2021, 18:54

To pour some oil into this old fire:
8bit Smackdown!
A YT vid comparison between 65C02 and Z80

Edit: Thanks to Parn now with the right link. ;)

By Parn

Hero (651)

Parn's picture

01-06-2021, 14:27

You mean this video, @hamlet? ;)

By Metalion

Paragon (1426)

Metalion's picture

01-06-2021, 16:39

(comment removed)

By PingPong

Prophet (3754)

PingPong's picture

01-06-2021, 16:49

It is.
The problem is always the same. In the '80 era a cpu like a 6809 or z80 had a price that was 3-4 times the 6502.
The 6502 is a cheap uP, rather limited , but in contrast it offered a very reasonable price.

I've found that 6502 biased people known that and tend to enphatize and over estimate the 6502 in various ways (some one said it was a RISC predecessor that is not true because the instruction complexity of a 6502 is somewhat more complex than you found on a z80! (like pre-post addressing modes). So it is more CISCKY than z80.

They tend also to compare the clock frequency, in flavor of 6502 but they do not mention that the clock frequency, by itself, does not give any idea of the cpu performances.

Just a note: with the same DRAM chips, in terms of DRAM access time you can use a 6502 @ 1.5Mhz and a z80 @3.5Mhz or 4Mhz. The difference is not the clock speed,only the way the cpu internally uses or divide the clock.

So arguments like a 6502 @4Mhz is faster than z80 are meaningless, because where one can use a 6502 @4mhz most probably you can use a z80 @20mhz!.

So they compare the clock speed instead of the uSec time required to perform a specific operation giving the memory constraints. And if you compare a 6502@1Mhz for example to a

, you get in terms of uSecs a better performance for the z80 in the range of 30%-50% percent.

But do not take those consideration to a 6502 lover, because is will fire a flame.

By Metalion

Paragon (1426)

Metalion's picture

01-06-2021, 18:31

I removed my comment because I was ranting about how the guy was 6502 biased.
But in fact, the conclusion of its video is that Z80 was a superior processor !
So everything ends well Smile

By hamlet

Scribe (3624)

hamlet's picture

01-06-2021, 19:08

Metalion wrote:

I was ranting about how the guy was 6502 biased.

It seems that the Z80 at least woke the interesst by that guy as he added a video about it a week later.

By PingPong

Prophet (3754)

PingPong's picture

01-06-2021, 19:21

to be more effective: it is not that the z80 was a superior processor.
It is the 6502 that is oversimplified ( thus more limited ) when compared to cousins.
Take for example the extremely good 6809. It is a very good cpu.

However, cpu power is not all in a system. the c64 was far superior than msx1 ( and some aspects even msx 2) thanks to the VIC/SID, even if its cpu is somewhat rather limited.

By Metalion

Paragon (1426)

Metalion's picture

02-06-2021, 09:01

PingPong wrote:

Take for example the extremely good 6809. It is a very good cpu.

As I was curious, I just took a look at the 6809 instruction set. It seems to me very similar to Z80, with the notable exception of a MUL opcode for unsigned multiplication between registers.

On a funny note, the 6809 has an opcode named ... SEX !!
LOL!

Page 9/11
2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | | 10 | 11