UseNuggets

COMP.SYS.CBM: The breeding ground of programmers and users alike. Let's see what topics are showing up this month:

We Want More Power!

CMD's announcement of the Super64 CPU accelerator got things stirred up in the newsgroup. When it was announced that the initial product would run on a C64 or on a C128 in 64 mode only, some angry C128 128 mode users vented all over the place. Everything from people wondering aloud what extra work the 128 version would require to threats of non-purchase of the unit ensued. Then, just as the first wave of fighting subsided, the next wave started, programmers worried about RAM transfer speed bottlenecks questioned CMD's decision not to include a DMA device on the unit to speed data transfers. CMD's response:

From: Doug Cotton
Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm
Subject: Re: Power Users!
Date: 28 Nov 1995 00:59:26 GMT
Organization: Creative Micro Designs, Inc.

There were some earlier questions about how fast memory transfers could be accomplished with the accelerator, and at least one individual emailed me over the lack of a DMA controller. I obtained some figures from Mark concerning this. Presently, the DMA transfers using an REU transfers a byte in 1 microsecond. The accelerator can achieve this same speed when transferring data from either on-board static RAM, or from expansion memory (slower DRAM) to the host computer RAM. Transfers internally (from static RAM to static RAM) will take .35 microseconds per byte (350 nanoseconds). Transfers from RAMLink RAMCard RAM (direct style) to the host computer RAM will take about 2 microseconds per byte. The only figures I don't have yet are for transfers between on-board static RAM and expansion DRAM, but this will be governed by the speed of the DRAM itself, and the number of wait-states required. It definately will be faster than 1 byte per microsecond though. So the only thing slower than a current DMA operation is transferring to and from RAMLink RAMCard memory, which is still pretty impressive at half the speed of present DMA transfers.

Given these speeds, the cost of high-speed DMA controllers ($$$$), and a real lack of anywhere to put one on the main board, I think going without a DMA controller is reasonable. If you really want one, though, there's always the high-speed expansion port, and a do-it-yourself project.

Doug Cotton

Notice the tiny "high speed expansion port" mention at the end. Reports indicate that such a port or ports will definitely appear on the unit, but it is still undetermined whether a single connector or a small expansion bus will be utilized. Commodore Hacking recommends the latter, as more options for hardware mods are available.

Let's all design the Commodore 64 Laptop!

Yes, the dreamers are at it once again. Starting in late October, the net was abuzz with thoughts on what should be included on a Commodore Laptop. The designs were flying fast and furious, with many different features discussed. It was agreed that the laptop would need to be a power sipper and have an LCD screen and a keyboard. However, that was where agreement ended. Some of following items were bantered about:

CPU:

Disk:

RAM

Video

Sound

So, on and on it went. Some got down to the nitty gritty of planning designs for chips. Some wanted to put the SIDs into one chip, while others wanted a SID/VIC/CPU single chip solution.

It's December, and the thread is still going strong, but a few great things have surfaced, which is why you can't just discount this type of dreaming:

C=Hacking encourages users to answer the quetion: My dream Commodore laptop computer would include.... Send you entries to Commodore Hacking (brain@mail.msen.com) with the subject "LAPTOP". We'll print the best entries next issue.

Everyone seems to think that CMD is going to have one in development before long. Dunno. Commodore Hacking has heard rumors of what is going on at CMD, but we haven't heard about the laptop project. Of course, we're not SPECIAL or anything.... :-)

The Tower of Power

It seems Al Anger's (coyote@gil.net) Tower 128 picture on Commodore World's Issue 10 cover got everyone excited. A couple of people were sending Al email about it, Commodore Hacking asked some questions, and some USENETters were deciding how to do it themselves. Al states that $2000 would just about cover it, which turned a few enquiring minds away, we're sure. Still, the reasons given for wanting a tower were solid. Commodore users are getting tired of all the clutter and mess cables, power cords, expansion extenders, Swiftlink cartridges, etc. make in the computer room. C=Hacking notes that at least one manufacturer produces tower 64 systems, but the cost is evidently more than what most folks are willing to fork over (~US$300 - US$550). So, everyone is waiting for the cost to come down....

Dave Letterman, Eat Your Heart Out!

The latest thread is the top ten list of games. Everyone is submitting their 10 most favorite games for the CBM machines. (Is anyone compiling these?) Anyway, it turns out this thread has a nice side effect. People are reminiscing about the old games, and the Commodore users are noting that the new games "just aren't as good". Here, here!

So, that wraps up the USENET this time. We try to keep an eye out for stuff of interest, but drop us a line if you think we might miss an IMPORTANT topic...

Last Updated: 1995-12-4