Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!van-bc!resbbs!Alex_Topic From: Alex_Topic@resbbs.UUCP (Alex Topic) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: Blitter vs. 040 (was: Computer Architecture question Message-ID: Date: 19 May 91 18:51:34 GMT Organization: Resonance - British Columbia, Canada Lines: 28 Yeah Hi there I find this question about the Blitter and various CPUs interesting. Well I only have a A500 and a blitter makes a mega difference with my machine. But when the Blitter was made with the custom chips. That was some time ago, about 7 or 8 years ago. My question is why and the heck didn't CBM make a faster blitter? When they designed the Super Agnus that all I can see has only afew advantages. The main being able to access 2megs of chip. I think the A3000 should of had a faster blitter, perhaps multiple blitter channels. Now that would help alot in animation. Some people may think who and the heck cares about the blitter. Well I do! Think about it has alot of important uses. Such as in a GUI enviroment! Let the blitter do all the window updateing thus leaveing the CPU to work on more important things at the moment. Personally I love the way the Amigas custom chips are arranged. I just wish CBM would continue to update them and get them out fast enough. If they ever do they should make sure they are backward compatible as well. Of course with a new blitter it would be really great for Simulation software. I agree that a blitter takes a load of work off the CPU and is useful if even slower than the CPU. But thats if you are in a multitasking environment though and the CPU speed would changed alot all the time thus being different. But if you made software that takes over the machine and you wanted the fastes animation possible go with the CPU.. or combine the two if possible. Oh well Cya all later! A.t.