Image Map Image Map
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: If a 286 can emulate a z80 or C64 why no console love?

  1. #11

    Default

    I had an Atari 8-bit computer series (400/800/XL/XE) emulator for the Atari ST (68000 @ 8 MHz). It seemed to work fine, although I didn't test it thoroughly to check if it was emulating at full speed.

    And of course the Atari ST could emulate a Mac Plus, if you had a copy of the ROMs...

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Toronto ON Canada
    Posts
    7,343

    Default

    In case anyone hasn't seen it, here's a pretty good multi-platform C64 emulation:
    https://frodo.cebix.net/

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Montevideo, Uruguay
    Posts
    449
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vwestlife View Post
    I had an Atari 8-bit computer series (400/800/XL/XE) emulator for the Atari ST (68000 @ 8 MHz). It seemed to work fine, although I didn't test it thoroughly to check if it was emulating at full speed.

    And of course the Atari ST could emulate a Mac Plus, if you had a copy of the ROMs...
    STXF is nice emulator but si only good to run basic and not much more.

    SpectreGCR is very cool and complete run even faster than the real 128k mac i have it on my Atari STE, but the magic is that is the same CPUon booth machines there very little to emulate you almost are running the os on the Atari ST

  4. #14

    Default

    I used C64S when I had to use a DOS system regularly. It wasn't happy running on a 386, and I guarantee it would choke on a 286. And that was a highly optimized emulator that cut a lot of corners for speed.

    CCS64, which was the gold standard for many years, wasn't useable on anything less than a Pentium, really.
    I use my C128 because I am an ornery, stubborn, retro grouch. -- Bob Masse
    Machine room updated for 2019!: http://www.floodgap.com/etc/machines.html

  5. #15

    Default

    I think there were some VERY early emulators that worked on 386 SX's - there's a lot of stuff that's been lost to the sands of the internet, like A26 (which evolved into Z26) which was the only 2600 emulator that worked decently on a 486. I seem to recall some pre-NESticle emulator that worked but I can't remember what that was. It was a very very long time ago.

    That said Super Mario Bros. would run on almost ANY NES emulator because that's like, one of the games most people would get an emulator to play initially, even the partial emulators, which most of the early ones had no sound, no scaling, some no game port support (keyboard only, and you could not map the keys), and you had to load the game by typing "NESEMU.EXE SMB.NES /F:5 /K to actually get it to run on your ancient 1st gen 32-bit x86 PC.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chicagoland, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    6,466
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vwestlife View Post
    And of course the Atari ST could emulate a Mac Plus, if you had a copy of the ROMs...
    Yes, but that was mostly emulation of the Mac environment, not complete architecture emulation. They used the same CPU.

    Since the ST ran at 8 MHz, and the Mac at 7.16 MHz, I remember some reports of Mac software running slightly faster on the Atari ST.
    Offering a bounty for:
    - A working Sanyo MBC-775, Olivetti M24, or Logabax 1600
    - Music Construction Set, IBM Music Feature edition (has red sticker on front stating IBM Music Feature)

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Augusta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    757

    Default

    The first wave of emulators would run on a 486, barely.

    A26
    Activision Atari Action Pack (for Windows) was an emulator, you could hack it and run other ROMs.
    DASARCADE/SPARCADE (This was just sorcery in 1995).
    Pre-MAME stuff, and maybe early MAME
    C64S
    Nesticle/Genecyst did run on 486, as I recall. It's possible it may have taken Socket 7 to do it.
    I remember the Nintendo64 emulator ran 100% smooth on P150 with a Voodoo 1 card.

    There were C64 emulators for stock Amiga, they didn't run great, but did run.
    There was a great Apple II emulator for stock Amiga (Apple2000).

    There were ST and Mac emulators for Amiga because you could cheat and run the real code and just use traps to translate the hardware bits. They were 1:1 with the real machines, or even better in some cases.
    Last edited by rittwage; December 20th, 2017 at 05:40 PM.

  8. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trixter View Post
    Since the ST ran at 8 MHz, and the Mac at 7.16 MHz, I remember some reports of Mac software running slightly faster on the Atari ST.
    The classic Macs actually run at 7.8336 MHz (often rounded up to "8 MHz" or down to "7.8 MHz"). Thus the Atari ST, which runs at pretty much exactly 8 MHz (it varies between 8.01 and 8.05 MHz depending on model and NTSC vs. PAL) is only very slightly faster.

    It's the 68000 Amigas which run at 7.16 MHz (NTSC; some sources incorrectly state 7.14 MHz) or 7.09 MHz (PAL).

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chicagoland, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    6,466
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rittwage View Post
    There was a great Apple II emulator for stock Amiga (Apple2000).
    There was an incomplete-but-still-functional Apple II for the PC called APL2EM by Randy Spurlock that, amazingly, had the minimum requirements of a 286 with CGA. It also came out during the Apple IIe's life; I remember seeing it first in 1990, although history shows it was worked on first in January 1988! A quick look at the source shows that it could easily be adapted to run on an 8086 system, although the speed would likely be 10x slower than a real Apple II.

    Quote Originally Posted by vwestlife View Post
    The classic Macs actually run at 7.8336 MHz (often rounded up to "8 MHz" or down to "7.8 MHz"). Thus the Atari ST, which runs at pretty much exactly 8 MHz (it varies between 8.01 and 8.05 MHz depending on model and NTSC vs. PAL) is only very slightly faster. It's the 68000 Amigas which run at 7.16 MHz (NTSC; some sources incorrectly state 7.14 MHz) or 7.09 MHz (PAL).
    I stand corrected! It's possible I read reports from Atari ST fanboys (IIRC I read that info on Usenet in the early 90s).
    Offering a bounty for:
    - A working Sanyo MBC-775, Olivetti M24, or Logabax 1600
    - Music Construction Set, IBM Music Feature edition (has red sticker on front stating IBM Music Feature)

  10. #20

    Default

    Activision Atari Action Pack (for Windows) was an emulator, you could hack it and run other ROMs.
    So was their C64 pack. The emulator they included (I think Digital Eclipse wrote both the VCS and the C64 emulators) wasn't any great shakes; the real reason to buy it was the copy-protection-stripped .d64s they included so you could play them on something better, and completely legally to boot even if you didn't have the original games.
    I use my C128 because I am an ornery, stubborn, retro grouch. -- Bob Masse
    Machine room updated for 2019!: http://www.floodgap.com/etc/machines.html

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •