I definitely did. For me this is a really nice proof why accelerating CPU alone doesn't bring any significant performance boost. Unless you have a faster RAM and/or some on-chip cache (and a [patched] game which can use it), there's really no point.rubber_jonnie wrote: Sun Feb 09, 2025 10:38 pmBooster Comparisons.
Hope somebody finds it interesting.
Can all registered uses please login, even just for a few minutes..
It helps build a picture where our "good traffic" is coming from..
Thanks :)
It helps build a picture where our "good traffic" is coming from..
Thanks :)
BOOSTED GAME COMPARISON
Re: BOOSTED GAME COMPARISON
Re: BOOSTED GAME COMPARISON
Also remember Agranlunds 'special' firmware for the tf536? I can't remember exactly but didn't it cache ST-RAM (shadowed/mirrored?) into fast ram? (Forgive me if I remember the details wrong) but damn it was ridiculous the speed improvement over a normal tf536! It was like on STeroids!mikro wrote: Mon Feb 10, 2025 11:22 amI definitely did. For me this is a really nice proof why accelerating CPU alone doesn't bring any significant performance boost. Unless you have a faster RAM and/or some on-chip cache (and a [patched] game which can use it), there's really no point.rubber_jonnie wrote: Sun Feb 09, 2025 10:38 pmBooster Comparisons.
Hope somebody finds it interesting.
Re: BOOSTED GAME COMPARISON
Yeah, I think writes were copied into TTram, so reads could be done at 50mhz basically. Very good project. But there was the problem that DMA devices, such as the blitter and DMA drives couldn't be used as the cache wouldn't have any knowledge of the writes. There was talks on how to fix it, but seems it was just abandoned in the end.Steve wrote: Mon Feb 10, 2025 12:14 pm Also remember Agranlunds 'special' firmware for the tf536? I can't remember exactly but didn't it cache ST-RAM (shadowed/mirrored?) into fast ram?
Accelerators are not really useful with graphic intensive things like games because ST RAM is always going to be the bottleneck. This is why 3-D games mostly benefit because the CPU can process parts of code much faster, and if the game can run in TT RAM, then you maximise what the accelerator can do. But you're still ultimately limited by graphics held in STram running at stock speeds. All you can do is maximise the bandwidth available to ST RAM. Aside from if you have huge caches that is.
I've said it before many times, but all these accelerators are, in my opinion are nothing more than dirty hacks to the system. This is why I want to move the Phoenix platform to just have a faster bus, so accelerators are just simply not needed, and you have STram running at 32MHz or whatever, so you simply don't hit all the bottlenecks & problems associated with accelerators.
- rubber_jonnie
- Site Admin

- Posts: 15150
- Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 7:40 pm
- Location: Essex
- Contact:
Re: BOOSTED GAME COMPARISON
mikro wrote: Mon Feb 10, 2025 11:22 amI definitely did. For me this is a really nice proof why accelerating CPU alone doesn't bring any significant performance boost. Unless you have a faster RAM and/or some on-chip cache (and a [patched] game which can use it), there's really no point.rubber_jonnie wrote: Sun Feb 09, 2025 10:38 pmBooster Comparisons.
Hope somebody finds it interesting.
Collector of many retro things!
800XL and 65XE both with Ultimate1MB,VBXL/XE & PokeyMax, SIDE3, SDrive Max, 2x 1010 cassette, 2x 1050 one with Happy mod, 3x 2600 Jr, 7800 and Lynx II
Approx 20 STs, including a 520 STM, 520 STFMs, 3x Mega ST, MSTE & 2x 32 Mhz boosted STEs
Plus the rest, totalling around 50 machines including a QL, 3x BBC Model B, Electron, Spectrums, ZX81 etc...
800XL and 65XE both with Ultimate1MB,VBXL/XE & PokeyMax, SIDE3, SDrive Max, 2x 1010 cassette, 2x 1050 one with Happy mod, 3x 2600 Jr, 7800 and Lynx II
Approx 20 STs, including a 520 STM, 520 STFMs, 3x Mega ST, MSTE & 2x 32 Mhz boosted STEs
Plus the rest, totalling around 50 machines including a QL, 3x BBC Model B, Electron, Spectrums, ZX81 etc...
Re: BOOSTED GAME COMPARISON
Awesome! I hadn't actually gotten around to trying it on my 40mhz Pak 68/3 equipped STacy.coonsgm wrote: Mon Feb 10, 2025 10:53 am Part of the intent is to set expectations that with most accelerators you lose compatibility in exchange for some performance improvement.
The video would be to show some examples of where the benefit is greatest.
Ultimately VI shows massive improvement btw.
On the list...
Welcome To DarkForce! www.darkforce.org "The Fuji Lives.!"
Atari SW/HW based BBS-Telnet:darkforce-bbs.dyndns.org 1040
Atari SW/HW based BBS-Telnet:darkforce-bbs.dyndns.org 1040
Re: BOOSTED GAME COMPARISON
"I've said it before many times, but all these accelerators are, in my opinion are nothing more than dirty hacks to the system."
Looking at my 40mhz, Pak 68/3 68030 equipped STacy, sulking in the corner...

Looking at my 40mhz, Pak 68/3 68030 equipped STacy, sulking in the corner...
Welcome To DarkForce! www.darkforce.org "The Fuji Lives.!"
Atari SW/HW based BBS-Telnet:darkforce-bbs.dyndns.org 1040
Atari SW/HW based BBS-Telnet:darkforce-bbs.dyndns.org 1040
- stephen_usher
- Site sponsor

- Posts: 7492
- Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 7:19 pm
- Location: Oxford, UK.
- Contact:
Re: BOOSTED GAME COMPARISON
The biggest problem with compatibility with PP's game conversions is the way he determines what machine it's running upon and what patches to apply.
Given that since TOS 1.04 we've had the cookie jar and from that you can read such things as what the CPU is and the machine type etc. you would have thought that he may use that info, such as using the 68030 patches if there's a 68030 set in the cookie jar, but no. From what I can see he looks at the TOS version only and then guesses what sort of machine ran that version. So, if you have an STFM with an ST536 installed and running TOS 2.06 it doesn't install the 68030 patches and the game usually doesn't work. (If you use the 512K TOS 3.06 patched for the PAK3 then it thinks it's a TT and usually does work.)
PP's games hardly ever work under EmuTOS I've found.
Given that since TOS 1.04 we've had the cookie jar and from that you can read such things as what the CPU is and the machine type etc. you would have thought that he may use that info, such as using the 68030 patches if there's a 68030 set in the cookie jar, but no. From what I can see he looks at the TOS version only and then guesses what sort of machine ran that version. So, if you have an STFM with an ST536 installed and running TOS 2.06 it doesn't install the 68030 patches and the game usually doesn't work. (If you use the 512K TOS 3.06 patched for the PAK3 then it thinks it's a TT and usually does work.)
PP's games hardly ever work under EmuTOS I've found.
Intro retro computers since before they were retro...
ZX81->Spectrum->Memotech MTX->Sinclair QL->520STM->BBC Micro->TT030->PCs & Sun Workstations.
Added code to the MiNT kernel (still there the last time I checked) + put together MiNTOS.
Collection now with added Macs, Amigas, Suns and Acorns.
ZX81->Spectrum->Memotech MTX->Sinclair QL->520STM->BBC Micro->TT030->PCs & Sun Workstations.
Added code to the MiNT kernel (still there the last time I checked) + put together MiNTOS.
Collection now with added Macs, Amigas, Suns and Acorns.
- stephen_usher
- Site sponsor

- Posts: 7492
- Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 7:19 pm
- Location: Oxford, UK.
- Contact:
Re: BOOSTED GAME COMPARISON
It depends. If there's a lot of calculation behind the "graphics" then it will help a lot if the code is in fast RAM. If it's purely sprites and 2D scrolling linked to the frame rate then it will make zero difference. Better to change the system to be NTSC for more performance at 60Hz.exxos wrote: Mon Feb 10, 2025 12:53 pm [Accelerators are not really useful with graphic intensive things like games because ST RAM is always going to be the bottleneck. This is why 3-D games mostly benefit because the CPU can process parts of code much faster, and if the game can run in TT RAM, then you maximise what the accelerator can do. But you're still ultimately limited by graphics held in STram running at stock speeds. All you can do is maximise the bandwidth available to ST RAM. Aside from if you have huge caches that is.
Intro retro computers since before they were retro...
ZX81->Spectrum->Memotech MTX->Sinclair QL->520STM->BBC Micro->TT030->PCs & Sun Workstations.
Added code to the MiNT kernel (still there the last time I checked) + put together MiNTOS.
Collection now with added Macs, Amigas, Suns and Acorns.
ZX81->Spectrum->Memotech MTX->Sinclair QL->520STM->BBC Micro->TT030->PCs & Sun Workstations.
Added code to the MiNT kernel (still there the last time I checked) + put together MiNTOS.
Collection now with added Macs, Amigas, Suns and Acorns.
Re: BOOSTED GAME COMPARISON
To be fair to PP, in the large majority of instances those assumptions are perfectly correct. I would say, I'm lucky because the majority of games I like to play work just fine with an accelerator and the two where I most want improved performance benefit substantially(Ultima VI and Civilization)stephen_usher wrote: Mon Feb 10, 2025 5:43 pm The biggest problem with compatibility with PP's game conversions is the way he determines what machine it's running upon and what patches to apply.
Given that since TOS 1.04 we've had the cookie jar and from that you can read such things as what the CPU is and the machine type etc. you would have thought that he may use that info, such as using the 68030 patches if there's a 68030 set in the cookie jar, but no. From what I can see he looks at the TOS version only and then guesses what sort of machine ran that version. So, if you have an STFM with an ST536 installed and running TOS 2.06 it doesn't install the 68030 patches and the game usually doesn't work. (If you use the 512K TOS 3.06 patched for the PAK3 then it thinks it's a TT and usually does work.)
PP's games hardly ever work under EmuTOS I've found.
I mean a big part of this exercise is to highlight incompatibilities....perhaps they could be fixed by folks more coding capable than I....but to provide transparency that just because you drop $200-$300 on an accelerator doesn't mean you get improved game performance.
With more plug and play accelerators, you start addressing a broader audience that hopefully understands, but I expect a not insignificant subsegment won't. These will be installed semi-permanently so if plugging it in unexpectedly makes someone's favorite most nostalgic game incompatible there will not be happiness.
Even more interesting is the fact that two different computers with their different pedigree may experience differences in compatibility. In the testing I did yesterday, I've already come across a small set of games that work on the STE536 that don't work on my ST536 and vice versa. Not even touching speed benefits.
