The Super Nintendo was a very interesting console, I think.
While it was not very powerful at first glance, it made up top it by using an intelligent chipset (SPC700, Mode-7).
So I'm not sure if a 386DX40 is the right thing to compare it to. Maybe an older Amiga with ECS chipset (Paula, Blitter, ..) is closer
to the design of the SNES. If I had to guess, I would say a MegaDrive (OPN2 FM, SN76489 PSG, 64 colours on screen) would be comparable
to a 286-25 w/ EGA (tweaked), Tandy 3-voice and AdLib Gold (OPL3). Or maybe to a i386 / i376 (linear addressing, etc.)

Edit: The SuperFX chips were very powerful for their time. I wouldn't be suprised if they would outperfom a 386 (w/o math co-pro) at number crunching.

It could be best compared to the Apple IIgs.... after all they use the same CPU core. Sound capabilities are surprisingly similar, although the SPC700 has an edge with 16-bit mixing, both have 64k of dedicated sample RAM. The Apple IIgs actually came with more memory stock, but the SNES obviously had better video capabilities with 64k of dedicated RAM and hardware sprites. The biggest weakness in the machine later in its life was the CPU. Not much ou can do with a 3.58Mhz 65c816 in the way of floating point math needed for 3D graphics, thus dedicated CPUs like the SuperFX and DSP chips.

NJRoadfan wrote:

It could be best compared to the Apple IIgs.... after all they use the same CPU core. Sound capabilities are surprisingly similar, although the SPC700 has an edge with 16-bit mixing, both have 64k of dedicated sample RAM. The Apple IIgs actually came with more memory stock, but the SNES obviously had better video capabilities with 64k of dedicated RAM and hardware sprites. The biggest weakness in the machine later in its life was the CPU. Not much ou can do with a 3.58Mhz 65c816 in the way of floating point math needed for 3D graphics, thus dedicated CPUs like the SuperFX and DSP chips.

But still it ran the Wolf3D game without any external chip right?. Impressive 😀

NJRoadfan wrote:

The biggest weakness in the machine later in its life was the CPU.

Yup, the main processor was always both the main problem and the center of discussion.
Later games were programmed "around" the CPU (in the meaning of circumenting it).
According to some rumors, the SNES CPU was originally based off the NES CPU for compatibility reasons (-> like Sega Master adapter).
But this backwards-compatibility was later scrapped (except for porting over some engines used by Mario games).
No idea, if it is true, but it would make sense. Besides, I really wonder if the SNES CPU still contains the audio capabilities (APU) of the NES.

386SX wrote:

Hi, […]
Show full quote

Hi,

I always admired the concept around the SNES system and its capability to make use of external cpu to improve performance. Even if I don't have this console, I will probably get one just to try the Doom cartridge that has the SuperFX-2 chip that ran at something like 21Mhz if I remember correctly.
In fact I think Doom even if probably less detailed and smooth of the pc version is still an impressive result on this console.
What do you think about this console/game? Was that someway similar to a 386DX-40 system with a good vga for its time?
Thank
Bye

Interesting. Is SNES the only system able ot use on-cartridge external CPU?

Sega Genesis had that one Virtua Racing game which was super expensive for its SVP chip.

It's funny that the Megadrive with the 68k gets compared to a 286, while SNES is compared to a 68k Amiga. I'd like to think that the Amiga (despite having under utilised custom chips) and Megadrive have a little more in common.

The 32X was a plug-in CPU upgrade that ran at 23MHz, so similar to SuperFX in that regard. There was also something called a j-cart which allowed you to plug in two extra controller (4-player action) without the need for dual port controller adaptor thingys.

Anonymous Coward wrote:

It's funny that the Megadrive with the 68k gets compared to a 286, while SNES is compared to a 68k Amiga. I'd like to think that the Amiga (despite having under utilised custom chips) and Megadrive have a little more in common.

Indeed. SNES was a direct competitor to the MegaDrive, a lot of releases were for both systems, and although there were a few cases (Jurrasic Park comes to mind), were pretty similar. Amiga was another ball park altogether and (imo o.0) demolish a 286 in reagrds to Multimedia... unless the game came on CD 😀.

Anonymous Coward wrote:

It's funny that the Megadrive with the 68k gets compared to a 286, while SNES is compared to a 68k Amiga. I'd like to think that the Amiga (despite having under utilised custom chips) and Megadrive have a little more in common.

Well, yes, it is true that both the Amiga and the MegaDrive/Genesis do share the same main processor (Motorola 68000).
But from another point of view (the chipset, the design, the philosophy) the SNES is/was closer to the Amiga.
Also, the MegaDrive and the average 286-PC did share something else: They both relied on bruteforce, instead of elegance (Amiga/SNES).
That beeing said, I don't have a bad opinion of the 286. In pratice, I believe the 286 CPU was even closer to the 68010, than the m68k.

spiroyster wrote:

Indeed. SNES was a direct competitor to the MegaDrive,

Originally, the MegaDrive competed against the NES (where the Mastersystem failed). The Super Nintendo was released afterwards,
and became its biggest competitor in the socalled 16-bit wars.

Edit: That's just a personal point of view, of course. The demo scene seems to enjoy heavy coding for the MD.
If you're curious, have a look at Titan's Overdrive and Overdrive 2. Both can run on BlastEm and on real hardware.

Jo22 wrote:

Well, yes, it is true that both the Amiga and the MegaDrive/Genesis do share the same main processor (Motorola 68000). But from […]
Show full quote

Anonymous Coward wrote:

It's funny that the Megadrive with the 68k gets compared to a 286, while SNES is compared to a 68k Amiga. I'd like to think that the Amiga (despite having under utilised custom chips) and Megadrive have a little more in common.

Well, yes, it is true that both the Amiga and the MegaDrive/Genesis do share the same main processor (Motorola 68000).
But from another point of view (the chipset, the design, the philosophy) the SNES is/was closer to the Amiga.
Also, the MegaDrive and the average 286-PC did share something else: They both relied on bruteforce, instead of elegance (Amiga/SNES).
That beeing said, I don't have a bad opinion of the 286. In pratice, I believe the 286 CPU was even closer to the 68010, than the m68k.

spiroyster wrote:

Indeed. SNES was a direct competitor to the MegaDrive,

Originally, the MegaDrive competed against the NES (where the Mastersystem failed). The Super Nintendo was released afterwards,
and became its biggest competitor in the socalled 16-bit wars.

I always thought the Master System didn't fail on that sense. I remember great games and the Sega VDP video chip, was quiet impressive wasn't it?

leileilol wrote:

Sega Genesis had that one Virtua Racing game which was super expensive for its SVP chpi.

I was reading about its story and it sounded like a good alternative to the external add on solutions.
Strange thing is that with all those polygons technologies beginning to show back then, most porting of the 2.5D Doom still wasn't as smooth or as complete as on the pc version. I like the SuperFX-2 version for its technical result but imho obviously far from perfect. They say PSX version was the best even I'm not really sure about it.
From the tech side, the GBA version based on the original Jaguar one, considering the 16Mhz cpu is the most impressive.

386SX wrote:

I always thought the Master System didn't fail on that sense. I remember great games and the Sega VDP video chip, was quiet impressive wasn't it?

Hmm.. Good point. I think it depends on the region also. It was quite popular in Europe and Brazil.
But all in all, the Master System had always been the no.2 (in respect to the NES).

My point simply was that the MegaDrive was sent out by Sega to beat the dominance of the NES (and Nintendo).
Perhaps I should have phrased that better. I didn't mean that the SMS was a failure per se.

http://segaretro.org/Master_System_consoles_in_Europe
http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/brazil-i … a-beat-nintendo

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

386SX wrote:

Hi, […]
Show full quote

Hi,

I always admired the concept around the SNES system and its capability to make use of external cpu to improve performance. Even if I don't have this console, I will probably get one just to try the Doom cartridge that has the SuperFX-2 chip that ran at something like 21Mhz if I remember correctly.
In fact I think Doom even if probably less detailed and smooth of the pc version is still an impressive result on this console.
What do you think about this console/game? Was that someway similar to a 386DX-40 system with a good vga for its time?
Thank
Bye

Interesting. Is SNES the only system able ot use on-cartridge external CPU?

The Commodore 64 I think could/used the external floppy disk drive (having its own cpu subsystem) for some processing. I remember trying some tech demo that make use of it. Impressive.

Jo22 wrote:

Hmm.. Good point. I think it depends on the region also. It was quite popular in Europe and Brazil. But all in all, the Master S […]
Show full quote

386SX wrote:

I always thought the Master System didn't fail on that sense. I remember great games and the Sega VDP video chip, was quiet impressive wasn't it?

Hmm.. Good point. I think it depends on the region also. It was quite popular in Europe and Brazil.
But all in all, the Master System had always been the no.2 (in respect to the NES).

My point simply was that the MegaDrive was sent out to beat the dominance of the NES (and Nintendo).
Perhaps I should have phrased that better. I didn't meant that the SMS was a failure per se.

http://segaretro.org/Master_System_consoles_in_Europe
http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/brazil-i … a-beat-nintendo

Eheh (I had/have the Master System. 😁). I always preferred the alternative solutions on games so when anyone bought the NES I went for the Master System, same thing for the Game Gear. Mostly because of the graphic that imho I liked better not to mention on the Game Gear that shared basically the Master System hardware (impressive thing if we would imagine nowdays something like a PS4 portable and compatible with original titles) Fact is with a master system adapter you can play its games on the Game Gear with no conversion but the screen size and 60hz fixed refresh.

386SX wrote:

The Commodore 64 I think could/used the external floppy disk drive (having its own cpu subsystem) for some processing. I remember trying some tech demo that make use of it. Impressive.

It's also funny to think of. When I first heard about this, I said to myself "Wow, the C64 was so underpowered it was even outperformed by its own floppy drive!"
Of course, at the time I wasn't aware about the fact the 1541 had its own onboard computer to handle the complex filesystem on its own.

Jo22 wrote:

386SX wrote:

The Commodore 64 I think could/used the external floppy disk drive (having its own cpu subsystem) for some processing. I remember trying some tech demo that make use of it. Impressive.

It's also funny to think of. When I first heard about this, I said to myself "Wow, the C64 was so underpowered it was even outperformed by its own floppy drive!"
Of course, at the time I wasn't aware about the fact the 1541 had its own onboard computer to handle the complex filesystem on its own.

I don't remember if any commercial games did use it as co-cpu or it was only tried with tech demos. I think more the second, considering the impressive results of tech demo developers.

386SX wrote:

Eheh (I had/have the Master System. 😁). I always preferred the alternative solutions on games so when anyone bought the NES I went for the Master System, same thing for the Game Gear. Mostly because of the graphic that imho I liked better not to mention on the Game Gear that shared basically the Master System hardware (impressive thing if we would imagine nowdays something like a PS4 portable and compatible with original titles) Fact is with a master system adapter you can play its games on the Game Gear with no conversion but the screen size and 60hz fixed refresh.

I agree, that was fun. Personally, I also liked the SMS versions of Sonic The Hedgehog (and even in PAL!).
The music was catchy (Bridge Zone), and some levels had a better atmosphere (Sky High Zone 2) than the MD counterpart.
I don't get it why there was so much rivalry back in the day. I liked the diversity, even though I was more of a Nintendo kid. 😊
Now, I own both consoles, a SNES and MegaDrive (I also had a SMS II, but had to sell it). I also had a GameGear at some point (I liked playing Tails' Adventure).

I imagine Sonic being probably one of the best programmed games specifically on these systems considering the hardware. I remember playing it on a friend Game Gear and wow, the speed, the frame rate and the music was awesome compared to the games I had. Never got to finish it cause it was quiet difficult at some point imho. Also Halley Wars (GG), space shooting game,and for the Master System the game I'll never forget should be Zillion, a platform puzzle game similar to Impossible Mission on the C64 and with a great soundtrack.

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Interesting. Is SNES the only system able ot use on-cartridge external CPU?

There were supposedly once plans to make an FPS for the NES based on he Hellraiser franchise, which would have included a Z80 on the cart to dynamically swap textures, or something. But the idea never even reached the prototype stage.