| |
Zibri
Account closed
Registered: May 2020
Posts: 304 |
New life for your underloved datassette unit :D
The first phase of testing just ended.
(Still in the packaging and refining phase)
But I wish to share with you all my latest accomplishment.
You might want to check this out:
https://twitter.com/zibri/status/1450979434916417540
and this:
https://twitter.com/zibri/status/1450979005117644800
The fastest example (11 kilobit/sec) has the same (or better) error rlsilience as "turbo250" but it is 3 times faster.
The slowest one (8 kilobit/sec) has the same error resilience as the standard commodore slow "save", but it is 100 times faster and twice as fast as turbo250.
;)
Notes:
1) faster speeds are possible if the tape is written with a professional equipment or hi-fi with a stabilized speed and virtually no wobbling.
2) if the tape is emulated (tapuino or similar projects) the speed can go up to 34 kilobit/sec.
3) even with datassette, higher speeds are possible but the highly depend on the status of the tape, the datassette speed and azimuth. |
|
... 327 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Zibri
Account closed
Registered: May 2020
Posts: 304 |
Quote: x64sc >>>>>>> dogshit > x64 :D
LOL :D
ok.. it works in x64sc
I wonder why they don't keep x64.exe up to date with x64sc.exe |
| |
Zibri
Account closed
Registered: May 2020
Posts: 304 |
Quote: it works fine in 3.5 - ie what krill said :) (yes x64 is vintage)
Then, update it to be in par with x64sc :P |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2980 |
[OT] Use x64sc. Uses the novel Quiss+Copyfault method of getting to a specified beam X position to set up a stable raster timer interrupt, without accessing VIC registers and in just a few bytes. .cerror * != $08a3, "sync not at $08a3"
sync = * + 1
ldx #$9e
ldy #8
cpx #0
bne sync |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11386 |
x64sc is the updated emulator. |
| |
Zibri
Account closed
Registered: May 2020
Posts: 304 |
Quote: Quoting ZibriI don't know if anyone ever used this method.. In some demos I saw them using an LDA or $04 in dc0c and an RTI in DC0E.
But the jump I came up with is way better. FWIW, Softwired does.C:dd0c 4C 83 05 JMP $0583 when handling a timer interrupt, acknowledging it while executing the jump, saving a cycle over BIT $DD0D.
Back to the topic.. ok.. I don't know about this 2021 demo.
But anyway nobody used that with tape :P
The strong point of my tyurbo is not the irq ... the irq just saves a few cycles (and I have plenty to spare.. more than 40-60).
The reasons my turbo works are others. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2980 |
The JMP saves a few cycles on IRQ dispatch, minimising overall execution time per pulse.
But most of the measurement error would come from unstable ISR latency, i.e. whatever opcode was executing when the interrupt triggered would delay handling it by a variable amount of cycles.
Do you correct for that somehow? |
| |
iAN CooG
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 3194 |
> I wonder why they don't keep x64.exe up to date with x64sc.exe
If it was possibile there would be no need for a x64sc.
X64 uses a faster but inaccurate emulation, x64sc is more accurate but heavier on the host cpu. Choose your destiny. |
| |
Zibri
Account closed
Registered: May 2020
Posts: 304 |
Quote: x64sc is the updated emulator.
x64sc takes as much as double the cpu time as x64.exe.
except for a few demos, everything I throw at it works.
and it's bugs are the same as in the x64sc version.
What an update!
lol
please. stay on topic anyways. I don't want this to become a circus again. |
| |
Zibri
Account closed
Registered: May 2020
Posts: 304 |
Quote: > I wonder why they don't keep x64.exe up to date with x64sc.exe
If it was possibile there would be no need for a x64sc.
X64 uses a faster but inaccurate emulation, x64sc is more accurate but heavier on the host cpu. Choose your destiny.
I know.. but most of the times the inaccuracies of x64.exe are irrelevant.
And, personally, I don't find x64sc so much more accurate.
cpu speed still wobbles and is never a "still" 100% even in the sc version. |
| |
ChristopherJam
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1409 |
Quoting Zibriwhat do you mean by "seven pulse length loader" ?
He used seven different pulse lengths. The shortest outputted a pair of bits, the other six groups of three.
Quote:hmm 167 + 50*n means a frequency separation of 50 cycles (strange).
That can work but it will be very prone to errors.
Well yes, as I said, he only was using it to load back on the drive he used to record on. Apparently it worked well enough for that purpose.
I mostly wanted to point out that experimenting with frequency separations that low is really not that groundbreaking. We've known for decades that separation 50 is really pushing it, and 100 is pretty safe. |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ... | 34 - Next |
