The Fastest Apple Mac is an Amiga - Fact or Fiction?

Summary

In this video, the host compares the performance of an Apple LC3 from 1993 with a Commodore Amiga 1200 from 1992, challenging the outdated belief that the fastest Mac was faster than the Amiga. Using a variety of tests, including boot times, CPU performance, and game playback, the Amiga outperforms the Apple in several areas, even when emulating a Mac. The video highlights the power of the Amiga, particularly with an accelerator card, showcasing its ability to match and exceed the Mac’s performance in various tasks, making for a surprising and insightful retro tech showdown.

Takeaways

• 😀 The video compares an Apple Macintosh LC3 (1993) and a Commodore Amiga 1200 (1992) to see which system performs better for tasks from that era.
• 😀 The Commodore Amiga 1200, while less powerful in terms of raw specs, outperforms the Apple LC3 in boot-up speed and several performance benchmarks.
• 😀 The Amiga uses emulation software (Shapeshifter) to run Mac applications, demonstrating that emulation can often run certain tasks faster than real Mac hardware from the same period.
• 😀 Even with emulation overhead, the Amiga performs well in tasks like unzipping compressed files and running the game 'Prince of Persia', outperforming the Macintosh in these tests.
• 😀 The Amiga outperforms the Macintosh in Adobe Illustrator, rendering images faster and even managing to zoom in and display illustrations quicker than the LC3.
• 😀 Despite both machines being relatively underpowered by today's standards, they both handle tasks like running SimCity 2000 and Microsoft Flight Simulator with playable performance.
• 😀 The Amiga, with its Motorola 68020 CPU, accelerates well with additional hardware such as a Blizzard accelerator card, and shows that upgrades can significantly improve performance.
• 😀 Both systems have similar architecture (Motorola 68030/68EC020 CPU), which is why the Amiga performs similarly to the Macintosh in emulated scenarios, with little to no delay in CPU processing.
• 😀 The Amiga’s multitasking capabilities, including the ability to seamlessly switch between programs, is a key advantage over the Macintosh during this era.
• 😀 The video concludes that, despite not being the 'fastest' machine, the Amiga can outperform the Macintosh in specific tests, especially with additional hardware like the Blizzard card, which boosts performance beyond the LC3's abilities.

Q & A

What is the main comparison being made in this video?

The video compares the performance of the Apple Macintosh LC3 and the Commodore Amiga 1200, specifically examining if the Amiga could outperform the Mac in various tests despite being a lower-cost system.

What hardware specs do the two systems feature?

The Apple Macintosh LC3 has a Motorola 68030 CPU running at 20 MHz, with 32 MB of RAM and an 80 MB hard disk. The Commodore Amiga 1200 features a Motorola 68EC020 CPU at 14 MHz, 2 MB of RAM, and a 350 MB hard disk.

What is the significance of the Blizzard 1213 mark in the comparison?

The Blizzard 1213 mark is an accelerator card that upgrades the Amiga 1200 by providing a 50 MHz Motorola 68030 CPU and additional RAM, which would boost the Amiga's performance to more closely match the price and performance of the LC3, if purchased during the period.

What software is being used to emulate the Macintosh on the Amiga?

The Amiga uses software called 'Shapeshifter' to emulate the Macintosh operating system, allowing it to run Mac software despite the difference in hardware.

How did the systems perform in the initial boot-up test?

The Amiga, running the emulated Mac, booted faster than the real Macintosh LC3, even though both systems had the same operating system version and extensions disabled.

Which system performed better when decompressing a compressed file?

The Amiga, running the emulated Mac, outperformed the real Macintosh LC3 in decompression tasks, benefiting from the extra performance of the Blizzard accelerator despite the overheads of emulation.

How did both systems perform with the game 'Prince of Persia'?

Both systems performed similarly in 'Prince of Persia', with smooth animation and gameplay. There was little difference in performance, and the game was fully playable on both the Amiga and the Mac.

What was the result when testing 'SimCity 2000' on both systems?

Both systems were able to run 'SimCity 2000', though the performance was slightly sluggish. The Amiga had a small edge in speed, but the game was still playable on both machines, even with large cities loaded.

What was the outcome of the Speedometer benchmark test?

The Amiga performed impressively in the benchmark with a score of 6.5, significantly outperforming the real Mac LC3, which scored only 0.479. This highlights the Amiga's superior performance in certain tests, even without the Mac's missing FPU.

How did the Amiga handle Adobe Illustrator compared to the Mac?

The Amiga with the Blizzard accelerator outperformed the Macintosh LC3 when using Adobe Illustrator, displaying a complex image of a power drill much faster, even managing to zoom in several times before the Mac had finished rendering the image.

What multitasking capabilities does the Amiga have that the Mac does not?

The Amiga is a pre-emptive multitasking system, allowing users to switch between applications (e.g., writing a letter or listening to music) seamlessly, while the Mac lacks this level of multitasking support.