Difference between revisions of "Sega Master System/Hardware comparison"

From Sega Retro
Line 13: Line 13:
 
Its main rival, the [[NES]], is an entirely 8-bit console, with an 8-bit [[Ricoh]] [[wikipedia:Ricoh 2A03|2A03]] (MOS 6502) CPU and 8-bit [[wikipedia:Picture Processing Unit|Ricoh PPU]] graphics processor, each with an 8-bit data bus. In comparison, the Master System is a hybrid 8/16-bit system, with its [[NEC]] [[Z80|780C]] ([[Zilog]] [[Z80]]) CPU supporting both 8-bit and 16-bit instructions and having an 8-bit data bus, while its [[Sega]] [[VDP]] graphics processor has a 16-bit data bus.
 
Its main rival, the [[NES]], is an entirely 8-bit console, with an 8-bit [[Ricoh]] [[wikipedia:Ricoh 2A03|2A03]] (MOS 6502) CPU and 8-bit [[wikipedia:Picture Processing Unit|Ricoh PPU]] graphics processor, each with an 8-bit data bus. In comparison, the Master System is a hybrid 8/16-bit system, with its [[NEC]] [[Z80|780C]] ([[Zilog]] [[Z80]]) CPU supporting both 8-bit and 16-bit instructions and having an 8-bit data bus, while its [[Sega]] [[VDP]] graphics processor has a 16-bit data bus.
  
−
The Master System's 780C CPU has approximately twice the clock rate (MHz) of the NES's 2A03 CPU, but this does not necessarily mean twice the performance. The 2A03 requires less cycles per instruction, thus it can actually output slightly more instructions per second (MIPS) than the 780C. However, comparing the MIPS of both CPUs would be just as misleading as comparing their MHz. The 780C has a more powerful hybrid 8/16-bit instruction set, so it requires fewer instructions to perform similar tasks. The performance of each CPU varies depending on the tasks. For accessing memory, the 2A03 is faster in that regard, but the 780C doesn't need to access the memory as much since it requires fewer instructions to perform similar tasks. Where the 780C has a significant performance advantage is the arithmetic. While both CPUs have similar performance when it comes to 8-bit additions and subtractions, the 780C has a significant performance advantage for most other arithmetic operations, including multiplications, divisions and 16-bit operations (due to the 780C having native support for 16-bit operations). The faster arithmetic thus gives the 780C an overall performance advantage over the 2A03.
+
The Master System's 780C CPU has approximately twice the clock rate (MHz) of the NES's 2A03 CPU, but this does not necessarily mean twice the performance. The 2A03 requires less cycles per instruction, thus it can actually output slightly more instructions per second (MIPS) than the 780C. However, comparing the MIPS of both CPUs would be just as misleading as comparing their MHz. The 780C has a more powerful hybrid 8/16-bit instruction set, so it requires fewer instructions to perform similar tasks. The performance of each CPU varies depending on the tasks. For accessing memory, the 2A03 is faster in that regard, but the 780C doesn't need to access the memory as much since it requires fewer instructions to perform similar tasks. Where the 780C has a significant performance advantage is the arithmetic. While both CPUs have similar performance when it comes to the addition and subtraction of smaller 8-bit numbers, the 780C has a significant performance advantage for most other arithmetic operations, including multiplications and divisions (of 8-bit and 16-bit numbers), as well as the addition and subtraction of larger 16-bit numbers (due to the 780C having native support for 16-bit operations). The faster arithmetic thus gives the 780C an overall performance advantage over the 2A03.
  
 
The Master System's VDP has has 16-bit data bus, compared to the NES's PPU which has an 8-bit data bus, thus the Master System has a higher memory bandwidth than the NES. The Master System displays 16 colors per tile and 16 colors per [[sprite]], like the 16-bit [[Mega Drive]] and [[SNES]], compared to 4 colors per tile and 4 colors per sprite for the NES. The Master System displays 32 colors on screen, compared to the Nintendo's 25 colors on screen. The Master System also supports diagonal scrolling as well as line scrolling, allowing it to simulate [[wikipedia:Parallax scrolling|parallax scrolling]]. The Master System is thus a more powerful console than the NES. On the other hand, the NES had a [[Ricoh]] sound chip that was more advanced than the [[SN76489|PSG]] in Western Master System hardware, but not as advanced as the [[Yamaha]] FM synthesis chip in Japanese Master System hardware. The NES was also capable of enhancement chips, some of which added diagonal scrolling, line scrolling and FM synthesis capabilities, but the Master System nevertheless remained the more powerful console.
 
The Master System's VDP has has 16-bit data bus, compared to the NES's PPU which has an 8-bit data bus, thus the Master System has a higher memory bandwidth than the NES. The Master System displays 16 colors per tile and 16 colors per [[sprite]], like the 16-bit [[Mega Drive]] and [[SNES]], compared to 4 colors per tile and 4 colors per sprite for the NES. The Master System displays 32 colors on screen, compared to the Nintendo's 25 colors on screen. The Master System also supports diagonal scrolling as well as line scrolling, allowing it to simulate [[wikipedia:Parallax scrolling|parallax scrolling]]. The Master System is thus a more powerful console than the NES. On the other hand, the NES had a [[Ricoh]] sound chip that was more advanced than the [[SN76489|PSG]] in Western Master System hardware, but not as advanced as the [[Yamaha]] FM synthesis chip in Japanese Master System hardware. The NES was also capable of enhancement chips, some of which added diagonal scrolling, line scrolling and FM synthesis capabilities, but the Master System nevertheless remained the more powerful console.

Revision as of 19:59, 23 April 2019

For technical details on the Sega Master System, see Sega Master System/Technical specifications.


This article presents a hardware comparison between the Sega Master System and other rival systems in its time, most notably the NES. It compares the technical specifications and hardware advantages/disadvantages between the systems.

Vs. Game Gear

As was tradition with Sega consoles at the time, the handheld Sega Game Gear is backwards compatible with the Master System and can run Master System carts through an adapter. The only hardware difference known between the two on a chip level is that the Game Gear can define 4096 possible colors, while the Master System can only define 64 colors. As the GG has more colors, it has a different method of setting each of the color registers than the SMS did; the SMS color can be determined by one byte and hence only needed one register, whereas a number from 0 to 4095 needs two bytes, and so the GG VDP has two color registers. Game Gear games which use the expanded graphics mode will run on an Master System, but with scrambled colors.

Another hardware difference is resolution. The Game Gear has a lower resolution compared to the Master System.

The lack of a "Start" button on a Master System also prevents many Game Gear games from being played without minor changes, however in many cases Game Gear titles are identical to their Master System counterparts, resolution included, meaning it was very common to see both Master System and Game Gear releases of games in regions such as Europe.

Vs. NES

Its main rival, the NES, is an entirely 8-bit console, with an 8-bit Ricoh 2A03 (MOS 6502) CPU and 8-bit Ricoh PPU graphics processor, each with an 8-bit data bus. In comparison, the Master System is a hybrid 8/16-bit system, with its NEC 780C (Zilog Z80) CPU supporting both 8-bit and 16-bit instructions and having an 8-bit data bus, while its Sega VDP graphics processor has a 16-bit data bus.

The Master System's 780C CPU has approximately twice the clock rate (MHz) of the NES's 2A03 CPU, but this does not necessarily mean twice the performance. The 2A03 requires less cycles per instruction, thus it can actually output slightly more instructions per second (MIPS) than the 780C. However, comparing the MIPS of both CPUs would be just as misleading as comparing their MHz. The 780C has a more powerful hybrid 8/16-bit instruction set, so it requires fewer instructions to perform similar tasks. The performance of each CPU varies depending on the tasks. For accessing memory, the 2A03 is faster in that regard, but the 780C doesn't need to access the memory as much since it requires fewer instructions to perform similar tasks. Where the 780C has a significant performance advantage is the arithmetic. While both CPUs have similar performance when it comes to the addition and subtraction of smaller 8-bit numbers, the 780C has a significant performance advantage for most other arithmetic operations, including multiplications and divisions (of 8-bit and 16-bit numbers), as well as the addition and subtraction of larger 16-bit numbers (due to the 780C having native support for 16-bit operations). The faster arithmetic thus gives the 780C an overall performance advantage over the 2A03.

The Master System's VDP has has 16-bit data bus, compared to the NES's PPU which has an 8-bit data bus, thus the Master System has a higher memory bandwidth than the NES. The Master System displays 16 colors per tile and 16 colors per sprite, like the 16-bit Mega Drive and SNES, compared to 4 colors per tile and 4 colors per sprite for the NES. The Master System displays 32 colors on screen, compared to the Nintendo's 25 colors on screen. The Master System also supports diagonal scrolling as well as line scrolling, allowing it to simulate parallax scrolling. The Master System is thus a more powerful console than the NES. On the other hand, the NES had a Ricoh sound chip that was more advanced than the PSG in Western Master System hardware, but not as advanced as the Yamaha FM synthesis chip in Japanese Master System hardware. The NES was also capable of enhancement chips, some of which added diagonal scrolling, line scrolling and FM synthesis capabilities, but the Master System nevertheless remained the more powerful console.

Vs. 7800

The Master System is a more powerful system than the 7800, for similar reasons as the NES.

Vs. C64 and ZX

The Master System's main rivals in Europe were the home computers ZX Spectrum, Commodore 64 (C64), and Commodore Amiga 500 (A500), the latter releasing a month after the Master System's European release in 1987; though, despite the rivalry, Sega supported these platforms as a third-party licensor of arcade ports. The Master System was the most powerful 8-bit home system, surpassing the NES, ZX, and C64, while at the same time the SMS had a lower price point than the ZX and C64.

Vs. Amiga

Compared to the 16-bit Amiga 500, the A500 was generally more powerful overall, with a more powerful 16-bit 68000 CPU, higher resolution, larger color palette, larger sprites, faster blitting, and superior audio capabilities (like the Mega Drive released a year later). However, the Master had several advantages, including more hardware sprite, superior tile capabilities, and smoother scrolling. Its tilemap backgrounds require up to 64 times less processing, memory and bandwidth than the A500's bitmap backgrounds,[1] allowing the Master System to produce smoother scrolling and animations. The Master System displays 32 hardware sprites on screen, compared to the A500's 8 hardware sprites (though blitting allows the A500 to exceed this limit). The Master System displays 32 colors on screen and 16 colors per sprite, while for the A500, colors range from 2 to 32 on screen and it displays 2 to 4 colors per sprite. The A500's parallax scrolling reduces performance and colors, while the Master System's line scrolling simulates parallax scrolling without affecting performance or colors. The Master System's cartridges also have faster loading than the Amiga's floppy disks. While the A500 was still more advanced overall, the Master System hardware was strong enough to remain competitive at a significantly lower price point, up until the release of the more advanced Mega Drive.

Vs. PC Engine

The Master System has a similar 8/16-bit hybrid design as the NEC PC Engine (TurboGrafx-16). The Master System has an 8/16-bit NEC 780C (Zilog Z80) CPU, supporting both 8-bit and 16-bit instructions and with an 8-bit data bus, compared to the PC Engine which has an entirely 8-bit CPU. The Master System's Sega VDP graphics processor has a 16-bit data bus, while the PC-Engine has a dual-GPU setup sharing a 16-bit data bus. The Master System is thus no less of a "16-bit" system than the TurboGrafx-16. Nevertheless, the PC Engine is a significantly more powerful system than the Master System, thus the PC Engine can be considered a next-generation system, even if both systems have a similar numbers of "bits".

Comparison table

Console Sega Master System[2] Nintendo Entertainment System[3][4][5]
System master
clock rate 		NTSC 53.693175 MHz 21.47727 MHz
PAL 53.203424 MHz 26.6017125 MHz
Central processing unit (CPU) NEC 780C (Zilog Z80) Ricoh 2A03 (MOS 6502)
Clock rate NTSC 3.579545 MHz 1.789773 MHz
PAL 3.546894 MHz 1.662607 MHz
Bus width 8-bit 8-bit
Word length 8-bit 8-bit
Instructions Instruction set 8-bit, 16-bit 8-bit
Instructions per second 0.52 MIPS (8/16-bit instructions) 0.7 MIPS (8-bit instructions)[6]
Main RAM Memory 8 KB (XRAM/SRAM, 8-bit) 2 KB (SRAM, 8-bit)
Bandwidth 3.579545 MB/s (NTSC),
3.546894 MB/s (PAL) 		1.789773 MB/s (NTSC),
1.662607 MB/s (PAL)
CPU read/write 1.2 MB/s[n 1] Up to 1.6 MB/s[n 2]
8-bit arithmetic Additions[n 3] Up to 800,000 adds/sec[n 4] Up to 800,000 adds/sec[n 5]
Multiplications Up to 140,000 multiplies/sec[n 6] Up to 100,000 multiplies/sec[n 7]
Divisions Up to 40,000 divides/sec[n 8] Up to 18,000 divides/sec[n 9]
16-bit arithmetic Additions[n 3] Up to 300,000 adds/sec[n 10] Up to 80,000 adds/sec[n 11]
Multiplications Up to 30,000 multiplies/sec[n 12] Up to 9,000 multiplies/sec[n 13]
Divisions Up to 3,000 divides/sec[n 14] Up to 1,000 divides/sec[n 15]
Graphics processing unit (GPU) Sega VDP Ricoh PPU
Clock rate NTSC 10.738635 MHz 5.369318 MHz
PAL 10.640685 MHz 5.320343 MHz
Bus width 16-bit 8-bit
Word length 8-bit 8-bit
Internal cache Cache 64 bytes
(32 bytes CRAM, 32 bytes sprite line buffer) 		256 bytes
(OAM)
Bandwidth 10 MB/s 5.369318 MB/s (NTSC),
5.320343 MB/s (PAL)
Video RAM
(VRAM) 		Memory 16 KB (XRAM/PSRAM) 2 KB (SRAM)
Bandwidth 7.692306 MB/s[n 16] 5 MB/s[n 17]

Notes

  1. ↑ [3 cycles per byte[7] 3 cycles per byte[7]]
  2. ↑ [Minimum 1 cycle per byte Minimum 1 cycle per byte]
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 [Same performance for subtractions Same performance for subtractions]
  4. ↑ [Minimum 4 cycles per 8-bit add[8] Minimum 4 cycles per 8-bit add[8]]
  5. ↑ [Minimum 2 cycles per 8-bit add[9] Minimum 2 cycles per 8-bit add[9]]
  6. ↑ [Minimum 25 cycles per 8-bit multiply[10] Minimum 25 cycles per 8-bit multiply[10]]
  7. ↑ [Minimum 17 cycles per 8-bit multiply[11] Minimum 17 cycles per 8-bit multiply[11]]
  8. ↑ [Minimum 81 cycles per 8-bit divide[12] Minimum 81 cycles per 8-bit divide[12]]
  9. ↑ [Minimum 98 cycles per 8-bit divide[13] Minimum 98 cycles per 8-bit divide[13]]
  10. ↑ [Minimum 11 cycles per 16-bit add[8] Minimum 11 cycles per 16-bit add[8]]
  11. ↑ [Minimum 22 cycles per 16-bit add (2 cycles CLC, 4 cycles LDA, 4 cycles ADC, 6 cycles STA, 6 cycles RTS)[14][9] Minimum 22 cycles per 16-bit add (2 cycles CLC, 4 cycles LDA, 4 cycles ADC, 6 cycles STA, 6 cycles RTS)[14][9]]
  12. ↑ [Minimum 95 cycles per 16-bit multiply (10 cycles LD HL, 7 cycles LD A, 22 cycles ADD HL, 16 cycles RL, 10 cycles JP NC, 6 cycles INC DE, 4 cycles DEC A, 10 cycles JP NZ, 10 cycles RET)[15][8] Minimum 95 cycles per 16-bit multiply (10 cycles LD HL, 7 cycles LD A, 22 cycles ADD HL, 16 cycles RL, 10 cycles JP NC, 6 cycles INC DE, 4 cycles DEC A, 10 cycles JP NZ, 10 cycles RET)[15][8]]
  13. ↑ [Minimum 192 cycles per 16-bit multiply[16] Minimum 192 cycles per 16-bit multiply[16]]
  14. ↑ [Approximately 1,070 cycles per 16-bit divide[17] Approximately 1,070 cycles per 16-bit divide[17]]
  15. ↑ [Approximately 1,900 cycles per 16-bit divide[18] Approximately 1,900 cycles per 16-bit divide[18]]
  16. ↑ [16-bit, 260 ns 16-bit, 260 ns]
  17. ↑ [8-bit, 200 ns[5] 8-bit, 200 ns[5]]

References

  1. ↑ Before the Crash: Early Video Game History, page 173
  2. ↑ Sega Master System/Technical specifications
  3. ↑ NES hardware specifications
  4. ↑ Sega Master System vs Nintendo Entertainment System
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Nintendo NES-001
  6. ↑ Obsolete Microprocessors
  7. ↑ File:Zilog Z80 Programmer's Reference Manual.pdf, page 33
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 Instruction Set
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 6502 Instruction Set
  10. ↑ The fast multiplication
  11. ↑ 8-bit Multiply
  12. ↑ Math
  13. ↑ 8bit Divide - 8bit Result
  14. ↑ 16-bit addition and subtraction
  15. ↑ htt (Wayback Machine: 2011-01-02 16:06)
  16. ↑ Fastest 16x16 unsigned multiplication
  17. ↑ Multiplications, divisions and shifts
  18. ↑ Math stuff


Hardware comparisons
SG-1000 / SC-3000 (specs) vs. Famicom | vs. Master System | vs. C64 | vs. MSX
Sega Master System (specs) Hardware comparison | vs. NES | vs. Atari 7800 | vs. Game Gear | vs. Mega Drive | vs. C64 and ZX | vs. Amiga
Sega Mega Drive (specs) Hardware comparison | vs. 32X | vs. Amiga | vs. Atari Jaguar | vs. Atari ST | vs. Mega-CD | vs. Neo Geo | vs. Saturn | vs. SNES | vs. TurboGrafx-16
Sega Game Gear (specs) vs. Atari Lynx | vs. Game Boy | vs. Master System
Sega Mega-CD (specs) vs. 32X | vs. 3DO | vs. Amiga CD32 | vs. Atari Jaguar CD | vs. Neo Geo CD | vs. SNES | vs. Saturn | vs. TurboGrafx-CD
Sega 32X (specs) Hardware comparison | vs. 3DO | vs. Atari Jaguar | vs. SNES | vs. Saturn
Sega Saturn (specs) Hardware comparison | vs. Atari Jaguar | vs. Dreamcast | vs. Nintendo 64 | vs. PC-FX | vs. PlayStation | vs. SNES | vs. PC | vs. Sega Model 2
Sega Dreamcast (specs) Hardware comparison | vs. GameCube | vs. Nintendo 64 | vs. PlayStation | vs. PlayStation 2 | vs. Xbox | vs. Arcade | vs. PC
Retrieved from "https://segaretro.org/index.php?title=Sega_Master_System/Hardware_comparison&oldid=492309"