Conference hydra::amiga_v1

    
    There are a few more differences between the A500 and the A2000...
    
    1.  The A2000 has an internal video expansion slot for direct plug-in
    of a genlock device or other video add-on, such as a de-interlacing
    card or professional graphics (16 million colors) adaptor.
    
    2.  The 2000 has a coprocessor slot for use of a 32-bit accelerator
    board, such as the Commodore A2620 or A2630 and other speedup boards.
    
    3.  The 2000 comes with one megabyte of memory on the motherboard.  On
    machines now shipping, this is configured as video memory (this is
    good).  The A500 starts out life as a 512K machine, and goes to one meg
    thru the addition of a small memory/clock board on the bottom of the
    A500 chassis.
    
    Note that the A500 DOES include an 86 pin expansion buss on the left
    side of the machine.  Hard drives from Commodore and other 3 rd party
    vendors attach here.  There are also expansion chassis from several
    vendors that allow you to use A2000 boards.
    
    The bottom line is that you'll generally pay more for add-ons for the
    A500, since they will need their own enclosure and power supply.  If
    you feel that you'll only need a hard drive and some extra memory, an
    A500 may suit your needs.  If you want to install an AT BridgeBoard,
    the 2000 is a better choice.
    
    Ed.

    If you can handle the initial cost going in I would opt for the
    2000.I know several people with 500's that while they love the 
    Amiga,and are happy,say they wish they had bought or want a 2000.
    The problem is with the Amiga itself.This problem is that few new
    users can actually see the full potential of the machine.many buy
    with the "I only want to do some word processing,and play some games"
    attitude.Then shortly thereafter they realize that thay can and
    most often do want to do digitizing,and video,and DTP etc.Ed did
    a fine job of explaning the differences above,I am trying to stress
    that before you decide what your user needs will be consider some
    of the ofen overlooked questions.
    	1)How much space do you have ? With my 2000,digitizer,disk storage
    etc,I find myself always looking for more space,and I don't have
    a printer yet.
    	2)how flexible is the space you have ? a deep space with a short
    width will not be as easy to work with for 500 expansion.
    	3)How about user needs over a period of time.If the primary
    user is a younger person(4-10)and getting into computers,and space
    is no problem then go with the 500.I say this because you could
    get the system,moniter,printer etc for the cost of a 2000,and would
    probably meet the user demands for a long long time.If you are the
    primary user,or you have a large family with diverse interest go
    with the 2000.(I don't have to share mine)
    	4)Of course if there is any chance you'll need to have I**,or
    Mac compatability you have no choice it is the 2000.
    	sorry for rambling on but these are the things I hear when talking
    to other users.The choice is difficult because the Lowend Amiga
    CAN run all (but for the bridgeboard) the applications that the highend 
    (Amiga 2500)Amigas can given the disk,and ram needed.You are not
    faced with this choice when looking at the other machines.One last
    suggestion.If you have children buy a 500 to start,and then later
    get a 2000,and let them have the 500.Your software investment is
    covered in full.As I tell my wife"DISKSPACE,and MEMORY are like
    MONEY in that you never have ENOUGH".
    						bill

    You might want to check around on the price of a 2000HD which has a
    hard drive installed.  I believe a previous note not too long ago
    stated that 1 dealer was selling the 2000hd for $1800.  I don't know if
    that included the monitor or not.  If you get a 500 and add a hard
    drive, you will be looking at about $1700 right there (including the
    monitor).  Also, if you get the A590 hard drive for the 500, adding
    memory on to it (1.5 meg is starting to get to be necessary) the
    special CMOS memory chips it uses are more expensive than the NMOS
    chips the 2000 uses for expansion.  1 meg on the A590 runs about $120
    compared to about $80 for the NMOS.
    
    I wish now that I had spent the extra money for a 2000, but that
    doesn't mean that I am dissatisfied with the 500.  Its a very good
    value compared to any other system on the market.
    
    Ken
    

    
    It's also fairly difficult to use a bridgecard on a A500...
    
    right?
    
    - steve

    Re .0, et al:
    
    The short answer is, "YES!  The A2000 IS worth the extra bucks."  If
    you were already prepared to spring for a Mac II of ANY flavor, you
    should go DIRECTLY to the A2000 without "passing GO ..."
    
    The A500 can't do the following at present.  We can hope for add-ons
    that might allow for some of these in the future, but the A200 can do
    any/all NOW as you get it out of the box.
      �	Support the FlickerFixer and a multi-scan monitor.
      �	Support a host of A2000 controller boards for disk, communications
    	and memory.
      �	Support a BridgeBoard.  If you need to execute MS-DOS software, you
    	need an A2000 or a separate system.
      �	Support (via the BridgeBoard) a host of cheap PC-compatible
    	controller cards.
      �	Support 1MB "Chip RAM" without modification.  (This is the weakest
    	point, now that some dealers are performing this modification on
    	a routine basis.  It's still a consideration, though.)
    
    AMAX (the Macintosh emulator) runs on both A500 and A2000 systems,
    contrary to an assertion in a previous reply.  (Rumor has it that AMAX
    prefers 1MB of Chip RAM, though.)
    
    From a software standpoint, both models use EXACTLY the same system
    software, so that is NOT a consideration.  As one who's been looking
    "under the hood" a lot lately, I'm STILL happily surprised as I go
    poking through the guts of the Amiga.  I've seen a number of operating
    systems' innards, and the Amiga is exceptional in that regard.
    
    The A500 has two other relative weaknesses (usually not problems, but
    certainly NOT features) that could also play a part in one's decision.
      �	The A500's attached keyboard has an acceptable "feel", but you
    	can tell it's an inexpensive unit.  It also lacks the convenience
    	inherent in being detached.
      �	The A500 power "brick" has only enough power for the A500 itself 
    	(and for the A501 Clock/RAM daughter board, but NOT for disk drives
    	and other accessories).  The A2000 comes with a heftier power supply.
    
    Bottom line:  if you can spare the extra money NOW, GET THE A2000. 
    
    I'm not trying to take anything away from the A500 here.  I *love* my
    A500, but I knew that it was the A500 or nothing (my wife insists the
    Amiga is my Christmas and Birthday presents for the next two years 8^),
    and I couldn't bear the latter possibility.
                             

From reading lots magazines, usenet, & this file, I have found only a few
"real" reasons to have a 2000 over a 500. 

If you intend to go the 68020, 68030 68040 route, the 2000 has the co-processor
slot. It may be possible at some point to add this to a 500, but I haven't seen
that one yet. You can add 68020s to the 500, but do not get the gain that you 
get in the 2000 slot.

If you want to run a Flicker Fixer with at Multisync monitor, you need
the 2000. The FF makes a beautiful display. Although one complany is 
advertising a fixer claimed to work on the 500 also, I think it is vapor
at this point. 

The other benefits mentioned fall into the convenience category. There
are expansion boxes that can run Bridgeboards, 8 meg boards, serial boards,
hardcards etc. The AMAX emulator runs on the 500 since it attaches to the
drive port. 
>>fairly difficult to use a bridgeboard
There's the rub. Any addition of boards designed for the 2000 involve
some trade off of time, risk of bugs, etc. As with most things in life
you pay for convenience, and can make or save money if you put up with
inconvenience. Sometimes it is worth it to someone at some time to live
with inconvenience. Is inconvenience a "real" reason? It depends...

Dave 
 

re .5 Bill sneaked his in while I was writing mine (.6).
I don't understand the chip ram problem. The modification is a factory one
and cheap compared to the cost to get a 2000. Unless I am missing something
I don't think that this is a problem with the 500.

I am sure I have seen ads for expansion boxes to run the bridgeboard on a 500.

DR

    .5 said the amiga 500 power supply is not enough for disk drives.  This
    is wrong.  It is enough for the amiga, the a501 expansion ram, and a
    3.5" floppy disk drive.
    
    Tom

    I don't think this has been mentioned, but the latest AmigaWorld
    has reviews of 3 A500 hard drive expansions.  They point out that
    the A590 (as is) is only capable of ~130k/sec read and ~65k/sec write.
    Many expansions are slower.  One expansion reviewed was faster, 
    something on the order of 300k/sec read and 200k/sec writing.
    
    Ultra-high speed might not be an issue for most owners, but I know
    my HardFrame/ST277N usually gets 550+k/sec read, and 400+k/sec writes.
    (Other people have posted similar times.)  If you want/need a 'fast'
    HD setup, shop around carefully for a A500 expander, or go the A2xxx
    route.  The speed may not be a factor for you, depending on what you're 
    doing with your Amiga.
    
    ~Steve - still 'expanding' his A2500 (the "black hole" :^)

    Re: .9
    
    Well, they obviously tested the A590 with the slow-mo drive that
    comes with it. If you attach a SCSI drive, this controller will
    blast that data into the system via DMA at a very high efficency.
    Transfer rates around 1MB/s are no problem.
    
    Regards,
    
    <CB>