----- Original Message -----
From: "Si Owen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no>
Sent: 12. listopadu 1999 16:30
Subject: RE: Wincoupe
> Robert Wilkinson wrote:
> > My machines a 166 pentium.
> >
> > Wincoupe needs a faster machine than this, needs a zimmer frame to get
> > around in this machine.
>
> hehe! Try using fullscreen mode and making sure the 'accurate mode 3'
> option is disabled. That will use 320x240 mode which requires no image
> stretching, so it's the fastest it'll go! Not sure how it'll compare to
the
> speed of the DOS version under the same conditions tho. With the
'accurate
> mode 3' option enabled it uses 640x480 which requires the 2x1 generated
> image to be vertically doubled by the display driver. Unfortunately you
> can't see the window title bar in fullscreen mode to know the speed, so
> you'll have to guess how well it's running - on-screen display is coming
> soon to solve that!
I think people who have P166 usually have some accelerated PCI video cards
on it (at least S3). These "S3 and better" can stretch picture by hardware.
So there shouldn't be a problem with 640x480.
> What the maximum framerate do you get on the startup screen with the 1x1
> window size and the 'frame skipping' set to 'none'?
> It's unfortunate that the only 2 machines I use are a PII-400 in work (S3
> video card with no hardware help) and a (dual) Celeron 550 at home (TNT
> video card *with* hardware help). With the 1x1 window I get 167fps in
work
> and ~307fps at home, so I hoped it would be ok on something like a P166
even
> tho I hadn't tried it out! I can't get it to drop under 50fps under any
> conditions at home!
I know that this question is not addressed to me, but I must say something.
When I set "frameskip none" it falls down to 25 fps. I have Pentium 3.
I use Pentium 3/450 and Windows 2000 rc 2.
Here is the table. It shows some interesting numbers, there are probably
some
weird bugs (in SimCoupe).
The "table" shows how the framerate changes when i set "frameskip" and
"accurate mode 3".
mode 3 on --- 175fps with "skip auto" --- 142fps with "skip none"
mode 3 off --- 50fps with "skip auto" --- 25fps with "skip none"
1. I though "skip none" should be the fastest. I can see "skip auto" is
faster. A bug?
2. Mode 3 off should generate 320x240 picture --> i.e. faster. But it is
slower. A bug?
All test were done in title screen (after reset).
Also, these all I've get with "frameskip auto". When "Frameskip none"
and "mode 3 on" I get 130fps (less than "frameskip auto"
> The frame skipping tries to make up the extra time to keep the underlying
> speed the same, but if the screen blits are taking far too long it can't
> quite compensate enough! Slow blits also make the keyboard less
responsive
> as it's possible for keys to have been released before the keyboard scan
> sees then (and using keyboard buffering only leads to lagged keys which
are
> awful in games!).
Well, menu has no shortcuts. I want at least Alt+Space to enter the menu.
> I've (possibly contraversially?) removed the dirty line checking from the
> memory and video code, as the frame skipping and high resolution updates
> made things too complicated. About the only drawback is that you no
longer
> get a speed boost when no video, palette or border changes are made in a
> frame, but the frame skipping should cover those cases unnoticably anyway
> when things are running below normal speed. I reckon most SAM software
> didn't really benefit from it anyway, and it also resulted in more of a
> speed fluctuation during use. With the tests removed all memory writes
are
> a bit faster which benefits things as a whole. The only loss I can think
of
> are possible inter-line 'pixel effects', done by writing data to the
screen
> close to the raster position (not including VMPR, border and palette
changes
> which are still done accurately). The undrawn part of each line is still
> updated at the end of the line to ensure to sure that they're not more tha
n
> 1 line behind - without this it magically removes the star field from some
> demos!
Dirty lines are too complicated? It's because you've probably did too
optimised
video code. I can imagine your sources. :-)))
Mame uses dirty rectangles (the thing you call "dirty lines") and it
benefits from
it. You're right, that it can slow the whole emulator. But how much? A
little bit.
---
I thing this "alpha" version is much better than we could even expect from
"beta" one.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bc. Aley [eili] Keprt - student, programmer (multimedia soft. etc.)
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** http://get.to/aley
----------------------------------------------------------------
