On 9/6/07, theGREENzebra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've got a good question. SDLmame is consistently slower than xmame. I'm > aware of the fact that API+code changes and driver updates and whatnot slow > MAME down from release to release, but we're talking even the same version > of xmame against the same version of SDLmame. Typically SDLmame is somewhere > around 65-75% the speed of xmame, depending on the driver of course. > > Does anyone know why this is? Has anyone noticed anything that can provide a > reasonable speedup? Am I doing something wrong?
I think this has been extensively discussed in the past... MAME slows down due to increased accuracy. You can't compare XMAME .106 with any SDLMAME, especially since SDLMAME started with .107 which was a release with huge core changes. I would be very interested by your XMAME and SDLMAME that have the same version ;-) >From a technical point of view I see no reason for SDLMAME to be much slower than an equivalent XMAME. Apart from that you should look at your SDLMAME parameters since they can greatly affect performance depending on your video card (OpenGL on ATI for instance). Laurent _______________________________________________ Xmame mailing list Xmame@toybox.twisted.org.uk http://toybox.twisted.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/xmame
