(Cringe) Sorry to ask...I'm lost with MAME PC specs!

[HanoiBoi]

I know this has been asked, and I apologize in advance for asking again, but I really don't want to shoot myself in the foot with the wrong PC.  I also don't want to burn up my wallet just to get the greatest PC out there.

I'm looking to upgrade my MAME pc.  The one I'm currently using needs to return to it's previous duties.   

So, I need to pick something up that will handle my needs. 

- I'd like to be able to play a good majority of MAME games
- I'm hoping to eventually figure out how to incorporate a pinball emulator (whichever is the 'norm', if there is a norm)
- I'd like to have the option to possibly add light guns and light gun games in the future.

I'm currently looking at a (refurb) PC that has a Pentium 4 3.0GHz, 512mb ram and a 40GB drive.

Will this do me good?

My thoughts are that the 3.0 GHz processor is the key and should be good....but I'm sure I'm missing something...

Also, let me know if you come across any 'deals' out there for a decent PC for MAME.  You know, the ones that make you say, 'Hey, that would be perfect for MAME!'

Thanks!
-HanoiBoi

[Silly Burrito]

http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=72776.msg1046987

There's a few setups on the last page which should give you an idea. I already had Vista and RAM, but I built a new PC for MAME for under $500, and it easily got past 4.0Ghz.

Not sure about the Core i3/i5/7 performance with MAME, though.

[ark_ader]

I see this type of post and I wonder why people need such specs to play a majority of arcade games.

A stock P3 would be able to play classic arcade games, 1000 at the very least.

Why is there a need for anything higher? 

[Lilwolf]

A single core 3ghz will be fine.  It will play 95% of the games out there.

a 2ghz with probably run 94% of the games

And a 3ghz dual core e8400 will run 97% of the games out there... and nothing non-OC'd will run all the games...

You have to decide how much you care about those 5% of the games.  If GauntLegends was in the list, I would say its worth it...

I would love to see a project sort the games based on the same hardware, how fast they run... (so if your computer plays game X just fine... you can go down the list until it starts failing... and have a good guess that everything above it should run fine)...  But the hardware would have to be the same (1) and would have to have an AMD group, and a Intel group since they change (some games DO work better on intels)

[Necroticart]

I'm using a Core I7 920 in my main PC they are amazingly fast i've not even bothered to overclock it and mame 64 runs great

[Jefferson]

Hanoiboi, I'd say your disk space is lacking... a full romset is about 36Gigs, non including CHD's for KI, 3rd strike, any lightgun games, or laserdisk games.

I can DIY wood and wiring ok, but making a PC is kinda beyond me right now. I bought this comp for $250 off overstock and I can run, like that dude said above, 95% of arcade games perfectly...
http://www.overstock.com/Electronics/IBM-8113-3.0GHz-2GB-400GB-Computer-Refurbished/4178981/product.html?recommendation_id=86324e11-01e3-4d5c-a296-ed62c4cb0cc5.1

IBM 8113 3.0GHz 2GB 400GB Computer (Refurbished)
Very very pleased. And the XP it comes with is fairly stripped down (or at least, the last PC I had years ago was preloaded with a bunch of trial stuff and antivirus garbage)

Also I'm running NES SNES and Sega, as well as a handful of n64, PS1 and DC games. With Video previews (MAME) and snaps for the other systems, its about 100G of space. Remember MAME is almost all processor, but RAM helps for peripherals (frontend, consoles)

[HanoiBoi]

I see this type of post and I wonder why people need such specs to play a majority of arcade games.

A stock P3 would be able to play classic arcade games, 1000 at the very least.

Why is there a need for anything higher? 

I hear ya, Ark.  I don't like these posts either, but I really need to move on something.  I guess the 'majority' part was fluff.  I have no experience with light guns or the pinball stuff (Pinmame, virtualpinball, Hyperspin, etc.).  I haven't been able to determine whether or not they require more GHz and/or RAM than say Donkey Kong.

A single core 3ghz will be fine.  It will play 95% of the games out there.

a 2ghz with probably run 94% of the games

And a 3ghz dual core e8400 will run 97% of the games out there... and nothing non-OC'd will run all the games...

You have to decide how much you care about those 5% of the games.  If GauntLegends was in the list, I would say its worth it...

Lilwolf, thanks for that break down.  You kept it simple and pretty informative at the same time.

Hanoiboi, I'd say your disk space is lacking... a full romset is about 36Gigs, non including CHD's for KI, 3rd strike, any lightgun games, or laserdisk games.

I can DIY wood and wiring ok, but making a PC is kinda beyond me right now. I bought this comp for $250 off overstock and I can run, like that dude said above, 95% of arcade games perfectly...
http://www.overstock.com/Electronics/IBM-8113-3.0GHz-2GB-400GB-Computer-Refurbished/4178981/product.html?recommendation_id=86324e11-01e3-4d5c-a296-ed62c4cb0cc5.1

IBM 8113 3.0GHz 2GB 400GB Computer (Refurbished)
Very very pleased. And the XP it comes with is fairly stripped down (or at least, the last PC I had years ago was preloaded with a bunch of trial stuff and antivirus garbage)

Also I'm running NES SNES and Sega, as well as a handful of n64, PS1 and DC games. With Video previews (MAME) and snaps for the other systems, its about 100G of space. Remember MAME is almost all processor, but RAM helps for peripherals (frontend, consoles)

Thanks Jefferson.  That looks like a pretty decent PC.  I do have an extra 500GB SATA drive kickin' around here...maybe I can find a good deal on a PC with a small SATA drive.

Regarding those other emulators...nice!  I still need to figure out where to get those and their games.  I know, everyone says that these things are easy to find, but damn if I'm able to....lol.

[drventure]

For mame, you won't need much in the way of a graphics card, but if you want to run future pinball or VP, you'll need a decent card or they'll be slow as heck. I found that out the hard way 

[RobbyMac]

I would love to see a project sort the games based on the same hardware, how fast they run... (so if your computer plays game X just fine... you can go down the list until it starts failing... and have a good guess that everything above it should run fine)...  But the hardware would have to be the same (1) and would have to have an AMD group, and a Intel group since they change (some games DO work better on intels)

+1 ON THE HARDWARE LIST!
I'm sure there are all sorts of ways to complicate the idea... but surely a simplified '3ghz+ list' would help people alot.

[Thenasty]

I wanted to see how the speed on MAME when you get this cpu (you might be the first one) on some games.

http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0312975

[Gatt]

I would love to see a project sort the games based on the same hardware, how fast they run... (so if your computer plays game X just fine... you can go down the list until it starts failing... and have a good guess that everything above it should run fine)...  But the hardware would have to be the same (1) and would have to have an AMD group, and a Intel group since they change (some games DO work better on intels)

While it's an interesting idea in theory,  in practice it's not very workable unfortunately,  for two reasons.

1.  In general,  on any hardware platform,  early games are much less demanding than later ones which fully exploit the hardware.  Especially on the hardware of more recent years,  which is the hardware that'd be in question.

2.  Too many variables in computer builds.  I've a 2.8ghz quad-core intel,  but I'm absolutely certain it runs a good deal faster than an off-the-shelf 2.8ghz Dell.  For several reasons,  I used an extremely high quality motherboard with memory chips that run much faster than the board is rated for,  and an aftermarket cooler.  What I'm getting at is,  no two systems are equal,  *especially* off-the-shelf systems.  Many companies will cut costs by offering a high-speed processor and pairing it with low-speed memory,  or use cheap motherboards that impact processor performance,  or worst of all,  integrated video.  So,  I mean,  I could run the tests and come up with good results on a number of edge-case games,  whereas a Dell or Compaq couldn't run them well.

There's just no reasonable way to compile such a list,  because in the end,  E-machines owner #43,689 is going to be *really* upset when he discovers that his system doesn't come remotely close to the posted recommendations.

I can DIY wood and wiring ok, but making a PC is kinda beyond me right now. I bought this comp for $250 off overstock and I can run, like that dude said above, 95% of arcade games perfectly...

It's intimidating at first,  but it's really not difficult.  Mounting the processor and heat-sink are the only skilled portions of the build,  everything else is just plugging things in where they go,  and you can buy a motherboard with the processor and cooler already mounted.  Of course,  there's an order to it,  perhaps I'll do a generic "Steps to assemble a PC" post in the near future with some tips.

[Haze]

A single core 3ghz will be fine.  It will play 95% of the games out there.

a 2ghz with probably run 94% of the games

And a 3ghz dual core e8400 will run 97% of the games out there... and nothing non-OC'd will run all the games...

You have to decide how much you care about those 5% of the games.  If GauntLegends was in the list, I would say its worth it...

I would love to see a project sort the games based on the same hardware, how fast they run... (so if your computer plays game X just fine... you can go down the list until it starts failing... and have a good guess that everything above it should run fine)...  But the hardware would have to be the same (1) and would have to have an AMD group, and a Intel group since they change (some games DO work better on intels)

There is a world of difference between what a single 3ghz core of a Pentium 4 will do, and a single 3ghz core of a C2D will do.  The mhz alone is NOT a good indicator.

With modern versions of MAME you might find there are times the 3gz P4 leaves something to be desired, even when running 'classics'.  There are drivers which have improved, and as a result become slower, and some classics which are pretty demanding from the off (the 'proper' 3 screen versions of Buggy Boy and TX1 for example)

I was doing some development on a 2ghz machine with MAME the other day, and it wasn't pretty at all, a lot of things would periodically dip a bit, and because it was only a single core background tasks in Windows were more prone to cause stuttering in the emulation.  A 3ghz P4 also gives you less of a buffer if things become slower again in the future as further improvements are made, and you want to upgrade to a newer version, but as a result can't.