Main > Main Forum

Which emulated games are the most heavy on the cpu?

Pages: << < (2/6) > >>

jimmy2x2x:

Yes, exactly that

I think almost everything already exists to do this, just needs putting together


XNIF:


--- Quote from: jimmy2x2x on July 14, 2010, 07:35:49 am ---Yes, exactly that

I think almost everything already exists to do this, just needs putting together


--- End quote ---

true. But i do not think it would give you an excact calculation. Some parts of the game are more cpu hungy then others. You should run only those parts to give an good indication.

EightBySix:

Doesn't MAME have the ability to record and playback games? Maybe a standard set of benchmark game play sessions could be built for use as a 'standard' to compare setups? Those sessions could include scenes that tax the machine...

lets call it MAMEMarktm  ;D

jimmy2x2x:

Yes, giving results for min% max% and average% of performance

cant see why it cant be done


Gatt:


--- Quote from: jimmy2x2x on July 14, 2010, 08:05:42 am ---Yes, giving results for min% max% and average% of performance

cant see why it cant be done


--- End quote ---

There's actually a few things preventing this...

1.  A decent number of games require initialization or they just hang,  so they'd each have to be initialized first before a benchmark could be done.  As some of these require control configuration,  it can't really be scripted.

2.  A large number of games attract mode isn't representative of gameplay,  such as Carnevil,  and would return horribly incorrect numbers.  Yes,  one could write code to bypass this,  but it wouldn't be a small amount of effort.

3.  Some games suffer only at certain points,  and if you don't get to those points,  it would report the game is good when it really isn't.



Pages: << < (2/6) > >>

Go to full version