Main > Software Forum
With which prior mame versions did the slowdown begin?
<< < (5/7) > >>
FrizzleFried:
I guess I am special...I run an 1800XP (1.5ghz I do believe it is) on both my cocktail in d3d mode w/a PC monitor and on my vertical cabinet via directdraw with an Electrohome G07 arcade monitor and I have YET to come across a single VERTICAL oriented game that experiences a slow down.   Sure,  my horizontal cabinet running an Athlon 3200+ can't run some newer 3d horizontal games...but that is to be expected.  Emulation isn't about emulating the software,  but rather emulating the HARDWARE that RUNS the software and that takes up quite a bit more clocks cycles...

Anubis_au:

--- Quote from: Aurich on April 03, 2007, 10:29:13 am ---Straight from the horse's mouth...

--- End quote ---


I will be buying a new PC for my next cab... they are dirt cheap nowadays...
Tiger-Heli:
Aurich - Basically, I agree with you, there are tons of post on here about the slowdown in MAME.  (I'm running 0.112 on an XP2800 with basically no problems and will be updating MAME as soon as ElSemi's M2 work gets incorporated.  For now, 0.112 is fine).  When it isn't, I run a different emu or a previous MAME.

--- Quote from: Aurich on April 04, 2007, 01:52:23 am ---
I was obviously being somewhat sarcastic, but I was responding to this quote:


--- Quote ---Please don't keep saying that the 80's games will work fine with recent releases of Mame....cause last I checked, Pac-Man was from the 80's and it runs slow as heck on newer Mame releases.
--- End quote ---

If Pac-Man is running "slow as heck" on ANY version of MAME your machine is ancient. You could only update your machine every 5 years and your old computer should still be plenty fast, expecting anything else is less than realistic. It's not a rare expectation though, hence my point. There's a reason Aaron wrote:

--- End quote ---
Actually, if you are going to quote that, you might quote the outcome as well.  The poster was not running ancient hardware, he was using -ddraw instead of -d3d, IMS and once he changed that setting, all was well with PacMan.
SGT:
Aurich,


--- Quote ---post some details on what exactly you're having trouble with on your 2GHz box. Presumably you can run Pac-Man ok
--- End quote ---

I cannot believe what this thread has become.  Let me try to help you.  I am not having trouble.  I want to run later games (not talking 'bout Pacman) at a faster FPS.  So... I want to run an older version of Mame. That's it. 


--- Quote ---You could only update your machine every 5 years and your old computer should still be plenty fast, expecting anything else is less than realistic
--- End quote ---

So people with computers 5 yrs old can run more recent games.  Or are you back on Pacman?


--- Quote ---Quote
I get tired of reading people just blindly saying that MAME gets slower with each release.

it happens all the freaking time, including here.
--- End quote ---

Dude, Mame IS getty slower, can you show evidence to the contrary?  I, however, am not complaining about it because I understand why it is. Did A.G.'s chart show it was getting slower? Yes.  Is Pacman still plenty fast enough? Yes.  Let me reiterate for the reading impaired. I AM NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT THE SPEED OF MAME.


--- Quote --- try losing the attitude
--- End quote ---

You will find people much more receptive to your opinions if you did not go off on rants and highjack threads (see R. Belmont post) in your zeal to ensure no devs are slighted.

Here is a question for you.  What era of games can a 2Ghz machine be expected to run with Mame 113 versus Mame 089?   You may know the answer to that question, but I do not.  That question is the sole motivation for this thread.
Tiger-Heli:
SGT, you seem to be pretty up on MAME, you said yourself there was no right answer, and I think that is very, very true.  I will try to give you some ideas, but I don't think there's a magic bullet.


--- Quote ---I cannot believe what this thread has become.  Let me try to help you.  I am not having trouble.  I want to run later games (not talking 'bout Pacman) at a faster FPS.  So... I want to run an older version of Mame. That's it.
--- End quote ---

http://www.stickfreaks.com/benchmark/search_all.php has a long list of performance of different games with different versions and processors.  Not comprehensive enough to give you overall guidance, but it might show some trends.

Also, Aaron has a lot of good info on his blog linked above:  Not sure I agree with all his conclusions, or how well pacman speeds compare with newer games, but:

0.53 was slower than 37b16.  Aaron associates this to 8-bit mode support dropping, but discrete sound was also added about this time as well (not a pacman issue, but in general).

0.63 was slower than 0.61, which Aaron attributes to the newer .GCC compiler, although I think this was also about the time of the artwork re-write, although presumeably Aaron would be running without artwork enabled for the benchmarks.

0.107 showed another slowdown, Aaron attributes to the 32-bit rather than 16-bit video modes, but this was also the change from the .art artwork system to the .lay artwork system (although in my experience, games using artwork ran faster on 0.107 and up).

0.110 showed a speedup for unknown reasons. 


--- Quote ---Dude, Mame IS getty slower, can you show evidence to the contrary?  I, however, am not complaining about it because I understand why it is. Did A.G.'s chart show it was getting slower? Yes.  Is Pacman still plenty fast enough? Yes.  Let me reiterate for the reading impaired. I AM NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT THE SPEED OF MAME.
--- End quote ---

Well, it isn't for PacMan, if you look at Aaron's chart (0.112 is faster than 0.110, which is faster than 0.109).  I don't think you can make that a blanket statement.


--- Quote ---Here is a question for you.  What era of games can a 2Ghz machine be expected to run with Mame 113 versus Mame 089?   You may know the answer to that question, but I do not.  That question is the sole motivation for this thread.

--- End quote ---

I don't think you will find one "era" of games that runs better under 0.89.  What you will find -

Generally, MAME runs slower (and more accurately) as hacks and workarounds are removed from the core.  It runs faster as more knowledge is gained about the drivers and the core itself is streamilined.

Where this crosses will vary from game to game, so you may well find Game A runs best in 0.89, slower in 0.63 or 0.112, Game B is best in 0.110, slower in anything newer or older, and Game C is best in R37b16 and slower afterward.

The good news is MAME is free and nothing limits you to one version -

So I would stick with 0.111 for all the games that run full-speed on it.  For games that don't run full speed, install some of the earlier versions (check with MAWS to see when significant driver changes might have been made affecting them), and use the version that runs best for those games only.

FWIW.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page

Go to full version