With which prior mame versions did the slowdown begin?

[SGT]

What a conundrum!  I currently use Mame .111 except for Gorf with which I use Mame .069.   I want to rollback my small set (174) of roms to an earlier Mame version with better performance.

I know that this is a question of personal taste that also depends upon the roms that I run.  I can look up what versions support the roms I want easy enough.

The tough question is, in your opinion, with what versions of Mame was the performance slower than the prior version?  What mame version do you run?

Opinions appreciated.

-SGT

P.S.  I know there is no right answer.

[WunderCade]

And just to add to your proposition....

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.

[u_rebelscum]

The tough question is, in your opinion, with what versions of Mame was the performance slower than the prior version?  What mame version do you run?...

P.S.  I know there is no right answer.

In general, each new mame is slower than the previous.  There are some that had bigger drops than normal, though.  (And since this was a generalization, there are times when parts of mame are faster in newer than older, and when there is no noticeable changes.)

The more recent "big drops" for mame happened with 0.106u1 (video change) & 0.93 (sound).  Individual games can drop and jump much more often, though; other here might want to note drops for games they like that are separate from the whole mame drops.

I don't worry about speed, usually.  However, I also keep dozens of versions of mame on my harddrive.  That's one of the great things about most FEs; they let you set up specific versions for specific games if you want.

...last I checked, Pac-Man was from the 80's and it runs slow as heck on newer Mame releases.

I bet it's because of the video rewrite, which effected different computers more than others.  If so, use directdraw, turn of bezels, or upgrade your video card.  (It's still fine on my athlon 1GHz computer, and my newer one.)

But yes, there are some 80's games that tax computers (eg: harddrivin), more than most 90's games.  (Pacman, though, shouldn't be one of them.)

[SGT]

In general, each new mame is slower than the previous.

Sounds like I need to pick the earliest version that runs my roms *and* that I can successfully rollback my roms.

The more recent "big drops" for mame happened with 0.106u1 (video change) & 0.93 (sound).

Great to know, u_rebelscum.  Thanks, this is the kind of info I was looking for.

I don't worry about speed, usually.  However, I also keep dozens of versions of mame on my harddrive.  That's one of the great things about most FEs; they let you set up specific versions for specific games if you want.

I love Mala, but that's one thing I wish it did differently.  I can run multiple versions of Mame easy enough, but each version of Mame must have its own gamelist.  Therefore, I cannot have all my Mame games together.  Loadman or Swindus may correct me on this or give me a workaround?

-SGT

[Aurich]

And just to add to your proposition....

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.

It might help if you list your machine specs. I have zero slowdown issues with Pac-Man and recent MAMEs, it sure doesn't run "slow as heck". Are you using a really old box?

[acevedor2]

Same here - no slow down at all.  Now I will say that I am running a 3.4 Pentium D with 2GB DDR2 Ram and a 256MB video card.  But I built this computer purposely because I didn't want to be limited.

[SGT]

Now I will say that I am running a 3.4 Pentium D with 2GB DDR2 Ram and a 256MB video card.  But ...

You may be looking for an older version of Mame in a couple of years if you upgrade with each version, but no worries now obviously.

-SGT

[gonzo90017]

I'm using a 400mhz overclocked to 500mhz with 128mb of ram. (Going to upgrade to 192) I'm currently running mame37b16, Pmame 59, Fastmame71, 84 Raine and winkawaks. I'm using AtomicFE to have on list. All games run full speed. Except for a few like Mortal Kombat and Nba jam.

[SGT]

Gonzo,

Did you rollback newer roms or are you using original .37 roms?

[gonzo90017]

I rolled back to 55 with Clrmamepro then I decided to use 37b16 and just used the 55 ones and most of those worked fine except for some of the system16 games. I haven't tested all roms though.

[Anubis_au]

I can't debate which release of MAME was a slowdown from the previous, but I can tell you this: I ran advmame 0.77 for years, and 99.9% of games played perfectly, did not slow down at all, or feel sluggish etc. Its one of the reasons for me now, trying to find a way to still being able to keep that old romset kicking in a new cab.

The one exeption was Mortal Kombat the movie, which was sluggish, but I think it may have been more to do with my system than the MAME version I used. It was a P3 800MHz, 128M RAM, and a 4MB video card. Every other game played brilliant.

[Aurich]

Straight from the horse's mouth...

[SGT]

Ouch.  Pacman FPS dropped 42% from version .037 to .113

[AaronGiles]

Ouch.  Pacman FPS dropped 42% from version .037 to .113

And putting it that way just shows that you pretty much missed the whole point of my post. You'll notice that Pac-Man still runs at 3x the speed it needs to on very modest hardware. When I do the Rastan comparison I'm sure you'll see a much smaller speed drop over the same period, because MAME is now optimized more for games of that era than for games of the Pac-Man era, which pretty much any hardware can handle without breaking a sweat.

[SGT]

that way just shows that you pretty much missed the whole point of my post. You'll notice that Pac-Man still runs at 3x the speed it needs to on very modest hardware. When I do the Rastan comparison I'm sure you'll see a much smaller speed drop over the same period, because MAME is now optimized more for games of that era than for games of the Pac-Man era, which pretty much any hardware can handle without breaking a sweat.

No disrespect was intended.  I understand that we only need 60 fps.  I just did not think that Pacman had dropped that much.  I realize that Pacman still runs much faster than is needed with .113.  Wasn't trying to spin your results nor would I want to make too many assumptions from statistics from only one game.

[Aurich]

It just goes to show though, that anyone who is complaining that 80's games run too slow is probably using really old hardware. I don't understand where this attitude that recent software should be running great on the 386 you found in your basement comes from. You can build a brand new bare bones PC that will kick ass in MAME for dirt cheap these days, let alone grabbing an older but plenty fast box off eBay etc. BYOAC is about the right tools to make your project work, and a decent PC should just be part of the list. It just shouldn't be a bone of contention in my mind.

Personally I love the new video system, I find the overlay flexibility very useful. I'm glad MAME is moving forward and not being stuck tied to old hardware. People with old hardware can just choose not to upgrade if they wish.

[SGT]

It just goes to show though, that anyone who is complaining that 80's games run too slow is probably using really old hardware. I don't understand where this attitude that recent software should be running great on the 386 you found in your basement comes from.

Who has expressed this attitude that recent software should be running great on a 386? 

People with old hardware can just choose not to upgrade if they wish.

You cannot seem to grasp that is exactly what this thread is about.  This is not a pissing contest nor a complaint fest.  It is simply a thread asking what version of Mame runs the fastest.  I have only a 2 Ghz cpu, not the latest cadillac.  I could care less if you upgrade your machine every two years or not.  You have not seen a complaint from me that Mame is getting slower.  I simply wanted advice regarding older versions of Mame.  Try to remove your nose from the Devs backside long enough to understand what this thread is about.

[dmckean]

It just goes to show though, that anyone who is complaining that 80's games run too slow is probably using really old hardware. I don't understand where this attitude that recent software should be running great on the 386 you found in your basement comes from. You can build a brand new bare bones PC that will kick ass in MAME for dirt cheap these days, let alone grabbing an older but plenty fast box off eBay etc. BYOAC is about the right tools to make your project work, and a decent PC should just be part of the list. It just shouldn't be a bone of contention in my mind.

Personally I love the new video system, I find the overlay flexibility very useful. I'm glad MAME is moving forward and not being stuck tied to old hardware. People with old hardware can just choose not to upgrade if they wish.

I think it's because a MAME cabinet is something that someone thinks about doing with their old computer after they upgrade. It shouldn't require big beefy hardware to run old classics from the 80s. An old Pentium 133 or Celeron you have laying around should be able to handle it. I realize old versions of MAME allow you to do this with most games, but theres a lot of old 80s games in those versions that don't have full sound support or are a little buggy that have since been fixed in later versions. Maybe it would make more sense if the MAME developers split MAME up by decade and had three versions to keep things from getting too bloated and also be able to maintain realistic system requirements for each version.

[Extreme8]

Maybe it would make more sense if the MAME developers split MAME up by decade and had three versions to keep things from getting too bloated and also be able to maintain realistic system requirements for each version.

Mamedev wouldn't care if NONE of the games run on current hardware. Their stated mission is to preserve these classics in as close to original form as possible.
The fact that hardware has progressed to the point that many of them are usable is just a bonus.
Those that don't contribute to the cause (and I consider myself among that number) should just be grateful that we are reaping the benefits of their work.

"Boo-hoo-hoo, Pacman is only 3 times faster than it needs to be. If those know nothing devs didn't mess with the code it could be 5 times faster than required, then the world would be all rainbows and lollipops."

Gimme a break.

There's a saying in American auto racing: "speed costs son.  How fast you wanna go?"
I guess the same could be said about high frame rates.
Which leads us to the next American racing expression:"put up or shut up"

[Aurich]

Who has expressed this attitude that recent software should be running great on a 386? 

I was obviously being somewhat sarcastic, but I was responding to this 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.

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:

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

it happens all the freaking time, including here. Don't take it so personally, I understand this thread just fine, if you really want some help try losing the attitude and post some details on what exactly you're having trouble with on your 2GHz box. Presumably you can run Pac-Man ok.

[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]

Straight from the horse's mouth...

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.

I was obviously being somewhat sarcastic, but I was responding to this 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.

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:

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,

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

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. 

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

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

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.

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.

try losing the attitude

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.

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.

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. 

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.

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.

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.

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.

[SGT]

Tiger-heli,

A lot of good information there, thanks.  Regarding saying Pacman is slower; I just meant over the whole period, not from release to release.  I can run Pacman fine, so its a non-issue for me.

[Tiger-Heli]

A lot of good information there, thanks.  Regarding saying Pacman is slower; I just meant over the whole period, not from release to release.  I can run Pacman fine, so its a non-issue for me.

The PacMan comment was specifically in response to your "Dude, Mame IS getty slower, can you show evidence to the contrary?" comment.  Another example would be the Cruis'n USA and Cruisi'n World games.  I'm not sure when the actual speedup occurred, but they used to run about 5-8 FPS and I think now they are up in the 25-35 FPS range on my system.

I agree, overall, the latest MAME is slower than the older versions, but it's not an across the board thing.  And it kinda frustrates me, other BYOAC'ers, and the MAMEdev when people have an "I'm just going to run a 30 revisions past version of MAME since the new ones are so slow".   I know that's not really where you were coming from, but it gets posted a lot by others and it could have been taken that way.

[SGT]

Tiger-heli,

I do not want to get pulled into a "is Mame slower" debate because it is a non issue to me.  I have never complained here or elsewhere about the speed of the latest releases.

However in order to help me better understand where you are coming from when you say my statement that "Mame is slower" is incorrect, are you saying that the video and sound revisions only affected a few games and did not affect most games across the board? I am not being sarcastic; I do not know.

I thought even the devs will tell you that the corrections that were needed to the code slowed it down somewhat ON THE SAME HARDWARE.  Again before I'm attacked by new readers of this thread, I'm not complaining about the speed.  I thought it was common knowledge that Mame was slower (not to be read too slow).  Again, I do not mean every revision, but slower over the long haul on the same hardware.

I think we apparently have two groups of people that get lumped into one group.  Group A that ignorantly complain that the devs are screwing up Mame by making it slower.  Group B that just want to run the more recent games at an acceptable frame rate by running an older version of Mame on their older hardware.

Though you are not one, there are some that get highly offended by the discussion of speed.  They start screaming to GET A NEW COMPUTER OR DON'T UPGRADE.  Well that's what I'm trying to do by going to a past revision.  Its very irritating to see the rants on a discussion about which past Mame version to use.

Extreme8 said:

Mamedev wouldn't care if NONE of the games run on current hardware.

If that is the case, the devs shouldn't care if I inquire about an old version for speed sake.  If that is the case, they shouldn't care if the complainers compain either.  If they don't care, the ones (not you) that trip out if anything can be construed as an insulting to the devs should chill out.  If they can read mame.net  they should be able to see that the devs can take care of themselves and do not need policemen on this board.

[Tiger-Heli]

However in order to help me better understand where you are coming from when you say my statement that "Mame is slower" is incorrect, are you saying that the video and sound revisions only affected a few games and did not affect most games across the board? I am not being sarcastic; I do not know.

No, I am not saying that the revisions affected only a few games.  What I am saying is that some games were affected (slowed) more by the changes, some not as much, and a few might even run faster after them.  Also in many cases specific games (such as Cruisn' series) will run faster on later versions than previous ones.

You have removal of hacks which slows down performance, and you have optimization of code and drivers which speeds it up.  And this is happening for all drivers at all times.  So it is very hard to say MAMEDev was making MAME faster until 0.76 (just an arbitrary number) and then they started slowing it down.  Some games will run faster in older versions, some will run faster in new versions.  The same debate used to go on with MAME32 and DosMame.  Overall, DosMAME was generally faster (not MAMEw, I am talking early days), but there were a handful of games that ran faster on MAME32, for whatever reason.

I thought even the devs will tell you that the corrections that were needed to the code slowed it down somewhat ON THE SAME HARDWARE.

What the devs generally refer to this as is "moving the sweet spot".  In other words, prior to MAME 0.53 or so, you could run Pac-Man and most 80's games on something similar to a Pentium 200 Mhz.  Later builds of MAME optimized the core for performance on 90's era games, meaning your Pentium 200Mhz can't play PacMan anymore (on a recent build), but nobody is building a MAME cab these days with a P 200 so they can run MAME 0.114u1 with full artwork.

I think we apparently have two groups of people that get lumped into one group.  Group A that ignorantly complain that the devs are screwing up Mame by making it slower.  Group B that just want to run the more recent games at an acceptable frame rate by running an older version of Mame on their older hardware.

What happens is Group A is a fairly vocal group.  As pointed out, MAME is not attempting to be a fast emulator.  For example, it typically emulates all the video code in the CPU before sending the output to the card.  So your 512M X1900 graphics card sits around until your 2.0 Ghz CPU finishes the processing of the emulated game GPU and the emulated Game GPU and then gets it's output to run.  It's the most accurate way to do it.  There are faster emulators out there.

Though you are not one, there are some that get highly offended by the discussion of speed.  They start screaming to GET A NEW COMPUTER OR DON'T UPGRADE.  Well that's what I'm trying to do by going to a past revision.  Its very irritating to see the rants on a discussion about which past Mame version to use.

Well - here's the practical advice section of my post:  Note that except for having approximately a 2.0 Ghz processor, I don't play a lot of the same games as you do (I don't think).  Note also, that I don't think there is a blanket answer.  (Run MAME 0.76 for all games is probably not good advice.)

First, if you like the new bezel artwork, don't go below 0.107.

Second, note what games do not run full-speed on the current 0.111 version that you are using.  Note: full-speed is all you are concerned about.  If the game runs at 101% unthrottled (F10) throughout the game, then the fact that it could run at 150% in a 30 revision ago version of MAME has little or no bearing.

Third for these games, look into other emulators which are not as "accurate" as MAME and therefore faster.  MAWS usually lists these.  Likely ones are Nebula, Final Burn, Zinc, HazeMD, CPS-shock, Retrocade, RAINE, etc.  Try these for the games that run too slowly.

Finally, in general, MAME has had a few revisions that were significantly slower than others, and generally incremental slowdowns in between.  Generally, you don't need to download and test all fifty versions between 0.53 and 0.113, b/c 0.78 is going to run identically to 0.77.  Get copies of R37B13, 0.53, 0.63, and 0.85, 0.106 and 0.111 and try the games on each one and find which works best for you.

Really finally - if none of the versions works well, look at either MAWS or the current driver info in the .src and see what was changed.  For example, let's look at Cruis'n USA:

Emuloader pulls the driver information for me, I am not sure where it gets it, but from MAWS:

- 0.74u2: Brake pedal hack removed.
- 0.74: Changed ADSP2105 clock speed to 10MHz.
- 0.62: Added Cruis'n USA (rev L4.1) and clones Cruis'n USA (rev L2.1) and (rev L4.0).

However, from the Driver Information:

- 0.99u7: Aaron Giles fixed crashing of the Midway V-Unit games.
- 0.94u5: Aaron Giles turned off debugging code in the hotspots, giving a huge speed improvement to the V-unit games.
- 0.84u3: Fixed sound1 roms addresses.
- 0.79u2: Changed Custom sound to DMA-driven_DAC.
- 23rd January 2004: Aaron Giles cleaned up the Midway Y/Z/X/T/W/V-unit drivers.
- 0.77: Changed ADSP2105 CPU2 clock speed to 10 MHz.
- 0.76u2: Aaron Giles update the Midway V-Unit driver: WarGods sound is 100% now, added some pre-initialization to the WarGods NVRAM, added speedup handlers for all games (it makes a little difference), revamped the DCS2 handling to support stereo output, fixed a number of synchronization issues in the DCS2 handling and implemented a few missing features in the Midway I/O ASIC. Changed ADSP2105 CPU2 clock speed to 10240000 Hz.
- 0.63: Changed wmsvunit.c driver to midvunit.c

So this game should be best in either 0.95 or 0.100, although 0.106 or 0.111 shouldn't be too much slower.

NOTE:  MAMEdev also doesn't do you many favors in that "Huge speed improvement to the V-unit games" doesn't correspond to the casual gamer as "Cruis'n USA is faster now (or Mortal Kombat, NBA Jam, Smash TV), etc."

If they can read mame.net  they should be able to see that the devs can take care of themselves and do not need policemen on this board.

Ermmmn, yeah, that's a bit of an understatement!!! 

[u_rebelscum]

SGT, please be careful about mixing generalities and absolute facts.

Generalities are correct most of the time, but by definition are wrong some of the time.  Absolute facts are always true.

"Mame is slower" is a generality.  As Aaron showed with pacman, the generality is not true a lot of the time for (in general ) the core: sometimes it speeds up or stays the same.  What the demo doesn't show is the WIP drivers and their more frequent ups and downs they go through as its emulation is improved.  Nor how different games are effected differently by the same core changes.

You actually might be thinking in generalities, but it sounds like you're writing as if it was the absolute fact.  Which might be where the communication problem is.  And someone new might read it & take it as an absolute fact that mame always slows down every new rev, which is not true.

[SGT]

SGT, please be careful about mixing generalities and absolute facts.

Nope, not going to happen.  If this was any other topic, I wouldn't be asked to be careful.  I see that you appended the word "generally" when YOU said Mame is slower.  I will not be bullied to scour my language to ensure no one gets their panties in a wad.  Saying Mame is slower than it used to be, in no way, implies from revision to revision.

And someone new might read it & take it as an absolute fact that mame always slows down every new rev, which is not true.

No. I never said that nor implied it.  This is a discussion board.  I never implied that I am an expert at anything.  A look at my # of posts and post content and one should easily see that I'm a noob.  I shouldn't have to go over every word with a lawyer to make sure I don't tick off a dev or the hypersensitive.

Some of you really, really need to relax a little.

[SGT]

Tiger-heli,

I really appreciate the great information that you put into that post.  It was very helpful to this noob.

-SGT

[WunderCade]

SGT-

You've been sorta drug through the ringer over my Pac-man post. You never mentioned Pac-man to begin with, and I think it was my post here that prompted AG's remarks so the least I can do is give you props.

And just to add to your proposition....

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.

The silver-lining is that there is now a wealth of info. here on the speed issue. So thanks for the thread, man!
  

[SGT]

I apologize. You've been drug through the ringer over my Pac-man post. You never mentioned Pac-man to begin with, and I think it was my post here that prompted AG's remarks.

No need to apologize as we all should be entitled to our opinions without confrontation.

I was scolded for supposedly insinuating that each and every version was slower even though the subject line was asking which versions were slower!