| Main > Main Forum |
| Toms CPU charts, which is good for MAME comparisons? |
| (1/2) > >> |
| rockin_rick:
Using Tom's Hardware CPU charts- http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html Which best compares to MAME performance? Thanks, Rick |
| Fozzy The Bear:
--- Quote from: rockin_rick on April 15, 2007, 08:55:18 pm ---Using Tom's Hardware CPU charts- http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html Which best compares to MAME performance? Thanks, Rick --- End quote --- Depends why you're asking....... If you're on a budget, then the fastest processor you can afford. If money is no object.... then the fastest processor available at any cost will give you the best Mame performance. There really is no other way to answer this. Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear) |
| SGT:
--- Quote from: rockin_rick on April 15, 2007, 08:55:18 pm ---Using Tom's Hardware CPU charts- http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html Which best compares to MAME performance? --- End quote --- Are you asking which benchmark would be similiar to running Mame? |
| Tiger-Heli:
If SGT is correct - I would say PCMark is probably the closest. If you just want general CPU advice - Something like a Sempron 2200 ($40 on Pricewatch) will play most late 80's games fine, but will be slow on games like cruisn' usa. Something like an Athlon 64 X2 3800 will give better performance to $90. If you can swing it, the Core 2 Duo 4300 at $180 is faster than the above at stock clocks and easily overclocks to ridiculous speeds, will play cruisin at full frame rates. Even that won't play the most demanding CHD games. |
| rockin_rick:
--- Quote from: SGT on April 16, 2007, 12:04:43 am ---Are you asking which benchmark would be similiar to running Mame? --- End quote --- Yeah, that's what I meant. I think that there are two main issues with the benchmarks. With Mame not taking (full) advantage of dual cores, then I'd think that a benchmark that only measures the speed of a single core in multi-core devices would provide a more meaningful/accurate comparison of CPU's for use with Mame. I'm guessing that some or most (all?) of those benchmarks take advantage of dual/multi cores and the score is based on that. Also, a benchmark that operates the CPU like Mame does would be more accurate. For instance, a benchmark that includes a lot of floating point math may skew the results if Mame does little FP math. (not sure what Mame uses...) PCMark 2005 - CPU is the best? Does it only measure one core? Thanks, Rick |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |