| Main > Main Forum |
| 4Ghz Core 2 Duo vs M.A.M.E. 0.120 (benchmark results) |
| << < (16/104) > >> |
| Shoegazer:
Just read through this thread with great interest... very nice. It's odd seeing all these great framerates. I have a 2ghz dual-core laptop (core duo, NOT core2duo mind you), running xp32 and MAME32. I realize I won't be able to even approach some of the stratospheric results I've been seeing from the likes of taz-nz, but still I did notice something weird: I checked "Multi-threaded rendering" and tried out every one of the games that have been tested in this thread (blitz2k, propcycl, etc). Result? 0% increase in all cases. My 2nd core is turned on in the BIOS, so what gives? Weird. I'm probably going to upgrade to a Penryn laptop next year when Intel releases it, though in the meantime it would be nice to see at least SOME performance increase out of this old dog... Shoegazer |
| TheManuel:
I did not see much from enabling MT either. When you compare your results to those of the author of the post, make sure to run his same command line parameters. |
| taz-nz:
--- Quote from: TheManuel on November 07, 2007, 06:49:03 pm ---What is PM and where could I find a PM build? I would like to compare my benchmarks with yours (scaled down to 2.4GHz). Thanks. --- End quote --- PM stands for Pentium M (mobile) the Pentium M, Core Solo, Core Duo, Core 2 Duo, & Core 2 Quad are all in same family of processors, and thus if you use the PM switch to compiling an optimised MAME build, these processors will gain a few % in preformance, but that build of MAME will no longer run on other processors, thus the offical MAME builds don't use this or any of the other CPU optimisation. Where do you find a PM optimised build, the easiest is to make one yourself by compiling the MAME source code. Everything you need to compile your own 32bit build can be found here http://mamedev.org/tools/ and here http://mamedev.org/release.html. If you work out how to do it for a 64bit build send me a set of step by step instruction. (I still haven't gotten around to doing this myself) MAME scales almost one to one with CPU clock speed, so if you get a score on a2ghz processor, that processor at 3ghz will get approx 1.5x it's score at 2ghz. So you can scale my scores the same way, 2.4ghz is 60% of 4ghz so your CPU should score around 0.6x my scores, allow +/- 10% for differences in FSB and cache memory etc. , this should get you in the ball park. (but your really need to hit 3ghz or better to make a lot of these games playable) --- Quote from: Shoegazer on November 07, 2007, 07:39:23 pm ---Just read through this thread with great interest... very nice. It's odd seeing all these great framerates. I have a 2ghz dual-core laptop (core duo, NOT core2duo mind you), running xp32 and MAME32. I realize I won't be able to even approach some of the stratospheric results I've been seeing from the likes of taz-nz, but still I did notice something weird: I checked "Multi-threaded rendering" and tried out every one of the games that have been tested in this thread (blitz2k, propcycl, etc). Result? 0% increase in all cases. My 2nd core is turned on in the BIOS, so what gives? Weird. I'm probably going to upgrade to a Penryn laptop next year when Intel releases it, though in the meantime it would be nice to see at least SOME performance increase out of this old dog... Shoegazer --- End quote --- the -MT does make a difference but it varies from ROM to ROM, some MAME drivers see a big boost others don't. The gain also scales with your CPU, so what might be a 1% or 2% gain for you might be a 5% or 6% gain for me, so at slower clock speeds it may be hard to pick any gains form the margin of error in the benchmarks. I did a quick benchmark of some of the ROM to show the difference I get. I use the command line: mame32-64u2.exe -noautoframeskip -frameskip 0 -seconds_to_run 240 -nothrottle -nosleep -video ddraw -skip_gameinfo -effect none -nowaitvsync -noreadconfig -mt [ROM NAME] >.\bench\[ROM NAME].txt (with and without the -mt switch) ROM with -MT without -MT radikalb 177.31% 159.18% speedup 177.36% 158.01% a51site4 239.42% 224.46% crusnusa 269.87% 253.39% wargods 404.79% 385.23% propcycl 152.83% 147.59% timecris 158.05% 149.28% blitz 173.04% 167.22% carnevil 268.86% 258.99% wg3dh 383.10% 364.30% gauntdl 132.08% 129.23% gradius4 96.02% 93.07% starblad 144.54% 139.86% As you can see there is a 5-20% gain to be had on my system from using the -MT switch. (you should see some improvement too, but it may not be as great) Your best bet to gain some preformance is to compile a PM optimised build and run that I saw about 8-10% gain with the use of a PM optimised build it could be more, I would love to be able to post a set of PM optimised MAME 64bit 0.120u2 benchmarks, but I jsut haven't had time this week to have another go at compiling a 64bit MAME build. |
| TheManuel:
Thank you very much for taking the time to write that helpful post. I will be a little more discering with the next benchmark as I did not run it using your process without the mt parameter disabled. I did use your parameters exactly as you described them, mt enabled. I took your numbers for mace and scaled them down to 2.4GHz (my processor). I am running MAME Plus 120u1 and my % frame output matched almost exactly (just a little over) your scaled number for version 120 but fell short of 120u1 by about 8 percentage points. However, this is confounded by the fact that your 120u1 version was PM optimized so I will have to give that a try and see where I fall. I will definitely get into compiling my own version. Unfortunately, I don't konw if I will be able to help you with a 64bit optimized version as I don't have Vista so I will not be able to tell whether it's working or not. A recommendation for the futue is to run a fixed number of frames rather than a fixed number of seconds. The reason is that if someone wants to compare his benchmark to yours (if you care, anyway), and his/her computer is slower, that computer will run a shorter sequence of the game in 240sec so it will not be a 100% apples to apples comparison since some parts of the attract mode of a game are more taxing than others. This could explain also why I see a slight improvement over your scheduled numbers. Just an observation. PS: this also goes to show how overwhelmingly dependent MAME is on processor speed and how little FSB, video card, memory speed and the rest matter. |
| TheManuel:
Can anyone tell me what available switches are there while compiling with mingw and how do I specify them? I also have a PIII that I would like to use on my future cabinet and would like to test different builds on it. I could not figure this out from the compiling instructions. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |