Best processor price/performance for emulation only

[Lilwolf]

I'm looking at upgrading my arcade machine (lots of reasons).  I was thinking of going to an e8600 (3.0 dual core intel) , but having troubles finding them... and really, they are a bit more expensive then I wanted to spend.

So, I started looking at a e5300 (2.6 dual core intel).  70 bucks seemed pretty cheap and could handl 95% of all the games I care about... (sure would have been nice to get a processor which could overclock and get some of the latest)...

but here is the question... If I'm going to spend 70-120 bucks on a processor... and if its really for mame only (maybe a dreamcast emulator or something)... should I look at AMD these days?  Do they give better bang for the buck with emulation?  I always hear that intel does better these days, but enough to make consider for the price?

Also, I'm considering building a PVR at the same time (different machine).  I might want to get two systems if cheap enough... should they handle HULU without a prolem I'm assuming)

Thanks!

[u_rebelscum]

Minor corrections:

I'm looking at upgrading my arcade machine (lots of reasons).  I was thinking of going to an e8600 (3.0 dual core intel) , but having troubles finding them... and really, they are a bit more expensive then I wanted to spend.

The e8600 is 3.3 Ghz; the e8400 is 3.0 Ghz.  And while it's "dule core", more technically it Core 2^tm duo.  (BTW, I hate that Intel branded "Core")

So, I started looking at a e5300 (2.6 dual core intel).  70 bucks seemed pretty cheap and could handl 95% of all the games I care about... (sure would have been nice to get a processor which could overclock and get some of the latest)...

The e5300 is a dual core Pentium 4.  An older generation than the Core 2^tm, and gets almost half the speed per Ghz as the Core 2^tm (in mame).  IOWs, the e8600 will have about twice the power as the e5300 AFA mame goes.  (This of course doesn't mean it will twice the number of games, only the few that are boarderline.)

but here is the question... If I'm going to spend 70-120 bucks on a processor... and if its really for mame only (maybe a dreamcast emulator or something)... should I look at AMD these days?  Do they give better bang for the buck with emulation?  I always hear that intel does better these days, but enough to make consider for the price?

Also, I'm considering building a PVR at the same time (different machine).  I might want to get two systems if cheap enough... should they handle HULU without a prolem I'm assuming)

If you're looking at the e5300 (a dual P4), then AMD is a great (IMO better) alternative.  AMD is slightly more powerful per Ghz then P4 for most games in mame (psx games excepted for some reason), and cheap to boot.

Review:
If you don't mind spending the $120-$170, I'd suggest the e8x00 (Core 2^tm) series. 
If you don't mind spending more, the Core i5/i7^tm might be a choice, but an overkill IMO for mame only machines, and $$$.
If you want <$100, I'd suggest AMD, mostly the Phenom II, but Athlon II & Athlon64 aren't bad either.  Like AMD Phenom II @ 3.1 Ghz, or Athlon II @ 3.0 Ghz.

[Lilwolf]

Yup, I was thinking e8400 (the e8600 being 100 bucks more for .3ghz extra doesn't seem worth it).

Thanks!  I might go with an e8200 instead.  Cheaper by 70 bucks and I think microcenter still keeps them in stock. 

[speedklz]

Or go with a cheap AMD dual core and go with XP 64 and Mame 64 for a real power boost.

[DillonFoulds]

But the real question is; would it run the 3d gauntlets? :O

[Cakemeister]

For my new desktop I went with a Phenom II 550 black edition. I'm very happy with the price to performance ratio.

[speedklz]

For most of the High end games that wont run under mame I have found a pc version or a port to some other source that will run.

[joemama]

If you go with a C2D, DDR2 is the same price as DDR3 now. I would go with an AMD cpu like the Phenom II 550 or a 955 for a little more.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/athlon-ii-x2-250-and-phenom-ii-x2-550-be-review/1

The performance of the PhenomII 550 is close to the E8400.

[Blanka]

The E8400 overclocks perfectly to 3.3-3.5 Ghz as well.

[DillonFoulds]

But the real question is; would it run the 3d gauntlets? :O

People should start commenting if your stuff can run the Gauntlets, yet

[massive88]

The performance of the PhenomII 550 is close to the E8400.

Im under the impression, falsely perhaps, that Core2's mhz for mhz are faster in Mame.

As thats the main emulator people worry about around here, it does not make the equal.  I could be wrong in my assumption though.

[u_rebelscum]

The performance of the PhenomII 550 is close to the E8400.

Im under the impression, falsely perhaps, that Core2's mhz for mhz are faster in Mame.

I haven't seen a mame benchmark for the Phenom II, but it's better than the P4 or athlon, athlon64 or athlon II..  In general, games in mame the following equivalent multipliers were pretty good rules a couple years ago:

1x = P4
1.0-1.25x = Athlon
1.1-1.2x = P3
1.8-1.9x = Core2^tm (do not confuse with the generic "dual core")*

CPUs we don't have enough benchmarking to show "hard" numbers about:
??x = Core i5/i7  (assumed to be ~1.8-2.0x for the little numbers I've seen)
??x = Phenom II (faster than athlon64, athlonII & phenom in most benchmarks, but not well mame benchmark tested; probably 1.1-1.2x to 1.4-1.6x, but [shrug])

So depending on if you emphasize the bang or the buck, you end up with a Core2^tm ("bang"), or AFAIK the Phenom II (lowest buck).


OT, can someone post benchmark numbers for their Phenom CPUs?  Use either the settings and games used in mameUI's benchmarks, or this thread.


* Did I mention I hate intel's branding of "Core", and the resulting (intentional?) confusion of "dual core" vs "Core 2^tm".

[Deadly]

The CHD games require mega CPU power and that's fact. I work for Intel and in my spare time lately I have been experimenting with different quad core procs for over clocking purposes as well at native speeds and how they react with MAME. Included in my testing wasWindows XP 32bit and 64 bit. There is no doubt that 64 bit gains are so substantial they warrant running a 64 bit OS which of course requires a 64bit capable proc..

I enjoy Gauntlet Legends and this is one of the worst games to try to emulate - so I focused on making this game run to the best of it's ability. My findings?? Substantial audio stutter with anything I used under 3GHZ (2.83 or lower in the QUAD CORE line). AT 3 GHZ -3.2GHZ I experienced slight audio stutter. At 3.5GHZ and up there is VERY LITTLE stuttering that occurs. So you say, "Hey there's a gap between 3.2 and 3.5 what's the deal?" Well I didn't test those ranges lol.

I have also benched rotational hard drives VS SSD drives. In MAME there is ZERO benefit of using SSD. However with SSD my system averaged 12 second boot times, A complete MAME set was scanned with CLRMAMEPRO in 15 seconds, opening MAMEUI - setting the rom path and scanned for new games in ~15 seconds or less. Is it worth the current price tag? No not really - however people using any type of virtual pinball an SSD is a must!

I'm sure I sound like a fan boy, and I certainly have nothing against AMD  - I simply buy and use what fits the need. We are talking MAME not PCMARK
People need to understand what exactly they need to buy in order to play certain games. What I might consider to be major might be considered to be minor by some. Rumor mill has it the Mame devs are eagerly working on GPU utilization. True or not I don't know but if this is accomplished you won't need this outrageous CPU power. That would be awesome.

[Bobulus]

I'm assuming you were using versions of MAME compiled to be optimized for those processors, Deadly? I'm curious how much of a difference that made.

[Cakemeister]

OT, can someone post benchmark numbers for their Phenom CPUs?  Use either the settings and games used in mameUI's benchmarks, or this thread.

I can do that, but 1) I'm running 64 bit windows 7, not Vista, and 2) I had to RMA my memory so I currently only have 1 gigabyte. Does that matter?

[massive88]

OT, can someone post benchmark numbers for their Phenom CPUs?  Use either the settings and games used in mameUI's benchmarks, or this thread.

Im hoping to have a Phenom II after Christmas, if so you can be sure Ill bench it against my Core2 Duo and share the results.

Cake-

Run what you got, any data is better than no data.

[Deadly]

I'm assuming you were using versions of MAME compiled to be optimized for those processors, Deadly? I'm curious how much of a difference that made.

If you are assuming I compiled MAME - no I did not. I downloaded MAMEUI64 and VPMAME64 ver 135.u3 and used those.
For instance comparing benchmark to MAMEUI's site:
http://www.mameui.info/Bench.htm
I benched Blitz - which came out as 166. Back in the day I used to download and use the optimized builds. I might have to try that - I don't expect to see much change though. If I have time today I'll give it a whirl.

[u_rebelscum]

I'm assuming you were using versions of MAME compiled to be optimized for those processors, Deadly? I'm curious how much of a difference that made.

If you are assuming I compiled MAME - no I did not. I downloaded MAMEUI64 and VPMAME64 ver 135.u3 and used those.
For instance comparing benchmark to MAMEUI's site:
http://www.mameui.info/Bench.htm
... I don't expect to see much change though. If I have time today I'll give it a whirl.

Yeah, in the past the specific CPU "optimized" builds got -1% to 5% (averaging ~2%) speed increases (and yes some decreases), varying depending on game and CPU and compiler, of course.

64bit vs 32bit often is an order of magnitude higher boost, around 10%-20%, again depending on game.

The CHD games require mega CPU power and that's fact.

Well, not all CHD games are that CPU taxing (Dance Dance & Area 51), and there are non CHD games (radikal bike, mk4) that are just as CPU taxing as the heavy duty CHD games.  

But in general what you said is usually true.  As true (and not true) as "newer games need more CPU".

(Sorry for nit picking.)


Edit:  Deadly, thanks for benchmarking.  Can you post FPS and CPU stats (family, Ghz, etc) also?  How does a four core Core2tm compare with a dual core Core2tm at same Ghz on mame? 
I've heard mame gets almost zero speed increases by going four core over two core in most games, but a noticable boost in others (I don't remember which games OTTOMH, though).

If you could, could you test other mame drivers?  (Atari Gauntlet Legends & Midway Blitzs use the same hardware, so use the same mame emulation drivers.)

Again, Thanks Deadly!!

[mvsfan]

I'm looking at upgrading my arcade machine (lots of reasons).  I was thinking of going to an e8600 (3.0 dual core intel) , but having troubles finding them... and really, they are a bit more expensive then I wanted to spend.

So, I started looking at a e5300 (2.6 dual core intel).  70 bucks seemed pretty cheap and could handl 95% of all the games I care about... (sure would have been nice to get a processor which could overclock and get some of the latest)...

but here is the question... If I'm going to spend 70-120 bucks on a processor... and if its really for mame only (maybe a dreamcast emulator or something)... should I look at AMD these days?  Do they give better bang for the buck with emulation?  I always hear that intel does better these days, but enough to make consider for the price?

Also, I'm considering building a PVR at the same time (different machine).  I might want to get two systems if cheap enough... should they handle HULU without a prolem I'm assuming)

Thanks!

Ive just come to the conclusion that gauntlet isnt worth trying to emulate at this time.

Ive been collecting Gauntlet hardware instead.

when ive finally got everything i need, im just going to set it up where i can either turn on the pc, or i can turn on the gauntlet hardware.

[Cakemeister]

I don't see source for v0.120u1, just v0.121. Is that okay, or do I need to have the v0.120u1 source?

[Cakemeister]

Okay, I've done a few benchmarks.

Mame version 0.120u1

System:
CPU: Phenom II X2 550 dual core 3.1 GHz
RAM: 1GB DDR2
OS: Windows 7 64-bit Home Premium

I used MAME Compiler and checked "AMD64", "64 bit", and "Dual Core".
MAME options: -str 90 -video none -nosound -nothrottle -norc -nosleep

crusnusa 284.90%
gauntleg 105.27%
blitz 79.12%
daytona 421.81%
radikab 68.40%
ridgerac 67.99

[SpeedEng]

Minor corrections:

I'm looking at upgrading my arcade machine (lots of reasons).  I was thinking of going to an e8600 (3.0 dual core intel) , but having troubles finding them... and really, they are a bit more expensive then I wanted to spend.

The e8600 is 3.3 Ghz; the e8400 is 3.0 Ghz.  And while it's "dule core", more technically it Core 2^tm duo.  (BTW, I hate that Intel branded "Core")

So, I started looking at a e5300 (2.6 dual core intel).  70 bucks seemed pretty cheap and could handl 95% of all the games I care about... (sure would have been nice to get a processor which could overclock and get some of the latest)...

The e5300 is a dual core Pentium 4.  An older generation than the Core 2^tm, and gets almost half the speed per Ghz as the Core 2^tm (in mame).  IOWs, the e8600 will have about twice the power as the e5300 AFA mame goes.  (This of course doesn't mean it will twice the number of games, only the few that are boarderline.)

but here is the question... If I'm going to spend 70-120 bucks on a processor... and if its really for mame only (maybe a dreamcast emulator or something)... should I look at AMD these days?  Do they give better bang for the buck with emulation?  I always hear that intel does better these days, but enough to make consider for the price?

Also, I'm considering building a PVR at the same time (different machine).  I might want to get two systems if cheap enough... should they handle HULU without a prolem I'm assuming)

If you're looking at the e5300 (a dual P4), then AMD is a great (IMO better) alternative.  AMD is slightly more powerful per Ghz then P4 for most games in mame (psx games excepted for some reason), and cheap to boot.

Review:
If you don't mind spending the $120-$170, I'd suggest the e8x00 (Core 2^tm) series. 
If you don't mind spending more, the Core i5/i7^tm might be a choice, but an overkill IMO for mame only machines, and $$$.
If you want <$100, I'd suggest AMD, mostly the Phenom II, but Athlon II & Athlon64 aren't bad either.  Like AMD Phenom II @ 3.1 Ghz, or Athlon II @ 3.0 Ghz.

umm a e5300 is not a p4 (or has anything to do with net burst procs) it's a c2d with a neutered l2 cache

[u_rebelscum]

umm a e5300 is not a p4 (or has anything to do with net burst procs) it's a c2d with a neutered l2 cache

Oh, dang, I stand corrected.

Did I ever mention I don't like Intel's branding, especially ever since the whole "Core"^tm junk started?

Hmm... I guess I need to review my understanding of Intel's branding/naming mess.  Correct me if I'm wrong with this Intel Branding summary:

Pentium^tm: "586"
PentiumPro^tm: "686"
Pentium II^tm: "686"
Pentium III^tm: "686"
Pentium 4^tm: "NetBurst"
Pentium D^tm: "NetBurst"
Pentium M^tm: "Yohan", more like "786" or "686.5" than P4
Core^tm: "Yohan" (but see next)
Core 2^tm: first "Core Microarchitecture^tm" cpu, "886"?
Pentium Dual Core^tm: "Yohan" or (lower end) "Core 2"
Core i7/i5/i3^tm: "Nehalem" (2nd full generation of the Core Microarchitecture), "986"?

Celeron^tm: PII, PIII, P4, PM, or Core2; lower end than matching brands at time of release
Xeon^tm: PII, PIII, P4, PM, Core2, or Nehalem; higher end than matching brands at time of release