Need help with Linux and Attract-Mode Front End Installation

[bsoder52]

Hi all!

So I recently took the jump and installed Linux Ubuntu 14.04 OS on my home PC.   I love Linux so far and I want to convert this PC to my arcade cabinet running the Attract-Mode Front End with MAME.

Hopeful for some help on getting this done. 

Do I use the Attract-Mode ArchLinux AUR Package ?  If so looks like i have to instll ArchLinux first?  is that a whole new LInux OS?

Thanks for any help!

[bulbousbeard]

Don't do it. Windows MAME is still better.

[phulshof]

I'm running Kubuntu 14.04 with RetroFE, and am having no issues with it. MAME on Linux works fine if configured correctly.

[bulbousbeard]

It works "fine," but it's still not as good as Windows MAME with Raw Input.

[phulshof]

I respectfully disagree. I've run MAME on my dual boot computer, and under Linux it runs better for me than under Windows. It's possible of course that your experiences differ; it also depends on how well your hardware is supported under Linux.

[nitrogen_widget]

Don't do it. Windows MAME is still better.

Please elaborate.

[bulbousbeard]

If any Linux variant of MAME is running better than Windows MAME with Raw Input on your machine, something's wrong with your machine.

http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=133194.0

Regarding Linux, I have done a similar test with GroovyArcade, although using the regular GroovyMAME Linux build (the frame_delay option was not enabled). Unfortunately this test seems to confirm that SDL page flippling adds 3 frames of lag, just like Direct3D. However, we still don't have a workaround for this as we have in Windows, so until this is figured out maybe it turns out that Windows with all these hacks applied is a better platform by now.

Yeah this seems to confirm our other Linux tests. Whatever I tried, even writing directly to the primary buffer without flipping, I could never go down from a count of 5-6 at 120 Hz (around 3 real frames) although usually it was 7-8. Notice that for simplicity we include the first frame were the led lights up even if the real input lag would obviously exclude that frame (this means that getting a count of 2 at 120 Hz (1 real frame) means no lag).

If you compare these results to the most recent ones above by rCadeGaming in Windows 7 you see that, on average, input takes 2 frames more to be received in Linux than in Windows. This happened even when we tested with low latency kernels.

Calamity's done tests in Linux and Windows with high speed cameras. Other users have done tests that are consistent with Calamity's results. This isn't a matter of opinion. It's fact. The bottom line is that SDL introduces more input lag than Windows with Raw Input. You might argue that you don't notice 3 frames of input lag, but the difference is there. I've done extensive playing with both SDLMAME and Windows MAME and can confirm that SDLMAME isn't as responsive as Windows with Raw Input. Note that if you use a USB joystick instead of a keyboard encoder, you're not running Raw Input, and it negates a lot of the benefit of running Windows. It's keyboard encoder or don't even get out of bed.™

When you factor in that along with the fact that there are more emulators, more native PC games, and more frontends available in Windows, it simply doesn't make sense to run Linux if you're powered by a computer capable of running Windows.

Frankly, I'm kind of sick of people spreading misinformation and making excuses for MAME's performance in Linux, because as long as people keep hiding the fact that it's inferior to MAME in Windows, it's never going to be improved.

[nitrogen_widget]

so you need a high-speed camera to tell the difference because the human eye can't.

[bulbousbeard]

Nobody said the human eye can't tell the difference. I just told you that I've run both SDLMAME and Windows MAME extensively, and you can tell the difference. The whole point is that people have done real testing to confirm that there is an explanation for the human-perceived difference between Windows and Linux MAME input lag. It isn't subjective. It's a fact.

Tell me what the advantage of running Linux over Windows is. I'd like to know.

I can tell you why Windows is better:

• More native PC games
• More emulators (there isn't even a good Saturn emulator for Linux)
• Better version of MAME
• More frontends

Let's talk about the games. We know that Street Fighter 3 has attacks that require precision windows (within 10 frames or less) to parry successfully. Go look up the frame information on this site:

http://baston.esn3s.com/

So say you've got 10 frames of game to successfully parry one attack on a real PCB. Now you've got 9 frames to do it on a Windows MAME setup. Now you've got 7 frames to do it on a Linux setup. That sucks. Even 1 frame of input lag is less than ideal, and you're happy with 3+?

Knowing all this, you'd rather use Linux?

[phulshof]

You're focusing on a rather specific performance area that apparently is very important to you, and from what I read requires source code patches in some cases. Though I agree that this should be addressed by the MAME developers, it's not as important to some of us as it is to you. The low cost of the software, and the low hardware requirements of Linux are sometimes more important. To me, this results in a higher frame rate, which is quite important for getting certain games to run on full speed on my machine. See also http://www.vogons.org/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=39128

So why is Linux better for me?
- Cheaper
- Lower hardware requirements
- Higher frame rates for some emulators
- More flexible

[phulshof]

As for front-ends: this what mine looks like these days:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/hvc3g0oddwncduh/Pandora's%20Box%20collection.png?dl=0

[bulbousbeard]

You're focusing on a rather specific performance area that apparently is very important to you, and from what I read requires source code patches in some cases. Though I agree that this should be addressed by the MAME developers, it's not as important to some of us as it is to you. The low cost of the software, and the low hardware requirements of Linux are sometimes more important. To me, this results in a higher frame rate, which is quite important for getting certain games to run on full speed on my machine. See also http://www.vogons.org/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=39128

So why is Linux better for me?
- Cheaper
- Lower hardware requirements
- Higher frame rates for some emulators
- More flexible

A specific performance area? CONTROL? You're brushing off CONTROL OF VIDEO GAMES as a "specific performance area?" It's literally the most important thing. Game. Gameplay. Yeah. Yeeeeaaaaaahh!

Linux isn't more flexible. How is having fewer options more flexible?

Your other bullet points (cheaper/lower hardware requirements/higher framerates) are all the same point: you care more about cost than quality.

That's fine (actually, it really isn't). Not everyone cares about having the best experience possible, but don't call it something it isn't.

Windows is better for arcade emulation than Linux. This is a fact. I couldn't care less about the cost. The end result is better in Windows.

Oh, and by the way, Windows MAME running in OpenGL with the Lottes Shader actually runs faster than the same setup in Linux SDLMAME.

OOOOOOOOOOH

It isn't just about input lag, either. Linux has no working solution for DTS Connect or Dolby Digital Live!, so if you wanted to create a cabinet or pedestal with a surround sound speaker setup using a home theater receiver, you couldn't do it Linux. Yeah. Sure is more flexible.





OOOOOOOOOH



I'm not going to respond to this thread anymore, because I can see that most of the people responding here don't actually care about high quality game experiences. It'd be nice if people would stop living in denial, though.

Repeat after me: "Cheaper. Shittier. Not better. Not more flexible. Yeah! Cheaper and shittier doesn't mean better! Yeah!"

[phulshof]

I'm not brushing off anything; I used to play a lot of Virtua Fighter (4 and 5), so I know how important a few frames delay can be in games like that. All that's not going to help you much though if you're running 45 FPS because your hardware isn't fast enough to run the game. I'm glad you can throw an infinite amount of money and space at this hobby, but not all of us are that fortunate. Not all of us play games that require that kind of precision either. My survival at Black Tiger rarely if ever depends on 3 frames extra input delay. We've got people running extra eye candy like HyperPause and HyperLaunch; I can't imagine that doing good things for your input delay either. As said: it's not the most important feature to some of us.

How is Linux more flexible? I can change practically every aspect of my operating system as I see fit. If my setup does not require a window manager, I can get rid of it, and squeeze a bit more performance out of it. I can bring the install back to a bare minimum to save disk space, RAM, and boot time. If something doesn't function as I want it to, I can take the source code, change it, recompile, and enjoy the changes. In Windows, a lot of it works straight away the way you want it to, but the things that don't are very hard to change. In Linux, setting things up can be harder, but you can change anything you want. I'm a programmer; I care about such things. You won't be seeing Windows and HyperSpin running on a Raspberrry Pi anytime soon. It may not be for you, but for some of us it's fun to create something like

DTS Connect and Dolby Digital Live on Linux? It's not easy, but it can be done. I'm sure standard support without having to fiddle will be added soon, but for now it just requires a bit of effort.

[nitrogen_widget]

Anything I or most other people care to play would play perfectly fine on a thrift shop celeron d with 512 mb ram booted off a thumb drive with a custom live Linux distro with persistence using an older version of mame.

Your argument is invalid because few can hope to attain the level of eleteness that is sitting on a folding chair with a one player control panel on their lap.