I have a 1.4 Ghz AMD Athlon, should I use the i686 version of MAME .66?

[AceTKK]

I'm going to grab the new version of MAME tonight and I'm not sure which version to get.  I would assume that I won't get any benefit by running the i686 optimized version on an AMD processor, but I'm not sure.  What do you recommend?

thx,
-Ace-

[SirPoonga]

Actually I think you will get some optimization.  Anyway, only one way to really find out,  get both,  run an intesive game with verbose, see if there is significance in fps.

[AceTKK]

errrr... verbose???

[cdbrown]

I think that's F11 which brings up the fps at the top right corner of the screen.  Make sure you have frameskip off or set to zero.  Run a game that is cpu intensive (alot of the midway games are) and press F11.  You should see some numbers at the top of the screen.  

eg 60/60 means doing 60 fps out of a possible 60 fps, that's what you want it to run all the time (but it won't for some games).  May get something like 32/60 where it is running nearly half as slow as it should.

Find some games which slow down and test them on both builds.  You may find that one gives you a few more fps than the other which is always beneficial.

[Minwah]

I use STUN Runner and Galaxy Fight for this purpose...they don't seem to run too well on my 1.4Ghz.

[Howard_Casto]

Try running fastmame instead.  Unlike the i686 optimized version, as it could give you a noticable speed increase.  It can be up to a maximum of 30% increase, while i686 version is only advertised to give a 3-5% increase in speed, and that's on a pentium chip....

www.geoshock.com

[rampy]

Try running fastmame instead.  Unlike the i686 optimized version, as it could give you a noticable speed increase.  It can be up to a maximum of 30% increase, while i686 version is only advertised to give a 3-5% increase in speed, and that's on a pentium chip....

www.geoshock.com

tell me more about this fastmame - is it legit? What do they do differently?  How new is this (I haven't heard of it) ?

Heck I remember when compiling with proc optimization flags wasn't done by the mame team's binaries - some other mamer put out builds called Amame or pmame (depending on your processor)... *Shrug* (just sharing some history for no good reason)

Furthermore: where's the source to fast mame (just curious)?!

rampy

[Lilwolf]

fastmame uses microsofts compilers.  And it does a better job of optimizing the low level stuff

so yes, it does do a good increase.  I hear that its more like 10% with spikes up to 30%.

but 10% is a HUGE differences when you need it.

I've never seen a difference on my athlons between the different normal compiles.  So I only used the main one.

[Howard_Casto]

fastmame uses microsofts compilers.  And it does a better job of optimizing the low level stuff

so yes, it does do a good increase.  I hear that its more like 10% with spikes up to 30%.

but 10% is a HUGE differences when you need it.

I've never seen a difference on my athlons between the different normal compiles.  So I only used the main one.

What he said

[Justin]

I have an Athlon XP 1800+  and just yesterday tested both the normal and the 686 optimized versions of mame.  The 686 MAME was in fact slighlty slower than the std MAME...   but I guess ymmv depending on your exact processor... you did not say you had an Athlon XP... so...

[AceTKK]

That's interesting Justin.  I haven't gotten around to testing the two builds head-to-head yet, but I will report back when I have.  My processor is a 1.4 Ghz. Thunderbird core, not the Palamino (XP) core.  

-Ace-