Main > Main Forum
Toms CPU charts, which is good for MAME comparisons?
ahofle:
My understanding is that the C2D still beats everything else in terms of MAME performance, despite the fact that MAME isn't specifically optimized for multiple cores.
dmckean:
The Pentium M's and C2D's are still something like 30% faster than a similar Pentium 4 at the same clock speed when using just one core. Plus duel cores still help some with MAME because system processes are able to run completely in the backround and let's MAME have slightly more CPU time.
Tiger-Heli:
--- Quote from: rockin_rick on April 16, 2007, 05:28:42 pm ---PCMark 2005 - CPU is the best? Does it only measure one core?
--- End quote ---
That was just a semi-educated guess on my part.
rockin_rick:
(It is my opinion) that the "Lame 3.98 beta....." benchmark at Tom's Hardware is the closest (not dead on) chart for comparing MAME performance. I believe that Lame only utilizes one core, like MAME. I came to this conclusion after reading CPU reviews and their benchmarks, and compared that info with MAME benchmarks, etc.
Rick
u_rebelscum:
--- Quote from: rockin_rick on April 16, 2007, 05:28:42 pm ---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...)
--- End quote ---
Mame is almost all integer, AFAIK.
--- Quote from: dmckean on April 16, 2007, 11:37:54 pm ---The Pentium M's and C2D's are still something like 30% faster than a similar Pentium 4 at the same clock speed when using just one core.
--- End quote ---
AFA mame goes, I though PM & Core 1 were about 30%, Core 2 about 70%, and Athlon somewhere around 25-35% faster than P4 at same GHz. (Athlon is wider range because some games like intel or AMD chips better.) And that solo, dual, or quad don't make very much a dent.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version