Re: [Xmame] Anyone home?

[theGREENzebra]

I've got a good question. SDLmame is consistently slower than xmame. I'm
aware of the fact that API+code changes and driver updates and whatnot slow
MAME down from release to release, but we're talking even the same version
of xmame against the same version of SDLmame. Typically SDLmame is somewhere
around 65-75% the speed of xmame, depending on the driver of course.

Does anyone know why this is? Has anyone noticed anything that can provide a
reasonable speedup? Am I doing something wrong?

I think this has been extensively discussed in the past...
MAME slows down due to increased accuracy.  You can't compare
XMAME .106 with any SDLMAME, especially since SDLMAME started
with .107 which was a release with huge core changes.  I would
be very interested by your XMAME and SDLMAME that have the
same version ;-)

Hmmm, what's this? SDLmame 0.106 -- were the core changes in this version?
http://www.emuhq.com/idx/184/2344/June-2006/article/SDLMAME-0106u1-Test-1A.html

I will admit to currently using newer versions of SDLmame, but my 
same-version testing was long ago, and probably with this stuff. I remember

From a technical point of view I see no reason for SDLMAME to be
much slower than an equivalent XMAME.

Agreed, that's why I asked =]

Apart from that you should look at your SDLMAME parameters since
they can greatly affect performance depending on your video card
(OpenGL on ATI for instance).

I'm thankfully not using an ATI card. Should I start spewing configfile to 
the list for anyone interested?

--
http://clickass.org  *  AIM: UnixGameRocker
-----GEEK CODE 3.12-----
GCM/CS/IT/MU d? s: a27 C++++ UL++++ P+ L+++>$ E---- W++ N+ o K- w---$ O- M 
V-- PS+ PE Y+ PGP- t++(+++) 5- X R tv(+) b+(-) DI+++ D+ G++ e h++ r+(---) y+ 
UF*++

_______________________________________________
Xmame mailing list
Xmame@toybox.twisted.org.uk
http://toybox.twisted.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/xmame