PDA

View Full Version : Never before seen error message


the_randomizer
18th December 2008, 11:07 PM
Okay, so, I'm using PJ64 1.7.0.49 and it was working pretty darn well on my old P4 3.2GHz CPU. Well, I upgraded to a Core 2 Quad Q6600, which shouldn't effect a single core program like PJ64. Boy was I proven wrong. Ever since reinstalling Windows XP Home, it hasn't so much as loaded a single game. I know it's still in the beta stages, but even so, it should at least load a game. All I get it an error message: IMG]http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh137/Nintendo1889/odderror.jpg[/IMG] Is this normal? Do people normally get this kind of error code? Didn't think so. I'm thinking it doesn't like CPUs that have more than one core in them. Anyone can tell me to use version 1.6 because that gives me the same issue. I've used this emulator since
2001 and never seen this before? I know my specs are way above recommended.

CPU: Core 2 Quad Q6600
OS: Windows XP Home
RAM: 2GB DDR2 800
Video: GeForce 9600GT 512MB GDDR3
Audio: Integrated Realtek HD 5.1 Audio

Plugins I'm using (which have worked fine before the upgrade and re-installation)

Video: Napalm Public Release 1.0
Audio:Jabo's Direct Sound 1.7.0.7
Input: N-rage's Direct Input V2.1.80a
RSP: RSP Plugin 1.7.0.2

squall_leonhart
19th December 2008, 12:18 PM
Okay, so, I'm using PJ64 1.7.0.49 and it was working pretty darn well on my old P4 3.2GHz CPU. Well, I upgraded to a Core 2 Quad Q6600, which shouldn't effect a single core program like PJ64. Boy was I proven wrong. Ever since reinstalling Windows XP Home, it hasn't so much as loaded a single game. I know it's still in the beta stages, but even so, it should at least load a game. All I get it an error message: IMG]http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh137/Nintendo1889/odderror.jpg[/IMG] Is this normal? Do people normally get this kind of error code? Didn't think so. I'm thinking it doesn't like CPUs that have more than one core in them. Anyone can tell me to use version 1.6 because that gives me the same issue. I've used this emulator since
2001 and never seen this before? I know my specs are way above recommended.

CPU: Core 2 Quad Q6600
OS: Windows XP Home
RAM: 2GB DDR2 800
Video: GeForce 9600GT 512MB GDDR3
Audio: Integrated Realtek HD 5.1 Audio

Plugins I'm using (which have worked fine before the upgrade and re-installation)

Video: Napalm Public Release 1.0
Audio:Jabo's Direct Sound 1.7.0.7
Input: N-rage's Direct Input V2.1.80a
RSP: RSP Plugin 1.7.0.2

Difference between P4 and C2D = The type of DEP. Disable DEP in the boot.ini, Anyway, OTHER people are running it in Quad systems just fine.

CA5
19th December 2008, 02:01 PM
Hm that's a weird-ass error :)

squall_leonhart
19th December 2008, 02:07 PM
not really, its a generic error that can occur at any time for any reason.

If he posted the error screen from 1.6 however....

CA5
19th December 2008, 02:15 PM
not really, its a generic error that can occur at any time for any reason.

If he posted the error screen from 1.6 however....

... you p0wned me too :D I take it you mean it's irregular for 1.6 then? :confused:

squall_leonhart
19th December 2008, 02:35 PM
Not likely at all.

CA5
19th December 2008, 04:11 PM
Righty-o. :D

the_randomizer
19th December 2008, 05:13 PM
Well, I went into the DEP settings in Windows XP and it was on "use DEP for essential Windows services only" and selected "use DEP for essential Windows services except for those I choose"; I added PJ64 1.x to the list, restarted my computer and attempted to load the emulator once more. Didn't do jack squat. PJ64 1.7 still has the weird "N64.cpp" error and PJ64 1.6 crashes right before the game's done booting up. Am I the only one with a quad-core CPU that's being S.O.L.ed? Like I said before, either the programmers don't give a **** about quad core users or Windows is being retarded as usual. I should NOT have to get a whole new CPU just so I can get one program (amidst several dozen that work properly) to work. Again, I know that emulators will never take advantage of more than 2 cores (like PCSX2) but at least PCSX2, (surprise, surprise) actually boots up with quad core CPUs! Coincidence? Isn't strange that so many emulators (which are programmed primarily for a single core CPU) like SNESGT, Snes9x, ePSXe 1.x, PCSX2 0.xx, No$GBA, Visual Boy Advance, and NullDC all happen to, by some odd twist of fate, work without a hitch?? Yet, somewhere along the line, PJ64 seems to fail? Don't get me wrong, I'm not insulting the emulator for what it is. I'm just pointing out the fact that out of one million programs that work perfectly fine, it has to be the only one to screw up.

zilmar
19th December 2008, 07:46 PM
Well, I went into the DEP settings in Windows XP and it was on "use DEP for essential Windows services only" and selected "use DEP for essential Windows services except for those I choose"; I added PJ64 1.x to the list, restarted my computer and attempted to load the emulator once more. Didn't do jack squat. PJ64 1.7 still has the weird "N64.cpp" error and PJ64 1.6 crashes right before the game's done booting up. Am I the only one with a quad-core CPU that's being S.O.L.ed? Like I said before, either the programmers don't give a **** about quad core users or Windows is being retarded as usual. I should NOT have to get a whole new CPU just so I can get one program (amidst several dozen that work properly) to work. Again, I know that emulators will never take advantage of more than 2 cores (like PCSX2) but at least PCSX2, (surprise, surprise) actually boots up with quad core CPUs! Coincidence? Isn't strange that so many emulators (which are programmed primarily for a single core CPU) like SNESGT, Snes9x, ePSXe 1.x, PCSX2 0.xx, No$GBA, Visual Boy Advance, and NullDC all happen to, by some odd twist of fate, work without a hitch?? Yet, somewhere along the line, PJ64 seems to fail? Don't get me wrong, I'm not insulting the emulator for what it is. I'm just pointing out the fact that out of one million programs that work perfectly fine, it has to be the only one to screw up.

so pj64 1.6 and 1.7 both crash as soon as you boot a game?
this is from a clean install ?
if the attached demo runs the I suggest trying a different video card driver

quad cores should not effect anything.

squall_leonhart
19th December 2008, 07:54 PM
He thinks its Glide64 now *rolls eyes*

i think he broke something during the repair install.

Mdkcheatz
19th December 2008, 08:13 PM
Disable DEP in the boot.ini

Squally,

I recommend you state a strong warning next time about modifying the boot.ini file, it would suck to have someone who doesn't know what they are doing make a mistake in it, causing a flaw which disables them from booting windows, hence loosing all there non-backed up data, having to reinstall there OS (if even possible).

Everyone esle,

So basically, people who are having problem under multiple cores should take Squally's advice with CAUTION! The boot.ini file is what allows Windows to boot, any sort of error can and most probably would lead to the above problems. I strongly recommend that if you are not computer savy, to LEAVE to boot.ini file alone or having somebody who knows what it is help you... If you are computer savy then please do you research on the do's and dont's before taking it upon yourself to modify its contents. It's not hard but even the slightest change could have reprocussions...:)

squall_leonhart
19th December 2008, 08:29 PM
dude, the boot ini is a snap to fix :P
insert windows cd
press R on the first screen

Type bootcfg and follow the prompts.

Mdkcheatz
19th December 2008, 08:47 PM
dude, the boot ini is a snap to fix :P
insert windows cd
press R on the first screen

Type bootcfg and follow the prompts.

*Tail in between legs*

I guess I'm the one who needs to do his research, sigh!

But It's good that you have mentioned about a recovery method for fixing the boot.ini- :)

the_randomizer
19th December 2008, 10:03 PM
Okay, that was really, really weird. So, I narrowed down the problem to a plugin. Funny thing is, when I changed plugins earlier, it didn't work and now it works. Why? I don't know. I changed the graphics from the Napalm Public Release 1.0 to the default and now both work fine. Glide3x.dll was in the right place(s) before the reinstall and it worked. But after the reinstall, they no longer work, why, I don't know...

zilmar
19th December 2008, 10:47 PM
Okay, that was really, really weird. So, I narrowed down the problem to a plugin. Funny thing is, when I changed plugins earlier, it didn't work and now it works. Why? I don't know. I changed the graphics from the Napalm Public Release 1.0 to the default and now both work fine. Glide3x.dll was in the right place(s) before the reinstall and it worked. But after the reinstall, they no longer work, why, I don't know...

so the default plugins worked? Just the Napalm plugin had an issue .. but is working now ?

the_randomizer
20th December 2008, 01:08 AM
Yeah, basically any non-glide plugins will work without issues. But the issue is that I never had to use the default plugins in the past; I was strictly a glide person. The fact that it worked before re-installing the OS and now no longer works after the reinstall truly confuses me. I at least know that the video card drivers (which is version 180.48 for my PNY GeForce 9600GT)aren't causing the issue.

squall_leonhart
20th December 2008, 03:05 AM
Don't assume so much, some people have had opengl issues with 180.48 which could lead to glide64 crashing.

squall_leonhart
20th December 2008, 05:15 AM
This issue has been fixed.