#21  
Old 14th July 2011, 01:01 PM
butter100fly butter100fly is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 9
Default

thanks sure I will indeed eventually try alternative emulators - what a pity tho

Its pretty much EVERY game I've tried bar SM64 and the obvioulsy low-resource ones. And the games are def still defaulting to the RDB settings, and these are def the same settings as on the celeron and as downloaded (I've never changed any of them)

I'm honestly beginning to wonder if PJ64's code doesn't like the atom architecture - and no-ones noticed this because they've always assumed the atoms weren't up to n64 emulation in the first place. I guess that's the point I'm trying to throw up here bar some other suggestions to get back to speed considering the situation? But i'm possibly jumping the gun because I do need to spend some more time on it....
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 15th July 2011, 12:54 AM
HatCat's Avatar
HatCat HatCat is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In my hat.
Posts: 16,256
Default

Well it sounds possible I guess. Not really a hardware enthusiast at all. Could also be it just doesn't like the larger compile buffer setting that some games need to use.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 18th July 2011, 07:03 PM
butter100fly butter100fly is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 9
Default

ok remaking everything has no effect at all, changing all settings per-game has no convincing pattern at all...

im using Unofficial-RDB-v4.21-by-Nekokabu-amp-MASA

It's mostly driving games

seems to be worse in driving games that have layers on top of the 3d - so RR64 is a case in point - it works fine at full speed with the highest setting, exept when on the starting grid with the helicopter and starting lights where it slows down to a crawl. cruisn' USA has the same problem, but also doesn't like other cars being on the road either (or scenery for that matter)

SFRush 2049 i imagine is quite hard to run anyway, but its the slowest game i can find and also co-incidentally has about 10 layers of HUD on top of the video. Turning them off in the pause menu makes no difference. (Compile buffer is off in my settings for sfrush 2049, but turning it on makes no difference)

That' s why I think driving games are suffering more - because they generally have more HUD than other 3d games? Flying games are similar (aero fighters assault is anyway)

When there isn't a problem things follow the same track as other emu's - I can now enable more effects at higher res and everything's a lot faster. How irritating.

so is 'certain functions of my cpu/gpu are underpowered whilst others aren't' a satisfactory explanation here? My suspicion is that a combination of dual-core hyperthreaded atom plus 64bit translation is what's up here - without one or the other this wouldn't be so noticable....certainly the gpu isn't involved and i don't suspect win7

Last edited by butter100fly; 18th July 2011 at 07:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 18th July 2011, 09:32 PM
HatCat's Avatar
HatCat HatCat is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In my hat.
Posts: 16,256
Default

Well if that's the conjecture that you notice then that would mean as to more HUD layer graphics being rendered upon the screen, which does correlate to your GPU. By GPU either something about your hardware the plugin doesn't like or another way of looking at that reversed, which is why I thought about maybe changing the emulator.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 26th July 2011, 12:15 PM
butter100fly butter100fly is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast View Post
By GPU either something about your hardware the plugin doesn't like or another way of looking at that reversed, which is why I thought about maybe changing the emulator.
ah yes thanks you've got a good point there....
now the new mobile intel chip is a dx11 chip, whereas the old is dx9.0c - I wonder if that can have any bearing in addition to the physical differences

i can try downgrading the intel driver to an earlier version, see what changes that brings (from the look of other intel drivers I 'think' its fairly safe to rely on their own uninstallers to actually downgrade and upgrade GFX driver without further intervention?)

luckily the problem isn't as bad as first suspected ie: not so many games are affected, but when it does manifest it can get SERIOUSLY slow!

Still to do is try another emulator to see what happens there....
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 26th July 2011, 12:17 PM
squall_leonhart's Avatar
squall_leonhart squall_leonhart is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,916
Default

Quote:
now the new mobile intel chip is a dx11 chip
no it isn't.

Ivy Bridge is Dx11
Sandybridge is Dx10
__________________

CPU:Intel Xeon x5690 @ 4.2Ghz, Mainboard:Asus Rampage III Extreme, Memory:48GB Corsair Vengeance LP 1600
Video:EVGA Geforce GTX 1080 Founders Edition, NVidia Geforce GTX 1060 Founders Edition
Monitor:ROG PG279Q, BenQ BL2211, Sound:Creative XFI Titanium Fatal1ty Pro
SDD:Crucial MX300 275, Crucial MX300 525, Crucial MX300 1000
HDD:500GB Spinpoint F3, 1TB WD Black, 2TB WD Red, 1TB WD Black
Case:NZXT Phantom 820, PSU:Seasonic X-850, OS:Windows 7 SP1
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 27th July 2011, 02:58 AM
HatCat's Avatar
HatCat HatCat is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In my hat.
Posts: 16,256
Default

I don't know if Intel provides downgrades, but any info on that as well as the installations themselves are on the official Intel.com website.

1964 0.9.9 (not version 1.1) uses a very old graphics plugin that's compatible with graphics cards from quite a while ago. If you install that it might give you better luck.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 28th July 2011, 12:32 PM
butter100fly butter100fly is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by squall_leonhart View Post
no it isn't.
Ivy Bridge is Dx11
Sandybridge is Dx10
hmmm....
Intel_GMA on wiki sure agrees with you. dxdiag on my pc doesn't tho:

why does dxdiag report this support?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg dxdiag_3150.jpg (20.2 KB, 7 views)
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 28th July 2011, 12:38 PM
dsx_ dsx_ is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,105
Default

it means you have directx11 installed; does not mean the hardware is capable of using the dx11 extensions
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 28th July 2011, 07:13 PM
butter100fly butter100fly is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dsx! View Post
it means you have directx11 installed; does not mean the hardware is capable of using the dx11 extensions
ah ok...thanks

will check back with results from other n64 emu's
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.