is there a difference in performance between Windows XP and 98 when using PJ64?

[petronius79]

I was compelled as a new PC buyer to have Windows XP (without the Windows XP CD!), though I preferred Windows 98.

My PC configuration is the following:
Celeron 1 GHZ, 128 MB RAM, AC97 Audio, some VIA integrated video card with an S3 chip using 8 MB System RAM, 18 GB disk.

I'm running PJ64 flawlessly with the newest video card drivers if you consider the quality of the card. Previously all games used to hang for some seconds, now only WWF No Mercy does this.

But would PJ64 perform better under Windows 95/98 which require less resources?

I mean would it have a higher framerate in general?

[Pro]

I think there was a quite crowded thread about this half or about a year ago - not sure about the verdict though. If someone (some mod or Martin) could find it, dust it and link it to here, that might help you, but I don't think it's very probable.

[sk8bloke22]

no, from my experiences in switching there was no performance issues.

[Slougi]

Well I am using dual-boot atm and sometimes test cheats under Win98 as well (The mem handling is slightly different and the addresses might be a few hex off). I usually get around 10% better performance under Win98.

[neoak]

All begin with a Celeron. 128kB of Cache (With L1 plus L2). Pentium 1 has 512Kb (mine does @ 200 Mhz MMX). P2 the same. P3 the same and P4 again.(Xeons have 1MB Cache or even 2MB cahce, but PJ 64 dont use it.)

I dont know anything about AMDs... Please confirm. (I only know that the Duron is better than a Celeron).

[Smiff]

IMHO a few percentage points are irrelevant considering that Windows 5+ (2k, XP) work properly (things don't randomly go wrong, or at least very rarely) and Windows 4 and below (98, ME etc.) don't (things go wrong for no apparent reason, often). If people see significant differences in performance that's likely due to their hardware and the OS (i.e. drivers) not PJ64.

[sytaylor]

i have to say that with being on dual boot i found there were some slight stability issues i had with Windows 98, but XP is pretty much flawless (id put this down to smiff being the bigcheese tester guy who has win2k)... as for speed, with a 1ghz+ chip you dont really notice the difference between the two operating systems anyways, cept that xp is is more stable (with the possible exception of the gui which can be a bitch)...

so yeah id say go for xp, its that bit more reliable :)

[Slougi]

well I don't have stability issues under win98fe at all, which is kinda peculiar as win98se crashes every 2 hours. anyway i get around 10 fps more there, for example Goldeneye is playable on Win98 but nowhere near playable on xp.

[Agent J]

I had an opposite experience, win98fe always crashed, but win98se doesn't crash, but then, win98fe never froze, but win98se freezes sometimes which is so annoying!!!

But IMHO, Win 98 would run games better than XP because win 98 min req. is 16 MB RAM, but XP min req. is 128 MB RAM, so XP usues up about 8 times more RAM..

[Doomulation]

Well, if I were to guess, you'd get more speed under w98 with your specs, since XP consumes more ram, which makes there less avilable to pj.
However, w98 seems to randomly crash for no apparent reason (as smiff said). So, I'd go for XP, and get a little more ram.

[6tree]

Strange.. I have fps about 50-60 in winME but in winXP 200-300.
Not tested any other emu but pj64 in XP.

[Doomulation]

Originally posted by 6tree
Strange.. I have fps about 50-60 in winME but in winXP 200-300.
Not tested any other emu but pj64 in XP.
Yeah, it's strange, but we also know that, of some reason, ME doesn't like pj. Or maybe the other way. But I can't see that that's a reason for it.

[6tree]

I thought it was xp doing something to pj. Getting it show too high numbers or something.

[Doomulation]

Originally posted by 6tree
I thought it was xp doing something to pj. Getting it show too high numbers or something.
Nah, I don't think so. I use XP myself, y'know. But maybe it is 'cuz you had limit FPS on under w98?

[6tree]

Originally posted by Doomulation

Nah, I don't think so. I use XP myself, y'know. But maybe it is 'cuz you had limit FPS on under w98?

oh ill explain. generally i have fps about 50-60 in most games under ME, all fps are without limiter. But in for example in super mario it can be over 100 something. And i was only testing how pj runs in xp and most likely, i dont remember, i tested only super mario and got the fps mentioned above.

There is a great performance increase if the numbers really are right. And i say it really was between 200 and 300, the fps.

I have quite the same specs as you but 256 mb ram an gf2 ti

[Doomulation]

Originally posted by 6tree


oh ill explain. generally i have fps about 50-60 in most games under ME, all fps are without limiter. But in for example in super mario it can be over 100 something. And i was only testing how pj runs in xp and most likely, i dont remember, i tested only super mario and got the fps mentioned above.

There is a great performance increase if the numbers really are right. And i say it really was between 200 and 300, the fps.

I have quite the same specs as you but 256 mb ram an gf2 ti
I don't really get that you can get such high speeds, but this really isn't an issue or somethin' bad, so we don't need to discuss 'bout it.

But then... :plain2: that was just my guess.

[RJA]

Correction, Windows XP min requirement is 64 MB of RAM
128 MB is what Microsoft recommends however.

[Smiff]

having a higher min. requirement. doesn't make something slower... if you have enough RAM you have enough RAM... i've always found Win2k fastest, probably due to better memory management & multitasking (than 9x) XP i don't like cos it's trying to be too "clever" for me

[6tree]

Originally posted by Doomulation

I don't really get that you can get such high speeds, but this really isn't an issue or somethin' bad, so we don't need to discuss 'bout it.

But then... :plain2: that was just my guess.

Look at this. No manipulation on the picture.

[Yoshi]

I have a lot of performance issues in widows xp. For example, Mario 64 have an average speed of 30-40.
I have a p3 700 mhz, 256mb ram and a ge-force3.

[sytaylor]

bah win2k is sloooooooow and j00 know it smiffy boy

[Doomulation]

I never got that high speed ever...
Well, then I haven't tested with Mario64.
The highest speed I've ever gotten is around 200 fps in Paper Mario using 1964.

[Smiff]

bullshit Win2k is not slow, if it was i wouldnt use it the most. that screenshot, either its a fast PC or the timer is f**ked up somehow

[RJA]

I suspect your slow game problem is to do with the
counter factor. Try using counter factors 3 or 1 .

The "default setting" counter factor is probably not
sufficient for you.

Super Mario 64 should run a lot faster than that!!!!!!:!!!: :!!!:

[sirss]

win98 works perfect for me and fast with pent3 tnt232 mg card 256 ram had a win xp pent 4 1.6 ghz 256 ram cant tell the differance except win98 run all my old games :) had a celeron for a day and took back cause celeron 900 mhz was little to slow mighta been the cheap vid card onbord but like my new pent3 win98 had to custem order it but was worth it .

[6tree]

Originally posted by Smiff
that screenshot, either its a fast PC or the timer is f**ked up somehow

This quite strange as I´ve mentioned above, not any problem, but pj just shows too high numbers in xp. The first screenshot is taken without framerate limiter, here is another with limiter on. You can see the strangeness.

Btw pj64 really works a bit better in xp than me.

Specs:
Athlon 1400 MHz
GF2 Ti
256 Mb
Win XP Pro

That PC would never get such high fps.

[Eagle]

Speaking of the problems with windows 4, I seem to remember Majoras Mask freezing randomly until I reintalled windows. Nothing like that ever happened on XP.

[Yoshi]

Originally posted by RJA
I suspect your slow game problem is to do with the
counter factor. Try using counter factors 3 or 1 .

The "default setting" counter factor is probably not
sufficient for you.

Super Mario 64 should run a lot faster than that!!!!!!:!!!: :!!!:

Now it works fine, thanks!
Still have problems with windows xp: Perfect dark won't load. And is a good rom.

[Slougi]

hmmm
It might be a bad rom although Goodn64 reports it as a good rom, it has happened to me a few times as well.

[neoak]

Here's my screenshots of PJ64. (WinXP HE, #2600.). ANd, Evangelion needs to store some data that the Emus don't recognize. (My version does... ¿Why? See for yourself)

[neoak]

Here's my screenshots of PJ64. (WinXP HE, #2600.). ANd, Evangelion needs to store some data that the Emus don't recognize. (My version does... ¿Why? See for yourself... Still isn't fixed) :plain:

[Remote]

Say what?

[Remote]

Originally posted by 6tree


Look at this. No manipulation on the picture.

Yeah, right. A little tip, if you are trying to manipulate a picture atleast do it right. Badly faked sceenshots pisses me off, you used the same background picture in both pics...

[Eagle]

Originally posted by Remote


Yeah, right. A little tip, if you are trying to manipulate a picture atleast do it right. Badly faked sceenshots pisses me off, you used the same background picture in both pics...

Yeah, well we all knew he was lying. We just chose to ignore him. After all, you can see the edges of something else behind the mario image. I know that isn't an emulation glitch, its image manipulation.

[CpU MasteR]

Originally posted by 6tree


Look at this. No manipulation on the picture.

Another tip, Dont Ever say it is manipulated when you post a pic. Denying that you didnt will problably suspect other people that it is. Besides, It is Lame to Post Fake pics, Just Be happy that I am Not going to Flame your ass for this. Dont ever post shit like this Here or anywhere... :plain2:

[Slougi]

Originally posted by Eagle
. After all, you can see the edges of something else behind the mario image. I know that isn't an emulation glitch, its image manipulation.
Actually that is a bug, when starting emulation pj64 somehow captures what is behind the window. Happens to me all the time.

[6tree]

You think i´m a liar:!!!: You don´t know me. I would never do anything such on this forum or anywhere else. I was just wondering that weird thing that seems not to happen to anybody else. Happens it? Tell if it does.