SeymourOmnis
New member
An 8800GTX surpassing internal slowdowns.
What do you think about this?
GE 007 had internal slowdowns? I don't think so!
- Thread starter SeymourOmnis
- Start date
An 8800GTX surpassing internal slowdowns.
What do you think about this?
squall_leonhart
The Great Gunblade Wielder
not possible. something else is at work here
Iconoclast
New member
That happened to me, too. I just blew the living shit out of myself with x2 rocket launchers over and over again for no apparent reason with the Invincibility cheat on in the Facility level, and on the actual N64, it slowed down about as badly as that system shown in the above-linked movie, except by skipping many frames instead.
OP
SeymourOmnis
New member
- Thread Starter
- #4
Why don't you believe me? Don't underestimate the power of the 8800GTX.
You are looking at the V/Is counter, so you won't see a dip there unless you have less than a Athlon XP 2000+ or so. It's the internal framerate that dips. Best example is having 30+ guards on-screen (easy to do with the Invisibility+Invincibility cheat on in levels that spawn unlimited guards). It gets extremely choppy on the real system. So, the real bottleneck is not the graphics card or even the CPU, rather it's a combination of the emulator itself and the limitations of the real N64 system. The graphics card almost sits idle in N64 emulation with the CPU doing most of the hard work.
Last edited:
chiklit
New member
The 8800 doesn't even come near it's limits playing N64 games. Such showdowns are the result of CPU/emulation bottleneck not a slow GPU.
Last edited:
OP
SeymourOmnis
New member
- Thread Starter
- #7
Still, you can notice in the video that the framerate isn't dropped, not even a single bit, everything keeps up fast.
The point of this topic is, the power of a very powerful computer can make it up for the GE slowdowns. Isn't that amazing?
And I think it's the graphics card that allows me to surpass the slowdowns; I have another PC with an Athlon 3500+ with a 7600GS and I still can't do what I did on the video without framedropping; and I think that the Athlon 3500+ (sAM2) is powerful enough to manage whatever kind of N64 emulation.
the master 123
New member
download fraps and tell us the framerate the fps of project 64 isn't the frame per second but rather the field per second. also what is the intel equalivie of the athlon 2000+ or were an intel dual core t2400 is at compared to a athon line.
Last edited:
chiklit
New member
Not really, the N64 only had a 94MHz CPU.
the master 123
New member
I was playing the first level with the cheat code on(unlimited body armor and ammo). with pfps limit on I was about 9-30 fps obious when about 9 it was choppy. I then disable pfps with pfps about 120-400(400 generally menus) with about 20(or was it 30)- 70 fps. I use the processor in my sig as well as ram amount however I did this with my intel card however(gma950) is obviously a lot weaker than a 8800 so that is a good example of this. pfps is what the emulator shows. I would should the difference however frap will limit the pfps and fps so I won't be accurate also I don't know any how to setup it up to show the 2 counters. I would note that I had music video in the background in firefox when I was doing this test.
Last edited:
Goldeneye is designed with a variable frame rate, so you only notice a slowdown once the framerate drops below a certain threshold. Without FRAPS running, there's no way of telling if frames were skipped, which is what happens on the real thing. Also, the 30+ guards scenario would certainly slow down the framerate considerably more than just firing rockets. As I said, graphics card does virtually no processing itself - the only tangible benefit with a 8800 card is using framebuffer.
the master 123
New member
as my pevious post mention I was use frap to get the frame per minute. without limiting(pj advance opinion) I was able to get much higher frame dispite my intel card. I also got the result back for my nvidia geforce 7400 go basely little inprovement though the that card is also more powerful. I wonder How high I could have went if pj 64 was multithreaded?
squall_leonhart
The Great Gunblade Wielder
Goldeneye actually has an internal fps of 60fps, unlike games like zelda and mario64 which was only 20fps
the master 123
New member
I was running at menu with pfps limit on at 60 only ingame then it go below also when it did it it was more random and generally was at 30 go up to 40 fps with iv(pfps) at 60.
PistolGrip
New member
Does anyone know if you increase the core clock of the emulated CPU whether Goldeneye can run better? Would be cool having an option to get 60 REAL FPS in game on newer CPUs which can handle more than 1x the emulated CPU.... hope I'm making sense here.
One bad thing about Goldeneye for me these days is the framerate getting so slow internally... the game shouldn't care (hopefully anyhow) what MHz the host CPUs are running at as there should be some timer like VSync for them to work off. Is there any way to try this with PJ64 atm, if not is an option planned in the future to tweak the CPU cores speed?
One bad thing about Goldeneye for me these days is the framerate getting so slow internally... the game shouldn't care (hopefully anyhow) what MHz the host CPUs are running at as there should be some timer like VSync for them to work off. Is there any way to try this with PJ64 atm, if not is an option planned in the future to tweak the CPU cores speed?
Disregarding potential timing issues, overclocking the emulated cpu wouldn't make the game run faster, just with a more stable framerate.
PistolGrip
New member
Yes I understand that, and it is what I want. ie GoldenEye to run at a constant 60 real FPS, rather than the up and down (sometimes as low as 10? fps) of the native console at native speed. Apparently hardware mods which overclock the CPUs have improved games like Perfect Dark so they don't run as jerky, so if it can be done like that it should be rather simple to emulate it. I know it won't improve every game, just the ones which are slow and don't have specific timing issues.
I modded 1964 0.8.5 (the latest source I could get) to give more CPU cycles per frame and it did indeed make Goldeneye smoother.... but also increased its gameclock so the characters and whatnot move faster than they should (but still at only 60VI/s). I think there is some timing setting the game is reading to determine I am giving it more cycles but don't have much time to put into it to find what.
It is rather a simple change in timer.c, in Set_VI_Counter_By_VSYNC()
changed this: max_vi_count = (VI_V_SYNC_REG + 1) * 1500;
to: max_vi_count = (VI_V_SYNC_REG + 1) * 3000;
Shame the source to 0.999 isn't out.
PistolGrip
New member
I have uploaded a modded 1964 0.8.5 EXE with the source change I specified (but actually 4 times the speed).
Some things I have noticed :-
1) San Fransisco Rush games don't have any more lag in multiplayer games, constant 30DL/s, which is nice
2) Some games get sped up and are unplayable (goldeneye and perfect dark are unplayable, but much smoother, nearly 60DL/s)
3) A lot of games limit the fps artificially to something like 20 or 30, this mod can still be useful if those games drop below those numbers (like Rush games do in multiplayer, to around 20DL/s from 30DL/s)
*Just a note - Since it is emulating roughly 4 times as much CPU, you will need a more powerful CPU to run this than say you would normally. CPU Core usage went from 2% on my CORE2DUO 3.25Ghz to 8-10%. Which is still not much.
Some things I have noticed :-
1) San Fransisco Rush games don't have any more lag in multiplayer games, constant 30DL/s, which is nice
2) Some games get sped up and are unplayable (goldeneye and perfect dark are unplayable, but much smoother, nearly 60DL/s)
3) A lot of games limit the fps artificially to something like 20 or 30, this mod can still be useful if those games drop below those numbers (like Rush games do in multiplayer, to around 20DL/s from 30DL/s)
*Just a note - Since it is emulating roughly 4 times as much CPU, you will need a more powerful CPU to run this than say you would normally. CPU Core usage went from 2% on my CORE2DUO 3.25Ghz to 8-10%. Which is still not much.
Last edited:
PistolGrip
New member
http://www.emutalk.net/showthread.php?t=40311
I have added a new build of the mod over in the 1964 forum. This allows Goldeneye to run at a real 60FPS (60DL/s), with the gameplay being the same speed as the original. So basically it's much smoother, and looks like a completely different game in motion to be honest. Check it out just for the smoothness (must have at least a 2GHz processor though).
Some other emu authors may be adding it to their emulators in the future (on overclock type option), hopefully it will happen since 1964 0.8.5 is quite out dated and I have no access to other sources.
I have added a new build of the mod over in the 1964 forum. This allows Goldeneye to run at a real 60FPS (60DL/s), with the gameplay being the same speed as the original. So basically it's much smoother, and looks like a completely different game in motion to be honest. Check it out just for the smoothness (must have at least a 2GHz processor though).
Some other emu authors may be adding it to their emulators in the future (on overclock type option), hopefully it will happen since 1964 0.8.5 is quite out dated and I have no access to other sources.