Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 92 of 254 1 2 90 91 92 93 94 253 254
Re: PC/XT/AT (inside) WIP topic [Re: mahlemiut] #81171
08/27/12 11:47 PM
08/27/12 11:47 PM
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 499
Melbourne, Australia
M
MikeAbson Offline
Senior Member
MikeAbson  Offline
Senior Member
M
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 499
Melbourne, Australia
Originally Posted By mahlemiut
Make sure you haven't forgotten to use -isa1 svga_s3 smile

Should work fine with the standard driver.


I was using the S3 driver that comes with Windows 95 smile and I'm fairly certain it was in ISA1, if not ISA1 then one of the other ISA slots, but Windows recognizes the card and isn't giving me any errors in Device Manager.

Is a black screen normal? Do I need to wait a few minutes? I just mentioned to Alegend there that I had a black screen for about a minute before giving up. I can try again tonight and wait a bit longer to see if anything changes.

I'm using Windows 95A 4.00.950. I can't see this making any difference if your using a new version of Windows 95 though?

Last edited by MikeAbson; 08/28/12 12:01 AM.
Re: PC/XT/AT (inside) WIP topic [Re: Haze] #81172
08/27/12 11:55 PM
08/27/12 11:55 PM
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 499
Melbourne, Australia
M
MikeAbson Offline
Senior Member
MikeAbson  Offline
Senior Member
M
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 499
Melbourne, Australia
Originally Posted By Haze
Originally Posted By MikeAbson
Even if it's just 256, it's still better than 16 colours and compatibility increases, which is always good. I think anymore than that will probably bring most if not all PC's to a grinding halt due to the amount of on screen colours at the same time smile


If you're emulating a sufficiently advanced 2D card with good HW acceleration features and driver support for them then it could well be quite a bit faster.

the emulation is slow mainly because of the i386 cpu emulation so if your emulated graphic card (which is emulated at a higher level) is doing most of the work, and the emulated CPU less of the work then the emulation will be faster.


That's interesting as I was expecting emulation to decrease the more colours are supported. Sort of like back in the day where users that had under-powered PC's had to run games in 16 / 24-bit colour instead of 32-bit to get decent speed.

Interestingly though about 10 or so pages back in this thread where was a post made with a link to download some DOS software that did some tests on the math co-processor and I was surprised to see emulation was faster when using that compared to not using it. I understand a system will be faster when using a co-processor, but I thought if an emulator has to use more CPU power to get that to work, emulation would be slower, so you may very well be right there smile

Re: PC/XT/AT (inside) WIP topic [Re: Kale] #81173
08/28/12 12:07 AM
08/28/12 12:07 AM
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,515
H
Haze Offline
Very Senior Member
Haze  Offline
Very Senior Member
H
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,515
well keep in mind people purchased expensive graphic cards to take load off their CPU and have the card do most of the work.

given the simple example of a line draw command, if you emulate it, done in software, with no card acceleration your 386 is having to do a lot more work, and then in turn the emulation of the 386 is having to do more work, decoding and executing multiple opcodes for every single pixel.

if the 2d card you're emulating has a build in line draw function, and the windows drivers / software can make use of it then instead it becomes only a handful of opcodes, once, to tell the card to draw a line, which then gets executed as a single command in native compiled (and optimized) C code of the emulator. The 386 is doing less work, so you're emulating less to get the same effect.

Now if your emulated card is handling a lot of things then 16-bit modes etc. could well be faster to emulate (and give better overall system performance) than a non-accelerated card even in 16 colour mode simply due to the sheer weight taken off the emulated CPU. Want to clear the screen without acceleration? you'd have to manually write to every pixel, with, tell the card to draw a big black rectangle.

of course this isn't going to magically make emulation of games which actually required a fast 486 / pentium *and* a good graphics card fast in MESS, but if you're emulating titles which ran on low end 486 systems but had good support for hardware accelerated graphics cards then it could help quite a lot.

framebuffers still take more CPU work to manage than say a pure tilemap / sprite system, but a blitter (which is essentially what the hardware acceleration is) at least takes some of the load away.

Re: PC/XT/AT (inside) WIP topic [Re: Haze] #81174
08/28/12 03:31 AM
08/28/12 03:31 AM
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 499
Melbourne, Australia
M
MikeAbson Offline
Senior Member
MikeAbson  Offline
Senior Member
M
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 499
Melbourne, Australia
Originally Posted By Haze
well keep in mind people purchased expensive graphic cards to take load off their CPU and have the card do most of the work.

given the simple example of a line draw command, if you emulate it, done in software, with no card acceleration your 386 is having to do a lot more work, and then in turn the emulation of the 386 is having to do more work, decoding and executing multiple opcodes for every single pixel.

if the 2d card you're emulating has a build in line draw function, and the windows drivers / software can make use of it then instead it becomes only a handful of opcodes, once, to tell the card to draw a line, which then gets executed as a single command in native compiled (and optimized) C code of the emulator. The 386 is doing less work, so you're emulating less to get the same effect.

Now if your emulated card is handling a lot of things then 16-bit modes etc. could well be faster to emulate (and give better overall system performance) than a non-accelerated card even in 16 colour mode simply due to the sheer weight taken off the emulated CPU. Want to clear the screen without acceleration? you'd have to manually write to every pixel, with, tell the card to draw a big black rectangle.

of course this isn't going to magically make emulation of games which actually required a fast 486 / pentium *and* a good graphics card fast in MESS, but if you're emulating titles which ran on low end 486 systems but had good support for hardware accelerated graphics cards then it could help quite a lot.

framebuffers still take more CPU work to manage than say a pure tilemap / sprite system, but a blitter (which is essentially what the hardware acceleration is) at least takes some of the load away.


If any load is taken off of the emulated CPU, we should see an increase in the percentage that MESS runs at shouldn't we? At the moment I can run the i386 driver at 100% no matter what it's doing, this in Windows 95 or software that requires EMM386, but the i486 driver gets killed when running certain software, Windows, Quake and GTA come to mind, running as low as around 40% in some cases. It'll be interesting to see how much, if any, load is taken off the CPU. None of us (well some do), expect miracles, but every little of speed boost helps the popularity of the emulator succeed.

Re: PC/XT/AT (inside) WIP topic [Re: Kale] #81175
08/28/12 09:33 AM
08/28/12 09:33 AM
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 856
Germany
D
Duke Online content
Senior Member
Duke  Online Content
Senior Member
D
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 856
Germany
Unless you're running GLQuake it won't use any hardware acceleration and uses the FPU quite extensively, so it will probably be always slow to emulate. Same for GTA, unless you use the 3DFX version.

Re: PC/XT/AT (inside) WIP topic [Re: Kale] #81176
08/28/12 10:07 AM
08/28/12 10:07 AM
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 499
Melbourne, Australia
M
MikeAbson Offline
Senior Member
MikeAbson  Offline
Senior Member
M
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 499
Melbourne, Australia
I've updated to the latest revision here, and I still can't get any more than 16 colours in Windows 95, just a black screen frown

I'm using the svga_s3 card and the default drivers that come with Windows 95, (listed in their driver database as "Number Nine 9FX Vision 330 (S3)"). I've tried various monitor drivers as well, the SVGA ones and the Plug And Play monitor drivers. I have also tried both the 486 and 586 drivers without success.

Any ideas?

Re: PC/XT/AT (inside) WIP topic [Re: Duke] #81177
08/28/12 10:51 AM
08/28/12 10:51 AM
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,515
H
Haze Offline
Very Senior Member
Haze  Offline
Very Senior Member
H
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,515
Originally Posted By Duke
Unless you're running GLQuake it won't use any hardware acceleration and uses the FPU quite extensively, so it will probably be always slow to emulate. Same for GTA, unless you use the 3DFX version.


Yeah, I don't think things like quake will magically improve, but IIRC things like Sim City which can make extensive use of 2d accelerated features were much better with a decent card.

Re: PC/XT/AT (inside) WIP topic [Re: Kale] #81178
08/28/12 11:37 AM
08/28/12 11:37 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 524
New Zealand
M
mahlemiut Offline
Senior Member
mahlemiut  Offline
Senior Member
M
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 524
New Zealand
r17526
Added background and foreground mix registers. Cleans up text in many areas, like the status bar in MAME32...





I have tried two driver versions - one included with Win95 OSR2.1 (DirectX2) and one included with DirectX 5. Both should be usable.


- Barry Rodewald
Re: PC/XT/AT (inside) WIP topic [Re: Kale] #81179
08/28/12 11:40 AM
08/28/12 11:40 AM
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 499
Melbourne, Australia
M
MikeAbson Offline
Senior Member
MikeAbson  Offline
Senior Member
M
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 499
Melbourne, Australia
Maybe that's my problem. I've got DirectX 8.0a installed. Does this make a difference?

Re: PC/XT/AT (inside) WIP topic [Re: MikeAbson] #81180
08/28/12 11:59 AM
08/28/12 11:59 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 524
New Zealand
M
mahlemiut Offline
Senior Member
mahlemiut  Offline
Senior Member
M
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 524
New Zealand
Possibly, they changed how text was drawn between DirectX 2 and DirectX 5, it's entirely possible that other stuff could have changed. Large icons on the desktop should always appear at a minimum, at least with DX2 and 5, as they are drawn in software. Windows includes a generic S3 764 driver also, so that's another option.


- Barry Rodewald
Page 92 of 254 1 2 90 91 92 93 94 253 254

Who's Online Now
1 registered members (sof-max), 76 guests, and 3 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Shout Box
Forum Statistics
Forums9
Topics8,575
Posts112,038
Members4,812
Most Online225
May 26th, 2014
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.1.1
(Release build 20180111)
Page Time: 0.069s Queries: 15 (0.045s) Memory: 5.7396 MB (Peak: 5.9606 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2018-09-23 12:00:33 UTC