| |
Dano
Registered: Jul 2004
Posts: 226 |
WinVice 3.1 speed/performance on Ultrabooks?
Currently i am coding on an Asus UX32VD Ultrabook (which should have some like an Intel Core i7-3517U 1.9 GHz in it). As of WinVice3.1 using x64 with FastSid does not work correctly anymore. Visuals yes, but Sound sometimes totally goes south (no filters and such).
From the Vice people i was told to use ReSid as FastSid is not supported anymore.
Now my problems start: With using ReSid WinVice drops to like 24fps on my system. Using x64sc with Resid gives me like 8fps.
Looking at procmon it seems like one core is maxed out as CPU load never goes over 24% (the graphs show a different picture as none seems to be properly used).
My workhorse laptop at the office can run x64+resid nicely and properly, but okay it got way more power than my ultrabook will have.
Somehow i got the feeling that my system (Win10 Creators) is not really working properly anymore.
That's why i am asking here.. Any of you guys got a laptop compareable to mine and how's WinVice working on your system? Or what are the general performance reports for WinVice3.1?
Before i go into the ordeal of doing a complete re-install i would like to hear what other experience with WinVice currently. If it's problem on my side, or if it's just how well WinVice works on lower spec (sort of) laptops.. |
|
... 51 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
oziphantom
Registered: Oct 2014
Posts: 478 |
putting ReSid on its own thread would really help too.
Somebody in VICE dev suggested we need a GPU based version. |
| |
soci
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 473 |
It is just getting more easily maintainable and correct now.
Once for 2.4 I cared a little to optimize speed, memory use and start-up time. There was some strange fun to try running it on old junk and see how it could perform better.
Then the direction changed. Old hardware and platform support is planned to be removed and X64 will be phased out in favour of the SC version. A lot of stuff I did will be stripped out as a clean-up. You know, there's no need for a redundant "fast paths" if the normal path handles the same case just as well just slower. Well I've added a lot of "crap" in name of performance which hinders maintainability in the long run.
Therefore worrying over it's performance is a complete waste of time. I've found better things to do and there's no turning back. Anyone can join to try to improve it, but I can tell it's going to be an uphill battle of conflicting interests.
On the other hand improving maintainability is good. I'm just wondering how the gained flexibility will be used for something in the future. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11100 |
what soci said - if you want performance, use x64 from VICE 2.4, enable fastsid, disable CRT emulation -> problem solved.
"putting ReSid on its own thread would really help too."
no it wouldnt. ReSID is being synced to the emulation every half cycle - putting it in a seperate thread would not only a lot of ugly code to maintain just that - the overhead would also make it slower in the end. there is not much that can be parallelized in a cycle exact emulator, unfortunately.
the one thing that could be done to speed up emulation considerably would be doing GLSL based CRT emulation (like micro64 does). however, there is tons of other stuff to be done under the hood (ie what soci said) before any of this will happen. |
| |
Dano
Registered: Jul 2004
Posts: 226 |
kudos for all the efforts in x64sc as it really looks neat and tidy and correct to my eye.
got a lenovo t540p here which perfoms well with it. not sure on how much power MORE this one has. internet says it got a Intel Core i7 4700MQ.
brings me back to my question on if x64(sc) from winvice 3(.1) should run on my i7 ultrabook at a 50fps or if there's something else on my system that must cause that slowdown. well i'm no n00b and i don't see anything particular that could cause the slowdown, but it might be there if others confirm to have it running normally on their (equal) systems.
so, to me, it would interesting on what power is/may be needed to drive x64 and x64sc with resid at a constant 50fps. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11100 |
a lot with the inability to run at stable 50fps is due to the terrible sound- and sync- code that needs to be deleted and rewritten.
IMHO any i5/i7 should be able to do it fine. my good old amd64 could do it even (ok, with 2.4) :) |
| |
algorithm
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 702 |
Any i3/i5/i7 device with the exception of perhaps a first generation ULV device (e.g i5 520um) should run Vice 3.1 x64sc at full framerate. Even on an Atom Cherrytrail z8700 (GPD Win) it runs fine. 50fps (or near enough)
The I5 3317u (On your device) is enough for vice 3.1 although there has been some severe throttling on some devices
I would probably check the settings in power options. make sure processor max performance is not set to 99% (This will disable turboboost). With adequate cooling, turboboost speeds should hopefully be maintained longer. |
| |
soci
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 473 |
As Groepaz said you need to trade off accuracy for performance.
The performance hit is mostly due to default settings changes for 3.0 which were done with the intention of exposing the more accurate emulation features over "half assed" but faster versions.
The point was that it's not possible to optimize for everyone, but at least the defaults should be something "sensible".
Which does not mean it fits exactly your use case or hardware out of the box. It's needs to be tuned.
For coding CRT emulation is counter productive anyway, I switch it off.
Sound I never turn on unless it's needed. Same with true drive emulation, most of the time device traps will do.
When coding mostly calculation heavy effects without tricky timing there's no point running it on X64SC.
If VICE was compiled with memory map or debugging it's going to be slow, so I only use it when really needed for something.
3.x got a little heavier independent of settings, but it's not all that bad yet as it seems. |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 - Next |
