[CSDb] - User Forums - WinVice 3.1 speed/performance on Ultrabooks?

Welcome to our latest new user maak ! (Registered 2024-04-18)

You are not logged in - nap

CSDb User Forums

Forums > CSDb Discussions > WinVice 3.1 speed/performance on Ultrabooks?

2017-05-12 09:29

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....

2017-05-12 16:58

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.

2017-05-15 03:34

Kruthers

Registered: Jul 2016
Posts: 21

Seems most of the hardware mentioned here should not really be an issue as my 6 year old Athlon II can run the latest Vice, maxed out, solid frame rate, without even using up one core.

However I notice that sometimes Vice gets in a "state" where framerate really drops, as low as 5fps, and it gets stuck there. Sometimes it happens on startup but mostly its random or possibly related to system load. Anyway, doing pause (alt-p), waiting a few seconds for the system to settle, then unpausing seems to clear it up.

Maybe on some systems Vice starts up in that "stuck" state and needs a chance to catch its breath? *shrug* Course, I'm seeing this behavior under Linux and there could be a world of differences, but figured it was worth mentioning anyway...

2017-05-15 05:57

chatGPZ

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11100

Quote: