Mame32 vs wolfMame

The place for all discussion on gaming hardware
Post Reply
User avatar
captain ahar
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: #50 Bitch!

Mame32 vs wolfMame

Post by captain ahar »

i don't think i'm violating any forum rules here, but if so, mods, set me straight.

i was running a few games in Mame32, and while older stuff was perfectly playable, more current manics would cut the framerate in half or worse, plus some extra display glitches for bonus. i thought it was just my computer (as it is generally accepted to be quite lousy) but...

i also got wolfmame to run a few games that wouldn't work properly in mame32, and thought, out of curiosity of running some of the newer stuff in wolfmame. runs perfectly. fast, slick, some slowdown, but my impression is this stuff was just carried over from the pcb (as it only happens in really hectic circumstances (last boss esprade comes to mind).

question:
i've got a 1.8Ghz P4, 512 RAM, running XP pro. is there some technical reason why my setup seems to favor wolfmame?

edit: again not trying to step on toes, just deeply interested in the performance gap. :)
I have no sig whatsoever.
User avatar
Specineff
Posts: 5768
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 12:54 am
Location: Ari-Freaking-Zona!
Contact:

Post by Specineff »

Talking about emulators is ok. Requesting romz is not. So you're ok, matey.
Don't hold grudges. GET EVEN.
User avatar
Shatterhand
Posts: 4099
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 3:01 am
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
Contact:

Post by Shatterhand »

I always thought Mame32 really had a performance problem. It has been like that for ages now.

Use regular mame with a front-end (I recommend Emu Loader). Its the best thing to do :)
Image
User avatar
Ganelon
Posts: 4413
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 1:43 am

Post by Ganelon »

Do you know of some shooters off the top of your head that has these slowdown issues early in the game. I'm interested in seeing if I have them as well on my computer.
User avatar
freddiebamboo
Posts: 1366
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 9:17 pm
Location: UK

Post by freddiebamboo »

My PC is slower than the captain's, and it runs the essentials fine.

I'm using standard fare mame - with possibly the least user friendly interface available, and it does progear and (apart from a bit of stuttering) dragon blaze + the raiden fighters.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think most things can run near perfect on a pretty cack PC. If there are serious probs, then it's probably a conflicting app in the background.
User avatar
captain ahar
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: #50 Bitch!

Post by captain ahar »

Ganelon wrote:Do you know of some shooters off the top of your head that has these slowdown issues early in the game. I'm interested in seeing if I have them as well on my computer.
esprade
truxton 2
guwange
dragon blaze
viper phase new
raiden fighters jet
many more

mostly the bad performance was centered on caves, raizings, psikyos, and seibus.
they ran like me (read: slowly, and awkwardly).
I have no sig whatsoever.
User avatar
Ganelon
Posts: 4413
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 1:43 am

Post by Ganelon »

Could you list a specific slowdown early in any of the games please? I don't play any of them seriously unfortunately.
AWJ
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 12:22 pm

Re: Mame32 vs wolfMame

Post by AWJ »

captain ahar wrote:i was running a few games in Mame32, and while older stuff was perfectly playable, more current manics would cut the framerate in half or worse, plus some extra display glitches for bonus. i thought it was just my computer (as it is generally accepted to be quite lousy) but...

i also got wolfmame to run a few games that wouldn't work properly in mame32, and thought, out of curiosity of running some of the newer stuff in wolfmame. runs perfectly. fast, slick, some slowdown, but my impression is this stuff was just carried over from the pcb (as it only happens in really hectic circumstances (last boss esprade comes to mind).
My guess is different default settings--e.g. one version is setting your monitor to the game's native resolution while the other is stretching the bitmap. Or one is using DirectDraw while the other is using Direct3D, and there's a significant performance difference between the two paths on your hardware. Do you have a graphics card, or onboard video?

It always surprises me that so many people just run emulators straight out of the distribution archive and don't explore the configuration options at all. A lot of the power of these programs lies in their configurability, and many common complaints about emulation are fixable just by changing some setting. Again and again I see such absurdities as someone naming a particular emulator as their favorite based on what keys it uses as controls (when these are fully user-configurable on practically all emulators)
User avatar
elvis
Posts: 984
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Post by elvis »

Yes, there are a thousand and one options you can pass to MAME to do all sorts of different things, some of which can really impact game play speed.

All versions of MAME use roughly the same core. Be it XMAME on Linux, AdvanceMAME, MAME32, WolfMAME or any of the other tweaked versions out there. Performance differences from one port to the next is negligable at best.

I run a MAME benchmarking site (getting out of date now) which has a howto section on how to benchmark MAME. Check out the command line switch options (all of which have the same options available within the MAME32 GUI) to see which options you are setting incorrectly.

http://benchmark.mameworld.net/
User avatar
captain ahar
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 10:03 pm
Location: #50 Bitch!

Re: Mame32 vs wolfMame

Post by captain ahar »

AWJ wrote:...stuff...
and actually both were configured the same. same aspect ratio, both directdraw, triple buffering on, same refresh settings, etc.
I have no sig whatsoever.
zaphod
Posts: 629
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 7:33 am
Contact:

Post by zaphod »

well one mame port IS different. FastMAME (laugh) it's faster. :)
User avatar
elvis
Posts: 984
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Post by elvis »

zaphod wrote:well one mame port IS different. FastMAME (laugh) it's faster. :)
Most versions of MAME are compiled using GCC (GNU C Compiler). It's free (as in, open source, as well as free of cost) for most platforms, hence it is the popular compiler of choice.

FastMAME is compiled with the (very expensive and not open source) ICC (Intel C Compiler). Binaries built by this compiler suite are quite often much more highly optimised for x86, thanks to the fact that the compiler writers have handy inter-copmany access to some highly skilled x86 engineers. Speedups vary greatly depending on the game driver and the amout of optimisations that are available. At worst you'll see 1-2% speedup. In some cases it's as sever as 20% speedup, which is very noticable.

There are also versions of MAME out there that are compiled using Microsoft's Visual Studio tools. Speeds of these builds are similar to GCC builds.

Other than being built with ICC, FastMAME is no different to normal MAME builds. It uses the identical code base, driver set, and DirectX headers and libraries.
User avatar
Shatterhand
Posts: 4099
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 3:01 am
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
Contact:

Post by Shatterhand »

Well, Ive someone saying that Xmame runned a lot faster than Mame32 on his laptop.

I am trying to compile Xmame on my Ubuntu distro, but being the linux newbie I am, it's giving me a lot of headaches :)

Is fastmame still being updated? I couldnt find not even a 0.100 version of it.
Image
User avatar
elvis
Posts: 984
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Post by elvis »

Shatterhand wrote:Well, Ive someone saying that Xmame runned a lot faster than Mame32 on his laptop.
Be careful when you say "faster". MAME has 3 parts: the MAME core, the game driver, and the blitter. The blitter is the part that draws game information to the screen.

XMAME and MAME share the same MAME core and drivers. The blitters are different, as MAME uses either Direct3D or DirectDraw, and XMAME can use X11, SDL or OpenGL.

When someone says to me "XMAME is faster than MAME on the same hardware" or vice versa, I call bullshit. The cores are identical. There are no extra optimisations, unless you compile them in yourself at compile time, but these are available from places like this:
http://redump.emubase.de/mame.php

Benchmarking MAME on various systems will give various results depending on the OS and blitters you are using. If the blitter code can only update to the screen so many times per second, that will result in capping your maximum framerate.

Outside of that, assuming you are using the same MAME core (remember that MAME changes greatly between revisions, so you need to compare identical releases to get a real comparison) there are NO DIFFERENCES between versions of MAME other than the blitters you choose.
Shatterhand wrote:I am trying to compile Xmame on my Ubuntu distro, but being the linux newbie I am, it's giving me a lot of headaches :)
Grab the pre-compiled version from your APT repositories. From a command line:

sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-cache search mame
sudo install xmame-<whatever version you want>

It's much easier than compiling the code yourself if you're not used to LInux compiling. If Ubuntu don't have it in their repositores, add some of the Debian repositories and try again.
Shatterhand wrote:Is fastmame still being updated? I couldnt find not even a 0.100 version of it.
Fastmame is done whenever the guy who runs the project has the time to update it. Generally speaking he updates every 3-4 versions. The MAME team have a bad habit of releasing versions very quickly during rest times (summer holidays, etc) and easing off during the rest of the year. The Fastmame guy (like most developers) is a busy person, and updates when he can.

At the end of the day, computer gear doesn't cost much. Fastmame is nice, but you can buy an AthlonXP processor, cheap board and 512MB RAM nowadays for less than a games console would cost you, and it will play any 2D shmup fine. I've got several dedicated MAME cabs in my house, and for all of them the computer hardware was by far the cheapest bit.
AWJ
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 12:22 pm

Post by AWJ »

elvis wrote:
Shatterhand wrote:Well, Ive someone saying that Xmame runned a lot faster than Mame32 on his laptop.
Actually, I can fully believe this. Some sound chips found in laptops (and a few desktops - cough cough Compaq) have extremely poor quality Windows drivers that eat upwards of 30% CPU while a sound stream is playing. This would cause a dramatic performance difference for emulators and other multimedia between Windows and Linux on the same hardware.
User avatar
elvis
Posts: 984
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Post by elvis »

AWJ wrote: Actually, I can fully believe this. Some sound chips found in laptops (and a few desktops - cough cough Compaq) have extremely poor quality Windows drivers that eat upwards of 30% CPU while a sound stream is playing. This would cause a dramatic performance difference for emulators and other multimedia between Windows and Linux on the same hardware.
"Sound chips eating 30% CPU" stopped being manufactured in the late 90's. Unless your laptop is 7-8 years old, such things don't exist any more since everyone has moved to AC97 standards since then, and that statement above is total legacy.

And if indeed your laptop was that old, you'd be playing on ~500MHz units, in which case I would highly recommend considering migrating to 1GHz+ before blaming your soundcard.

And of course, if we were all truly analytical and empirical, we'd be benching with -nosound to remove inconsitencies like that anyway.

Oh, and for those wanting to know how to benchmark MAME, here's a site I wrote a few years back with examples, scripts, and a very out of date database:
http://benchmark.mameworld.net/
User avatar
Shatterhand
Posts: 4099
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 3:01 am
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
Contact:

Post by Shatterhand »

There was no Xmame in the Ubuntu repositories, at least not in the old version I own. I've heard that Xmame is included in the lastest version of Ubuntu! :) (I am still waiting my discs for the new version)

I had looked for a .deb version of Xmame with no luck either. What I did was to download an RPM file, and convert it to .deb with Alien. Now it's working nicely.
At the end of the day, computer gear doesn't cost much. Fastmame is nice, but you can buy an AthlonXP processor, cheap board and 512MB RAM nowadays for less than a games console would cost you, and it will play any 2D shmup fine. I've got several dedicated MAME cabs in my house, and for all of them the computer hardware was by far the cheapest bit.
This is true, of course, if you don't live in Brazil. Or probably in most third world countries. I really would LOVE to have a dedicated MAME cab in my house (or maybe even 2, one for verts and one for horis), but I can barely put my own PC to run properly :)

I was curious to see how fastmame works with those games that are utterly slow in MAME for nature, like those PSX games, some Namco 3D games (Cyber Cycles), the Midway racing games, ST-V games, etc. Just out of curiosity really, as I doubt they would be "playable" anyway.
Image
User avatar
elvis
Posts: 984
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Post by elvis »

Shatterhand wrote:There was no Xmame in the Ubuntu repositories, at least not in the old version I own. I've heard that Xmame is included in the lastest version of Ubuntu! :) (I am still waiting my discs for the new version)
The Ubuntu kids should be saluted for their free CD service. They are doing really great work. A lot of Linux distros assume everyone has fast broadband access in the world, when that is far from the truth.
Shatterhand wrote:I had looked for a .deb version of Xmame with no luck either. What I did was to download an RPM file, and convert it to .deb with Alien. Now it's working nicely.
Ah, good thinking. The Debian repositories most certainly have XMAME in the "non-free" repository.

You can use apt-get.org's repository search tool to try and find .DEB packages:
http://www1.apt-get.org/search.php
Shatterhand wrote:This is true, of course, if you don't live in Brazil. Or probably in most third world countries. I really would LOVE to have a dedicated MAME cab in my house (or maybe even 2, one for verts and one for horis), but I can barely put my own PC to run properly :)
Ah I see. I'm in Australia, and we pay roughly 30-50% more for the same hardware than the lucky northern Americans do, not to mention our Asian neighbours who get it even cheaper thanks to population densities and close distance from the manufacturers.

Maybe we should start a emergency shmups donation scheme? :)
Shatterhand wrote:I was curious to see how fastmame works with those games that are utterly slow in MAME for nature, like those PSX games, some Namco 3D games (Cyber Cycles), the Midway racing games, ST-V games, etc. Just out of curiosity really, as I doubt they would be "playable" anyway.
MAME emulates hardware, not games. The side effect of emulating hardware is that many games are playable. :)

If you want to play 3D arcade games (particularly ZN-hardware games like Namco stuff), check out ZiNc, or even a real Playstation or PSX emulator like ePSXe.

http://www.emuhype.com/index.phtml?s=zinc&ss=index
http://www.epsxe.com/news.php

These focus more on playability on lower-end hardware than on accuracy. They also allow higher-res play and offloading to 3D cards. You don't need anything super powerful. I play ZiNc on a 1.5GHz machine with an old GeForce2MX card with fairly decent framerates on most games.

Most 3D games in MAME won't be playable on consumer hardware for quite some time. Some MAMEDevs are reporting that they'll need 6-10GHz CPUs to run certain 3D games properly. I doub't we'll see them any time soon, as CPU manufacturers are already hitting a wall and are turning to slower multi-core CPUs instead of faster single-core units. And emulation doesn't work very well under multiprocessor environments due to the inability to sync properly under SMP.

STV in particular is one that will take some time before we see easily playable games.

With fastmame you can expect 5-15% speed boosts, maybe more depending on the driver. But still, if you're only seeing 30FPS (and need 60 for smooth play), that's only a 5 or so FPS boost, which is useless. :(
User avatar
Shatterhand
Posts: 4099
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 3:01 am
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
Contact:

Post by Shatterhand »

Yeah, I know about Zinc and stuff. I wasnt interested in "playing" those games with fastmame, like I said, I was just curious to see if they would get any faster with it. I would probably run it just a couple of times, and then delete it :)

I use Zinc here too, and it runs most games nicely, I think some games run even faster than they should (Is Dead or Alive ++ really THAT fast? :D)

I Also know MAME is all about acuracy, not speed.


And I agree, Ubuntu is amazing. I was really surprised when I found out I could order CDs for free, and as many CDs as I wanted!
Image
User avatar
seattlexc
Posts: 314
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 4:02 pm
Location: Beautiful NW

Post by seattlexc »

I've got another n00b question about wolfmame ver. 106. Where do I put the roms to load the game? I was using wolfmame .99 and I could just drag the compressed file over the mame icon and it would load, but thats not working with ver. 106. I'm not sure if theres a folder I put the files in or what. Anyways, thanks for the help.
Image
RIP Seattle SuperSonics - 1967–2008
User avatar
Danny
Posts: 740
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:43 pm
Location: Owermongie, England

Post by Danny »

EDIT: Opps sorry my a bit of a mistake there!

Seattlexc I would just download WolfMAME Plus as it's got a GUI much like MAME32!
User avatar
seattlexc
Posts: 314
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 4:02 pm
Location: Beautiful NW

Post by seattlexc »

Danny wrote:EDIT: Opps sorry my a bit of a mistake there!

Seattlexc I would just download WolfMAME Plus as it's got a GUI much like MAME32!
Sorry, I didn't make my first post very clear :oops: . Heres a more detailed description of my situation and problem.

I am currently using WolfMame Plus Ver. 106. I'm having trouble playing roms on it because I don't know where to put them, or how to open them.

In Mame32 you put the compressed roms in the 'rom' folder, and then play them from mame. However I don't see a 'rom' folder in Wolfmame Plus, so I have no idea where to put the roms. Whenever I try to open a game I get a list of files that are "NOT FOUND'. So basically I'm just trying to find where the roms go, so wolfmame can find the roms.

I was using WolfMame Plus Ver. 99 earlier and with that I could drag the roms onto the Wolfmame icon and the game would start up. I tried doing that with ver. 106 but the screen just turns black for a couple of seconds and then it goes back to thes desktop.


You made a good point that Wolfmame plus has a very similar GUI as Mame32, which I like a lot. Now if I could only figure out how to use it. :?
Image
RIP Seattle SuperSonics - 1967–2008
User avatar
incognoscente
Posts: 927
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 11:33 pm
Location: Georgia, USA

Post by incognoscente »

Make a "roms" folder in the same folder as mame32ip106.exe and place your roms inside. If WolfMAME / mame32ip103 doesn't automatically scan for the roms, choose File > Audit all games.
User avatar
seattlexc
Posts: 314
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 4:02 pm
Location: Beautiful NW

Post by seattlexc »

Thanks a lot for the help Danny and incognoscente. Thanks to you guys I got Wolfmame Plus ver.99 up and running. Hopefully I'll finally be able to 1CC Donpachi with the help of save states.
Image
RIP Seattle SuperSonics - 1967–2008
destructor
Posts: 119
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:49 pm

Post by destructor »

If you have roms in some important place on HD and you don;t want to copy these roms to wolfmameplus106/roms then:
1. run wolfmame
2. in upper menu choose options and directories. Choose 'roms' directory and add new roms directory.
Post Reply