Number of Cores vs. GHz
#11
Hmm....so does a quad core mean "a massive waste of money and electricity" if not doing video editing??
Reply

Sponsored links

#12
Pretty much.

Or you can run SETI@home 24 hrs a day on 2 cores in the background, and donate half of your awesome CPU to some stupid cause. Probably won't even notice any speed drops in PCSX2 and only very minor speed drops in other games. Wink
Jake Stine (Air) - Programmer - PCSX2 Dev Team
Reply
#13
(09-16-2009, 01:38 PM)rama Wrote: I wish they'd put their resources ore into improving single threaded performance..
they actualy planned to do it, they even said ( long ago ) that by now we should have 8ghz processors, but we got hit by a technological barier, we simply cant get more raw power from materials we are using now, so they are trying to get that power with detours like more cores.
Check my profile for hardware/software and games i played on PCSX2.
Reply
#14
In software render mode
4core better than 2 core
i using Q9450@ 3.7Ghz , it is 100% full load when i using software render
[email protected]
4GB DDR2@1000Ghz CL5
Reply
#15
(09-16-2009, 02:30 PM)saya1314520 Wrote: In software render mode
4core better than 2 core
i using Q9450@ 3.7Ghz , it is 100% full load when i using software render

Yes, because the graphics plugin can eat all the cores and CPU time you can throw at it.

This isn't indicative that the rest of the emulator can be considered in the same way. There are massive synchronization issues if you start trying to part out different subsection of the PS2 to different cores. When using the software renderer, the main emulator code is still using just 1 core; GSDX sucks up the rest.
"This thread should be closed immediately, it causes parallel imagination and multiprocess hallucination" --ardhi
Reply
#16
of course throwing pcsx2 on core 2&3 (the last two cores) ould actually be productive, since they hit the cpu load the least. so there would be less running with pcsx2 on them (processor affinity)

at least in theory.. I don't have a quad core, but I do want one
Reply
#17
Saiki:
Not so much, no. Windows will be clever enough to put any incoming task on the core with the least load.
Except of course if you have a hyper threading cpu, and the OS screws up and puts task 1 and 2 on the same physical core.
Yay for intel and them giving us even more headache. I mean cores. Virtual cores. Sigh Tongue2
Reply
#18
windows? clever? since when? well, 7 I guess.. Vista lags on the net like nobody's business, 7 preforms 100% better lol

and windows typically uses core 1 the most, regardless on how hit the cpu is. core 2 on my pc uses less resources by about 25% I can only imagine the same with a quad. where core 4 would have little of nothing on it
Reply
#19
No way ! PCSX2 can use any number of cpu cores with GSDX software mode !
And more cores = better rendering speed ! Core i7 or i9 is ideal for PS2 emulation, because GSDX software mode emulates all postprocessing effects, which is unavailable in GSDX hardware mode.
Example - I tested many games on Core i7 with 6 or 7 threads in software mode and it plays just like real PS2 !
Excl The man will die, but not his ideas Excl
Reply
#20
... right, at native resolution, which a lot of users of the emu consider "native res plus full post processing effects" support less desirable than HW-accelerated results. Furthermore, the real speed benefit of an i7 using 6 software threads is only like 15% over a C2Quad using 2 software threads. Yay?
Jake Stine (Air) - Programmer - PCSX2 Dev Team
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)