Cliche slow emulation

[nosisab Ken Keleh]

OP, although is understandable the user not understanding the differences between running native code and emulating a hardware (or even software), your reply sounded bad because you acted as know that difference, what clearly don't.

Emulating a different computer hardware goes beyond simply translating totally different instruction set (what is by itself demanding around that three times mentioned by refraction). The emulation is a lot easier when the emulated machine is equal or at least resembles the emulating one and that is not PS2 case at all.

Don't be fooled by the apparent weakness of EE (the PS2 CPU), PS2 hardware is far more complex than just it. Where in your common PC the bulk of processing is divided by the CPU and GPU, PS2 uses a different approach including yet two more hardware pieces called VU (for Vector unities).

x86/amd64 based CPUs all have one or few more embedded vector unities you can call float point unities but the bulk of them goes under the GPU. This approach allows for PC games pushing on the GPU almost all graphical processing, as it must be while the CPU is responsible by the general logic flow.

PS2 works differently in that the VUs are not exactly part of it's CPU as aren't part of GS (PS2 graphical engine). The VUs sit midway serving both, making too hard to define and decide which should be using it, EE or GS. What is meant is there is no clear definition about what is general processing task and graphical treatment task, the consequence is the bulk of work goes to the emulating machine CPU.

That's the reason for people saying is nonsense comparing native code with emulation and that's right. Not only because the sheer power necessary for the emulating machine over the emulated machine's power but the performance is affected by the actual emulated machine software (I mean the games here) which can be nicely behaving, making easier to implement optimizations and shortcuts as might be a misbehaving bit** making those optimizations more a hindrance than help.

Better stopping pointing the differences here but you can believe there are many more, all contributing to making direct comparison near uterly nonsense.

So, better is saying in all your posts you told us about the youtube tutorials and things you did, all questionable. which should be reserved as despair resources when everything else failed. At this point reinstalling the emulator might not be enough if you don't grant the complete removal of the ini files. Is highly advisable you start the emulator from scratch and let it to reconstruct the config files completely.

Once that's done, try the speedhacks, VU cycle stealing and EE cycle rate are your best bet to achieve some performance gain... keep away from dabbling with those other parameters till absolutely necessary (despair case).

[Mythfury]

I see. when smething like that happens, reverting the settings back to default is a better idea than reinstalling (or just delete the .ini files)
we recommend quad core above 3.0 ghz for most games.
FFX is an exception and may run @ playable speeds (not full speed all the time, though) on low-end machines
I'm not sure i got what you mean ... what are those 5 Mhz you're talking about ?

Those are my CPUs processing rates. 2.79 MHz x 2. I know, you dont add them up, but I can essentially push a MAX of 5-6 MHz, if they are being used in the most effiecient way. Amd CPU's, that ive seen, are up to 3.5 GHz. GHz in comparison of my MHz would probably speed up the emulation.

Thank you guys for your input! Ill be around for a bit, if you have any more advice.
So far I know that upgrading my CPUs will be the next thing to do, because mine, while not horrible, is still lacking. I can mess with the settings like I do, but that would make sense if I even had a CPU that can handle the emulation. Thank you guys again!

[Mythfury]

OP, although is understandable the user not understanding the differences between running native code and emulating a hardware (or even software), your reply sounded bad because you acted as know that difference, what clearly don't.

Emulating a different computer hardware goes beyond simply translating totally different instruction set (what is by itself demanding around that three times mentioned by refraction). The emulation is a lot easier when the emulated machine is equal or at least resembles the emulating one and that is not PS2 case at all.

Don't be fooled by the apparent weakness of EE (the PS2 CPU), PS2 hardware is far more complex than just it. Where in your common PC the bulk of processing is divided by the CPU and GPU, PS2 uses a different approach including yet two more hardware pieces called VU (for Vector unities).

x86/amd64 based CPUs all have one or few more embedded vector unities you can call float point unities but the bulk of them goes under the GPU. This approach allows for PC games pushing on the GPU almost all graphical processing, as it must be while the CPU is responsible by the general logic flow.

PS2 works differently in that the VUs are not exactly part of it's CPU as aren't part of GS (PS2 graphical engine). The VUs sit midway serving both, making too hard to define and decide which should be using it, EE or GS. What is meant is there is no clear definition about what is general processing task and graphical treatment task, the consequence is the bulk of work goes to the emulating machine CPU.

That's the reason for people saying is nonsense comparing native code with emulation and that's right. Not only because the sheer power necessary for the emulating machine over the emulated machine's power but the performance is affected by the actual emulated machine software (I mean the games here) which can be nicely behaving, making easier to implement optimizations and shortcuts as might be a misbehaving bit** making those optimizations more a hindrance than help.

Better stopping pointing the differences here but you can believe there are many more, all contributing to making direct comparison near uterly nonsense.

So, better is saying in all your posts you told us about the youtube tutorials and things you did, all questionable. which should be reserved as despair resources when everything else failed. At this point reinstalling the emulator might not be enough if you don't grant the complete removal of the ini files. Is highly advisable you start the emulator from scratch and let it to reconstruct the config files completely.

Once that's done, try the speedhacks, VU cycle stealing and EE cycle rate are your best bet to achieve some performance gain... keep away from dabbling with those other parameters till absolutely necessary (despair case).

Okay, that link given under the OP. I read through it, and adjusted it, Only for everything to fail. I then reinstalled it because of that. I dont feel that setting the emulator back to default would help performance, but maybe make the emulator itself work again, instead of crashing at fast boot.

Secondly, I know how programs work, and know the difference between hardware and software.

I dont claim to know anything about emulation, though. See the questions? Are those low clock rates? Why would an emulator run slower on one game than another?
I have played through Dark Cloud 1 and 2, FFX and FFX-2, and KH1 and KH2, only referring to youtube and the forums, never posting, or following 100%, because they dont have the same specs as me, but I like the concept "if its nit broke, dont fix it" It's not until now, when I want to play games like Shadow of the Colossus or Blood Omen or Gran Turismo, will I NEED the performance, and decided to ask some questions.

Basic questions with basic answers I could guess and

I only download the binary, so uninstall is easy. And reinstall is as easy as copying and pasting my memory card and PS2 bios and dump.

It all looks high definition, just slow, when everything else I run is HD and fast.
Comparison of GPU to CPU(Age of Conan)

The only thing that would be nonsense, is where your folder is on your file system, and whether you change the name of your ROM to something else.

What you are saying is that the computer doesnt run like a computer because of the PS2's hardware difference? Duh! Thats the point of the emulator. See, I was asking why it was a cliche slow emulation. What you described was a vague description on the differences of standalone and console and how the emulator works, which while informative and slightly condescending, didnt answer any thing.

[tsunami2311]

Okay, that link given under the OP. I read through it, and adjusted it, Only for everything to fail. I then reinstalled it because of that. I dont feel that setting the emulator back to default would help performance, but maybe make the emulator itself work again, instead of crashing at fast boot.

Secondly, I know how programs work, and know the difference between hardware and software.

I dont claim to know anything about emulation, though. See the questions? Are those low clock rates? Why would an emulator run slower on one game than another?
I have played through Dark Cloud 1 and 2, FFX and FFX-2, and KH1 and KH2, only referring to youtube and the forums, never posting, or following 100%, because they dont have the same specs as me, but I like the concept "if its nit broke, dont fix it" It's not until now, when I want to play games like Shadow of the Colossus or Blood Omen or Gran Turismo, will I NEED the performance, and decided to ask some questions.

Basic questions with basic answers I could guess and

I only download the binary, so uninstall is easy. And reinstall is as easy as copying and pasting my memory card and PS2 bios and dump.

It all looks high definition, just slow, when everything else I run is HD and fast.
Comparison of GPU to CPU(Age of Conan)

The only thing that would be nonsense, is where your folder is on your file system, and whether you change the name of your ROM to something else.

What you are saying is that the computer doesnt run like a computer because of the PS2's hardware difference? Duh! Thats the point of the emulator. See, I was asking why it was a cliche slow emulation. What you described was a vague description on the differences of standalone and console and how the emulator works, which while informative and slightly condescending, didnt answer any thing.

You can not compared Native PC games to Emulations Emulations usual need on the order of 3x the power of Native PC game to run full speed some times alot more.

AMD are not good for PCSX2 emulations either there Per core performance is well bellow that of intel chips that run at slow speeds.

To many people come here comparing PC native to Emulation saying my pc runs PC games just fine but emulations is slow, (and tell them to fix there emulator) To many people are to lazy to read sticky to many people refuse to except that the PC is no good enough to run things full speed.

No ps2 game is the same some are very heavy on the CPU other are heavy on GPU, some are Lite and so on. For the SAME reason some PC games run better then other.

We get tired of say this stuff over and over again, cause PEOPLE refuse to read sticky

[hellbringer616]

Okay, that link given under the OP. I read through it, and adjusted it, Only for everything to fail. I then reinstalled it because of that. I dont feel that setting the emulator back to default would help performance, but maybe make the emulator itself work again, instead of crashing at fast boot.

Secondly, I know how programs work, and know the difference between hardware and software.

I dont claim to know anything about emulation, though. See the questions? Are those low clock rates? Why would an emulator run slower on one game than another?
I have played through Dark Cloud 1 and 2, FFX and FFX-2, and KH1 and KH2, only referring to youtube and the forums, never posting, or following 100%, because they dont have the same specs as me, but I like the concept "if its nit broke, dont fix it" It's not until now, when I want to play games like Shadow of the Colossus or Blood Omen or Gran Turismo, will I NEED the performance, and decided to ask some questions.

Basic questions with basic answers I could guess and

I only download the binary, so uninstall is easy. And reinstall is as easy as copying and pasting my memory card and PS2 bios and dump.

It all looks high definition, just slow, when everything else I run is HD and fast.
Comparison of GPU to CPU(Age of Conan)

The only thing that would be nonsense, is where your folder is on your file system, and whether you change the name of your ROM to something else.

What you are saying is that the computer doesnt run like a computer because of the PS2's hardware difference? Duh! Thats the point of the emulator. See, I was asking why it was a cliche slow emulation. What you described was a vague description on the differences of standalone and console and how the emulator works, which while informative and slightly condescending, didnt answer any thing.

Okay, I'll try and sum this up but i am terrible at translating geek speak (my native language of course )

Okay, So on a computer you run a game written for the x86 architecture (think of it like a guideline all Windows PC parts have to follow) While a PS2 runs games written for the PS2 architecture, Which is crazy different from a PC.

For simplicity, we'll say the PC speaks English, and the PS2 is a group of people that speak other languages. (as explained above the PS2 has the EE, which is the CPU, the GS, which is kinda like a GPU, and the VU's, plus the SPU. lots of stuff)

Now, obviously the PC has to think before it acts and translate his english to say the EE's german, while simultaneously translating other information to say French, Spanish, and russian. Now if you tried to do that, You're head would spin. And so does the CPU, it takes time but it spits it all out.
Think of it like a conversation really, you have to keep the flow going otherwise it grinds to a halt.

Which with a PC game, it's just speaking english the whole time, So everything is nice and snappy.

Take my sig rig for example, It can play Skyrim on maximum settings with so many texture mods that you'll be thinking you're watching a CGI movie. But try emulating ZoE2 or SotC? and my PC can barely do it at full speed.

And thats because you're running on code that needs to be translated into multiple languages at the same time otherwise the conversation will slow down and or stop (crash)

Now hats of to the dev team as they have found creative ways to bring the requirements down from a dual core at 6ghz (which i guess is perfect PS2 accuracy) to tri and quad cores running at 3ghz.

So what you're experiencing isn't a bug, it isn't bad coding on the devs part, It's just your hardware isn't up to the task of being a PS2.

Also you don't add the CPU cores clock speed together, because most apps only use 1 or 2 cores, because getting more than that requires you to use more cores just to keep the syncing of the other cores together. Long complicated stuff that unless you are a die hard computer guy you won't care about.

But you have 2.7ghz, thats it.

As for getting FFx playable, EE cycle rate to 3, think you can even do VU cycle stealing to 1, and all speed hacks other than MTVU enabled, skipdraw 1 to take care of the pesky blurring, and away you go!

[rama]

Let's just say that everyone is lucky we even got it as fast as it is now.
We've already implemented a ton of shortcuts, tweaks and workarounds just to make it a little
easier to emulate.
At the end of the day you want an Intel CPU for PCSX2.