Poll: Keep or Drop legacy SuperVU
This poll is closed.
Keep it.
28.26%
13 28.26%
Drop it.
71.74%
33 71.74%
Total 46 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Keep or drop superVU
#1
Personally no opinion but it could reduce a bit PCSX2 complexity.

Pros:
* remove 12K line of code (of non portable i386 arch)
* reduce testing/configuration

Cons:
* a couple of games (maybe 1 actually?) don't work with micro VU
* urban legend say svu is faster but MTVU is much faster anyway
Reply

Sponsored links

#2
You guys were speaking of this in IRC the other day.

I vote remove. I think there are like 2-3 games that are faster with it, but removing 12k lines of complexity from the code far outweighs that IMO.

If you remove it, don't forget to remove the manual gamefixes that only apply for SVU(of which there is at least 1 that I know of!)
[Image: vwah44]
Gaming: Intel i7 3770k @ 4.2Ghz | R9 290 | 16GB RAM | 480GB(240GB+240GB RAID0) SSD | 3 TB HDD | 1 TB HDD | 500GB HDD
Server: AMD FX 6300 @ 4.4Ghz | GTX 670 | 16GB RAM | 240GB SSD | 320GB HDD
PCSX2 General Troubleshooting FAQ
Reply
#3
Yes. Rama suggests the poll. It was a good idea, so I decide to open it Smile

For speed, it would be better to use AVX/FMA than to rely on a less accurate version of VU. Well honestly I'm not sure that AVX will increase mvu speed. VU are 4*32 bits so technically SSE it enough. However VUs do FMA so it might help here.
Reply
#4
(07-20-2014, 04:04 PM)gregory Wrote: Yes. Rama suggests the poll. It was a good idea, so I decide to open it Smile

For speed, it would be better to use AVX/FMA than to rely on a less accurate version of VU. Well honestly I'm not sure that AVX will increase mvu speed. VU are 4*32 bits so technically SSE it enough. However VUs do FMA so it might help here.

I am for keeping it if removing it will decrease compatibility in any way.
Reply
#5
the con is only that 1(?) game that relies on it. leave the code files in but excude it from building. i'm sure there's a way save patching macroing define it out to be still able to include for custom builds for people that want it. fair balance between your maintenance and user preference. imho Smile
Reply
#6
Honestly I don't know which games that rely on superVU. Dunno if there is a list somewhere.
Reply
#7
I say remove all of it. Compatibility with one game isn't worth it to keep it in. If someone cares enough then they can track down the bug with older builds that do include sVU.
Main Rig: i5 4670k, 16GB RAM, Nvidia 770 GTX, Windows 8.1/Arch
Main Laptop: Toshiba Kirabook. i5 4200U, 8 GB RAM, windows 8.1/Arch
Reply
#8
It's much more than 1 game. Search the contents of the public compatibility list (with the old method, not google) for the term "SuperVU" in the entire post, there's about 20 games which don't run right (or at all) with MicroVU and work much better on SuperVU.


I'd say keep it for now, until the problems are solved on microvu.
[Image: ref_sig_anim.gif]
Like our Facebook Page and visit our Facebook Group!
Reply
#9
(07-20-2014, 06:44 PM)refraction Wrote: It's much more than 1 game. Search the contents of the public compatibility list (with the old method, not google) for the term "SuperVU" in the entire post, there's about 20 games which don't run right (or at all) with MicroVU and work much better on SuperVU.

Sounds like it should be kept unless something can be done to get those games working on MicroVU. However many lines of code shouldn't be worth a step backwards in compatibility.
Reply
#10
Ah handy. Interesting figure. We should really put this list on some Wiki. So yes it seems to soon to drop superVU.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)