Re: Gus, IIgs emulator...

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

spec@vax2.concordia.ca (Mitchell Spector) wrote:

>[Lurk mode off]
>
>In article supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer) writes...
>
>>Back when my 6x86 Windows PC was a PR200+ (it has since
>>been underclocked to PR166+ after I static shocked the
>>processor while installing a hard drive) I thought I would
>>try emulation because I heard it was so great and all.
>
>    Doubt it was a static shock, those IBM designed processors
>are notorious for cooking themselves to death, quite literally.

Well I wish I could blame it on IBM, Mitch, but I did it
all by myself.  ;-(

The computer worked fine clocked to PR200+ before
I installed the hard drive.  While installing the hard drive,
my hand brushed up against the processor's fan/heat sink.
I felt a ZAP.  SHIT, I thought, and sure enough the
computer would not boot.  I fiddled around with it for
a long time before discovering that my damaged unit
would work, but now only underclocked to PR166+.

>>So I spent a long time online looking for and downloading
>>XGS for the Windows PC.
>>
>>Well, I set it up and was pretty excited.  Using an 12.5Mhz
>>TransWarp GS is one thing, but here was a computer with
>>speed in excess of a Pentium 200!
>
>    An IBM/Cyrix PR200+ is not faster than a 200 MHz Intel
>Pentium CPU in the vast majority of cases (the same applies
>to a PR166+ as far as being faster than an Intel P166).
>
>    We argued this before and I explained why your claim was
>in error, but you refused to believe me--or anyone else for
>that matter.

I'm not saying it is faster in everything, but it IS faster
in many programs and, more importantly, the ones I
use.

>>I have never used such a slow IIGS before, real or
>>emulated.  Not only was it slower than my 12.5Mhz TWGS,
>>it was slower than the STOCK IIGS.  It was like trying
>>to run the IIGS set to the IIe (normal instead of fast)
>>speed.  There was also random glitches that locked up
>>the system all the time.
>
>    Ah ha! Now we have some solid proof your "PR200+" is
>not speedier than a Pentium 200. My system, running with
>a 166 MHz Pentium CPU (not even MMX) runs XGS not only
>up to par with a stock IIgs system, but slightly faster.
>The 'bootlog' file reports it running at 3.5 MHz, and I
>can tell it is running faster than my stock IIgs (even
>if just slightly) since I have a real IIgs sitting next
>to my Pentium to compare.
>
>    Now do you finally believe me when I say your system
>is not what you claim it to be?

After reading the above, I looked at my bootlog file.
It fluctuates all over the place from a low of 1Mhz to a
high of 3.5Mhz.  I'm sure if I ran the "CPU speed"
program on the IIGS, it would report a CPU speed
faster than 1Mhz, but that's beside the point.  When
XGS just sits idling, sure you get a higher Mhz rating.
But just try DOING something.  Hit the Ensoniq and
BOOM, emulated Mhz goes down.  Do some scrolling,
etc., ANYTHING.  Overall, even on a PR200+ (didn't
check the bootlog file back then, but I'm sure it was
had a faster emulated Mhz than 3.5Mhz), the system
DOES do things as slow as a real IIGS set to 'normal'
emulated IIe (1Mhz) speed.

>>I'm not complaining.  It is free software.  However, I have
>>not booted XGS for a long time.  ;-)  It is sort of like
>>UAE, that cross platform Amiga emulator for the
>>Windows PC.  You know what they jokingly called
>>UAE?  The "Unusable Amiga Emulator."  UAE has
>>improved, but XGS still needs A LOT of work.
>
>    Despite it running slightly faster than a stock IIgs
>on my currently system, you'll get no arguement from me
>that it is a terrible emulator. It is horribly slow, is
>crammed with bugs, has an awful interface and keyboard
>mapping, and probably only 50% complete. I'm waiting for

Glad we agree on something.  ;-)

>Bernie ][ the Rescue to get ported as a Win32 program
>(what an appropriate name for PC XGS users :) or that
>new "dApple" emulator which promises IIgs emulation.
>
>    I'll be playing with XGS and UAE again, though next
>time it'll be on a 450 MHz system. :-)

I'm eyeing the 400Mhz AMD K6 "3D" chip actually.  ;-)

The neat thing is that I can plug in this chip into my current
Windows PC motherboard.  If you stick with Intel, you
need to replace your motherboard to work with newer
Intels (such as Pentium IIs).