VisualBoyAdvance-M

Hi there!

 

I just wrote a new graphic output using Direct3D 9, but this one is highly optimized for speed and uses pure 2D pixel transfer to back buffer instead of a more complicated render-to-texture. If you have an old computer with some Matrox graphics card or other older 32MB thingies or the like, please test this build (select Direct3D) and tell me if it works better or the same as the Direct3D output form the other builds.

 

http://vba-m.com/vbam/vbaotherbuilds/VisualBoyAdvance_SVN528+SimpleD3D.zip

 

Info:

• 16 bit (back buffer, desktop colors do not have to be changed)

• 32 bit

• full screen

• pixel filters

• double buffering

• triple buffering

• vsync

• aspect ratio scaling

• scale to full window client size

 

If it appears to be of use to users of older machines, than I'll expand it and add it to the SVN, if not, I'll just throw it away.

Maybe I could just add it as an option to the current renderer.

 

 

(The source file is attached if anyone is interested.)

Doesn't help my old PC(Pentium 3 933 mhz, 192 megs of PC100 RAM, GeForce FX 5200, XP home SP2) a bit, sadly.

 

Oddly enough, using an old build with directdraw still in doesn't help either. I must be limited by the CPU...

This version can't use all filter. :ashamed:

That is to be expected. Remember this renderer is still WIP.

Doesn't help my old PC(Pentium 3 933 mhz, 192 megs of PC100 RAM, GeForce FX 5200, XP home SP2) a bit, sadly.

 

Oddly enough, using an old build with directdraw still in doesn't help either. I must be limited by the CPU...

 

 

Hm, a GeForce FX 5200 isn't really that limited.

He said CPU, not GPU spacy.

 

That PC would FLY if it had Windows 98 SE on it.

 

The problem with these old PCs running slow is that Windows XP does not mix well with them...the PC (proccessor mainly and RAM) can barely run the operating system, adding the emulator on top of that is pure murder to performance.

He said CPU, not GPU spacy.

 

That PC would FLY if it had Windows 98 SE on it.

 

The problem with these old PCs running slow is that Windows XP does not mix well with them...the PC (proccessor mainly and RAM) can barely run the operating system, adding the emulator on top of that is pure murder to performance.

 

It's actually faster in every way than when it had ME on it, though that's probably due to the fucked up HD the ME install was on...

I said Windows 98 SE...Windows ME is a whole other horror.

I said Windows 98 SE...Windows ME is a whole other horror.

 

I was under the impression it wasn't slower unless the memory leaks started.

I currently also doubt that older machines with older gfx cards and older OS have DirectX9 drivers...