Page 2 of 6
Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2004 1:59 am
by Tech Knight
MAME 0.81 (Win32 console, unoptimized)
System
CPU: P4-2.8 (HT & 800FSB) @ 3.07GHz
RAM: 1GB PC3200
Video: GF4Ti4200 128MB @ 1152x864x32
OS: Windows XP SP1
Benchmarks
Pacman [pacman]: 907.181355
Malzak [malzak]: 1035.516386
Double Dragon [ddragon]: 190.398614
Twinbee Yahhoo! [tbyahhoo]: 235.328907
STUN Runner [stunrun]: 115.404764
Mr. Driller [mrdrillr]: 56.136052
Tekken [tekken]: 78.533941
Cotton 2 [cotton2]: 31.090798
Space Invaders [invaders]: 1256.776872
Beastorizer [beastrzr]: 60.220191
not my machine (yet) but for ref
Posted: Tue Dec 14, 2004 12:41 pm
by Chad
OS: windows xp sp2
MOBO: a78nx deluxe
RAM: Corsair Twin 3200 XL (2-2-2-5)
CPU: AMD 3200+ (overclocked a bit)
Graphics: ATI 9800 pro 256
Drives: Dual Raptor 74Gb
mame: mame89
pacman: 1091.9
malzak: 968.8
ddragon: 219.1
tbyahoo: 263.7
stunrun: 132.8
mrdrillr: 37.3
tekken: 72.6
cotton2: 23.7
invaders: 1683.7
puzzloop: 132.9
please could others try the benchs for mame89? see first page of this thread. I'm particularly interested in a P4 comparison.
Posted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 6:24 pm
by Chad
bump. am really interested in someone testing mame89 with this script, no matter what your specs are. you can benchmark everything at once with one batch file (still have to weed through the mame results to see the fps line) but you can run it and walk away and it'll be done in 10 minutes or so to cut and paste the results back here. please try, anyone? thanks.
Posted: Thu Dec 16, 2004 6:58 pm
by mahlemiut
MAME 0.89 standard build, no optimisations.
AMD AthlonXP 3000+
1024MB DDR400 RAM
128MB GeForceFX 5200
Windows XP Pro SP2
Pacman: 613.86fps
Malzak: 426.61fps
Double Dragon: 201.96fps
Twinbee Yahhoo! (Konami GX): 214.99fps
STUN Runner: 122.01fps
Mr Driller (Namco System 12): 35.08fps
Tekken (Namco System 11): 66.36fps
Cotton 2 (Sega ST-V): 22.53fps
Space Invaders: 653.15fps
Puzz Loop (Kaneko SuperNova): 118.04fps
Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2004 4:13 am
by DRN
Chad, I'll run one tonight when I get home from work.
Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2004 11:37 am
by Chad
cool thanks drn, just the man i wanted to see post, but still interested in someone who hasn't tried it to try the benchall.bat out too. i wonder if you had two sticks of memory if that would actually use the full 800fsb, i.e. 400x2.
Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2004 2:37 pm
by DRN
Hmmm, I'm not sure. Anyway here you go.
OS: Windows 2000
CPU: Pentium 4 3.2ghz 800fsb - not overclocked for the benchmark
Memory: 512MB DDR PC3200
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce4 MX 440 64Mb
Mame: MAME 0.89 Standard
pacman: 865.92
malzak: 691.62
ddragon: 149.62
tbyahhoo: 198.68
stunrun: 92.28
mrdrillr: 40.20
tekken: 62.13
cotton2: 15.17
invaders: 1085.81
puzzloop: 100.69
Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2004 2:53 pm
by Chad
very curious, even though i've always thought a better cpu would make mame perform better, now i'm wondering if it's NOT the cpu that's making the 3200 outperform the p4 system, i think the 3200 guy overclocked it not more than 100mhz more. The hyper memory and the ati card might have something to do with it but will never know untill someone with a P4, ati, and hyper memory can try (which might be me as a guinea pig, since that's want i'm thinking on getting.) wanted to just take a step away from amd and nvidia for a while. thanks for the run.
EDIT* oh hey, the P4 got a better mrdriller fps, that's good!
Posted: Fri Dec 17, 2004 6:37 pm
by mahlemiut
Chad wrote:EDIT* oh hey, the P4 got a better mrdriller fps, that's good!
Which should be normal. Something to do with a lot of floating point code, which Pentium CPUs perform better at. Why Tekken isn't the same is rather odd though...
There'd probably be a bigger gap on ZN games too.
Re: Benchmarks
Posted: Sun Dec 19, 2004 11:08 am
by eyp
mahlemiut wrote:Thought that it might be interesting to compare benchmarks. Using the attached batch file will help too. (Change the -rompath parameter to match the location of your ROMs first, if needed)
Where is the batch file needed to do the benchmarks?
Posted: Sun Dec 19, 2004 1:08 pm
by Chad
oops i thought i uploaded the super batch script, here it is again (with the mini batch script in the zip to that it needs.)
Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2004 12:08 pm
by LordGaz
Benchmarks using Chad's benchall.bat script.
Toshiba Centrino Laptop
OS: Windows XP Pro
CPU: Intel Pentium-M 2Ghz 2Mb L2 cache
Graphics: GeForce FX Go5200 64Mb
Sound: SoundMAX Integrated
Memory: 512Mb
Code: Select all
Game mamep4.exe mamepp.exe mame.exe
________________________________________________________________
pacman 2142.41 2056.86 1794.08
malzak 1331.56 1359.24 1191.85
ddragon 280.33 271.19 259.54
tbyahhoo 362.31 347.12 326.62
stunrun 169.05 167.46 153.75
mrdrillr 61.12 58.64 53.06
tekken 95.42 93.44 87.16
cotton2 30.48 31.50 27.97
invaders 2775.61 2765.49 2584.35
suplup 76.04 75.81 68.18
Figures are average fps over 5000 frames, run in 1024x768x32 resolution.
mamepp.exe and mame.exe were downloaded from mame.net, mamep4 was from another site. I tried some games with an Athlon optimized mame as well and got similar figures to mamepp.exe, weird.
Chad how do you do that nice table? (*done)
Gaz
Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2004 3:07 pm
by Chad
cool, thanks gaz, damn that's fast for a 2Ghz, the video card, l2 cache p4's normally have 1mg, or something else must be playing a part in the speed. The nice table is in automatically from the new board modifications. It seems a bit high in real estate and it happens for every attached file now. unless you are talking about my benchmark table that is made using the "Code" feature of this board while posting. It justifies each character like a real text screen.
Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2004 7:39 pm
by mahlemiut
Pentium-M CPUs are faster per clock cycle, like Athlons are. So it's probably somewhere around the level of a 3GHz P4.
Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2004 8:04 pm
by Chad
doesn't seem to make sense that it's SO much faster, if you compare drns numbers 3.2 p4 PALES in comparison to the 2.0 M. sure sold me on a laptop anyway.