64bit and other things

[Marcuz]

tonite i almost crashed the pc while moving the whdload complete collection from a phisical HD to another in diropus in winuae; i had to stop the moving because the pc was no more usable: the oved files instead of being distructed would end in my windows trashcan as it supposed, but after more than 20 thousand files were there...

well so 3 things i wish for the future:

the ability to avoid the files go in the trashcan
a better multicore impementation, so that the other windows program could be run at the same time better,
a 64 bit executable.

probably the improvement for the last two wouldn't be so visible, i have no clue. but it would be nice to know that if they are implemented, any slowdown would be responsability of the pc.

as a side question: using warp mode on such a situation described, would risk of broking files in the copy?

[BippyM]

I second better multi-core support and a real 64bit version

[Ian]

By trash can do you mean windows side?

You can already disable that. "Don't use windows recycle bin" on the hard drive section.

I had this issue before, I disabled my virus scanner and it was much better.

Still fairly slow though as Vista isn't that great at transfering stuff from one drive to the other anyway.

[Marcuz]

Originally Posted by Ian

By trash can do you mean windows side?

You can already disable that. "Don't use windows recycle bin" on the hard drive section.

I had this issue before, I disabled my virus scanner and it was much better.

Still fairly slow though as Vista isn't that great at transfering stuff from one drive to the other anyway.

thank you! i missed that recycle bin thing! i remember it was talked about but i did forgot about it

sadly winuae is the only way to move the whdload stuff, as vista refuses to do it, simply quits the moving while doing it without notice. probably due to the non windows names? AND it leaves the directories in place.

[cosmicfrog]

lets hope toni keeps developing WinUAE if so sooner or later he`s gonna go 64bit aleast i hope so, my reason for this is that all new intel/amd processors are 64 bit, but now i actual come to think about it the os that lets you use 64bit apps so in that case when the critcal mas of users us a 64bit os then it more likely we get 64 bit WinUAE . make any sense ?

[Toni Wilen]

64-bit: pointless without 64-bit compatible JIT. (there is one in Basilisk II JIT but it will be really boring merging job..)

Note that I have nothing against 64-bit, I haven't used 32-bit Windows on my main development PC since Windows XP 64-bit was released.

Multicore: wouldn't really help OPs problem. And multicore + emulation is very incompatible. See my earlier replies. In theory it could be possible to run CPU emulation in separate thread but it would be really tricky..

as a side question: using warp mode on such a situation described, would risk of broking files in the copy?

No but it wouldn't help much either (if the problem is I/O limit, not CPU)

[Photon]

I think the clincher is that no 64-bit cpu exists that has speed problems emulating the classic platforms I got XP 64-bit for number crunching (rendering), which is like 3% faster for a 10-hour render. 64-bit really doesn't do anything extra at all, ever, for anyone but mathematicians and 3D artists. Well, it can make some of your existing hw like printer and scanner useless, since 64-bit has gotten a fat thumbs down from droves of hw manuf's.

You don't want 64-bit *Makes Jedi hand gesture*. True for 99.999% of all users.

[StevenJGore]

a better multicore impementation, so that the other windows program could be run at the same time better

If you're using Vista (not sure about XP) you can choose which core a program runs on. Obviously WinUAE would still be running on just one core, but you could choose a core that didn't cause other Windows applications to slow down quite as much.

-EDIT- Actually, isn't Vista supposed to have some kind of load-balancing between cores? The above might not work then, in that case.

Steve.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by Photon

I think the clincher is that no 64-bit cpu exists that has speed problems emulating the classic platforms I got XP 64-bit for number crunching (rendering), which is like 3% faster for a 10-hour render. 64-bit really doesn't do anything extra at all, ever, for anyone but mathematicians and 3D artists. Well, it can make some of your existing hw like printer and scanner useless, since 64-bit has gotten a fat thumbs down from droves of hw manuf's.

You don't want 64-bit *Makes Jedi hand gesture*. True for 99.999% of all users.

I don't think that's true.

MAMEUI64 is faster than MAMEUI32. It depends how "64bit" the code really is.

[Shoonay]

Originally Posted by StevenJGore

If you're using Vista (not sure about XP) you can choose which core a program runs on.

Lovely feature
In case of some games (Thief) you *HAVE TO* change it to 1 core. If not - it hangs.
I think same option's in a multi-core XP.

Originally Posted by StevenJGore

isn't Vista supposed to have some kind of load-balancing between cores?

Yes. Core selection works on Vista but in most cases is just not needed to do manually.
Unless it is required, like in the above (Thief) example.
On Vista x64 I can run for example mp3 encoding, a hdtv movie, a game and still watch movies on youtube with a browser at decent speed.

But when Vista came out one year ago it wasn't as much "multi process friendly" so I had to use this proggie called Processor Lasso to play StarCraft on decent speed, lol

Now, with SP1 and about 200 hotfixes it's stable and runs perfectly.

[cosmicfrog]

core selection works in xp , go to task manager, fined a process and then choose affinity
and you can choose which core gets to do the work.....