make rain from tbl work perfectly with winuae

[turrican3]

hi everybody,
i try to make rain from tbl running correctly with winuae !!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fi5ijtRlKGI

look at 3 min 14 on the video a picture appear, ist i can't see this picture !
2nd problem 3 min later i loose the music !

The man who can make it run perfectly win my considers, it's not a high prize but sadly i have nothing more to give

[NovaCoder]

Maybe you just have an early buggy version of the demo?

[turrican3]

I don't think so , i don't see an other version.

[Ironclaw]

Probably another wrong-settings problem. Some games/demos are sensitive and need special treatment.

[TCD]

@turrican3
Not much info you give there Which WB version do you use (Plain 3.1/3.5/3.9, ClassicWB etc.) and which config settings (CPU, RAM...)?

[zipper]

Using Amiga Forever 2008 with WinUAE v1.5.0 my Rain runs exactly like that Youtube one.
Same functionality with AmiKit + WinUAE v1.6.0.

[turrican3]

i zipper can you give me the config you used ? ?
thank you in advance.
the cyberdruid, i used so much config !!!!!
but always with winuae 1.6.1
ok i manage to make it run correctly with 1.5 but with 1.6.1 i can't !!
Zipper did you try with 1.6.1 ?
strangely, i think the jit make slowdown the video with 1.6.1, strange !

[zipper]

Originally Posted by turrican3

i zipper can you give me the config you used ? ?
... run correctly with 1.5 but with 1.6.1 i can't !!
Zipper did you try with 1.6.1 ?
strangely, i think the jit make slowdown the video with 1.6.1, strange !

No, must have a look.

[TCD]

Originally Posted by turrican3

strangely, i think the jit make slowdown the video with 1.6.1, strange !

Hmm, here with 1.6.1 and JIT is runs too fast (some overlays show random memory stuff, see here : http://www.pouet.net/topic.php?which=2212), but both the picture and the music are fine. Which config do you use in 1.5 then?

[zipper]

1.6.1 behaviour confirmed, crawls and stalls, tested via AmiKit. 1.6.2b1 works again.

[turrican3]

ok thank you,
i'll be waiting for winuae 1.6.2 then.

[turrican3]

the slowdown still with 1.6.2 beta 10.
is there somebody who knows what's the problem ?

[niobyte]

Have you tried running the demo without JIT (Just In Time) emulation.

Also try using the 68060 CPU option with FPU -> CPU Internal -> More compatible ticked.

You will find with JIT emulation since it is cached and pre-compiled the demo runs way too fast compared to its native speed on a real 68060.

I have honestly tried myself without using JIT it has major issues trying to emulate this demo. I have found that using 68030, 68040 or 68060 with the above configuration of 'more compatible' it ends up with a guru just after the rain intro.

I have found with the 68020 + FPU it completes the whole demo but the timing is completely gone and the parts take a long time to appear but eventually do way too late.

The demo completes in around 8 mins with the 68020 + FPU config without JIT and set to 'fastest possible but maintain chipset timing'. Mainly due to seeing a blank screen a long time between parts. It also missed the girl with rose picture (with JIT turned on it seems to show this picture). When each segment is seen at an acceptable frame-rate faster than what it is natively seen on a 68060 @ 50 MHz.

I had tested this with the latest version of WinUAE. It seems older versions of WinUAE seem to be able to run this demo a little better for some reason (runs faster in older versions, mainly due to emulation in-accuracy). Although, not much differs in reality.

You will find with the 68060 config without using JIT if you view that you will see that it runs a similar speed to how it is on a real 68060, well it is on mine. This will depend on how fast your CPU is. With the 68060 option it does not go past the intro unfortunately.

For JIT settings:
8MB cache | Constant Jump | FPU Support | No Flags | InDirect

You will find under JIT at least completes properly, but is just a lot faster (depending on how fast your CPU is) compared to how it runs on a 68060 @ 50 MHz. I have run this demo on my A1200 BPPC @ 210MHz with 68060 @ 50 MHz. The speed of it is pretty close to the YouTube video.

I guess the only chance of seeing this demo at the correct speed and a lot of other 68060 demo's. Is if cycle-exact emulation is done for a 68060 equipped Amiga. At the moment WinUAE only does cycle-exact emulation for the Amiga 500.

The versions I tested this on were: 1.4.6.0 & 1.6.1.0

Quite interesting that you were able to get it to work at a more accurate speed in 1.5.0

You can ignore this post if you want

I am just posting my findings.

[andreas]

Originally Posted by niobyte

At the moment WinUAE only does cycle-exact emulation for the Amiga 500.

I dare claim this to be untrue.
CE emulation, albeit very experimental and prone to cause random side-effects on 68020+ (especially in CPU timing; according to Toni), already DOES exist for higher-class m68k CPU types set in WinUAE.
There's just no guarantee that it works without any flaws; but chances are it does anyhow---if you're lucky

[pmc]

I agree with niobyte.

In my experience getting TBL's Rain to work with WinUAE is very difficult. I've tried many different settings, with and without JIT.

I've either had crashes, at worst, or, at best, the demo running too fast or too slow.

Only real solution I found was to watch it on a real A1200 with '060.

I would love there to eventually be a real (ie. not just experimental) cycle exact for 020 and above processors and the AGA chipset but I realise this is one hell of a lot of horrible intricate work.

[TCD]

Originally Posted by pmc

I would love there to eventually be a real (ie. not just experimental) cycle exact for 020 and above processors and the AGA chipset but I realise this is one hell of a lot of horrible intricate work.

There is Have a look here : http://eab.abime.net/showpost.php?p=621742&postcount=4 (oh and maybe read andreas post again )

[pmc]

@ TCD - yeah I know there's now been good steps made towards closer to 020 cycle exact but as per andreas's post (see, I did read it ) it's experimental only at the moment.

I'm talking a proper, full blown, spot on perfect cycle exact software representation of all the the higher spec processors up to 060 and the AGA chipset itself too. That's definitely not anywhere near done yet as far as I know.

Of course I'd be happy to be wrong on this.

[TCD]

Heh, maybe I should have read your post more carefully Does anyone tried Rain with cycle-exact and a custom CPU frequency? I might have a look later (although I have no 060 Miggy to compate it to).

[pmc]

@ TCD - nope, never tried that personally. I tend not to really use the beta versions of WinUAE so I'm waiting for the release of 2.0.0

Would be interesting to know whether the new timing enhancements have improved compatibility with this demo...

[Toni Wilen]

I 100% don't care about 68040+ demos that don't like too fast CPU or too fast chipset.

Only if someone finds and explains the 100% exact problem. No assumptions or maybes accepted. (and only if the problem is not "too fast CPU")

[amiga]

I tried it with latest Winuae beta, and it DOES work as intended !!!

My configuration is: plain workbench 3.1, 68020 + FPU (fastest possible, but maintain chipset timing, without CE) + JIT + 32 Meg Fast Ram + AGA (PAL)

[TCD]

Originally Posted by amiga

I tried it with latest Winuae beta, and it DOES work as intended !!!

You mean that you don't get the glitched graphics because the demo runs too fast :

?

[amiga]

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

You mean that you don't get the glitched graphics because the demo runs too fast :

?

Exactly !!
I don't get that corrupted graphics which is on the picture.

[TCD]

What are the specs of your PC then? With fastest possible and JIT I always get that glitch here.

[amiga]

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

What are the specs of your PC then? With fastest possible and JIT I always get that glitch here.

My specs are rather old:

PII 400MHz
Graphics card: Matrox Graphics Millennium G200 AGP

Also, I use Line Mode: Double in "Display" settings of Winuae, and NO filters.

[TCD]

Ah, that might explain it then Thanks for the info amiga.

[amiga]

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

Ah, that might explain it then Thanks for the info amiga.

Try without JIT !

[TCD]

I did and it's far too slow then

[andreas]

Well, maybe there's someone reading this having a dual or quad core to hand who could test it without JIT on his rocket-fast machine?

/me doesn't (still my ole AthlonXP - well it still works :P) so I would need to enable JIT too, though you guys are fully right - JIT *DOES* mess it up.

[niobyte]

I did perform these tests on an Intel Quad Q6600 with an NVidia GeForce 8800GT 512 MB + 4GB RAM Windows XP SP2 /3GB and /PAE switches enabled.

Problems are too fast CPU

[andreas]

OT alert...but that's a weird combination:
/3GB - increase virtual address space in kernel in order to cram more page tables in (NB: exclusively made for huge programs that can and will make use of this by enabling IMAGE_FILE_LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE flag only)

/PAE is (afaik) only for systems >= 4 GB physical RAM.

Using both switches at the same time does not make much sense whatsoever. Even people who, in terms of experience in servers, have an additional 15 years 'plus' in there (compared to mine) would state that as well. YMMV, though.
(As with all those WPUMs [Windows Power User Myths] there are )

[TCD]

Wonder why Russ disabled comments... Anyway, they don't really hurt either (even if they don't make much sense for most apps).
MS explanation of the two switches : http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system...AE/PAEmem.mspx

[pmc]

Aren't the problems with this demo running properly on WinUAE just down to a fundamental lack of accuracy in the emulation of > 68020 processors on the emulator...?

What I mean by this is: surely if you start from a base of inaccuracy, it doesn't matter what settings you use on the emulator, or on the machine running the emulator, you'll still get an inaccurate result. In this case a too fast / slow / out of sync demo.

If you get anything like an "it works OK here" result then this must just be mainly down to a luck I would've thought.

[TCD]

Originally Posted by pmc

If you get anything like an "it works OK here" result then this must just be mainly down to a luck I would've thought.

That's true. I wouldn't say that there's a lack of accuracy of the emulation, but a lack of the correct speed of the emulation matching a given processor/machine type. Maybe one day...

[niobyte]

@andreas

Who said anything about using the switches at the same time. I have multiple OS installs. In fact in one I just use /PAE -> then again by default with the DEP (Data Execution Prevention) enabled actually makes full use of the Physical Address Extension anyway .

The other OS install I use /3GB /userva=2750 <-Allocation made slighly less than 3GB due to the amount of VRAM on Graphics Card. I have MS SQL 2005 and other stuff installed.

Most apps don't even allocate the full 3GB as far as I am aware. MS SQL is one of the apps that actually makes full use of the /3GB switch (hence why I use it).

Yes, the post was a little unclear. It was a rather quick post. Maybe I should have been a bit more descriptive, lol.

The whole /3GB and /PAE switches argument. Well, with non 32-bit Windows Operating Systems (64-bit) there is no reason to even get into a debate, lol.

Even with Windows Enterprise Server 2003 32-bit. It will have PAE enabled when DEP is active. Allowing up to 64 GB RAM. At my work max I think we have used for Windows Server 2003 32-bit I think is 32 GB RAM. Servers with higher end use and 64GB+ are running on 64-bit RHEL and Solaris. With those just got to worry about having the right semaphore allocation sizes (well other stuff too -> Way Off Topic).

This is getting rather off topic now.

In regards to WinUAE with TBL - Rain.

I do remember quite a few years ago running it at a pretty good speed with JIT enabled on a Windows PC with an Intel Celeron clocked @ 500 MHz + 128 MB RAM.

It played from start to finish with no glitches. I don't recall what version of WinUAE it was though.

I think it was around the WinUAE 0825 mark (possibly a bit earlier).

Well, all I can say once again. Until 68060 Cycle Exact is done at a particular clock speed. Hmm, let's say 50 Mhz or there abouts. Until this happens the timing is always going to be different.

This isn't exactly on the list of priorities for Toni or even remotely near that.

If it's a problem get a real Amiga. In this case to run this demo a Apollo 1260, Blizzard 1260 or a Blizzard PPC 1200 603e/603e+ with a 68060 clocked @ 50 MHz or higher.

I have heard even an Amiga 4000 with a CyberStorm PPC with 68060 doesn't work. Maybe others here could confirm that. Keropi? anyone?

[andreas]

Who said anything about using the switches at the same time. I have multiple OS installs. In fact in one I just use /PAE -> then again by default with the DEP (Data Execution Prevention) enabled actually makes full use of the Physical Address Extension anyway

Agree!

Originally Posted by niobyte

Yes, the post was a little unclear. It was a rather quick post. Maybe I should have been a bit more descriptive, lol.

Definitely...

I did perform these tests on an Intel Quad Q6600 with an NVidia GeForce 8800GT 512 MB + 4GB RAM Windows XP SP2 /3GB and /PAE switches enabled.

This bit DID make me think of a combination of both which you were actually using; and at first I was like "Oh, not AGAIN..." OK, point taken, this is gonna lead too much OT...just one thing: apparently you're really one of the guys that know their stuff well and don't fall for too many myths set up by P0W3R us3r k1dz...already most comfortable in these times (lol)