Pistorm32 showcase thread

[Kin Hell]

Originally Posted by Dunny

It might, but bear in mind that Pi3A uses brcm-sdhc.device for the uSD card and the Pi4 uses brcm-emmc.device which may slow you down.

Originally Posted by jeff b00toNic

Has anyone here played around with the FPSE emulator? I'm surprised by the speed of the thing.

As long as you don't try 3D games like Tomb Raider, it runs really well.
This means many 2D games are playable with a few limitations.
And games like Resident Evil 2 and 3 run surprisingly well.

The games I have tried and that run well: Alundra, CT Special Forces, NBA Jam, Raiden Project, RE2 and 3, Strikers 1945 I and II

All of this, of course, is with an RPi4.
I would be interested to know how much more performance an overclocked CM4 brings compared to a normally clocked 1.5GHz.

Originally Posted by Mr-Z

Did try FPSE on CM4 2.2Ghz with Gran Tourismo 3 and Rayman it performs better than expected but Gran Tourismo was too much.
Rayman is kinda playable though.


2.2 Ghz OC for pi4b/CM4 brings roughly 2500 MIPS in Sysinfo, it's more than a noticeable boost.

CM4 2GBLite_Wi-Fi combo: 2.5Ghz @ 2812 MIPS in SysInfo
Aproximatey 26Mb/Sec on branded media.

CM4 8GB_32GB_Wi-Fi combo: 1.5Ghz @ 1620 MIPS in SysInfo
Aproximatey 28.25Mb/Sec

[jeff b00toNic]

Yes, the MIPS numbers are higher, but what do these figures really say about performance, other than being larger?
I suspect that the difference in gaming performance is only marginal, but as long as no FPS data is provided in a game, it's all just speculation.
And Sysinfo's MIPS figures are anything but accurate.

Is there something we can test that measures FPS or something more meaningful than Sysinfo?

[Kin Hell]

Originally Posted by jeff b00toNic

Yes, the MIPS numbers are higher, but what do these figures really say about performance, other than being larger?
I suspect that the difference in gaming performance is only marginal, but as long as no FPS data is provided in a game, it's all just speculation.
And Sysinfo's MIPS figures are anything but accurate.

Is there something we can test that measures FPS or something more meaningful than Sysinfo?

Go and do something constructive on your Amiga...

Lightwave: - Imagine: - Real3D; - VistaPro & such....

The Render times are ridiculously small compared to an 060 @100Mhz and so much faster than PPC solutions that just might have PCI support....

*cough*

[Karlos]

Originally Posted by jeff b00toNic

Yes, the MIPS numbers are higher, but what do these figures really say about performance, other than being larger?
I suspect that the difference in gaming performance is only marginal, but as long as no FPS data is provided in a game, it's all just speculation.
And Sysinfo's MIPS figures are anything but accurate.

Is there something we can test that measures FPS or something more meaningful than Sysinfo?

Run AB3D2 at 50fps on AGA. Run a time demo in Quake. Do some 3D rendering. Any of these amply demonstrate the huge difference in performance.

[jeff b00toNic]

Originally Posted by Karlos

Run AB3D2 at 50fps on AGA. Run a time demo in Quake. Do some 3D rendering. Any of these amply demonstrate the huge difference in performance.

Thank you!
Here are the results of the Quake time demo measured with ClickBoomQuake on a PiStorm32 lite with RPi4 1.5GHz.

Quake Time Demo 1

AGA
320 x 200 / Processor C2P Routine = 46,10 FPS
640 x 400 / Processor C2P Routine = 12,56 FPS

RTG
320 x 200 8bit / Normal Copy Routine = 98,80 FPS
640 x 480 8bit / Normal Copy Routine = 33,35 FPS

Let's see what a CM4 at 2.2GHz can do.

[Angus]

Originally Posted by jeff b00toNic

Is there something we can test that measures FPS or something more meaningful than Sysinfo?

You could run drone demo in Tornado AGA with Paraj's fps indicator enabled.

[Mr-Z]

Originally Posted by jeff b00toNic

Thank you!
Here are the results of the Quake time demo measured with ClickBoomQuake on a PiStorm32 lite with RPi4 1.5GHz.

Quake Time Demo 1

AGA
320 x 200 / Processor C2P Routine = 46,10 FPS
640 x 400 / Processor C2P Routine = 12,56 FPS

RTG
320 x 200 8bit / Normal Copy Routine = 98,80 FPS
640 x 480 8bit / Normal Copy Routine = 33,35 FPS

Let's see what a CM4 at 2.2GHz can do.

Clickboom quake should hit somewhere around 140 fps on RTG 320x200 when running CM4/pi4b at 2.2Ghz.
With some Emu68 versions I got as high as 150 fps on 320x200 8bit.

[Kin Hell]

Not familiar with the Quake cfg files as such.

Where are the values "Processor C2P Routine" & "Normal Copy Routine" found/changed??

What do I need to do with what to get results as above please?

Run_Benchmark fails to find autoexec,cfg & sets Video core @ 640x380 15Bit PC 2173K Surface cache...

Result is 969 Frames 10.6 seconds 91.15fps

[jeff b00toNic]

Originally Posted by Kin Hell

Not familiar with the Quake cfg files as such.

Where are the values "Processor C2P Routine" & "Normal Copy Routine" found/changed??

What do I need to do with what to get results as above please?

Run_Benchmark fails to find autoexec,cfg & sets Video core @ 640x380 15Bit PC 2173K Surface cache...

Result is 969 Frames 10.6 seconds 91.15fps

All with ClickBoom's Quake not AmiQuake!
In the video options, set the desired resolution and copy routine.
Then open the console with '~' and enter 'timedemo demo1'.

[jeff b00toNic]

Originally Posted by Mr-Z

Clickboom quake should hit somewhere around 140 fps on RTG 320x200 when running CM4/pi4b at 2.2Ghz.
With some Emu68 versions I got as high as 150 fps on 320x200 8bit.

150 FPS is no longer marginal but rather significant. I would have thought the difference wouldn't be that large.

[Kin Hell]

Originally Posted by jeff b00toNic

All with ClickBoom's Quake not AmiQuake!
In the video options, set the desired resolution and copy routine.
Then open the console with '~' and enter 'timedemo demo1'.

Okies....

CM4 @ 2.5Ghz - No overclock on the Gfx

Run ClickBoom Quake & changed gfx in game....

AGA
320 x 200 / Processor C2P Routine = 55.33 FPS
640 x 400 / Processor C2P Routine = 14.59 FPS

RTG
320 x 200 8bit / Normal Copy Routine = 149.54 FPS
640 x 480 8bit / Normal Copy Routine = 56.55 FPS

RTG
320 x 200 8bit / MC68040/60 Copy Routine = 150.67 FPS
640 x 480 8bit / MC68040/60 Copy Routine = 56.95 FPS
640 x 400 8bit / MC68040/60 Copy Routine = 66.62 FPS

[jeff b00toNic]

Great, now we're getting some real numbers, thank you!

[Karlos]

Originally Posted by jeff b00toNic

150 FPS is no longer marginal but rather significant. I would have thought the difference wouldn't be that large.

Why? PiStorm has two major advantages. Firstly, the emulated CPU performance but secondly the available write bandwidth for RTG. For AGA modes both the PiStorm and fast 060 are both bottlenecked by writing to chip ram.

[jeff b00toNic]

Originally Posted by Karlos

Why? PiStorm has two major advantages. Firstly, the emulated CPU performance but secondly the available write bandwidth for RTG. For AGA modes both the PiStorm and fast 060 are both bottlenecked by writing to chip ram.

We're talking about the difference between an RPi4 at 1.5GHz and a CM4 at 2.2GHz...

[Karlos]

Originally Posted by jeff b00toNic

We're talking about the difference between an RPi4 at 1.5GHz and a CM4 at 2.2GHz...

Ah, missing context.