>by shoggoth on 2009/1/23 3:51:30
>>by amigaksi on 2009/1/22 12:25:08
>>That's a false statement. Claiming that cycle-accurate should mean 1/7.16Mhz timing accuracy on OCS Amiga is false right?
>No, cycle accuracy at 1/7.Mhz granularity is perfectly possible without using timers. Get those timers out of your head.
This is where we differ and you also differ from others who also claim you need higher precision timers than just a 60Hz WM_TIMER message. I won't be getting timers out of my head since my work is mostly timing stuff. I time stuff through the I/O ports in interfacing between Ataris/Amigas/PCs. Here your WM_TIMER bullcrap won't cut it nor your updating frames at 60Hz be enough. But I am trying to give you cases where this I/O is not involved since everyone knows that's not emulated.
>... based on facts about hardware - but not based on how emulators actually work. You've *assumed* that they work in a certain way using timers - which they generally don't (because it would be completely retarded to do it that way).
Again that's your flawed idea. You can make the emulators cycle-exact if you had an interrupt of 1/7.16Mhz accuracy and did everything cycle at a time instead of frame at a time which is only makes it "visually" appear the same except for the VBI not being in sync with WM_TIMER difference.
>>Regardless, of how fast your CPU is, it won't make your beep speaker (1-bit resolution) do 4-channel 16-bit 44Khz audio.
>Now you're just being silly. Of course you need a soundcard to get proper sound. That wasn't the point - we were discussing emulation accuracy.
Emulation-- to equal or excel in my dictionary. That means you have to equal or excel in every catagory including audio (DAC output/music/dynamic effects/etc.), video (color depth/sprites/blitter/etc.), timing, reading joystick ports (for games), etc.
>>Regardless if your CPU is Pentium IV at 4Ghz, it won't improve your timers. And you can't time things equally or better with 1.19Mhz timer vs. a 3.57Mhz timer-- just seems to be violating some laws.
>Drop timers. You don't use timers to achieve accurate emulation. That's *in* your *head*. You've chosen to compare this aspect of computers because it suits your ideas, obviously.
If your defintion of emulation means "an ATTEMPT" to mimic the target machine, yeah you can drop timers. Otherwise, you should drop your ideas that you only need CPU speed to emulate any machine.
>LOL! So by this you claim that Marat Fayzullin has no idea what he's talking about? Do you know who this guy is?
>"... as an ATTEMPT to imitate" - well that's *exactly* what emulation is. And emulation accuracy is defined by compatibility and perceived user experience. Both which can be realized on any PC today. If you ignore the latter, even a ZX81 can accurately emulate a modern quad core x86 class machine, given enough time and memory.
Okay, as long as you stick to this definition.
>I'll try to refrain from further comments now, since there is no point in discussing a topic such as this one with you. You're either incredibly ignorant or trolling, or both.
Your the one who keeps insulting and making straw man arguments like I am claiming "not accepting technology" or "Amigas can never be emulated" or "their divinity is preventing them from being emulated". Your taking them out of context.
