Next Generation Emulation banner
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
I m meow desu! ^_^
Joined
·
4,455 Posts
I prefer vista or 7 64
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
815 Posts
It doesn't run all that much faster on 64. XP32 ran faster for me than vista64. Vista is generally a slower OS than XP - not all that much but I can notice a difference. Plus 64bit can't take advantage of the IL modifications - right now I'm using the 32 bit Dolphin IL because it's a little faster than 64bit non-IL.
 

·
I m meow desu! ^_^
Joined
·
4,455 Posts
Generally il is faster than normal dolphin in some games
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
815 Posts
lol I'm not saying use XP - my guess is win7 64 would be just as fast as xp. I'm just saying that 64bit isn't a huge advantage for running dolphin any more. The speed difference is negligible. It used to be but now maybe a few fps, not much more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
XP 64-bit is overcritised and quite excellent. Assuming you can find the drivers (which isn't so hard unless you have really obscure hardware), it basically runs the same as XP 32-bit, except with compatibility with 64-bit applications and 4GB+ address space. There are a few downsides, it follows the Server 2003 update roadmap, and isn't compatible with Windows Live Essentials (though you can find standalone .msi files for stuff like Live Messenger easily enough), but other than that, it's just like using XP.

I used it for about 18 months before recently switching to Windows 7 Release Candidate 64-bit, which is excellent also, a massive improvement on Vista. Performance-wise it's on par with XP.

Go with whichever you want, being aware that the current Windows 7 releases are time limited.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
358 Posts
XP 64-bit is overcritised and quite excellent. Assuming you can find the drivers (which isn't so hard unless you have really obscure hardware), it basically runs the same as XP 32-bit, except with compatibility with 64-bit applications and 4GB+ address space. There are a few downsides, it follows the Server 2003 update roadmap, and isn't compatible with Windows Live Essentials (though you can find standalone .msi files for stuff like Live Messenger easily enough), but other than that, it's just like using XP.

I used it for about 18 months before recently switching to Windows 7 Release Candidate 64-bit, which is excellent also, a massive improvement on Vista. Performance-wise it's on par with XP.

Go with whichever you want, being aware that the current Windows 7 releases are time limited.
100% agree. I just got XP64 yesterday and it's so better than XP32. And of course W7 is the best right now!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
i use vista x64 sp2 for my main machine. i haven't looked back. i used to have xp sp3 running but found it to be old and too outdated on my new rig (quad core intel, 8800 gt, 8 GB RAM). xp is good for people who have old and underpowered machines.

i plan on upgrading to windows 7 when it's released for retail. i've tried the beta version under vmware. it looked alright. it's like an extension of vista.

i have not run dolphin under any x32 builds so i cannot say. but certainly, it runs fine under vista x64 with service pack 2 installed.
 

·
Resident Rabble Rouser
Joined
·
174 Posts
XP64 is the fastest, hands down. XP32 is second. Those claiming Win7 is as fast have drank the kool aid, it is just Vista SP2, and not really that fast at all. I mean, it's better than Vista, but so is putting my own fist in my own ass.

XP is still king by a very large margin!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,934 Posts
XP64 is the fastest, hands down. XP32 is second. Those claiming Win7 is as fast have drank the kool aid, it is just Vista SP2, and not really that fast at all. I mean, it's better than Vista, but so is putting my own fist in my own ass.

XP is still king by a very large margin!
Uh, Windows 7 is just as fast as XP if not faster. There are several benchmarks as well as feedback from several members here and from other forums to confirm this in addition to the benchmarks.

Just because it looks similar to Vista, does not mean it should be referred to Vista SP2 and regarded as such. Windows 7 and Vista are two completely different beasts under the hood.

Windows XP was technically Windows 2000 SP5, and Vista was technically Windows XP SP4 going by that logic.

There are several improvements both compatibility and performance wise over Vista that should blow XP clear out of the water. Even in the beta and RC stages it is still much faster, better and stable than Vista currently is and will likely ever be.

Even those that bought into the Vista fud or were originally against Vista, are now saying how much better Windows 7 is than Vista.

Also, Windows 7 runs quite well on older hardware without any issues, the same thing can't be said for Vista. Of course you won't get the flashy Aero interface if the video hardware doesn't support it, but the operating system itself will run quite smoothly on older hardware

The features, increased performance, compatibility, and stability over Vista in Windows 7 are a good reason to finally ditch XP.

There is no real reason to stick with XP besides being completely ignorant or needing XP for the odd game or few which won't run on the newer operating systems, in that case dual booting should be considered.

In some cases you'll find that odd game, application or few will likely run in a virtual machine. Windows 7 will have a Virtual XP mode that will be available as an update to keep the compatibility gap between XP and Vista/7 relatively small.

Sure Windows 7 won't shine much in emulation, emulation is already so resource intensive that whatever performance benefits an operating system offers, it is unlikely it would make much of a difference in emulation.

However PC gaming and general operating system usage is where the benefits over Vista and possibly XP will be noticed.

Microsoft has even announced that they are continuing to optimize Windows 7 and fixing most/all the major issues (Compatibility issues, Stability issues, Performance issues, Bugs) that everyone had with Vista to ensure a successful launch.

Windows 7 performance is already great compared to Vista, performance is already comparable to XP or better and will likely get even better before the official release of Windows 7.

In relation to what 64-bit operating system is best, stick with XP64 for now until Windows 7.

There is however no much of a difference in performance with either Dolphin or PCSX2 regardless of what operating system you use. I generally get the same speed in these emulators no matter if using XP, XP-64, Vista, Vista-64, Win7, Win7-64.

Also the performance benefits the x64 build of Dolphin offers over the x86 build is relatively small, about an 8 - 15 FPS increase with some games.

The x86 JITIL build can run most games with performance and speed comparable to the 64-bit builds of Dolphin.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,934 Posts
Sonic Adventure 2 runs at 45 - 50 FPS on the intro and some levels with the x86 builds, while the x64 builds usually run at full speed or near full speed on my Core2Duo E8500.

There are other games where the x64 build is generally faster than the x86 builds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
815 Posts
hm I'm going to run them side by side and make some comparisons. I'm quite interested if it makes that much of a difference.

Wow it definitely IS faster - like you said about 5-8fps. Paper mario is 48-50 on il, 55-57 on 64. Zelda tp is 10-11 on il (sand dunes), 13-14 on 64. SMS 20-30 il, 30-40 64. Yup definitely worth moving to 64 bit I take it back :D
 

·
Go-player 15 kyu ^^
Joined
·
185 Posts
Of the few games I've tested, Dolphin x64 on Arch Linux x64 has run faster than the Windows counterpart. Greatest speed difference I've seen so far was on ToS2 for Wii. About 30% better fps contra Win7 x86 build o_O (Might be x86 vs x64 though) (Just the intro screen as the wiimote plugin doesn't really work on Linux yet, but still :p)
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top