[Performance Discussion] PCE Accurate is slower than Mednafen PCE

[negativeExponent]

(THIS IS NOT A THIS CORE VS THAT CORE DISCUSSION. THE PURPOSE AT LEAST IS TO OPTIMIZE THE PORT FURTHER IF POSSIBLE)

the libretro_pce core is significantly slower compared to Mednafen PCE.

tested by running the cores in fast-forward mode. im aware this is not the best way to compare as i am bottlenecking my cpu at 100% when running this way but still its slower:

Common setups:

• everything is on default settings both versions as much as possible
• both seems to prefer audio enabled when fast-forwarding so lets leave that as is.
• retroarch uses 16 bit for colors, so i assume the slowdown is not about the color-format
• using linux-arch with xfce4's window manager disabled for best framerate
• retroarch uses RGUI with blings disabled (at least the animation stuff)
• Mednafen has a max fast-forward rate of 15x, but i think i am not at its max limit yet based on screenshot below

libretro PCE:

Mednafen PCE with frameskip enabled:

Mednafen PCE with frameskip disabled:

I cannot do the same comparison with pce_fast or supergrafx since Mednafen is always at max fps with those (about 900fps) and i haven't found yet if mednafen's fast-forward multiplier limit can be changed or set to infinite

Mednafen PCE_Fast with SuperGrafx enabled, frameskip enabled:

[hizzlekizzle]

Does mednafen's fast-forward use frameskipping, etc?

[negativeExponent]

ok, found the frameskip option. disabling it, still faster

at 456 fps, its still faster

[mrjschulte]

Is this not part of the inherent price being "paid" for having the more accurate emulation path?

[negativeExponent]

this is a mednafen_pce and libretro_pce comparison, not a pce / pce_fast comparison...

[negativeExponent]

moved to appropriate core: https://github.com/libretro/beetle-pce-libretro/issues/11