[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

RE: executor & windows95





----------
From: 	Scott Stegura[SMTP:scottuf@grove.ufl.edu]
Sent: 	Tuesday, March 05, 1996 12:54 PM
To: 	Mat Hostetter
Cc: 	executor@ardi.com
Subject: 	Re: executor & windows95

Mat Hostetter wrote:
> 
> >>>>> "Scott" == Scott Stegura <scottuf@grove.ufl.edu> writes:
> 
>     Scott> Well, as an experiment I tried running Executor under
>     Scott> MS-DOS Mode and I was surprised because it ran almost twice
>     Scott> as fast!!!  The video was a lot faster and the CPU jumped
>     Scott> from a 6 to a 12 on my 486DX2-66.  Well, I guess from now
>     Scott> on I'll run directly under DOS instead of Win95.  I'm
>     Scott> really surprised at how much of a drain Win95 is on my
>     Scott> system.
> 
> That's interesting.
> 
> Video should be faster (if you've got UniVBE) because we can directly
> access the linear frame buffer under DOS.  Still, I wouldn't think
> that the CPU number should slow down.
> 
> Can you try:
> 
> executor -nosound -oldtimer
> 
> and see how fast it is under Win95?  Thanks!
> 
> -Mat

The -oldtimer option helped speed things up some.  The -nosound option 
didn't help though.  And I am running UniVBE 5.1a.  However, things 
still weren't up to DOS speed so I think I'll stick with the hassle of 
exiting windows to go to DOS mode for now.  Hopefully V3.00 (or maybe 
V2.1) will be fully Win95 compatable.

Scott Stegura

I have the same problem you do with speed in '95. Well sorta...
Sometimes I can get it to run as fast as DOS when I use a simple command line like:

executor -nosplash -memory 4M

This command started working as fast as DOS around the time I changed my serial mouse to a PS/2 port mouse. I am not certain though.

I noticed when running in a small amount of RAM if you continue to run executor, exit, then reload the numbers get less and less. So when I test different command lines like Matt suggests I always reboot.  

I took the liberty to use the command switches -nosound -oldtimer to see what I came up with.  Below are my findings they are sorta interesting.
=====================================================
Specs:

i486DX4100, 8M ram, Cirrus Logic (CL-GD5428) 1MB  VBE 1.2
Using executor 1.99q8 and Univbe 5.1a
2.0 VBE extentions, Linear framebuffer loacated at 14Mb
Speedometer 3.23
Standard command line: Executor -nosplash -memory 4M
							
		CPU	Graph	Disk C:	Math	Bench avg	Color avg
Dos*	11.456	  7.701	3.707	26.614	17.375		1.674
-nosound	12.627	  8.670	3.945	27.647	19.489		1.859
-oldtimer	13.206	  9.382	3.827	29.395	21.067		1.972
both**	14.108	10.328	3.915	34.067	22.637		2.165

Win95***	11.456	7.613	4.160	26.250	17.108		1.678
-nosound	  8.357	5.231	5.587	13.815	10.858		1.187
-oldtimer	11.768	7.657	6.865	26.468	17.199		1.687
both**	13.106	8.902	3.698	29.102	19.711		1.907

*Used Smartdrv: smartdrv a b- c d 2048 0
**Executor -nosplash -memory 4M -nosound -oldtimer
***Only Explorer was loaded with Executor
==================================================
For some reason Win95 does not like -nosound.  The really odd thing is when both -nosound and -oldtimer are in use, it is faster then each one individualy. Especially when -nosound is slower then executor running with just -nosplash -memory 4M.

Looking at these results gives me a question.  Why isn't -oldtimer part of the default settings when it makes the emulation run much faster?? What are the pluses and minus of using -oldtimer?

Well anyways I hope this gets to all of you cuzz this took forever :)

Enjoy,


Glenn R. Keyser	



Follow-Ups: