On 14/03/2018 22:57, silverdr@wfmh.org.pl wrote: > IMHO there is quite a difference between an emulator and the ultimate. There is a difference between Vice and an ultimate (and for completeness chameleon), however they are all emulating a c64. You avoid the latency imposed by serially emulating the logic, feeding data through usb peripherals, video card etc. I have no problem with the latency in vice & you also will get latency issues with some TV's anyway. The precense or absense of latency is not how you determine whether something is emulating something or not. What Vice and Ultimate have in common is that they all require people to sit down and model the behaviour of the analogue and digital circuits in the 64, where some of the digital circuits suffer from analogue effects. How you structure that code is different between the two, but the ability to get the behaviour wrong is the same. It's also much easier to hook up real sid chips/joysticks/etc to an ultimate than it is to Vice. Timing would be a major pain in Vice, but theoretically you could write an emulator that runs on a CPU without an OS which was able to adhere to the same timing as a real C64. If it had Unified memory and a reasonable shading language then you could emulate the VIC in real time and have no latency there either. It would require a fixed specification platform and a lot of time, it's easier to use an FPGA. I bought a reloaded mk2 and I will probably buy a ultimate. I may regret going for the ultimate instead of a reloaded mk3, because the chameleon software has had more time spent on it than the ultimate software. However I like that the ultimate software is open source and the hardware is much cheaper.Received on 2018-03-15 11:00:02
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.