0 users browsing Emulation. | 3 bots
| daman |
Posted on 21-05-30, 10:18
|
 Post: #12 of 19 Since: 05-10-21 Last post: 1142 days Last view: 1130 days |
Ok. |
| daman |
Posted on 21-06-01, 17:41 (revision 1)
|
|
Post: #13 of 19 Since: 05-10-21 Last post: 1142 days Last view: 1130 days |
There's excellent SGB and SGB2 emulation in bsnes 0.70, probably even earlier versions(!?), but there's no SGB and SGB2 emulation in the first releases of bsnes. |
| creaothceann |
Posted on 21-06-01, 21:21
|
 Post: #342 of 456 Since: 10-29-18 Last post: 46 days Last view: 3 days |
You could always try Win95 -> VirtualBox -> WinXP -> bsnes 0.70... My current setup: Super Famicom ("2/1/3" SNS-CPU-1CHIP-02) → SCART → OSSC → StarTech USB3HDCAP → AmaRecTV 3.10 |
| tomman |
Posted on 21-06-02, 00:38
|
|
Dinosaur
 Post: #948 of 1317 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 1 day Last view: 4 min. User is online |
VirtualBox never had host compatibility for Win9x at all, and only features very limited guest compatibility (read: it sucks - for starters InnoTek/Sun/Orrible never made video drivers for the emulated videocard, and the best you can get is VESA using something like VBEMP, which means no 2D acceleration at all which is kinda critical for emulators) for Win9x VMs. So... uh, nope. But if you're feeling masochist, you may want to push your luck with some real ancient Connectix (yes, pre-MS acquisition) Virtual PC build, although I'm not even sure if those had any kind of support for XP guests (maybe W2000?). Oh, and performance will suck, mainly due to the lack of hardware-assisted virtualization. Unfortunately no emulator which supports TRUE SGB emulation will run at all on Win95/98/Me, or at any acceptable speed under XP/Linux on a Northwood/Prescott-era Celeron. And I wouldn't run ancient versions of emulators (except maybe for nostalgia reasons) if you care about emulation accuracy. Licensed Pirate® since 2006, 100% Buttcoin™-free, enemy of All Things JavaScript™ |
| daman |
Posted on 21-06-02, 08:28
|
|
Post: #14 of 19 Since: 05-10-21 Last post: 1142 days Last view: 1130 days |
But, running XP on Virtualbox on win 98 is even slower than running XP alone. |
| tomman |
Posted on 21-06-02, 18:13 (revision 2)
|
|
Dinosaur
Post: #949 of 1317 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 1 day Last view: 4 min. User is online |
Posted by daman Uh, did you read my post? VirtualBox will NOT RUN on 9x hosts! Virtual PC (which is another product by another developer) will, but of course it will be SLOW (due to no hardware virtualization on those ancient platforms, among other limitations), basically unusable... So... don't do it. If your goal is legit SGB emulation (especially with bsnes) on ancient Celerons running Windows 98, desist. You've reached a dead end. Stick to SGB borders on suitable GameBoy emulators that can run on that thing, and use bsnes on newer gear, like something with a Core-series CPU. Or wait until nocash revives NO$SNS (not updated since 2016!), and decides to merge it with NO$GMB (which hasn't been updated in nearly 20 years!), then add SGB support to those... THEN that would be your best bet for retroboxes (as his emulators are tailored for very obsolete hardware/OS combos). Unfortunately the chances of that happening are pretty much ZERO. And you want bsnes anyway, so... Licensed Pirate® since 2006, 100% Buttcoin™-free, enemy of All Things JavaScript™ |
| NTI |
Posted on 21-06-02, 22:02
|
 Post: #36 of 40 Since: 10-29-18 Last post: 713 days Last view: 713 days |
This thread is gradually reaching a point where it's becoming a good candidate to preserve for posterity alongside these ones. Please, don't stop guys. |
| creaothceann |
Posted on 21-06-02, 22:17 (revision 1)
|
|
Post: #343 of 456 Since: 10-29-18 Last post: 46 days Last view: 3 days |
There may be a non-Windows version here: https://archive.org/details/tukuyomi-snes-archive --- Posted by NTI "This is definitely why I have no ambition whatsoever to implement NDS or N64 emulation." - byuu, 2014 :) My current setup: Super Famicom ("2/1/3" SNS-CPU-1CHIP-02) → SCART → OSSC → StarTech USB3HDCAP → AmaRecTV 3.10 |
| tomman |
Posted on 21-06-03, 02:48
|
|
Dinosaur
Post: #950 of 1317 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 1 day Last view: 4 min. User is online |
Posted by NTI Nah, needs moar math. And MS Paint charts. Licensed Pirate® since 2006, 100% Buttcoin™-free, enemy of All Things JavaScript™ |
| CaptainJistuce |
Posted on 21-06-03, 10:25
|
|
Custom title here
 Post: #1003 of 1164 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 65 days Last view: 2 days |
So you're saying we just need to create the formula that represents the flow of path by steps of a shitpost? --- In UTF-16, where available. --- |
| creaothceann |
Posted on 21-06-30, 21:51
|
|
Post: #352 of 456 Since: 10-29-18 Last post: 46 days Last view: 3 days |
Posted by creaothceann Update: Perhaps not? My current setup: Super Famicom ("2/1/3" SNS-CPU-1CHIP-02) → SCART → OSSC → StarTech USB3HDCAP → AmaRecTV 3.10 |
| daman |
Posted on 21-07-25, 10:49
|
|
Post: #15 of 19 Since: 05-10-21 Last post: 1142 days Last view: 1130 days |
It would be much better if I had a builds of 'bsnes 0.70' for 'Win 9x' and 'BeOS 5'. |
| CaptainJistuce |
Posted on 21-07-25, 11:42 (revision 1)
|
|
Custom title here
Post: #1015 of 1164 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 65 days Last view: 2 days |
Posted by damanAs previously stated, that would actually be pretty awful. Any hardware that could reasonably be expected to run either of those operating systems is far too slow to run bsnes. The state of the art in the year 2000 has not changed in the last two months of AD 2021. As no code targetting either platform was ever written, it would require a ground-up porting effort to make this very-bad-idea port a reality. Use SNES9x and be happy. Don't ask us to make you suffer. --- In UTF-16, where available. --- |
| KingMike |
Posted on 21-08-02, 03:50
|
|
Post: #36 of 36
Since: 12-21-18 Last post: 1209 days Last view: 117 days |
Asking for bsnes compatible with Win98 is very much the modern day equivalent of people back in the day asking for ZSNES that could run full framerate with sound on a 486 CPU (or did people ask for even older than that?). |
| CaptainJistuce |
Posted on 21-08-02, 05:44
|
|
Custom title here
Post: #1018 of 1164 Since: 10-30-18 Last post: 65 days Last view: 2 days |
Posted by KingMikeUsually they were just asking for it to be ported to their PowerMac. They didn't appreciate that x86 assembly only runs on x86 processors. --- In UTF-16, where available. --- |
