Dolphin would never run wii games on netbooks. Maybe if they invent ion hardware accelerated emulating, but that is probably impossible and even if it would be done, framerate would be still low.
No need to move pc to living room. Just buy some cables and connect it to TV. Thats how i have it done and it works perfectly.
Ok, clearly an Atom system is not optimized for Dolphin @ 32 bit.
As far as the Atom processor not being a good gaming processor that might not be entirely true.
It is a very good processor for emulating the following consoles:
Nintendo:
Nintendo 8bit (Nes)
Super Nintendo (Snes 16bit)
GameBoy (First gen, Advanced or Color)
DX
Nintendo 64
Sega:
Gamegear
Master system
Megadrive/CD
Sony:
PlayStation 1 & perhaps PS2
PSP
Atari,
Commodore 64,
DOS,
Most 2D games, and older 3D games (DX9 games released before 2005) for Linux, Windows 3.x, Win 9x, win Me/2000, NT, or XP.
And plenty more consoles not mentioned like the Neo Geo, or others.
The Atom processor, with a right program might be up to the job of playing back Wii games with a more optimized program. Even if it only reaches 12fps, there are games where FPS play very little importance (like in RPGs).
More fps is always better (upto 60fps, after 60fps there's no much gain), but with the right tweaking you might get optimal results.
It would be nice if the creators of Dolphin could find what exactly it is that taxes the CPU/GPU so much and optimize it.
I care less about playing the Wii on a 640x480 resolution, without AA, and graphics details set to low, as long as I can set the program to have somewhat fluid framerates I'd be happy.
I know many emulators which emulate 64bit systems (like the Nintendo 64), had the same issues on similar computer systems back in the days.
Without knowing the exact detail, I believe programmers have been able to improve game speed drastically, and inserted a function (show every other (1 or 2)frame (s), which effectively doubles/triples fps without much visual perception of graphics degradation).
The nintendo 64 bit only ran a sub 100Mhz processor on 64 bit which is why@32 bit you can emulate it with 630 (and in some games 800)Mhz processor.
The Atom N450 is being compared to a 1,1Ghz single core CPU, and in single threaded apps it runs about as fast as an 800Mhz Pentium M (Dothan) processor.
The Atom N270 was rated at the same performance as a 850Mhz and a 1Ghz Pentium M processor.
Either way 1Ghz is not nothing. I remember 1994 when the Pentium MMX 166Mhz CPU was widely used. It could run 3D games fluidly at a resolution of 800x600 pix, with a simple 1x PCI graphics card with 8MB VRAM.
I also remember my first D7 4xAGP card with 8MB VRAM, which ran games fluidly at 1024x768 resolution (low details).
Because Intel graphics cards have always had lousy lighting and lousy shadows, it was able to emulate games at a much faster framerate than graphics cards from Nvidia or AMD in the same pricerange.
If it means I'll have to see much less visually pleasing lighting, explosions, and smoke, to keep my FPS high, I think Dolphin would benefit enabling or disabling more quality feats, for lower powered systems like the atom processor.
Tell me how many of you would wouldn't want to see your Ion platform, or Asus EeeBox playing back Wii games?
I believe the Dolphin developers don't want (and shouldn't) sacrifice their time, emulation accuracy and code stability to make Dolphin faster on weak single core processors.
Turning Dolphin in an unstable hackjob in order to play 30% of the games fluidly on Atom isn't really a success.
In 2-3 years, Dolphin will be even better overall, and you'll buy a newer netbook with better CPU, then all will be great, just be patient.
(03-20-2010, 06:17 AM)ProDigit Wrote: [ -> ]Sony:
PlayStation 1 & perhaps PS2
All the other systems you mentioned are roughly 15-30 years old and could already be emulated on weak laptops a decade ago so that's not a wonder really.
Smooth PS2 emulation on atoms is not going to happen any time soon. PS1 is an entirely different system.
If you have tried the PCSX2 emulator, you'd know it is at least 2-3 times more demanding than dolphin. Some games will not run smooth even on the best possible cpu available.
Of course everyone wants emulation on the low end systems too. This widens the appeal for dolphin to everyone and not just enthusiasts. But you also have to be realistic.
Wii and PS2 are exponentially more complex and more hardware intensive than all those other systems/OS'es you mentioned. There is a bigger chance that they will be never fully emulated on any system at all (as even Sony couldn't create a fully working software emulator on their PS3), than that they will work even on the slowest systems.
Considering I hit 2GHZ on my Dual Core Atom, rather easily. It is not as weak as you are making it out to be. Wii emulation is very close to being playable on it. I am sure there are some games, that would run just fine. I was testing animal crossing. Another 10FPS or so, and it would of been very playable. I might see if I can get a PCI 9500GT, and see if the external graphics help improve it any.
(03-20-2010, 07:55 PM)Takenover83 Wrote: [ -> ]Considering I hit 2GHZ on my Dual Core Atom, rather easily. It is not as weak as you are making it out to be. Wii emulation is very close to being playable on it. I am sure there are some games, that would run just fine. I was testing animal crossing. Another 10FPS or so, and it would of been very playable. I might see if I can get a PCI 9500GT, and see if the external graphics help improve it any.
1- Did you try this on Windows, Linux, or another OS?
2- and, are you running the emulation at 32bit or 64?
I think there might be a performance gain at 64 bit (that is if there are drivers for the hardware), but I could be wrong about this...
I haven't read a lot online about performance gains when running emulators at 64 bits, some pages mention it though.
As far as the gaming consoles to be 15 years old, the PSP, GBA, and Nintendo 64 are fairly recent. The original gameboy might be 18 years old by now, but I don't care how old an emulated program is, just as long as it can keep you entertained or busy it'll be effective.
There are several Text based DOS games I still own that could keep you busy for several months.
Excellent for long trips in bus or plane; especially so when you own a netbook with battery life of over 6 hours!
It is not performance that I'm seeking but there's just nothing out there that can tip the Atom processors in battery life, and still run Windows and games.
Perhaps an ARM processor could tip the Atoms, but I'm not knowledgeable enough about Linux to make most programs run on a non x86 architecture.
Also there's little hardware out there that could offer this performance/battery life/price.
I think there are more people out there owning an Atom powered system than there are owning a Corei powered PC (or Quad/Dual core system).
The mentioning of a Linux system is just to have an operating system compatible with plenty of hardware, that will have a low footprint and a fast response. Though, I admit, it's hard to beat MS Windows in that...
But it's easy to base an operating system off of an already existing platform (like eg; a DSL or Debian based linux, get the drivers from their servers, and optimize it for gaming use (if it doesn't exist already)).