Mach3

[The TJT]

http://replay.marpirc.net/r/mach3-bmb

Dear sirs,

I recently downloaded video file, CHD, for laserdisc classic M.A.C.H. 3...which is around 14GB, only...
I'm barely able to play the game, it runs around 95% with full frameskip on my 2.4Ghz old PC. The biggest problem seems to be that control of the ship is a bit jerky due to all that frameskipping, but yet it's still playable and fun.

Two things:

1. I think old mach3 scores should be DQ'd.

...because they have been submitted using no background video at all. This means that you see only black background instead of the video footage...which makes playing the game actually easier: You see targets and enemies/fire much more clearly against the black background. The game was not intended to be played this way. (No offense to Welby's very skillful play, I'm sure he can make good score with background video too)
Another issue is that emulation in older versions is flaky, you get a lot of disc errors which has a tendency to save your butt in tight situations.

2. To whom can I submit screenshots for MARP? Any rules for pic size?

I'll try and make recordings asap on both bomber and fighter missions and submit screenshots for both tracks.

Thanks,
Tommi

[Chad]

send screenshots to me, any resolution is fine, but it's best to just use the png made by mame, it's what all the others are.

[The TJT]

No further replies...

Ok then. I'll submit scores as soon as I break 300k on bomber mission(probably today) and Chad puts those screenshots up...

[Chad]

keep your after burners on, i'll have them up shortly :)

The regulation coordinator should chime in here, the old recordings probably should be dqued for true emulation, but maybe not since playing the new game is only for people who have monster systems.

[The TJT]

keep your after burners on, i'll have them up shortly

Flush the bombers, get the subs in launch mode. We're at DEFCON one!

The regulation coordinator should chime in here, the old recordings probably should be dqued for true emulation, but maybe not since playing the new game is only for people who have monster systems.

I experimented a little on wolf82. It's true that the game play is slightly easier because of black background. But yet it seems I average 20k higher on new mame version...
I guess it's because of actually seeing the scenery, knowing what to expect around the corner, so to speak. Also those disc errors in wolf82 seem to take points off, from a finished game.

So I'd say, false alarm.

Colonel, take us to DEFCON five.

[Chad]

shots there, bombs away.

[Chad]

The key to making this run is not cpu power but hard drive power, you need at 10mb a second transfer rates to get 100%. On a slow drive i could barely get 50%fps, but when I copied to a much faster drive I got 500% fps.

It is really great how the narrator tells you you are entering an intensely radioactive area and then you see civilians driving on the freeway :)

[The TJT]

The key to making this run is not cpu power but hard drive power, you need at 10mb a second transfer rates to get 100%. On a slow drive i could barely get 50%fps, but when I copied to a much faster drive I got 500% fps.

Good point.

It is really great how the narrator tells you you are entering an intensely radioactive area and then you see civilians driving on the freeway

Hahah. Didn't notice that.

This could be radioactive area.
Cut that bridge in half.

Thinking about it...what the heck is a radioactive area?! You get nuclear waste drifting in sky...

[The TJT]

The key to making this run is not cpu power but hard drive power, you need at 10mb a second transfer rates to get 100%. On a slow drive i could barely get 50%fps, but when I copied to a much faster drive I got 500% fps.

Btw, I can play the game around 95% with full frameskip...so my hardware definitely is not up to par for MACH3.
I tested if it's my hard drive that causes this:



So it seems my HD is fast enough...The bottleneck in my system would be 2.4 Ghz processor...or more likely my "ghetto" graphics accelerator...?
[NVIDIA GeforceMX 440)

So don't all go buying new hard drives just yet.

[Chad]

yeah true, not saying that you don't need a fast processor either, but the big bottle neck will be the harddrive speed. When you do full frameskip does your cpu get pegged (100% or 50% for dual cores) by looking at the Task Manager? If not pegged, then it's the hard drive you need to sup-up. Geting a faster than 5400 or 7200 (like 10k or 15k) drive with a large memory cache will help.

[***PL***]

If you're going to spend $$$ on a 10K or 15K RPM harddrive, you might as well get a solid state one instead!

[Chad]

yeah ssd's are awesome but trying to go reasonable here, solid states are at best 3 times more expensive. probably a good 7200 with 16mb cache should work ok at 30mb per second.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/con ... 324-5.html

SSD's only disadvantage is write speed and cost, you can get 1 160gb SSD for 300$, you can get 1tb hd for 100$ and you do need lots of space for chds, and don't forget to format ext3 or NTFS, fat32 won't do chds.

[***PL***]

A few months ago I had two drives crash within days, and decided enough is enough.

I ended up installing 4 Western Digital Caviar Black drives (1TB, 7200 RPM, 32 MB cache) with Raid 10.

Can't beat the price/performance. There's not much, if anything that can write faster with that RAID setup!

[Chad]

yeah raid rips! cheap safety (sometimes hot swapable) and speed plus lots of noise :) I do prefer ssd on the desktop and raid on the server.