3 ms·

In case you aren't trolling, the reason you are getting downvoted is probably because you are comparing apples to oranges. ZSNES is not an accurate emulator. by

In case you aren't trolling, the reason you are getting downvoted is probably because you are comparing apples to oranges. ZSNES is not an accurate emulator. byuu's goal is to emulate the systems perfectly. Here is an article he wrote about it: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2011/08/accuracy-takes-power-one-mans-3ghz-quest-to-build-a-perfect-snes-emulator/ http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2011/08/accuracy-takes-power-o... So yes, ZSNES feels a lot more responsive than higan. But that's because it cuts a lot of corners with regards to accuracy of emulation. It is probably the least accurate emulator for this reason. It prioritizes speed. In light of that, your comment doesn't really add anything to the discussion.

makomk 10y ago
Perhaps the delay from user input to actual action on the screen should be considered when we talk about how accurate emulators are. After all, it's something that can noticeably affect how games actually play.
byuu 10y ago
If you can run higan at 100% speed, then ZSNES has more lag than higan does (due to double buffering, polling only once per frame, etc.) For me, the issue with the OP is a) comparing to clone NES hardware, and b) it's subjective. Different people react differently to latency. The numbers I talk about may be largely estimated, but they're objectively real latencies that really do exist, even if you can't observe them personally. It's a very good thing if you can't. Makes gaming a lot more fun. Testing myself, I don't really detect a change in latency under emulation alone until I simulate adding about 75ms more than is already there. However, I did notice a problem when I moved from playing Ninja Gaiden Trilogy (I know, bad port) on my SNES to higan: all of my timed moves were failing (it's a game that requires pixel-perfect movements); but I adapted pretty quickly and was able to beat the game. But again, this is all subjective stuff, so it's not really adding to the technical discussion any.
- jdbernard 10y ago
  > If you can run higan at 100% speed, then ZSNES has more lag than higan does Yes, I should have said, "ZSNES feels a lot more responsive than higan on less powerful systems."

makomk 10y ago

Perhaps the delay from user input to actual action on the screen should be considered when we talk about how accurate emulators are. After all, it's something that can noticeably affect how games actually play.

byuu 10y ago

If you can run higan at 100% speed, then ZSNES has more lag than higan does (due to double buffering, polling only once per frame, etc.) For me, the issue with the OP is a) comparing to clone NES hardware, and b) it's subjective. Different people react differently to latency. The numbers I talk about may be largely estimated, but they're objectively real latencies that really do exist, even if you can't observe them personally. It's a very good thing if you can't. Makes gaming a lot more fun. Testing myself, I don't really detect a change in latency under emulation alone until I simulate adding about 75ms more than is already there. However, I did notice a problem when I moved from playing Ninja Gaiden Trilogy (I know, bad port) on my SNES to higan: all of my timed moves were failing (it's a game that requires pixel-perfect movements); but I adapted pretty quickly and was able to beat the game. But again, this is all subjective stuff, so it's not really adding to the technical discussion any.

jdbernard 10y ago
> If you can run higan at 100% speed, then ZSNES has more lag than higan does Yes, I should have said, "ZSNES feels a lot more responsive than higan on less powerful systems."