3 ms·
SheepShaver is much faster at the expense of not being able to run the latest version of OS 9, only 9.0.
by grishka 5y ago
SheepShaver is much faster at the expense of not being able to run the latest version of OS 9, only 9.0.
- exikyut 5y agoI wonder why it's faster - specifically *how* it's more efficient. (Admittedly an expansively broad question; summary responses accepted!)
- grishka 5y agoIf my understanding is correct, it doesn't implement the MMU (which latest OS 9 versions require), takes some other shortcuts and does JIT.
- wk_end 5y agoqemu actually tries to emulate all of the hardware in a Mac; also, I believe its CPU emulation is just interpreted though someone correct me if I'm wrong. SheepShaver emulates the CPU with a JIT and then patches the emulated MacOS so that calls to it run as native code.
- anthk 5y agoSheepShaver is hacky, I know it since BasiliskII times, same people. SS is faster, but nowadays the gap against Qemu is not that big on a modern machine. Also, Qemu will provide an ATI Rage device for the G3/G4 machine, so you may be able to correctly play a good chunk of 3D games released for Mac OS 9. >I believe its CPU emulation is just interpreted Something between interpreted and a JIT. TCG: https://wiki.qemu.org/Documentation/TCG https://wiki.qemu.org/Documentation/TCG That's why I say Qemu is not as slow as Bochs.