3 ms·

From personal experience I know a 266 MHz (single core) PC from c. 1997 can run 3D games with somewhat comparable graphics just fine (MechWarrior 2, the PC vers

by csense 3y ago

From personal experience I know a 266 MHz (single core) PC from c. 1997 can run 3D games with somewhat comparable graphics just fine (MechWarrior 2, the PC version of FF7) at low SVGA resolutions (640x480 - 800x600). The Pico3D is 1/2 the performance (133 MHz if you use only one core for rendering), but 1/8 as many pixels (240x240 display). Definitely a cool project, but based on specs it's actually not that surprising this is possible.

detrites 3y ago
One key relevant difference between the Picosystem/RP2040 and a '97 PC is available RAM and video RAM, the RP2040 has only 264KB of any fast RAM (excluding external flash which has DMA and XiP but is still comparably slow). Whereas a '97 PC would be in the many tens of MB or possibly hundreds, and at least a few MB dedicated VRAM on a video card. So not an equivalent comparison really, this is a much more constrained environment.
- vardump 3y ago
  You can render one line of output and DMA it to the display. So no need to have a complete framebuffer in the first place. Lack of memory just limits the number of textures you can have.
- moefh 3y ago
  Another huge difference is that the RP2040 lacks floating point support. At least it has (integer) hardware division, but that's about it.
  - monocasa 3y ago
    Floating point doesn't really matter much here. Even at the time, you'd typically use integer fixed point math unless you were micro optimizing for the different execution ports of the CPUs you were targeting and didn't want the float pipes to sit idle.
- benj111 3y ago
  Did a 1997 pc have 100s of mb? I seem to recall running Windows 95 on a 200mhz - 300mhz processor with 64mb ram. It wasnt top of the line but I don't think windows 95 was top of the line either. My ex corporate windows 2000 pc upgrade had 128mb ram. Neither had fancy graphics cards. Mechwarrior as I recall ran on my 486 with 8mb ram. I'd guess that's in the same ball park of 256k for ram with xip flash. With a lot of hand waving of course. It could certainly run doom.

by csense 3y ago

detrites 3y ago

One key relevant difference between the Picosystem/RP2040 and a '97 PC is available RAM and video RAM, the RP2040 has only 264KB of any fast RAM (excluding external flash which has DMA and XiP but is still comparably slow). Whereas a '97 PC would be in the many tens of MB or possibly hundreds, and at least a few MB dedicated VRAM on a video card. So not an equivalent comparison really, this is a much more constrained environment.

vardump 3y ago
You can render one line of output and DMA it to the display. So no need to have a complete framebuffer in the first place. Lack of memory just limits the number of textures you can have.
moefh 3y ago
Another huge difference is that the RP2040 lacks floating point support. At least it has (integer) hardware division, but that's about it.
- monocasa 3y ago
  Floating point doesn't really matter much here. Even at the time, you'd typically use integer fixed point math unless you were micro optimizing for the different execution ports of the CPUs you were targeting and didn't want the float pipes to sit idle.
benj111 3y ago
Did a 1997 pc have 100s of mb? I seem to recall running Windows 95 on a 200mhz - 300mhz processor with 64mb ram. It wasnt top of the line but I don't think windows 95 was top of the line either. My ex corporate windows 2000 pc upgrade had 128mb ram. Neither had fancy graphics cards. Mechwarrior as I recall ran on my 486 with 8mb ram. I'd guess that's in the same ball park of 256k for ram with xip flash. With a lot of hand waving of course. It could certainly run doom.