Nice emulator on Microsoft Windows (98SE/ME/2000/XP/2003)

Supporter (9)

22-06-2004, 08:49

I tested the following MSX emulator for Windows.

blueMSX 1.5.0
MESS 0.82
NLMSX 0.48
ParaMSX 0.46(beta)
RuMSX 0.27

In my opinion, blueMSX 1.5.0 is nice emulator than others on Windows.
Of course, NLMSX 0.48 is also nice.
But now, I prefer to use blueMSX than NLMSX.

If blueMSX begin to supports MSXturboR, other Mapper and improve the MSX-Music,
this emulator will be world's No.1 emulator.
Most of goodMSX1/2 software works on blueMSX correctly than others.

!login ou Inscrivez-vous pour poster

Par BiFi

Enlighted (4348)

22-06-2004, 09:31

You do know MESS 0.83 has been released a few days ago I hope?

Par karloch

Prophet (2159)

22-06-2004, 11:35

If blueMSX begin to supports MSXturboR, other Mapper and improve the MSX-Music, this emulator will be world's No.1 emulator.
Most of goodMSX1/2 software works on blueMSX correctly than others.blueMSX is one of the best MSX emulators for Win32/DirectX. I just love his video rendering engine, the best that I have seen in any emulator of anything. However, you are forgetting the greatest MSX emulator that we have nowadays: openMSX. openMSX is nowadays the best MSX emulator that you can find. It works under Win32, Linux, FreeBSD and MacOS X (I'm not so sure about this one) and it uses SDL libs.

Maybe that it doesn't have a GUI as friendly as blueMSX one (I haven't see openMSX 0.4 yet, with the improved Catapult), but it is indeed, the best MSX emulator for now.

In a ranking I would put this way:
1. openMSX
2. blueMSX
3. NLMSX

Par fs5500

Supporter (9)

22-06-2004, 15:14

Well.

I tested openMSX 0.4.0 too.

It supports many of configulation or special mapper.
It is also good MSX emulator.

But I don't use openMSX so much.
Because openMSX doesn't support a few of goodMSX1/2 just like blueMSX.
(A few of MSX1 software doesn't run correctly than blueMSX or NLMSX.)

ALso its emulation speed is slow than other MSX emulator on MSX/MSX2/2+ mode.

(It requires High perfomance H/W. (Especially CPU / VGA) than other Windows Emulator.)

My H/W is Cel 2.0 with RIVA TNT2 M64.
It is Not so good enviroment to run openMSX.
It is good to run blueMSX.
(BlueMSX is fast on my machine.)

I heard openMSX is optimized to Linux.
I don't know openMSX's emulation speed is higher than Windows.

Although openMSX have catapult for win, I think it is Not so easy to use than blueMSX / ParaMSX / NLMSX.

openMSX is good for emulation MSX H/W.

But blueMSX is more good for emulation MSX S/W for me.

Par BiFi

Enlighted (4348)

22-06-2004, 15:18

IMO, the combination Catapult/openMSX is the same in use as ParaMSX.

Par DarQ

Paragon (1038)

22-06-2004, 16:22

My H/W is Cel 2.0 with RIVA TNT2 M64.
It is Not so good enviroment to run openMSX.

i have the same videocard, but only an AMD duron 1200. it runs very smooth on my system.

Par [D-Tail]

Ascended (8263)

22-06-2004, 19:55

But you're a Debain Linux user, DarQ... unlike fs5500
I must say I'm happy enough with NLMSX, because I don't think I need perfect emulation. The real thing's the only thing good enough for me

I only use an emulator to make screenshots and to quickly try whether a certain program works.

Par Manuel

Ascended (19674)

24-06-2004, 09:32

Because openMSX doesn't support a few of goodMSX1/2 just like blueMSX.
(A few of MSX1 software doesn't run correctly than blueMSX or NLMSX.)

What ROMs are not supported yet, except Super Lode Runner?

I heard openMSX is optimized to Linux.
I don't know openMSX's emulation speed is higher than Windows.

Where did you hear that?
The point is: most openMSX developers only run Linux, so the program is mainly developed using Linux. It is however not optimized for Linux, unless SDL works better in Linux or so. Also, it is at least not optimized for Windows. Almost all other MSX emulators *are* optmized for Windows. We hope that more Windows-oriented developers would like to join us to help us making optimizations for the Windows platform, such as using DirectX for rendering.

Note that although openMSX is not optimized for Windows, it is indeed very portable and runs on a lot of operating systems, such as Linux, FreeBSD, MacOS X and Windows.
Porting to other operating systems which have ports of the libraries required for openMSX should not be hard.

Oh, and D-Tail: openMSX is not optimized for any Linux distribution at all. It doesn't matter which one you use, it should work on all of them, as long as the proper librarires are available. So, the fact that DarQ uses Debian is completely irrelevant. (Yes, most openMSX developers use Debian, but certainly not all of them!)

Par fs5500

Supporter (9)

26-06-2004, 21:57

>What ROMs are not supported yet, except Super Lode Runner?

A few of Roms doesn't run correctly.
(Especially any Namcot games or other)

But I'm not so interested in openMSX.
So I have no reason to report the bug detailly.

(My interested emulator is blueMSX / NLMSX works on Win32, not on Linux or other platform OS.)

Par karloch

Prophet (2159)

27-06-2004, 01:40

But I'm not so interested in openMSX.
So I have no reason to report the bug detailly.
Reporting bugs is a excellent way to help out to the development of every application, so I think that it is enough reason. ^^

(My interested emulator is blueMSX / NLMSX works on Win32, not on Linux or other platform OS.)
That's right, but is there something wrong about an emulator run under other plattaform and OSes besides Windows? I just think that is great that openMSX run under Win32, Linux, FreeBSD and Mac OS X. Of course, blueMSX and NLMSX are great emulators.

Par [D-Tail]

Ascended (8263)

27-06-2004, 02:55

But I think I get fs5500's point: he's a Win32 user (like me) so he just uses stuff that has been specifically designed for that system. No difficult settings for XML files or so ... I could agree with that