which emulator

페이지 2/5
1 | | 3 | 4 | 5

By dvik

Prophet (2200)

dvik의 아바타

07-03-2008, 00:09

Well you are 10 years overdue to change your computer wolf_ and you know that so stop complaining. blueMSX works like a charm on 1.5GHz and above. And I run it on my 600MHz laptop without any big issues (needed some config tweaking though).

blueMSX and openMSX are quite comparable on what is emulated. both emulate far more MSX devices than other emulators and both are way more configurable than others. They are also much more accurate than other emulators. The big difference is in the user interface. blueMSX has a quite straight forward graphical user interface while openMSX needs console input if you want to do something more than the bare basics.

blueMSX has imo much better video rendering (it does interpolation to avoid flickering caused by frequency mismatch between MSX and PC). This is to me a very nice feature but it is a bit CPU intensive but it can be disabled and then the emulator works like other emus.

The big disadvantage with openMSX is that it doesn't support save states.

blueMSX is probably easier to use for most Windows people but if you prefer a console like interface openMSX is the better choice.

NLMSX was (and still is to a few) a preferred emulator but its quite crappy compared to openMSX and blueMSX. The only emulator that I would recommend other than these two is Meisei (MSX1 only) which has some nice features for game playing.

Since you are using blueMSX already I would give openMSX a try (and perhaps also Meisei) and then you'll pretty much covered the good part of all MSX emulators. The rest is not worth trying unless you are interested in emulation.

By JohnHassink

Ambassador (5655)

JohnHassink의 아바타

07-03-2008, 01:50

Well I have always used NLMSX and my standard is:

If it don't work on NLMSX, it's crap. Smile

No seriously, with openMSX and blueMSX you can seemingly modify all kinds of stuff which you can't with NL.

But in my experience, the emulator which works almost guaranteed on any (older) system, the one which you can start up fast, just load a .dsk or .rom in and play it, well that's NLMSX (for me).

But it's what it is: A pure MSX emulator and nothing to add.

Just my two cents.

By [D-Tail]

Ascended (8263)

[D-Tail]의 아바타

07-03-2008, 11:01

DemonSeed, this is true I know. Before my linux era, I used NLMSX quite a lot (and that was too, because I was on a 600MHz system, too slow for BlueMSX/openMSX). But some of the basic things are not supported in that emulator (e.g. SCREEN 3).

By gargamel

Expert (101)

gargamel의 아바타

07-03-2008, 12:44

I love blueMSX when running Windows, very accurate and user friendly. It has a good debugger and lot of other features.

I'm also into retro emulators and running MSX4PC on my vintage PC.Wink

By pitpan

Prophet (3155)

pitpan의 아바타

07-03-2008, 15:04

I love BrMSX. Too bad that it isn't supported any longer. Anyway, even today I'm using the patched version that does work in Windows XP. I know that RicBit is currently integrated in the BlueMSX team, but I love the oldschool emulators for DOS, such as BrMSX and NO$MSX.

ATM, I mainly use openMSX 'cause I've moved to Linux, but I do use both BlueMSX and openMSX when using Windoze. BlueMSX debugger is awesome and openMSX isn't easy at this level. I use both emus basically for MSX1 development. Several problems still happen, but both do an excellent job for average users, I guess.

From my MSX1 freak developer point of view, I'd like to highlight two details:

Pro openMSX: excellent WAV support
Pro BlueMSX: user friendly debugger

If one of those emulators had the two points that I mention, I'll stick to it faithfully and drop the other. Wink

By dvik

Prophet (2200)

dvik의 아바타

07-03-2008, 18:00

@pitpan: I think you'll get both features on both emulators sometime this year Smile

By alexworp3

Expert (126)

alexworp3의 아바타

07-03-2008, 18:07

well i tried openmsx yesterday and i didnt like it very much, although it is looking nice and has a lot to offer but basically bluemsx looks easyer to use so i think i stick to bluemsx. (and offcourse playeing a cloecovisiongame is very very retro, which i do like)

By Manuel

Ascended (19273)

Manuel의 아바타

07-03-2008, 20:16

DemonSeed, this is true I know. Before my linux era, I used NLMSX quite a lot (and that was too, because I was on a 600MHz system, too slow for BlueMSX/openMSX). But some of the basic things are not supported in that emulator (e.g. SCREEN 3).

openMSX runs on a 200MHz GP2X, so, it definately runs on a 600MHz system. Just don't demand the most fancy settings/effects.

By PingPong

Prophet (4093)

PingPong의 아바타

07-03-2008, 20:53

In some words:
bluemsx is simple to use (easy) the debugger is very user friendly.
but
openMSX is a very sofisticated tool for example you can stop execution when a program do a out(0x98),a with a=10. That's is not possible (AFAIK) in bluemsx. Not to mention Disk manipulator, a true gem....

By dvik

Prophet (2200)

dvik의 아바타

07-03-2008, 21:06

I honestly don't think openMSX is more sofisticated than blueMSX. overall they are quite equal when it comes to what you can do. the disk manipulator v9990 support and the contitional breakpoints are features that are unique to openMSX but blueMSX has quite a few unique features as well, like obsonet support, digitizer support, midi in, scsi cd audio and much more.

So I get a bit annoyed when people think that simplicity means less features. Overall I think blueMSX supports a bit more stuff than openMSX but overall its about the same.

페이지 2/5
1 | | 3 | 4 | 5