Which CPU for PCSX2 emulator?

Ahh.. Been a LONG TIME since this thread has been updated.

So anyone have any updates/experiences to share for i5/i7/or i5/i7-Sandy Bridge cpus?

 

When my new G170 with the default Processor: Intel® Core™ i7-2630QM 2.00GHz - 2.90GHz Quad Core - (32nm, 6MB L2 Cache) arrives I will definitely be testing out PCSX2.

Since there is a backlog of those systems, I don't expect to get my laptop until late February and in the worst case, beginning of March.

 

yeah with G170 you can run this on medium settings


here my laptop

runs in max at 800x600

Lenovo IdeaPad Y560 06465LU 15.6" Notebook, Intel Core i5-480M 2.66 GHZ
ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5730

 

pcsx2 is really all about speed and ok video card
emulator YouTube - Dolphin Svn : Zelda Twilight Princess GC [Perfect]

his video card it out dated
runs 2 cores and 15 threads

 

So I'm wondering, how the quad cores (Sandy Bridge 2630/2720QM) will do then. Cuz folks who sported an i5-4x0 cpu were doing fine with dolphin and pcsx2 on youtube. It seems like even the i5-430m was enough.

 

I was running PCSX2 on the laptop in my sig just fine. I played FFX and KH2 on it a few months ago. FFX worked perfectly and KH2 worked great except it would occasionally speed up. Yeah it would speed up, not slow down. Though I stopped using emulators because I could never get my PS3 controller to coordinate well with them. I can use it just fine on PC games but on the emulator the buttons would always get mixed up and I'd have to set them up manually each time I launched the emulator.

 

Yah, my biggest concern is how it'd do on the quad core mobile cpus, since there's "lower" speed on 'em.

 

I started using the latest version of pcsx2 and it has improved greatly since the last time I used it. Im running them on my system (see sig below) and I only tested 2 games, Kingdom Hearts 1 and Okami. KH runs beautifully in 720p at 60fps, but Okami gets hiccups every now and then but runs at 60fps for the most part. The only exception is that if I look at the stars in the sky it lags, lol.

 

There is no need to worry about that since Turbo Boost will take care of it.

 

ASUS N53SV vs. G53JW/SW vs. Sager NP5160 vs. Alienware m17x r3 is what I'm debating right now. I just want to get the cheapest lappy possible which will handle pcsx2/dolphin/sc2 on high or ultra. The Sager is only $800 on xoticpc, and all of the above use SB cpus. They'll be fine, right, even if I go with the 2630QM, right?

 

There are no "high" or "ultra" settings. You will not be able to run most games on bumped up resolutions on ANY laptop, even most desktops can't. Sorry.

The current best cpu for PCSX2 (and only pcsx2, negating all other games) is the 640m.

This will be the case until a sandy bridge replacement is out for that.

 

Also it's worth mentioning that kingdom hearts 2 is one of the EASIEST games to run. It's also one of the few games you can bump up the graphics on, probably at least 3x (scaling)

 

How about MvC2, Initial D, Ridge Racer, Contra Shattered Soldier, Neo Contra, or Killzone on a quad core mobile cpu?

Also, I meant high and ultra for SC2

 

Oh I see, sorry I'm reading quite a few topics.

I haven't tried those games. The most intense game I've played... either Onimusha 4 or Shadow of the Colossus. They played full fps but definitely no scaling up the grahpics/ I used speedhacks.

Quad core mobile will give you virtually no gains over dual core. In fact increased heat could be detrimental, but I wouldn't say one way or the other sinc eI have a dual core i5.

What matters for pcsx2 (that you can control) is your L2 cache and your clockspeed. The only thing you gain from moving to quad core is increased L3 cache (pretty much not going to change anything for pcsx2) and 2 more cores, which won't really do anything either.

Of course for other games/ things you'll definitely see the increase in multiple cores. I would personally choose the quad core if it's in your price range.

I personally clock at 2.66ghz (i5 i520m) and that's enough for most games. Honestly, if you're going to play some games (For example starwars battle front 2) you'll need a much better CPU anyway and most laptops just can't offer the increase you'd need.

Again, just try for like 2.8ghz in dual core mode or higher.

 

Yah, hopefully the 2630 or 2720QM does 2.8 in dual core mode.

 

The 2630QM even out performs the i7 920XM. I expect a nice boost in PCSX2 performance from the sandybridge technology and since it is 32nm, it will run cooler with the potential for higher Turbo Boost capabilities and for longer.

 

Egg-sellent! Do you think it'd be even worth it to upgrade to the 2720QM, or would it not be necessary (2ghz base/2.9ghz turbo vs. 2.2ghz base/3.3ghz turbo) ?

 

I think the cache sizes are different between the two processors as well but you are paying such a high amount extra which to me it is definately not worth it.

 

Sorry, but that's incorrect. I've had discussions with various devs at great lengths about this, centered mostly on the problems with emulating complex systems under a hyperthreaded environment; and I've personally benchmarked multiple emulation scenarios (using PCSX2, Dolphin and MAME) with post-c2d quad-core notebooks where TB should have provided significant gains to emulation and ended up worse overall than my old c2d with a slightly higher base clock. The appallingly small size of the L2 cache in the newer platforms also hurts, as most emulators rely on large low-level cache sizes for speed (the new platforms all have whopping L3 cache sizes, but that's not low-level enough). With emulation, you are definitely better served by focusing on the CPU with the fastest possible base clock and the most L2 cache than relying on the fancy tricks employed by TB and HT. Needless to say, I haven't upgraded from my three-year old 2.66ghz c2d notebook with 6MB of L2 as it's still held up as the fastest mobile emulation platform through the many tests I've done over the last several years.

With that said, I have not tested Sandy Bridge yet and probably won't for some time (good Sandy Bridge models have yet to surface, and even HP has stated that their Envy 14 won't have the new processor until September!) so who knows, maybe the platform's other efficiencies and higher base clocks over the previous generation will help. I'd be curious to see what others post in this thread about it. After all, from what I've read there are many good non-emulation reasons to buy a Sandy Bridge.

 

No, in my experience quad core is actually a speed liability. As others here have said, try to stick with a dual-core proc. Besides, no emulator that I'm aware of (certainly not PCSX2) provides advantages for quad core processors anyway (most have dual-core advantages) and according to the devs I've spoken to, they have very good reasons for not doing so.

Also, the recent die-shrink to 32nm will not provide enough heat advatages for what you want to do, since quad-core processors run at 45W or 55W. Imagine the heat a 45W quad-core system will generate while being pushed to its absolute limits under, say, a multi-hour gaming session of Shadow of the Colossus. I wouldn't risk the possible damage to your CPU unless you happen to run your notebook in a freezer. Speed throttling would probably kick in to prevent that from happening anyway, but then that would defeat the purpose of dumping tons of cash on a high-end processor that is quickly reduced to a fraction of its maximum speed.

It's a bit sad that most notebook vendors today are only selling the quad-core models (I noticed that trend continues with Sandy Bridge). It may help for most situations, including PC gaming where there's far more reliance on the GPU, but definitely not for emulation. So I'm afraid you may be stuck with a limited selection or being forced into a quad-core model.

 

There are many i7 quad-core users feedbacks and it seemed they're fine for pcsx2. You're like the first person I've ever seen who'd recommend a core 2 duo / quad over their more recent counterparts.

 

Reason why I even considered quad was the G53 and Alienware m17xR3, both of which will have the SB quads. The non-quad I considered was the Envy14, which seems to constantly sell out of their Radiance screens, or the 3820TG which doesnt offer an i5 model to the USA (don't want the 4820TG btw).

 

I'm certainly not the only one. Even in this very thread there are plenty of people who have talked about the benefits of dual-core i7s like the 640m and others, but there are other threads a Google search away if you still don't believe what we're saying.

Anyway, try one you'll see what we mean. Sure there are people who have been fine with quad-core notebooks, but keep in mind not everyone is stress testing to the limit. A game like Kingdom Hearts will run fine on a quad core or even lower-end, while not running God of War 2 or Gran Turismo 4 at anything near playable speeds. So if all you want to do is play games like that, then knock yourself out and buy a quad-core. But I'd trust your own experiences and mileage more than what someone else may say you'll have. Pay the money for a quad-core if you want, and have fun. I don't really care what you buy; I'm only speaking from my own emulation benchmarks with modern dual AND quad core platforms to try and save people time and money in advance.

 

Yep I know high-frequencies dual cores are generally better for pcsx2. I was rather talking about your remarks about quad-cores i7 being worse than quad-cores Penryn, and the L2 cache stuff because I've always heard about how Core 2 Quad generally sucked (OC aside) for pcsx2.

If the L2 cache matters so much I don't see why it's a widely acknowledged thing that Nehalem CPUs perform better in pcsx2. Then again Sandy Bridge has half the L2 cache Nehalem had and yet I'd be surprised if it performed worse. I think Clarksfield CPUs are surely not the greatest for pcsx2 but work out if they can turbo high enough, maybe with a slight overclocked, which of course supposes your notebook has a decent cooling system. But I'm almost positive Sandy Bridge quad-cores are just as fine as their dual-core counterparts seeing how they can almost reach the same speeds when using 2 cores. And somebody needs to establish a serious comparison about the heat output between Clarksfield and Sandy Bridge but I'd be very surprised if they didn't run cooler, being much more efficient and 32nm.

 

I never said quad-core i7 was worse than quad-core Penryn. I said quad-core in general is a bad idea for emulation. I don't want to keep restating the same facts to back this up, so just re-read what I've written above.

It's certainly not "widely acknowledged" that Nehalem CPUs perform better in pcsx2. Where are you getting that idea? Regardless - in my personal observations through extensive benchmarks and carefully controlled test cases, I've seen otherwise. That's all the proof I need, and I really couldn't care less what other people think they know. If you want your own hard proof, test them yourself, don't rely on third-hand accounts. You'll see what I mean.

I would also be surprised if Sandy Bridge performed worse even with a lower L2 cache, because there are other optimizations in the architecture that will probably make up for it. But that wasn't my point; rather that L2 cache makes a difference to emulation.

Clarksfield CPUs were generally garbage for PCSX2 when compared with the previous generation, pure and simple. Again, turbo does very little good for emulation - you are much better off comparing base clocks. Sandy Bridge quad-cores will only be just as fine as their dual-core counterparts IF the base clocks are the same or nearly the same. Otherwise, no. And for the money and extra heat the quad will give you under extreme emulation cases, I'd go with the dual-core any day of the week. But hey - it's your money.

I'm not sure why you are comparing Clarksfield with Sandy Bridge, since as you said Clarksfield uses a 45nm die. A better comparison would be Arrandale, since they are also 32nm - and there, Arrandale processors run cooler at 35W and 25W, rather than 55W and 45W as is the case with Sandy Bridge. So yeah, Sandy Bridge will definitely run hotter if there's any hope of it outperforming Arrandale clock for clock.

 

From the pcsx2 boards, among others.

Yea you did. See ->

Q9000/Q9100 means you're stuck at 2/2.2ghz. Unless your i7 can't sustain 2.2ghz using the turbo multipliers which would be shocking, it should be at least equal, unless Penryn beats Nehalem at pcsx2. Or you own a QX9300, but then be fair and compare it with its competitor.

Then I suppose you can disable the 2 cores you don't use and you pretty much have a dual-core. A lot of people are doing that with their Clarksfield on pcsx2 and it seems to work fine, better in fact as it saves more room for turbo.

You have your opinion based on your own experience and I respect that, just don't make me sound like a retard who can't read between the lines. I was just sharing my surprise reading your statements, that was pretty much it.

 

Im guessing Quad cores would be the best for emulators especially in this new generation CPUs.

- Quads go higher up in frequency than Dual cores. Frequency is Alpha in emulators.

- Although Quad is not supported in PCSX2 and Dolphin, you can lock threads to cores which will leave you with unused resources on the CPU which all the other programs running can use without effecting the performance on the emulated game. With Dual core CPU the emulator will use all threads/cores which will stress your system and will leave little room for other programs. Quads will never stress like crazy on 100%.

I don`t know if the coders of the emulators have implemented the instruction set AVX for Sandy bridge yet, but when they do, SB with better hertz per hertz efficiency than past generation CPUs, will kick a**

 

@ Cloudfire

Dual Core will always be able to hit higher frequencies than Quad Core simply because there is less heat and thermal envelope constraints. For PCSX2 emulation, a higher clocked Dual Core is likely to win out unless both have the same highest clocks.

 

Shure about that?
Quads running with only 2 cores active (50%) will draw less wattage than 4 cores active and will therefor stay at higher frequencies because of less thermal stress. Dual cores on the other hand are at full use in emulators and will be close to TDP throughout the whole emulator session and will therefor fall lower down in speed than Quad cores.
2820QM has 100 MHz higher DC speed than the fastest Dual core cpu, 2920XM is 200 MHz faster in DC.

I could be wrong though..

 

Interesting debate.

Now considering the i5-430m ran at 2.26ghz base (dual core mode, right?) and 2.53ghz turbo'd (single core mode, right), then we should be fine if we buy a lappy that has a cpu's base clock of at least 2.26ghz (i.e. everything that's available today), right right?

Please shed some clarity on nubs like myself

 

The i5-430M has 2/2 turbo multiplier so it can reach 2.53ghz with 2 cores active. I would say that's enough for some games and not for many others. But it's not sold anymore, it's been progressively discontinued in favor of the i5-450M (2.4ghz base clock), then i5-460M (2.53ghz) and even i5-480M (2.66ghz).

 

I intel core 5 480m 2.66 ghz
I intel core 5 750 2.66 ghz


overall intel core I5 owns quadcore when it come to PCSX2 and Dolphin

 

In what way is that comparison relevant to your point, if I may.

 

Intel core i5 750 2.66 ghz 4 cores 4 threads = same speed
Intel core i5 480m 2.66 ghz 2 cores 4 threads = same speed

PCSX2 and dolphin uses 2 cores

PCSX2 and Dolphin = super dual core speed

here recommended processors for pcsx2 and dolphin

Intel core 2 duo/ core i3 @ 3.2 ghz or faster= desktop speed
Intel core i5/i6/i7 @ 2.66Ghz or faster
AMD Phenom II/AthlonII (x2 x3 or x4) @ 3.4 Ghz or faster

the only mobile processors i know can run full speed is Intel core i5 480m

 

It's ridiculously easy to reach like 3.4+ghz on an i5-750 so you're fine with it. I think it'd be really dumb to get one of those Westmere i5-6xx instead just to run pcsx2.

As for mobile CPUs if a i5-480M runs pcsx2 flawlessly most of the time so can any higher dual-core (i5-560/580M, i7-620/640M).

 

hey tell them that i got this form somewhere else
your right

 

I have had a chance to test out some emulation on my new G170 and notice big improvements with the i7-2630QM (specs in sig). For example, Metroid Prime on Dolphin now runs up to 50 fps and is fully playable at fullHD. The frame rates do occasionally hover around the 30's but not for long and it is always perfectly smooth. Metroid Prime was never smooth enough to play previously with my i7 820qm.

A difficult NDS title to emulate called Golden Sun Dark dawn is also improved with a constant 60 fps with 0 frame skipping and advanced SPU logic enabled (resource intensive setting).

Although emulation in general has far too many variables that can effect performance, I have noticed a big frame rate increase in Shadow of the Collosus Ps2 which was previously unplayable.

Consider that these are the exact same settings at a higher resolution because I have simply copied over the exact same emulation folder from my old G860 laptop to the folder onto my new one and increased the graphic resolution settings.

I will do some more testing later and report back if I notice anything more.

I haven't set up any fps counters yet will do so later. Fight Night Round 3 for the PS2 looks beautiful at fullHD and appears to be very near to full speed now.

Edit:

More testing of NDS and PS2 shows a consistent boost in frame rates with previously unplayable games now near full speed in some cases. For example Advance Wars: Days of Ruin used to lag with a little slow down but it full speed at 60 fps now. Turbo Boost monitor shows CPU at 2.6 Ghz but resource monitor shows 3 Cores being used.

 

Dang, I remember this thread!

I have not yet tested PCSX2 on my R3, but Dolphin works wonderfully. The most graphically intense game so far is F-Zero GX, which will run at around 35fps while on battery (in windowed mode). While plugged in, it is around 60fps even on fullscreen.

Question: full-screen = 1080p, right?

Also, all other games on Dolphin work fine: MKDD, SSBM, Ikaruga, Donkey Kong Returns, SSBB. All at around 60fps most of the time.

2720qm runs at 29xx mhz according to CPU-Z, and that's for core#0. How do I check if it's running on 2 cores, cuz CPU usage is very low, around 25% at most?

 

No, fullscreen doesnt mean that the emulator renders at 1080p or whatever the native resolution is, not with pcsx2.
You need to set an appropriate internal resolution in the gdsx plugin to render to a specific resolution.
Dolphin on the other hand by using integral render actually upscales the resolution in window mode, but still you need to set an internal resolution as well.
If you use default settings youre playing the native resolution just stretched to fit your screen, so its always 640x480 but stretched.

 

Ah, just set it to 1080p. Looks NICE! 60fps still too Thx!

 

I have PCSx2 and it runs very well on my extreme Dual Core, the x9100. I have dragon ball z budokai 3 and a Kingdom Hearts 2 which both run very smooth at frame rates above 35 fps rather constantly, with few dip occasions.

 

Uh, KH2 and DBZ Budokai 3 should not be dipping at all. They should be 60.

Those are two very very light games. Make sure you use speedhacks...

 

Good to see this thread's still alive Thx guys for the continuous help!

 

So I take it that an i5-460m will be able to handle PCSX2 perfectly fine when it's running at 2.8GHz turbo? ^_^

Now I just have to worry about how in the world I'm going to get the darn thing to run on integrated graphics. I guess I'll end up sticking to consoles >.>

 

How do I see how many cores my computer is running at? And how do I see what speed each core is running at? When I use CPU-Z, it only shows "process #1", and it's greyed out, so I cant click it.

 

i5-460m will work for the majority of games. IGP won't.

 

It really depends on what games you are emulating. Some games really need a lot more CPU power. For example the God of war series can run full speed (60 fps) on a 4GHZ desktop CPU but runs around 35-40 fps on my Sandybridge CPU which is a lot more powerful than the i5.

I had problems with a few games on a dual core that ran at a constant 3.0 Ghz Turbo boosted. It is not only CPU power, it is code efficiency, game type, speed fixes, configuration etc. Too many variables really.

 

Run Windows 7 Resource Monitor and it will show all Cores as well as parked ones. It will show you percentage of Core use and you can use Turbo Boost monitor desktop widget to see speeds.

 

How do I view "Turbo Boost" monitor widget?

 

Download and follow instructions here.

I am not sure how accurate it is because it only shows one overall CPU speed though.