VOGONS

Common searches


DOSBox 0.74 CPU Benchmark

Topic actions

Reply 80 of 196, by jk3one

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Yes, viewsize 120 seems to be the default. I just tested this again: With "viewsize 100" I get 43.8 FPS. With 120 its 42.4 FPS. So it is definitely close. Id like to see somebody else´s results... my Win10 is an upgraded version, and those are usually slower than a clean install.

In 320x200 (with viewport 120 and the cpu warmed up):

demo1: 134.3 FPS
demo2: 136.4 FPS
demo3: 126.2 FPS

Cheers

Reply 81 of 196, by Tertz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
jk3one wrote:

Yes, viewsize 120 seems to be the default.

default is viewsize 100. 120 removes the panel at the bottom

and those are usually slower than a clean install

In this testing clean install may give no effect, as DOSBox is hard for CPU mostly. Only if new system services appear, the difference may be noticed.

Thank you for the results.

DOSBox CPU Benchmark
Yamaha YMF7x4 Guide

Reply 83 of 196, by Tertz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
MrEWhite wrote:

New results on i7 4790k @ 4.5 GHz
800x600: 62.8,70.8,62.0
320x200: 201.1,205.1,190.4

2% rise of frq and 11% rise of fps. interesting
same OS Win8.1-64?
was new viewsize 120 used? all other settings according to the standard procedure?

DOSBox CPU Benchmark
Yamaha YMF7x4 Guide

Reply 84 of 196, by MrEWhite

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Tertz wrote:
2% rise of frq and 11% rise of fps. interesting same OS Win8.1-64? was new viewsize 120 used? all other settings according to th […]
Show full quote
MrEWhite wrote:

New results on i7 4790k @ 4.5 GHz
800x600: 62.8,70.8,62.0
320x200: 201.1,205.1,190.4

2% rise of frq and 11% rise of fps. interesting
same OS Win8.1-64?
was new viewsize 120 used? all other settings according to the standard procedure?

I am using Windows 10 Pro 64 bit actually, and viewsize 120 and used the config provided in OP.

Reply 85 of 196, by Marek

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

DOSBox 0.74:
Phenom II X4 905, 2511 Mhz, Windows 7 SP1 x64: 23.2, 25.5, 22.6
Phenom II X4 905, 2511 Mhz, Windows XP SP2 x64: 24.1, 25.6, 23.6
Phenom II X4 905, 2511 Mhz, Windows XP SP3 x86: 24.3, 26.7, 23.8
Athlon XP 2600+, Windows 2000: 11.1, 12.4, 11.5
Athlon XP 2600+, Windows 7: 10.8, 12.0, 10.5
Athlon XP 2600+, Linux Mint 17.2 DOSBox native: 9.0, 10.4, 8.9
Athlon XP 2600+, Linux Mint 17.2 DOSBox in WINE: 3.6, 4.2, 3.3
Raspberry Pi 2, 900 Mhz, Raspbian: 0.2 (3953.0s), 0.3 (3709.2s), 0.2 (4678.5s) each demo ran only once, but you'll get the idea, I guess.

Native (same settings as in DOSBox):
Pentium 200mmx, S3Vision with 2MB VRAM, UniVBE 5.1: 9.4, 10.4, 9.2
Phenom II X4 905, Windows XP SP3 x86: crashes

DOS-PC: DFI k6bv3+, Pentium 200mmx, 64 MB RAM, Terratec Maestro 32 sound card, Roland MT-32 + SC-155, Winner 2000 AVI 2MB, Voodoo 1, Win98SE
Windows PC: GigaByte GA-MA790GPT, Phenom II X4 905e, 12 GB RAM, M-Audio Delta 44, NVidia 1060 6 GB, Win7 pro x64

Reply 86 of 196, by Tertz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

MrEWhite
Thank you. Interesting that your system on 4.5 GHz has results 5% more than i7 4930K 4.6 GHz. Probably there were more improvements than just frq or happens "magick" ~10% fps jump we saw previously on some 4-core systems

Marek
Thank you. Results for 320x200 are obligate too, including for real DOS section. They were added later in the testing, hence some had no it.
For CPUs you may do a single 320x200 measure in OS wich gave best results previously, as only single result for CPU among Win OS will be added (Linux results go separately).

Raspberry Pi 2, 900 Mhz, Raspbian: 0.2 (3953.0s), 0.3 (3709.2s), 0.2 (4678.5s)

For slow systems I'd do only demo1 run once (for every resolution).
Also for more precise understanding of DOSBox emulation speed of slow systems I'd look results in synthetic tests like that.
Bay Trail systems are not bad with such background, but prices begin at $100.

Pentium 200mmx, S3Vision with 2MB VRAM, UniVBE 5.1: 9.4, 10.4, 9.2

Besides real DOS, DOSBox results for P200MMX are interesting too (demo1 only).

DOSBox CPU Benchmark
Yamaha YMF7x4 Guide

Reply 87 of 196, by DosFreak

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

DOSBox 0.74
Intel Core i7 930 @ 4.0 GHz (Win10-64) 39,43,38 / 131,134,125

For anyone looking for a speed boost using the latest DOSBox SVN with the latest QDOS binaries provides a nice increase. 😁

//UPDATED - Ran the benchmark incorrectly. The above are now accurate.

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Make your games work offline

Reply 88 of 196, by Tertz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
DosFreak wrote:

Intel Core i7 930 @ 4.0 GHz (Win10-64) 38,39,39 / 130,125,132

Thank you.
demo2 (320x200) is slower than demo1. It's not common. If it's not due to accidental background process while you could run demos only for 1 time.

DOSBox CPU Benchmark
Yamaha YMF7x4 Guide

Reply 91 of 196, by Marek

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I hooked up an old hardrive and installed Windows 98 on my Phenom II X4 905. Windows doesn't even start complaining about not enough RAM. But the relevant DOS part works and runs Quake. No 3rd party VESA driver was used, as 800x600 ran out of the box. This is of course without sound:
29.8, 29.8, 29.7 / 244.7, 249.5, 246.4

Marek wrote:

Pentium 200mmx, S3Vision with 2MB VRAM, UniVBE 5.1: 9.4, 10.4, 9.2

That was with sound. For comparison, it is slightly faster without sound: 9.7, 10.8, 9.5 / 37.5, 37.7, 35.3

Now testing DOSBox on my Pentium 200 mmx under Windows 98. Quake is loading forever right now. It was at "Locked 1 Mb Image" for several minutes, and now it is at "Locked 14 Mb data" for even longer. I hope, I can actually start timedemo sometime in the future. The Raspberry Pi 2 feels like a racing car in comparison. 😉

DOS-PC: DFI k6bv3+, Pentium 200mmx, 64 MB RAM, Terratec Maestro 32 sound card, Roland MT-32 + SC-155, Winner 2000 AVI 2MB, Voodoo 1, Win98SE
Windows PC: GigaByte GA-MA790GPT, Phenom II X4 905e, 12 GB RAM, M-Audio Delta 44, NVidia 1060 6 GB, Win7 pro x64

Reply 92 of 196, by DosFreak

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

On my P3 Mobile 866 in NT4 DosBox was able to get like 14fps in 320x and 2.6 in 800x so I don't even want to think what your P200 will get.

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Make your games work offline

Reply 93 of 196, by Tertz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Marek wrote:

I hooked up an old hardrive and installed Windows 98 on my Phenom II X4 905. Windows doesn't even start complaining about not enough RAM. But the relevant DOS part works and runs Quake. No 3rd party VESA driver was used, as 800x600 ran out of the box. This is of course without sound:
29.8, 29.8, 29.7 / 244.7, 249.5, 246.4

Real DOS mode is interesting for <= P3, as we see DOSBox performance on this level in near future and may compare. 2nd thing: your real DOS results for Phenom 2.5 GHz are on a level of P3 1.4 what is doubtful to be correct. In Phil's testing technically close Phenom II X4 945 3 GHz (frq +20%) had 700 fps, so you should get ~580. The difference is giant. For correct results in real DOS you probably need other video card (some late cards may work in 2D DOS modes not optimaly). Or/and need MTRR activated, what can be tried to be done in DOS by MTRRLFBE utility (command "mtrrlfbe lfb wc" for 800x600, "mtrrlfbe vga wc" for 320x200).

Marek wrote:

Pentium 200 mmx <...> I hope, I can actually start timedemo sometime in the future.

Thanks for real DOS fps. So with sound P200 gets 4% fps drop in SVGA.
I'd run DOSBox+Quake on a night. And tried synthetic test wich is relatively fast.

DosFreak wrote:

On my P3 Mobile 866 in NT4 DosBox was able to get like 14fps in 320x and 2.6 in 800x so I don't even want to think what your P200 will get.

Thanks for new data.
P200 may give less. For slow systems (<= P3) is also interesting additional data by synthetic tests as they may show more clear the performance of a pre-Pentium level (for P200 it may be 386 N MHz, for example).

DOSBox CPU Benchmark
Yamaha YMF7x4 Guide

Reply 94 of 196, by Marek

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
Tertz wrote:

I'd run DOSBox+Quake on a night.

It is already running since my last post. And it is still in the room with the bars.

DOS-PC: DFI k6bv3+, Pentium 200mmx, 64 MB RAM, Terratec Maestro 32 sound card, Roland MT-32 + SC-155, Winner 2000 AVI 2MB, Voodoo 1, Win98SE
Windows PC: GigaByte GA-MA790GPT, Phenom II X4 905e, 12 GB RAM, M-Audio Delta 44, NVidia 1060 6 GB, Win7 pro x64

Reply 96 of 196, by Marek

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
DosFreak wrote:

I wonder how low the fps counter can go. 0.00000001 fps?

I guess, the game will display 0.0 fps. Luckily, it also displays the time it took, so you can calculate the exact frame rate from it. That's why I also posted the time in my Raspberry Pi 2 results.
Right now, it is at the second box of nails after the lowering ceiling. Anyone fancy a 386 run? 🤣

I suspect that DOSBox takes the majority of time for it's own overhead rather then executing the game.

DOS-PC: DFI k6bv3+, Pentium 200mmx, 64 MB RAM, Terratec Maestro 32 sound card, Roland MT-32 + SC-155, Winner 2000 AVI 2MB, Voodoo 1, Win98SE
Windows PC: GigaByte GA-MA790GPT, Phenom II X4 905e, 12 GB RAM, M-Audio Delta 44, NVidia 1060 6 GB, Win7 pro x64

Reply 97 of 196, by Tertz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Marek wrote:

Anyone fancy a 386 run? 🤣

I suppose the system wich will show 0.1 fps in 800x600 is min resonable for the testing. As 386DX 40 MHz gives in Quake 320x200 1.5 fps it should give in 800x600 1.5 / 3.2 = 0.5 fps. Hence min emulation speed may to be twice less than 386DX 16 MHz. To find min system may be used Speed Test in DOSBox. In this "min CPU" quest I'd look at 486 100 MHz.

DOSBox CPU Benchmark
Yamaha YMF7x4 Guide

Reply 98 of 196, by Marek

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
Tertz wrote:

Or/and need MTRR activated, what can be tried to be done in DOS by MTRRLFBE utility (command "mtrrlfbe lfb wc" for 800x600, "mtrrlfbe vga wc" for 320x200).

I tried that and measured 30.0 fps for each in 800x600. Almost like if it vsyncs to the screen for some reason, which is 60 Hz according to my monitor.
The values for 320x200 didn't change at all. Might be very well the graphics card. Those really aren't made for DOS anymore, thus anything could happen.

Raspberry Pi 2 Raspbian in 320x200: 1.3 (768.1s), 1.3 (774.0s), 1.2 (909.2s)

Phenom II Windows 7 x64 in 320x200: 73.6, 74.5, 70.0

My Pentium 200 mmx is still shooting at the scrags. 😵
EDIT: Just bumped at the locked door. Only a few hour to go. 😀

DOS-PC: DFI k6bv3+, Pentium 200mmx, 64 MB RAM, Terratec Maestro 32 sound card, Roland MT-32 + SC-155, Winner 2000 AVI 2MB, Voodoo 1, Win98SE
Windows PC: GigaByte GA-MA790GPT, Phenom II X4 905e, 12 GB RAM, M-Audio Delta 44, NVidia 1060 6 GB, Win7 pro x64

Reply 99 of 196, by Tertz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Thank you for Raspberry and Phenom II fps.

Marek wrote:

Almost like if it vsyncs to the screen for some reason, which is 60 Hz according to my monitor.

The correct result in Phil's testing was on Radeon 7750, wich is rather modern. Maybe AMD cards work better in DOS, at least some up to 7xxx series. To connect through analog VGA output may be good idea too.

My Pentium 200 mmx is still shooting at the scrags.

Looks as >24h. I thought P200MMX will do better, if you do demo1 only even in both resolutions.
If it's not hard, is good then to test P200 by Speed Test in DOSBox to get more precise data about its emulation speed.

Last edited by Tertz on 2015-09-02, 07:45. Edited 1 time in total.

DOSBox CPU Benchmark
Yamaha YMF7x4 Guide