I also want to thank you for the feature, it makes DOSBox work smoother, and easier to use. It's great.

So what does CyclesAuto do, for the total noobs like me?

I`m guessing it sets the most appropriate cycles per game you play via dosbox?

icemann - I think you guess right 😉
And not just per game I think, but per moment.

From reading the code (but note that I haven't talked to any of the developers about this so I might be wrong), the idea seems to be that you can just say cycles=auto in the conf file and dosbox will then aim at eating about 80-90% of your CPU's power, so that it runs almost as fast as it can, but without making other things unresponsive. The same idea basically as the timesynch/coreswitch patch from gulizoka's (sp?) page, which ought to be no longer needed as soon as the remaining problems are worked out.

Interesting, why include this glitchy feature, when there was perfectly working and MUCH better "timesync" patch? Now timesync considered "obsolete" by Gulikoza, while "cyclesauto" remains completely useless so far (considering sound problems and impossibility of speed regulation). 🙁

huh?

Since you obviously know so much about how timesync and autocycles work explain to us how TimeSync is so much better than AutoCycles.

Please. I'd really like to hear this.

DosFreak wrote:

huh?

Since you obviously know so much about how timesync and autocycles work explain to us how TimeSync is so much better than AutoCycles.

Please. I'd really like to hear this.

First of all, I apologize if I did hurt anyone's feelings.😘 Second, I don't know "much about how timesync and autocycles work" in terms of coding, if you ask about that, and so far I have no desire to know. I judge from the "end-user" position, and for me TimeSync is better, because:
1. I don't get any sound stuttering problems.
2. I don't get any occasional slowdown problems.
3. I can set maximum speed limit.

I admit that #1 & #2 are most troubling with the "dynamic" core being used, but occasionally they happen to appear even with the "normal" core. Besides, I almost always use dynamic core for its speed.

P.S. Btw, DosFreak, are you the creator of the "AutoCycles"?

The TimeSync patch created problems with certain games, especially
non-working sound detection. Thus the AutoCycles is the better choice,
if you want something faster you can always buy a new pc.

wd wrote:

The TimeSync patch created problems with certain games, especially
non-working sound detection.

Maybe it created problems with sound detection, I don't know. I've never used autodetection anyway (if that was what you meant). The AutoCycles creates problem with about 60% games I have (minimum), and not with "sound detection", but with sound itself.

wd wrote:

Thus the AutoCycles is the better choice,
if you want something faster you can always buy a new pc.

Thank you very much for the advice. I have Athlon64 FX-55 with 2 gb RAM and GForce 6800 Ultra. Would you be so kind to tell me what parts of my PC I must upgrade to have no problems with AutoCycles?
By the way, occasional slowdowns appear to happen exactly because of high speed. Cycles jump like crazy all the way from 100 to 100000 and back every 5 seconds during the intros, for example, causing sound stuttering and slowdowns.

P.S. I have nothing against AutoCycles in general. But in its current state it is glitchy, and makes many games unplayable (ok, unenjoyable) with sound. Why was it necessary to include it in the main code in the present condition, I can't understand.

> I've never used autodetection anyway

The affected games do that themselves.

If you got sound stuttering, try a fixed cycle count using the dynamic
core if possible.

Happy Prince wrote:

Thank you very much for the advice. I have Athlon64 FX-55 with 2 gb RAM and GForce 6800 Ultra. Would you be so kind to tell me what parts of my PC I must upgrade to have no problems with AutoCycles?

Thats why I always set my cycles manually, and why D-fend is really useful. I just test what the game *needs* not my PC's maximum. You'll get stuttering and bad performance that way. I've got an FX-53 and I never have problems with stuttering on evern the most demanding games if I set the cycles myself.

Auto is just for if you are having trouble finding that ideal max cycles - once you do find it, then remember what it was and set it manually to that value.

With the official 0.65 release I had this problem:

The autocycles feature was bugged and would lower the cycles but not increase them again. Also, sound would sound really warped and horrible opposed to the changed mixer in the latest CVS which skips sound.

The latest CVS seems to work much better but yes, it's lacking a maximum cycle amount - some games run too fast at higher cycles, yet benefit from auto cycles. Timesynq was pretty much perfect - now I get occasional sound stutters when the game suddenly needs a lot more CPU power, and the cycles take a split second to catch up.

My builds have autocycle limiter...it's really a very simple addition and much better for older games 😀

> Also, sound would sound really warped and horrible opposed
> to the changed mixer in the latest CVS which skips sound

There was nothing changed in the CVS after the release.

> it's lacking a maximum cycle amount

Dunno, but that's not what the autocycles is for, just set
the cycles to a fixed value.

wd wrote:

> Also, sound would sound really warped and horrible opposed
> to the changed mixer in the latest CVS which skips sound

This was fixed before release (mixer)... He is a bit confused... 😀

wd wrote:

it's lacking a maximum cycle amount
Dunno, but that's not what the autocycles is for, just set
the cycles to a fixed value.

Well, it would be nice to have the combination: autocycles, but with possibility to specify upper limit... I think myself that it would be quite usefull.

Mirek

With all the releases I have on my hard drive, no surprise I got confused 😜 It was RC1 or 2 that had that problem.

wd wrote:

> If you got sound stuttering, try a fixed cycle count using the dynamic
core if possible.

The problem is, many games have different "ideal" cycle requirements on some stages. For example, in Privateer there are 3 parts: cinematic sequences, land views and space combat. During the cinematics the cycles on my system may go from 20k to as far as 70k (I've never tried more) without problem, on the bases it is better to set them around 30k, and in space - 45k. Lesser of higher settings for each part sometimes caused trouble with speed (too slow or too fast).
Btw, I must admit that Privateer is one of the few games which work flawlessly on my system with AutoCycles. 😀

gulikoza wrote:

My builds have autocycle limiter...it's really a very simple addition and much better for older games 😀

Could you tell how to limit cycles in your build, please? I guess, that would help to get rid of sound problems.

When in autocycle mode, the cycles are always limited to what it was set before autocycle mode was activated (if activated with ctrl-=). If autocycle mode is started from dosbox.conf, the cycles are limited to 150.000. And you can always change the limit with ctrl-f11/f12. This works the same as previous timesync patch - the cycles will be lower if the game is demanding, but will never rise above the limit...

gulikoza wrote:

When in autocycle mode, the cycles are always limited to what it was set before autocycle mode was activated (if activated with ctrl-=). If autocycle mode is started from dosbox.conf, the cycles are limited to 150.000. And you can always change the limit with ctrl-f11/f12. This works the same as previous timesync patch - the cycles will be lower if the game is demanding, but will never rise above the limit...

Thank you very much. 😀 It helps indeed with AutoCycles' sound and speed problems.