Check if it works with core=normal under windows-dosbox.
Also verify that the dosbox configuration files are equal, especially the
ems= entry and related things.

I'd advice you to use a Linux version of MAME, or even MAMEUI32 under Windows to build that cabinet.

I tried some time ago to run an old DOS version of MAME under DOSBox, and the speed was so low it was completely unusable.

I was thinking the same thing. I'd simply use the Windows version, as it's much easier to configure and run than the Linux version, and has very good hardware support because of the underlying OS (controllers, sound, video, etc.). I once tried to setup a cab with a PII/350 under XP, and the CPU was a little too slow to run MAME games in full speed - i guess with a CPU that's a bit faster, you'll be good to go. You won't need a fancy graphics card, too, as MAME doesn't use hardware 3D acceleration at all. Another benefit of using the Windows version would be that you can choose from a number of very good frontends - the pinnacle being GameEx, if your cab machine can handle it (the program is quite demanding for a frontend, but it's highly configurable, and looks fabulous). Another benefit is the sheer number of emulators available on Windows - you could build a arcade/console/computer (home computers, DOS, etc.) cab, and play freeware/commercial games, all on the same machine.

I can't say much about the speed of the DOS version, but i think it would be a nightmare to get a "normal" controller working in DOS. Keyboard-emulating arcade controllers wouldn't probably be a problem, of course.

AdvanceMAME is a project to specifically support Arcade VGA cards, and it's quite difficult to configure it for "normal" graphics cards. There's a nice boot CD called AdvanceCD, which boots a small Linux, and the AdvanceMenu MAME frontend. This is a nice way to have a look at the Linux version of AdvanceMAME, and the ISO can easily be altered to add additional ROMs, change settings, etc. . But sadly, all Advance projects are pretty much dead now, because the original coder "switched out of the emulation hobby", as he says on the Advance Projects website.

Oh, and why are you using these ancient MAME versions?! Currently MAME's at 0.127, and that build should be available on all major OSs.

Thanks WD, Neville and Addict. Good advice, which I will definately be following up. I was using DOS mame from the http://www.arcadeathome.com/ site as I wanted to get mame resources all from one site and many sites didn't seem to have mame binaries for all platforms. It seems development has sadly stopped for the DOS version of mame. It's really hard to find, but I think I may have just found the last version of DOS mame which is version 1.06. I know running mame inside DOSBox would be slow, but it was really for the convenience of being able to work on the cab build from any platform, which is one of the reasons I didn't want to use Windows. I'd prefer an instant boot DOS based cab and easy cross platform development.

Alternatively I suppose I could use Windows 98 / ME as a small footprint OS host to mame, then I could develop this cab build on a Virtual Box Virtual machine which I could work on in Linux, OSX and Windows since virtual box is available for all platforms. I really wanted to go back to the simplicity of DOS and thought DOSBox would be ideal for my plans.

Many thanks for all the suggestions.

ADDiCT, kxmame is just as easy to use and configure as any Windows MAME GUI. 😉

Snover, i'll check it out during my next Linux venture (i work in XP most of the time, but i like to check out new distributions from time to time, and play around a bit). But still, have you seen GameEx? If you have an XP install, try it - it looks amazing out of the box, and is very well suited for cab usage (full controller support in the frontend, ability to map controller buttons to keys (exit emulators, etc.), and so on). I think i've seen all the frontends on Windows, and GameEx is the most functional by far. kxmame looks a bit like the Win32 MAME GUI, and thus isn't very useful in a cab (KDE on a cab would be overkill, too).

I haven't, and their Web site reliably crashes my browser, which is a neat trick. MythTV has a plugin called MythGames, which is a similar frontend for a MythTV installation (and does more than just MAME), if a standard GUI doesn't work. Here's some dude running it on an Xbox. Oh, the irony!

Been there, done that... (not with MythTV though). The Xbox is a wonderful console (i own two chipped ones), but it hasn't got enough RAM to run Linux and apps with good performance. I didn't try MAME under Xbox Linux yet, but i bet it's too slow to play anything more recent than Pac-Man or Joust. The whole Linux on the Xbox-thing is more of a tech demo than anything else, sadly. Still a great media player, though (XBMC!). (;

I wonder why the guy from the link you've posted isn't just using the native emulator ports. They'd run _much_ better than the Linux ports, and thanks to XPort and a few other coders, there are native Xbox ports of (nearly) all "major" emulators (MAME, Daphne, FBA, VBA, etc. - even DOSBox).

If you're only remotely interested in gaming/emulation frontends on Windows, there's no way around GameEx. I've spent _ages_ configuring AdvanceMenu, MaLa, and other frontends, and none of them were as good looking or flexible, or worked as well as GameEx. C'mon Snover, you should be able to get around a crashing browser, shouldn't you?! (;

In case anyone wonders why i'm so exited about this frontend stuff: i love emulation. My dream is one machine which plays _anything_, and is hooked up both to a TV set, and a LCD monitor. The Xbox came very, very close to that dream, but sadly, the console can't play HD video (too slow, not enough RAM), and is too slow to conveniently browse the web. So the only solution IMHO is a relatively powerful HTPC, with a nice looking and functional frontend. That would give you the best of all worlds - you could run the latest emulator builds, play Windows games, all kind of media (video, audio, etc.), and have a cool looking interface that's easy to use with a controller or a remote. _And_ you could have the occasional bluescreen, too. (;

ADDiCT wrote:

C'mon Snover, you should be able to get around a crashing browser, shouldn't you?! (;

I did. I just didn't have the heart to tell you how poor MameEx looks compared to MythGames 😉

Interestingly, I can run dmame.exe in both Windows and Mac versions of DOSBox when core=normal or simple. Simple mode seems to show more fps than normal mode. This seems to suggest that dynamic compilation is broken on the Mac version of DOSBox, since as soon as you set core=auto or dynamic you get page faults. Unfortunately DOSBox in core=simple/normal mode is too slow to use. Funnily enough I can run XP at a rate of knots within VMWare fusion. I'm going to try freedos running within virtual box, that will hopefully give me a fast DOS environment that will let me move my DOS C drive between OSX, Linux and Windows.

Thanks for the info, especially about the linux ports and windows front ends, I am going to investigate all of these options.
<SOLVED>