Basically is the article well written, but the numbers and values seems a little wrong to me, at least the ones for the sound:
Quote:
Accomplishing this means that the OS holds audio buffers for each application, and mixes samples from all of the applications into a final stream to output to speakers or headphones. The output queue while speaking to hardware also needs some buffering of its own to maintain exact sample rates.
Generally, this can end up being anywhere from 10ms to 40ms of latency.
Again, this is a latency source that is avoidable, but only in limited cases. Currently, I'm only aware of WASAPI exclusive mode. A Windows-only technology with terrible driver support. So bad that I've yet to find two systems that act similarly when following the official API.
It's rare to see a program support this, and it's even rarer for it to work all that well.
From my own experience, i can say that X-audio (currently the fastest, what MAME can offer and only under Windows 10) has approx. 45ms. and DirectX has about 110ms. WASAPI or ASIO has a max. of 4ms. Thats why i wrote before, you earn 2 frames at least.
What i dont like, is the conclusion at the end: "Realizing Our Own Limitations". That stuff seems to negate the whole article a bit. The difference with GroovyMAME+ASIO+CRT vs. official MAME+LCD regarding lag, is like day and night. You will see AND hear the difference instantly, that is a promise and of course you will *feel* it too. Especially on shmups+beatemups.
|
Index 
Flat 
Re: 'Battle Garegga and Dangun Feveron making a completely unexpected comeback
Reply
