christo930
Well-Known Member
Is it better to run PAL games when possible since they only run at 50 fps? Thats 20% fewwer frames than ntsc. All other things considered, is it best to run pal games?
I also have a question about what the minimum fps should be. In the US we have a tv refresh of 60, but interlaced, which means there is really only 30. When emulating consoles, would you miss anything by doing a frameskip of 1 (which would produce 30fps the same as a tv). Is this the same for PAL? Does PAL run at 50 interlaced frames per second producing 25 or is it 50 full frames per second.
One last thing, I noticed that many games can run with a much slower clock rate than the emulator defaults to. Many older games in MAME for example, can run at much slower cpu clock speeds and it greatly increases battery life. The same can be said for many of the console emulators. I make sure I run the cpu at the lowest possible speed for the game I am playing and it signifcanly improves battery life.
Chris
I also have a question about what the minimum fps should be. In the US we have a tv refresh of 60, but interlaced, which means there is really only 30. When emulating consoles, would you miss anything by doing a frameskip of 1 (which would produce 30fps the same as a tv). Is this the same for PAL? Does PAL run at 50 interlaced frames per second producing 25 or is it 50 full frames per second.
One last thing, I noticed that many games can run with a much slower clock rate than the emulator defaults to. Many older games in MAME for example, can run at much slower cpu clock speeds and it greatly increases battery life. The same can be said for many of the console emulators. I make sure I run the cpu at the lowest possible speed for the game I am playing and it signifcanly improves battery life.
Chris