Psp Emulator?

[q9Lp4dzYzu]

Sorry for the double post here but I couldn't find a way to edit my previous post.

I was wondering what DroneB Dev meant by ,"that reminds me they are almost finished in pandora emulator 99.9% of more nop's"

I have no idea what he was saying.

 

[God Ginrai]

Also, for most people, a PSP is just not worth it.

That's a bit presumptuous of you to say, isn't it? :blink:

Not at all, really. If you're already getting a Pandora, then it will beat the PSP in homebrew, so the only reason you would get a PSP is for the PSP games. The PSP does have some decent games, but not enough to warrant buying the system. (unless you are a diehard fan of one of the series the game is from) Especially since Load times are a big negative for a handheld system. UMD was a bad idea on Sony's part, and only a diehard PSP fanboy would say otherwise. Hell, even Sony's recognized that and came out with the PSP Go.

-God Ginrai

 

[Tensuke]

There are a ton of great games for the PSP, too bad I'll spend all my time playing my Pandora to care.

 

[wermy]

Not at all, really. If you're already getting a Pandora, then it will beat the PSP in homebrew, so the only reason you would get a PSP is for the PSP games. The PSP does have some decent games, but not enough to warrant buying the system. (unless you are a diehard fan of one of the series the game is from) Especially since Load times are a big negative for a handheld system. UMD was a bad idea on Sony's part, and only a diehard PSP fanboy would say otherwise. Hell, even Sony's recognized that and came out with the PSP Go.

I agree the UMD format was a bad idea, and the load times are horrible (some youtube videos about that with yackety-sax music come to mind...). But I got a used PSP-1000 at the beginning of this year to tinker around with while waiting for the Pandora for $80 on ebay -- it has been more than worth it for the homebrew alone (in fact, I've wondered why someone would buy a Dingoo for the same price, as has been popular around here). I could also see people who aren't able to plunk down $330 on a Pandora using it as a good alternative. Anyway, my only real point was that the worth is in the eye of the purchaser. Sorry to everyone for going OT.

 

[WizardStan]

I do have a psp, the thing is if I bought a pandora I wouldn't want to carry around 2 handhelds

This is an argument that confuses me. Wouldn't it be easier to just not play games on 2 handhelds at the same time? Or keep your PSP gaming for long haul travel, where it really is no problem to pack an extra system, or at home where you don't have to worry about packing it. I'm entirely certain the there will be enough games on the Pandora in the form of original homebrew and emulated that you will never have to even consider PSP, really.

 

[God Ginrai]

Not at all, really. If you're already getting a Pandora, then it will beat the PSP in homebrew, so the only reason you would get a PSP is for the PSP games. The PSP does have some decent games, but not enough to warrant buying the system. (unless you are a diehard fan of one of the series the game is from) Especially since Load times are a big negative for a handheld system. UMD was a bad idea on Sony's part, and only a diehard PSP fanboy would say otherwise. Hell, even Sony's recognized that and came out with the PSP Go.

I agree the UMD format was a bad idea, and the load times are horrible (some youtube videos about that with yackety-sax music come to mind...). But I got a used PSP-1000 at the beginning of this year to tinker around with while waiting for the Pandora for $80 on ebay -- it has been more than worth it for the homebrew alone (in fact, I've wondered why someone would buy a Dingoo for the same price, as has been popular around here). I could also see people who aren't able to plunk down $330 on a Pandora using it as a good alternative. Anyway, my only real point was that the worth is in the eye of the purchaser. Sorry to everyone for going OT.

You misunderstood what my response was about then. I was responding to someone who said to buy a PSP. He was telling this to someone who was already getting the Pandora. That means he would own both handhelds, making homebrew pointless on the PSP, because the Pandora is capable of much more. My posts were based on the assumption that owning a PSP, when already owning a Pandora, would not have much use. I can see why people would get a PSP for homebrew if they do not already have a handheld that satisfies those needs.

-God Ginrai

 

[Yigguth]

If you don't feel like carrying around two consoles then it's up to you to decide what's more important to you, emulation and homebrew or retail games

 

[God Ginrai]

If you don't feel like carrying around two consoles then it's up to you to decide what's more important to you, emulation and homebrew or retail games

Emulation and retail games are almost synonymous. This guy just wants to be able to emulate more so that he doesn't have to lug around a system which he can't emulate.

-God Ginrai

 

[Yigguth]

I guess what I meant was current-gen retail games. Don't get me wrong, I would love to have a working PSP emulator on my Pandora, but I just don't see it happening. At least not at a fast enough speed to replace an actual PSP. I know some people are willing to put up with extremely slow FPS, but I think you should just get a PSP and save yourself the trouble. That's just my opinion anyways, people can do whatever they want!

 

[hlidegp2x]

I think you should recognize the fact that hlide mentioned that PSP could possibly run at playable speeds on the Pandora. So unless JFR decides to give up on the emulator, I think we could easily see upwards of 5fps.

-God Ginrai

Right now, i'm working on PCSP (so a C++ PSP emulator on PC) but I would still love to make a port on Pandora if I ever receive it someday. HLE (firmware API) and GE (GPU) are still vastly incomplete, so very few games are working now.

I'm also experimenting a static recompiler as a proof of concept. Now it only generates a function per basic block (which mean those functions are very small) which is called through an array of functions pointers which are compatible with the interpreter (still used in some cases as a fallback) but I can achieve a x 3.5 speed compared with the interpreter version. Indeed I'd like to improve my static recompiler so I can generates a function per super block (a set of basic blocks with direct jumps between them instead of dispatching them through an array of functions pointers) to give to the compiler more opportunity to optimize the code. And to reduce the register context saving/restoring by using local register as much as possible. And yes, VFPU is still missing in PCSP so 3D is not ready.

But I must admit it's a very big work :/.

 

[God Ginrai]

I guess what I meant was current-gen retail games. Don't get me wrong, I would love to have a working PSP emulator on my Pandora, but I just don't see it happening. At least not at a fast enough speed to replace an actual PSP. I know some people are willing to put up with extremely slow FPS, but I think you should just get a PSP and save yourself the trouble. That's just my opinion anyways, people can do whatever they want!

I feel similarly about the Dreamcast, but I'm willing to give them the opportunity to prove me wrong.

I think you should recognize the fact that hlide mentioned that PSP could possibly run at playable speeds on the Pandora. So unless JFR decides to give up on the emulator, I think we could easily see upwards of 5fps.

-God Ginrai

Right now, i'm working on PCSP (so a C++ PSP emulator on PC) but I would still love to make a port on Pandora if I ever receive it someday. HLE (firmware API) and GE (GPU) are still vastly incomplete, so very few games are working now.

I'm also experimenting a static recompiler as a proof of concept. Now it only generates a function per basic block (which mean those functions are very small) which is called through an array of functions pointers which are compatible with the interpreter (still used in some cases as a fallback) but I can achieve a x 3.5 speed compared with the interpreter version. Indeed I'd like to improve my static recompiler so I can generates a function per super block (a set of basic blocks with direct jumps between them instead of dispatching them through an array of functions pointers) to give to the compiler more opportunity to optimize the code. And to reduce the register context saving/restoring by using local register as much as possible. And yes, VFPU is still missing in PCSP so 3D is not ready.

But I must admit it's a very big work :/.

That sounds really cool. It's been a while since I last saw one of your posts. It's good to see you're still around.

-God Ginrai

 

[dflemstr]

@hlide:
Wasn't it you who wanted me to do some Qt work for PCSP? After we exchanged some messages, I never heard from you again... (and for some reason, I can't send you PMs; full inbox?)
Anyways, how did it go? Do you still use Wx for the GUI? Still wanting to use Qt instead?

 

[hlidegp2x]

@hlide:
Wasn't it you who wanted me to do some Qt work for PCSP? After we exchanged some messages, I never heard from you again... (and for some reason, I can't send you PMs; full inbox?)
Anyways, how did it go? Do you still use Wx for the GUI? Still wanting to use Qt instead?

indeed, pcsp is swicthing to Qt and shadow is loving it.

We want to split the emulator into several executables according the need :

- generic emulator (interpreter source only) : we can launch any games (supposedly they can run)
- specific game emulator (interpreter source + statically recompiled C++ source of the specific game generated by a prxtool I modified)
- game launcher so a user can select a game to run : running the specific emulator if it exists
- debugger : self-speaking

My part of the project is stalling because I'm pretty busy with my flat moving and my job.

If you are still interested with pcsp, I'll be glad to add you in our devteam. Your Qt expertise may be a precious help.

PS: my inbox is less than 1% so i don't think it is the issue