/tech/ - Technology★

Are you talking about qemu?

nobody wants to spend a year porting an emulator to run doom at 3fps.

x86 emulation on ARM is already painfully slow. Why the fuck would you want to emulate on micro-controllers?

>emulating CISC on a RISC architecture

It's ass. This is why CISC will always be superior in this case. Emulating RISC on CISC is a lot easier than vice-versa

>>886429

>CISC > RISC

I would much rather have IPC approach as close to 1 as possible.

>>886435

With emulation it really depends on the instructions themselves as opposed to bare metal. CISC, do to its very nature, can never be emulated 1:1 on a RISC machine

qemu, Bochs, DOSbox, PCem

Not sure about the last one, but the others run on whatever architecture you want them to run. There are plenty of people playing DOS games on their phones right now.

>>886325 (OP)

>>886424

Hack this, spread the word

https://eltechs.com/product/exagear-desktop/

>>886467

>Why not just stick some x86 hardware on a board/card attached to the main RISC computer that's used exclusively to run an x86 guest?

they already have that, it's called Intel ME and AMD PSP.

>>886467

Let's go a step further and just get an FPGA card, which we will reprogram on the go with whatever hardware we need at the moment, from x86 processor to additional GPU to hardware sound synthesizer.

>>886472

See >>886468

>>886467

>stick some x86 hardware on a board/card attached to the main RISC computer

you mean a co-processor?

>>886445

>>886429

Modern x86 processors are already essentially a CISC ISA emulated on RISC.

>>886467

It's been done in the 80's, but nowadays it's better to avoid x86 hardware unless you enjoy botnet and bugs gallore. I guess it would be okay if you stuck with 80386 chips.

Amiga sidecar. Later they made better ones (including 80486) that fitted on a Zorro card to plug into your A2000, A3000, or A4000 case.

http://amiga.resource.cx/exp/a1060

>>886728

If you enjoy spending $300 on ancient hardware, I have seen Pentium 2 class boards for old PowerMacs with PCI. Probably no 3D acceleration unless you get a really late model however. If I had the Power Mac G3/G4 and the money to spare, I'd probably try it out. It's just a bit too expensive for my taste though.

>>886719

>NOT COPY PROTECTED

Thanks for making me cry, jerk

>>886468

Nobody is going to buy your emulator kike.

>>886338

Kek, this.

Also the Russians are now selling an enhanced x86 QEMU backend for the Pi for a couple bucks that's 10x faster than the open source one. They plan on releasing their code yearly, which is awfully nice of them.

>>887456

>sauce?

Also could it be ported to POWER?

>>886743

>old 386DX/33

>barely enough to run Doom, and that not too well

>"enough to run every DOS game I care about"

Apparently you're an 80s DOS games afficionado.

>>888505

So why exactly was a focus on quality and taking the customer seriously (or at least not considering him an idiot by default) abandoned in the 90s?

>>888554

>SSM

You mean SMM (System Management Mode)?

Also if Carmack started to work on the Amiga rather than PC in the late 80s (supposedly Amiga was recommended to him but he did not have enough funds to buy one so he chose to rent a PC instead) and if id made games like Wolf3D and Doom for Amiga rather than PC, things could have worked out quite differently (as they did, Doom actually was pretty much the penultimate nail in the Amiga's coffin, second only to the collapse of Commodore the following year).

>>888558

Doom would not have changed much. The Amiga was already showing its age at the time and Commodore was not willing to update it or license it to companies who were willing to update it. And by the time Escom bought the IP things were already too late.

>>888554

>They killed off the affordable competition (Atari, Amiga, etc.)

When IBM stumbled into PC scene, every competitor were shooting themselves in the foot, IBM didn't need to kill anyone.

>>888644

And then IBM themselves were immediately blown the fuck out by various cheapo clones, it is really hilarious when you think about it.

>>888647

IBM wanted to abandon the PC for their new PS/2 system, while the market said "nah, we wanna stick to PC now, be it with or without you IBM".

>>888785

>Anyway, they pushed the shitty Win95 hard and OS/2 didn't make it despite being much better. It's like they settled on the worst possible platform.

Wrong bro. The NT kernel is the best possible platform and when it got 95's UI and Plug and Play and DirectX the competition was shut what they call the fuck down for good. Linux is still Le Resistance with curly mustaches. OSX doesn't pay the bills.

>>897768

>The NT kernel is the best possible platform and when it got 95's UI and Plug and Play and DirectX the competition was shut

It was in 2001 with XP that NT and 9x were completely merged, and XP was mature by SP2 in 2004 (reflecting this, Microsoft reset its lifecycle so its mainstream support lasted til 2009 and extended support til 2014, rather than 2006/2011 as originally planned). Still, only a few years after many if not most good things about NT5 were thrown away with Vista, and a de-evolution (somewhat alleviated by 7, but just temporarily) began.

To keep living in interesting /tech/ years one would need to go from Dec 31, 2006 back to Jan 1, 1990.

>>897809

Sure, that's fine. I'd just stock up on Amiga 3000's and never touch a PC again.

>>888571

Raycasting "2.5D" 3D graphics like Wolf/Doom were basically impossible on Amiga/Atari due to their "planar pixel" video chipsets. Great for 2D, but "chunky pixels" were the only way to go for 3D.

>>886719

>>886838

I believe this is from a time when Copy Protection used to fuck with floppy discs hard, making them unusable much of the time, to the point where a lack of copy protection was a feature.

>>888520

Because that was the time when idiots started buying computers.