Actually, it IS relevant... I was responding to this:lord_danzig wrote:eightdayregret you raise some good points. though i'm not sure why the conversation about emulation on the Wii console, it's irrelevant. Also, you fail to recognize that better emulation of the SNES console was already achieved on the 1st gen PSP. the reason why emulation of the SNES is lacking on the vita is due to the limited nature of the exploits, eCFW and ARK. they have very limited access to the Vita's system resources, so the emulators don't have the power they usually would.
it seems programmers are left with two options -- either rewrite the emulators from scratch with the currently limited resources of the vita in mind, or wait for a Userland UVL or Kernel exploit of the Vita, which would give them much more power to work with and make the job a lot easier.
pridefuldawn also makes a good point. if the GBA can be emulated at the speed it is now (not fullspeed, but very close in many games), the SNES clearly can as well. the GBA was the more powerful system. it's just a matter of a very good emu being written, which is not likely at this point IMO.
And the question I was answering was in regard to the PSP, NOT the Vita. And the person I was responding to brought up the Wii.udo4ever wrote:pridefuldawn wrote:I mean has anybody come to general consensus on the best SNES Emulator?
It seems that almost every psp/vita community recommends SNES9x(Including Wololo), but I have found that Eurphoria emulates alot of games better, such as Contra 3.
Also the lastest version of SNEX9X didn't work for me until ARC was released, now it works fine.
The emulation is very subpar for the SNES on the psp, which is pretty baffling because of how old the system is(GBA has perfect emulation, but the SNES does not.)
I second that... I really do wonder why the snes emulator struggles when compared to the gba emulator. The standard answer I get is that emulating the snes is complicated but such an answer seems rather vague and sounds like bolocks to me. Not that I know coding, but emulating the snes seems to work flawlessly on other devices like the wii, while gba emulators struggle to keep up with the same pace. Thus, this leads me to believe that gba is usually more ressource hungry and difficult to emulate. Granted the Wii and the psp ain't the same type of machine...
So now all of a sudden, this conversation has taken another unexpected turn because someone didn't read something. I mean no disrespect, but if you're gonna tell me I'm wrong about something, you should at least take a look at the other posts prior to what I said before doing. so.
And if the SNES emulation was better on the PSP-1000 (even with the lack of extra RAM of the 2000 models), why isn't it still going well now?
The PSP's OS is pretty much the PSP's OS. By your argument, the older versions of the SNES emulator should work, which would mean that this whole argument about the quality of SNES emulation on the PSP would be completely invalid because we'd have, how did you put it? "better emulation of the SNES console was already achieved on the 1st gen PSP" And then you go on to say that what I said is invalid in relation to the Vita, even though I never mentioned the Vita, and neither did the person whose question I was answering.
You're talking about a PSP emulator running a SNES emulator on a Vita.... You can't comment on SNES support for the Vita, considering THERE ARE NO HOMEBREWS FOR THE VITA. Everything we're using was programmed for the PSP.
When there's actually an emulator programmed FOR THE VITA, then this will be a valid point, but for now, it isn't even remotely a valid point to bring up anything as far as "Vita support."
The model of the PSP is not the problem, it's the emulator.
If it doesn't work on a 2000, it's not gonna work on a 1000, 3000, or Go. The hardware is not gonna do a whole lot to change that. If an emu is set up only to use the smaller amount of RAM that's on the 1000, then it's just not gonna take advantage of the full amount of RAM on the 2000, 3000, and Go. It's not gonna make it run worse.
Now if you're talking the opposite (as in an emu programmed for the 2000 that takes advantage of the full amount of added RAM, but used on a 1000), then, yeah, I can see you saying that such and such worked better. But to say that the 2000 runs emus worse than the 1000 is completely inaccurate.
At the very least, they run them the same, if not the 2000 running the emu slightly better because of the extra headroom.