If I had the skill, I would make a good jaguar emulator that plays commercial games. I am only just learning C though, and don't know enough to do anything. I am suprised that as long as Jaguar has been out, there aren't very many good emulators for it.
There are only 2 existing 64-bit consoles in the world, (to my knowledge) both of which are cartridge based, and I'm glad to say i own them both: Jaguar and N64.
Technical: Now tell me, is Jag really 64-bit? I heard it was really only 32-bit with a processor slower than that of the SNES/SFC. IMO, it does look 64-bit, it just doesn't have the textures that N64 has, making it appear more like the Sega 32X.
0
Jaguar Emulation
Started by RK Sparxster, Sep 21 2002 3:42 AM
10 replies to this topic
#2 OFFLINE
Starcat
-
-
- 977 posts
Dragonstomper
- Location:Germany
Posted Sat Sep 21, 2002 3:52 AM
Hi !
That is a questions that was been asked really often. Many people argue about it, even today.
The Jaguar has the following components:
64-Bit Object Processor (no own instruction set)
64-Bit Blitter (no own instruction set, can be fed with valued and started)
32-Bit GPU (own instruction set, can be fully programmed)
32-Bit DSP (own instruction set, can be fully programmed)
16-Bit MC 68000 (own instruction set, can be fully programmed)
All of these components is ahead of the SNES when it comes to performace.
However as the architectures of the SNES and Jaguar are completely different and also the requirements for performance are completely different, it is not easy to compare the systems directly.
However you can be sure that it has better hardware than the SNES. After all the SNES is from 91 and the Jag from 93 (almost 94)
Regards, Lars.
That is a questions that was been asked really often. Many people argue about it, even today.
The Jaguar has the following components:
64-Bit Object Processor (no own instruction set)
64-Bit Blitter (no own instruction set, can be fed with valued and started)
32-Bit GPU (own instruction set, can be fully programmed)
32-Bit DSP (own instruction set, can be fully programmed)
16-Bit MC 68000 (own instruction set, can be fully programmed)
All of these components is ahead of the SNES when it comes to performace.
However as the architectures of the SNES and Jaguar are completely different and also the requirements for performance are completely different, it is not easy to compare the systems directly.
However you can be sure that it has better hardware than the SNES. After all the SNES is from 91 and the Jag from 93 (almost 94)
Regards, Lars.
#3 OFFLINE
LinkoVitch
-
-
- 1,955 posts
Stargunner
- Location:Manchester UK
Posted Sat Sep 21, 2002 5:36 AM
I heard that the SNES core was a Z80 based CPU.. (well it's housekeeping CPU).
so that would be ikky..
I thought the jags GPU was 64 bit?
so that would be ikky..
I thought the jags GPU was 64 bit?
#4 OFFLINE
Starcat
-
-
- 977 posts
Dragonstomper
- Location:Germany
Posted Sat Sep 21, 2002 7:46 AM
Hi !
No, the Jag GPU is 32-Bit. However it has 64-Bit Bus access (allowing 64-Bit Load and Store instructions).
Regards, Lars.
No, the Jag GPU is 32-Bit. However it has 64-Bit Bus access (allowing 64-Bit Load and Store instructions).
Regards, Lars.
#5 OFFLINE
Thunderbird
-
-
- 2,501 posts
River Patroller
Posted Sat Sep 21, 2002 8:59 AM
I would argue that the Object Processor has it's own language. It's a very specialized language but it does follow lists of instructions and even had branching and conditionals.
Hence, the word "processor" in the name.
Hence, the word "processor" in the name.
#6 OFFLINE
Starcat
-
-
- 977 posts
Dragonstomper
- Location:Germany
Posted Sat Sep 21, 2002 12:43 PM
Hi !
What I meant was the OP has no instruction set as the GPU for example and can't be programmed like that.
You can not write a program for the OP to tell him to calculate numbers for example. You can only tell the OP what settings to use for the objects that should be displayed and you can tell him to branch to objects.
But that is not really what I would call programmable. The GPU/DSP/68k are what I would call programmable, because you can write programs to do whatever you want (within the systems limits of course). The Blitter and OP can only be fed with data to do things it was designed for.
Regards, Lars.
What I meant was the OP has no instruction set as the GPU for example and can't be programmed like that.
You can not write a program for the OP to tell him to calculate numbers for example. You can only tell the OP what settings to use for the objects that should be displayed and you can tell him to branch to objects.
But that is not really what I would call programmable. The GPU/DSP/68k are what I would call programmable, because you can write programs to do whatever you want (within the systems limits of course). The Blitter and OP can only be fed with data to do things it was designed for.
Regards, Lars.
#7 OFFLINE
Ze_ro
-
-
- 8,511 posts
Quadrunner
- Welcome Back!
Posted Sat Sep 21, 2002 2:16 PM
LinkoVitch said:
I heard that the SNES core was a Z80 based CPU.. (well it's housekeeping CPU).
The SNES is run by a 65C816 processor, which is the 16-bit equivalent of a 6502 I think. Any similarities to the Z-80 is coincidental I believe (There's a CPU called the Z-8000 which is the 16-bit equivalent of the Z-80 I think. It wasn't very popular.)
--Zero
#8 OFFLINE
Thunderbird
-
-
- 2,501 posts
River Patroller
Posted Sat Sep 21, 2002 4:03 PM
Starcat said:
Hi !
What I meant was the OP has no instruction set as the GPU for example and can't be programmed like that.
You can not write a program for the OP to tell him to calculate numbers for example. You can only tell the OP what settings to use for the objects that should be displayed and you can tell him to branch to objects.
But that is not really what I would call programmable. The GPU/DSP/68k are what I would call programmable, because you can write programs to do whatever you want (within the systems limits of course). The Blitter and OP can only be fed with data to do things it was designed for.
Regards, Lars.
What I meant was the OP has no instruction set as the GPU for example and can't be programmed like that.
You can not write a program for the OP to tell him to calculate numbers for example. You can only tell the OP what settings to use for the objects that should be displayed and you can tell him to branch to objects.
But that is not really what I would call programmable. The GPU/DSP/68k are what I would call programmable, because you can write programs to do whatever you want (within the systems limits of course). The Blitter and OP can only be fed with data to do things it was designed for.
Regards, Lars.
Too bad that your description of a generalized processor is far too broad to be used to disqualify the many fine programmable processors out there which perform specific and highly useful tasks.
Just because a fellow cannot add two numbers doesn't mean he cannot compose music, or decompress data or encrypt packets or draw bitmaps. If it follows instructions and has branching and conditionals it's a processor. No doubt about it.
If you fell down and bruised your brain, you can go see a general physician who knows a little bit about brains, feet, genitals, lungs, hearts and buttocks. I will go see a brain specialist. They're both doctors. Just because my doctor can't cure a boil on someone's butt doesn't mean he's not a doctor!!!!
#10 OFFLINE
Starcat
-
-
- 977 posts
Dragonstomper
- Location:Germany
Posted Sun Sep 22, 2002 2:43 AM
Thunderbird said:
Starcat said:
Hi !
What I meant was the OP has no instruction set as the GPU for example and can't be programmed like that.
You can not write a program for the OP to tell him to calculate numbers for example. You can only tell the OP what settings to use for the objects that should be displayed and you can tell him to branch to objects.
But that is not really what I would call programmable. The GPU/DSP/68k are what I would call programmable, because you can write programs to do whatever you want (within the systems limits of course). The Blitter and OP can only be fed with data to do things it was designed for.
Regards, Lars.
What I meant was the OP has no instruction set as the GPU for example and can't be programmed like that.
You can not write a program for the OP to tell him to calculate numbers for example. You can only tell the OP what settings to use for the objects that should be displayed and you can tell him to branch to objects.
But that is not really what I would call programmable. The GPU/DSP/68k are what I would call programmable, because you can write programs to do whatever you want (within the systems limits of course). The Blitter and OP can only be fed with data to do things it was designed for.
Regards, Lars.
Too bad that your description of a generalized processor is far too broad to be used to disqualify the many fine programmable processors out there which perform specific and highly useful tasks.
Just because a fellow cannot add two numbers doesn't mean he cannot compose music, or decompress data or encrypt packets or draw bitmaps. If it follows instructions and has branching and conditionals it's a processor. No doubt about it.
Of course it's a processor as well.
The OP is simply a specialized procesor that is responsible for the display.
But it can not be used for other tasks.
However, the question was: What porocessors are 64-Bit ?
I answered that question. And I though it might be interesting for him to know what processors have instructions sets that need to be learned, if you want to code the Jag.
The OP is not programmable like the 68k/gpu/dsp. And that is all I said.
And even you have to admit that it is true.
You can continue turning around the words I said as long as you want, but you can't change facts.
Regards, Lars.
#11 OFFLINE
Thunderbird
-
-
- 2,501 posts
River Patroller
Posted Sun Sep 22, 2002 7:18 AM
What do you mean the object processor is "not programmable"? That's preposterous. Of course it's programmable! That's what makes it a processor.
I suggest you get the developer docs and look up the section on building "Object lists", which are the "programs" the Object Processor runs, making it programmable.
I suggest you get the developer docs and look up the section on building "Object lists", which are the "programs" the Object Processor runs, making it programmable.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
