Dynarec vs Interpreter

Discussion in 'ePSXe Discussion' started by Remos, Apr 19, 2017.

  1. Remos

    Remos New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey guys, glad to see this forum is still active. I have a question, maybe someone can answer...

    Version 2.0.5 of ePSXe introduced CPU Mode options, but I can't find much (if any) info on it.
    Is Interpreter the most accurate to use and is it the better one if you don't care about the (slow) tag?

    Is any option preferred over the other in 2d sprite-based games vs 3d, or it has nothing to do with that?

    Also, these tests show that Interpreter is the better choice, why is it not the default selection?

    Don't much care about the technical details, just asking which of the two to use if you have a good PC -- i7 6700k, AMD RX 480.

    Thank you very much.
  2. NGEmu.com Advertisement

  3. FoxSevent

    FoxSevent Not a Registered User

    Messages:
    617
    Likes Received:
    3
    Interpreter is the more accurate one but it's far far slower then Dynarec, it's used mostly for testing/debugging.
    Using Interpreter mostly wasn't possible for gaming back in the day due to how slow it is, nowadays you maya be able to do that due to how fast PCs have gotten, but still it isn't worth it, you get like 2-5% increase in accuracy but you need 5x more power then Dynarec.

    Interpreter makes ePSXe behave like a real PSX, it's a 1:1 emulation depending on how well coded it is.
    Dynarec uses various methods to speed up the emulation process, making it less accurate but much faster, again depends on how well coded it is.

    That's anyway my understanding of it.
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2017
    Remos likes this.
  4. Remos

    Remos New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ah, I see. So just stick with Dynarec then, thanks for the fast answer. Hey, I've read on Reddit that ePSXe may have gotten as accurate (or even more so) as Mednafen, with release 2.0 and up, is that true?
  5. FoxSevent

    FoxSevent Not a Registered User

    Messages:
    617
    Likes Received:
    3
    I've edited my post above, as for your question, it doesn't matter ePSXe has around 95-98% accuracy rate, there are maybe 3 games that either don't work or have issues out there.
    As for Mednafen, im not sure, never used it.
    It's up to you what you prefer.
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2017
  6. Remos

    Remos New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    I prefer ePSXe since it's more user-friendly and can use gpuBladeSoft which is one of the best plugins. Recently got updated to 1.46 and works great. Never got GTK to work though, therefore I can't use the configuration GUI, but I've done all I could with the .ini file.
  7. dpence

    dpence New Member

    Messages:
    1,578
    Likes Received:
    40
    basically, interpreter is a huge look up table, it gets a PSX instruction, and starts a search looking for it in the list so that it can get the x86 counterpart...it's a really slow (But accurate) way to emulate a CPU...Dynrec, recompiles the program code at startup, holds it in memory and runs it from memory..it's much faster since the whole thing is converted at once, BUT, can be prone to errors. if the recompile engine for example doesn't work efficient or the code is self writing and rewrites part of itself the recompiler has to take that into account, and it can sometimes be missed. The goal of recompile is to completely convert the game code to work in the environment native to your platform and OS rather than interpreter whose goal is to interpret the games platform commands on a line my line basis
  8. Remos

    Remos New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks for the explanation. So basically go with Dynarec?
  9. dpence

    dpence New Member

    Messages:
    1,578
    Likes Received:
    40
    always, unless it is a new implementation and buggy..the coders will usually state that it a work in progress in those cases though

Share This Page