Sylvania G (VIA C7-M/CX700M2) serious speed (not lag) issues

jbruchon · Post by **jbruchon** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:10 am

I'll try to be as concise as possible, though I tend to ramble. ZSNES 1.51, Windows XP Pro on a Sylvania G (original, not Meso) netbook, VIA C7-M ULV CPU with a Unichrome Pro II (CX700M2) chipset. ZSNES has serious speed issues on this netbook in Windows XP. I don't know that ZSNES is the only thing having issues, but it's the most prominent. Games run far too quickly most of the time as if in 1/2 fast-forward mode, but FF is not on and still "fast forwards." Sometimes the game will periodically slow down to a near-normal speed VERY briefly, sometimes it will burst to "HOLY *(&$" ALSO very briefly. I use FF3 every time I try, because I am so used to its "normal" speed. I've toyed with drivers and various settings in ZSNES, and even changed Windows HALs between ACPI Uniprocessor and MPS Uniprocessor to kill off ACPI (hoping to turn off possible use of ACPI CPU P-states in the process) but to no avail. Windows appears to be running the 1.2 GHz CPU at 600 MHz when checked in the System control panel, but sometimes it reports a 198 MHz CPU (which isn't even a valid C7 Enhanced PowerSaver frequency) and I'm suspicious about whether this is the cause of the problem. Linux, on the other hand, runs fine, but Linux fully supports VIA C7 Enhanced PowerSaver in cpufreq (with module e_powersaver) and that's what makes me wonder if the C7 is the problem.

Is there a timing loop of some kind in ZSNES that pukes when CPU clock speed changes? Anything at all that the C7 could be screwing up? Surely someone else on here has access to a similar netbook to test with. Hopefully you guys can help me out. No, I haven't tried SVN or an older version yet, but I also don't know that it's really a ZSNES issue. (If it's not, I won't get any help from the manufacturer, so why not at least ask?)

Thanks in advance.

adventure_of_link · Post by **adventure_of_link** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 2:11 am

could be several issues here...

first, lol VIA

next, is your netbook overheating, or perhaps running off batteries? if the former, and you still have a warranty on it, honour it ASAP.

jbruchon · Post by **jbruchon** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 4:05 pm

AC power, no overheating, watched a movie on it last night with no problems. If it helps, the emulator Gens ran without issue, but ZSNES for DOS (ancient 0.700 and new versions) also exhibited similar speed issues (surprised it ran at all on XP, but whatever...)

The only thing I'm clearly having timing issues with at the moment is ZSNES. I'll try other emulators and apps to see what happens, but the netbook hardware itself isn't broken. I'll also drop Wine back on there and try ZSNESW under it as well as ZSNES for Linux, and get back to you with the results.

Deathlike2 · Post by **Deathlike2** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 5:19 pm

Running ZSNES DOS under XP is asking for extra unwanted overhead to get it working.

Post by **Agozer** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:15 pm

Running ZSNES DOS under Windows XP is asking for trouble, period.

Post by **grinvader** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:19 pm

ZSNES won't run right if you have cpu speed stepping.

kode54 · Post by **kode54** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:04 pm

You can try adding the /usepmtimer switch to your boot.ini line. It's a fix for AMD processors for QueryPerformanceCounter, (which ZSNESw uses for speed regulation) but it may work with your system as well.

jbruchon · Post by **jbruchon** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 10:52 pm

kode54 wrote:You can try adding the /usepmtimer switch to your boot.ini line. It's a fix for AMD processors for QueryPerformanceCounter, (which ZSNESw uses for speed regulation) but it may work with your system as well.

I'll try that out as soon as I get home. Busy working on pesky initramfs networking stuff right now, yayyy. Will report back with results tomorrow.

adventure_of_link · Post by **adventure_of_link** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 10:57 pm

kode54 wrote:You can try adding the /usepmtimer switch to your boot.ini line. It's a fix for AMD processors for QueryPerformanceCounter, (which ZSNESw uses for speed regulation) but it may work with your system as well.

Nice, I'll have to try that out as well (even though I don't have the same issues, thanks for the tip all the same)

funkyass · Post by **funkyass** » Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:53 am

the AMD CPU drivers add that switch anyways.

kode54 · Post by **kode54** » Tue Mar 03, 2009 1:32 am

funkyass wrote:the AMD CPU drivers add that switch anyways.

Yes, but I was suggesting it as a fix for that VIA C7 based system.

Then there's Intel, which doesn't need it for most processors with clock speed throttling. Even though they don't use RDTSC for QueryPerformanceCounter, they report a constant RDTSC rate based on the maximum clock speed of the processor, rather than the current speed. Great for old games that use RDTSC for timing, like the classic Unreal engine games. (Not sure about the Steam versions...)

Squall_Leonhart · Post by **Squall_Leonhart** » Tue Mar 03, 2009 2:12 pm

grinvader wrote:ZSNES won't run right if you have cpu speed stepping.

*cough*

works fine on this sempron,...
anyway....

VIA... yeah those cpu's aren't made for running anything but Notepad.

jbruchon · Post by **jbruchon** » Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:55 pm

Adding /usepmtimer to the Windows boot parameters fixed the problem. It runs wonderfully now. Passes the "Kefka test."

I think someone needs to document this fix such that it is more discoverable.

BTW, to you kids ripping on VIA chips: it's an effing netbook, not a giant desktop replacement monstrosity, it runs ZSNES (with a little kick in the rear), it gets the job done, and it was ridiculously cheap. Don't pick on the brave little toaster. (It runs ZSNES, it can't be too bad, no?)

adventure_of_link · Post by **adventure_of_link** » Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:58 pm

jbruchon wrote:BTW, to you kids ripping on VIA chips: it's an effing netbook, not a giant desktop replacement monstrosity, it runs ZSNES (with a little kick in the rear), it gets the job done, and it was ridiculously cheap. Don't pick on the brave little toaster. (It runs ZSNES, it can't be too bad, no?)

You do know that they make netbooks with intel chipsets, right? And the lowest I've seen one of those go for ~$350.

that being said, VIA is crap in general, but still glad to hear things are going good for you all the same.

I am also 22, btw. I will be 23 at the end of the month. Just FYI.

jbruchon · Post by **jbruchon** » Tue Mar 03, 2009 7:18 pm

adventure_of_link wrote:You do know that they make netbooks with intel chipsets, right? And the lowest I've seen one of those go for ~$350.

that being said, VIA is crap in general, but still glad to hear things are going good for you all the same.

I am also 22, btw. I will be 23 at the end of the month. Just FYI.

I got a Sylvania G right after they first came out, when they were $300 and anything with an Intel chip either had impractical amounts of disk space (the Eee) or were out of my eternally low price range (the Aspire One with a real hard drive was $400+ at the time). I just wanted a cheap netbook, and honestly in retrospect the Aspire One blows balls to use. I know because I got my wife a pink one (eww) and every time I try to use it, I realize just how bad the touchpad design really is. At least my postage stamp touchpad isn't molded such that the buttons feel like they're part of the touch area.

I didn't literally mean kids. It was a term of playful combativeness.

I'm 25, so I qualify. My point is that yes, the VIA processor's not super powerful, but it gets the job done pretty well and I'm very happy with it, even though under Windows it's running at 600 MHz or less for some reason. (The netbook wasn't ever made for Linux; maybe one day I'll code something that tweaks the MSRs to hold it at 1200 in Windows.)

Anyway, thanks for the help. It's greatly appreciated.

Squall_Leonhart · Post by **Squall_Leonhart** » Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:57 pm

jbruchon wrote:Adding /usepmtimer to the Windows boot parameters fixed the problem. It runs wonderfully now. Passes the "Kefka test." I think someone needs to document this fix such that it is more discoverable.

BTW, to you kids ripping on VIA chips: it's an effing netbook, not a giant desktop replacement monstrosity, it runs ZSNES (with a little kick in the rear), it gets the job done, and it was ridiculously cheap. Don't pick on the brave little toaster. (It runs ZSNES, it can't be too bad, no?)

no, its a VIA netbook. VIA as a whole, sucks.

VIA's hardware are shoddy in general, i know as i've owned 7 mainboards based on Via chipsets, ranging from Faulty chipsets causing pci data corruption, to a broken AGP bus that only effects Nvidia cards.

They aren't as bas as SiS.. but i'd take a nforce over a via chipset, even knowing full well the issues with nforce.

Intel Netbooks ftw.

jbruchon · Post by **jbruchon** » Tue Mar 03, 2009 9:58 pm

Squall_Leonhart wrote:
jbruchon wrote:Adding /usepmtimer to the Windows boot parameters fixed the problem. It runs wonderfully now. Passes the "Kefka test." I think someone needs to document this fix such that it is more discoverable.

BTW, to you kids ripping on VIA chips: it's an effing netbook, not a giant desktop replacement monstrosity, it runs ZSNES (with a little kick in the rear), it gets the job done, and it was ridiculously cheap. Don't pick on the brave little toaster. (It runs ZSNES, it can't be too bad, no?)
no, its a VIA netbook. VIA as a whole, sucks.

VIA's hardware are shoddy in general, i know as i've owned 7 mainboards based on Via chipsets, ranging from Faulty chipsets causing pci data corruption, to a broken AGP bus that only effects Nvidia cards.

They aren't as bas as SiS.. but i'd take a nforce over a via chipset, even knowing full well the issues with nforce.

Intel Netbooks ftw.

And the million-dollar question: what part of my rectum do you think I could have yanked the extra $100 out of when I bought my netbook? What amazes me is that so many of my fellow techies are so busy preaching technical superiority that they fail to take into account that not everyone has that kind of cash just lying around. Why else is HP still in business?

It's no different than me asking you why you didn't buy a quad-core with 8GB of RAM when you chose a dual-core with 2GB. Not everyone has the cash on hand to buy the most badass box in town. My netbook was perfect for what I needed when I bought it, and continues to be so, VIA notwithstanding. No overheating issues whatsoever, and despite its "inferiority" I can do everything I want on it. It works for me, end of story, nothing more needs to be said. What bothers me is you getting critical of the hardware I chose on technical measures, ignoring why I picked it in the first place. I won't say an Atom-based netbook isn't "better" as far as the core internals go, but it wasn't a good fit for me, and my "sucky" VIA-based netbook has been very surprisingly well-behaved and stable, despite its shortcomings.

I don't want to continue an Intel vs. VIA debate here; that's not why I'm here and not why this forum is here, so let's let that sleeping dog lie, okay? (It's not like we actually disagree, after all.)

Squall_Leonhart · Post by **Squall_Leonhart** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 5:02 am

im sure you could've taken the time to save the money.

ITs that pathetic I NEED IT NOW attitude that is fucking this world up.

sweener2001 · Post by **sweener2001** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 5:28 am

eee pc anyone? intel netbooks on the cheap. 350 bucks average.

and what's a hundred bucks when the quality of hardware is night and day?

it's also not the same as quad core + 8 GB RAM v. dual core + 2 GB. as that difference is actually substantial.

a better comparison is acer monitors v. samsung monitors. except we pretend that acer makes utter crap for monitors. in that case, the premium for a samsung is justified, because acer is utter crap. that's the comparison they're making with you.

now, if your situation more like the real acer v. samsung, you'd be right in your argument, as acer products are completely adequate for people looking for a deal. i.e., they aren't known for failing constantly and having constant hardware issues, and they actually decent specs for the price.

also, hp's still around because they make amazing printers. i'm also not disappointed with my laptop. it has a bottom firing sub, for crying out loud. also blu-ray. and discreet graphics (geforce 9600M GT). 17" screen (1440x900, the only real downside). also cheap considering.

no need to get all huffy because you made a [poor/uninformed/impatient] choice.

Post by **odditude** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 5:33 am

personally, i'm excited about nano-based netbooks.

i miss when via was a viable competitor in the chipset market... the competition helped a lot in the market. anyone else notice that nvidia's chipsets got increasingly half-assed and buggy after via fell of the map?

jbruchon · Post by **jbruchon** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:41 pm

Squall_Leonhart wrote:im sure you could've taken the time to save the money.

ITs that pathetic I NEED IT NOW attitude that is fucking this world up.

sweener2001 wrote:eee pc anyone? intel netbooks on the cheap. 350 bucks average.

and what's a hundred bucks when the quality of hardware is night and day?

no need to get all huffy because you made a [poor/uninformed/impatient] choice.

Fortunately, none of your opinions matter, because it wasn't your choice. Go get what you want and quit whining because I didn't do what you would have done. No one asked for your opinion and no one cares. I asked about a specific problem with ZSNES on a piece of hardware, not for a giant BAAAWWWW IT AIN'T INTEL commentary on the hardware in question, and more courteous and mature board members helped out without crying about the fact that VIA is still in business. Having an Atom doesn't make you any less of an asshole. It'd be nice if the mods would lock this thread to make that point hit home; isn't there some kind of "general discussion" forum you could use for your hardware-bashing needs?

kode54 deserves a pat on the back: he helped me out, solved the problem quickly, and didn't cry like a baby over everything in the world not running an Intel chip. Thanks a million.

As for the rest of you that insist on being assholes about the hardware, I've got a very simple solution. Since I apparently need an Atom-based netbook, you're more than welcome to fix that problem and give me one at any time. That way you'll be happy and won't have to cry any longer, because there's one less Intel-less user in the world.

</thread>

Deathlike2 · Post by **Deathlike2** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 4:12 pm

Sometimes I think you're expecting a lot for something that you shouldn't be expecting much if at all. If that is your preference, then fine... just don't expect the VIA processor to do much really.

I am locking this thread before it degenerates further.

ZSNES board

Sylvania G (VIA C7-M/CX700M2) serious speed (not lag) issues

Sylvania G (VIA C7-M/CX700M2) serious speed (not lag) issues

It worked.

Re: It worked.

Re: It worked.

Re: It worked.

Re: It worked.