C64 barebone distribution on top of

[juga]

Hi, thinking on building a barebone c64 distribution: installing
micro64 on a minimal linux installation, are there any recommendations
for doing this:
- recommended linux distribution
- required components, drivers

Would micro64 consume less cpu and would it work smoother if it is
installed on a minimal os?

By the way, you are doing a great work Bero, thank you.

[Ed Spittles]

It should at least boot faster, and be in a more predictable environment (which makes it more like a console, or an original ROM-based micro, which is what it's emulating)

I use tinycore linux for a thin client: have a look at http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/11023?page=0,0

(It can boot from the network and run from RAM, so an old diskless laptop becomes useful.  If you boot from CD or USB stick and run from RAM you get advantages.)

Cheers

Ed

[Benjamin Rosseaux]

Hi juga,

I think that any current x86/x64 linux distribution should do for it,
and as graphic card I would suggest one of the cheapest from the
current or pre-current NVidia serie, and as processor I would suggest
any current cheap tricore/quadcore/hexacore processor (for example AMD
A6-3500 / A6-3600) or any current fast dualcore processor with the
near same single-core performance of a current quadcore/hexacore
processor (for example any current Intel i3, i5 or i7 CPU), but I
think, that you should check the CPU rang lists from the web for
this. :)

I'm developing Micro64 at least on a Notebook with a Intel i7 2630QM
processor and NVIDIA Geforce 555m 3GB graphic chip.

BeRo

[juga]

Thanks Ed, Tiny Core Linux looks like what I have been looking for.
Have you tested micro64 on it?

Best regards.

On 5 dic, 06:36, Ed Spittles <ed.spitt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It should at least boot faster, and be in a more predictable environment
> (which makes it more like a console, or an original ROM-based micro, which
> is what it's emulating)
>

> I use tinycore linux for a thin client: have a look athttp://www.linuxjournal.com/article/11023?page=0,0

>
> (It can boot from the network and run from RAM, so an old diskless laptop
> becomes useful.  If you boot from CD or USB stick and run from RAM you get
> advantages.)
>
> Cheers
> Ed
>

[juga]

Hi Bero, thanks, you have a powerful computer, I run a Win XP-32Bit
Intel T7200 Dual Core 2GHz, 2GB RAM.

Why micro64 is so demanding of CPU? is this related to SDL? My first
core sometimes reach to 100% with micro64, but the second core is less
demanded.

Best regards.

[Ed Spittles]

(Wow - tce was fast to boot!  micro64 didn't run on my existing tce machine - out of memory - had to boot a different laptop.)

Yes, it does run! I had to load the 'SDL' package.  ('ab' is a text-mode package manager. See

http://wiki.tinycorelinux.net/wiki:package_management_cheat_sheet

)

It's reporting 46% 24 FPS, just running the built in BASIC.

This is on a 1.66GHz Atom N455 laptop (with hyperthreading - I don't think it's a genuine dual core, but it thinks it is) with 2G ram.  It's saturating one core.  The graphics is integrated. So this is a low-end machine.

Having also loaded the 'alsa' package, I have some semblance of sound working too.

I typed in these POKEs, in separate lines:

POKE 54296,15:POKE 54278,240:POKE 54273,100:POKE 54276,33

(max volume, full sustain ADSR, medium pitched note, sawtooth waveform)

and got a rough 'boing' sound. I think I'm supposed to get something continuous.

What's the quickest and easiest route to running something more multimedia?

Cheers

Ed

[Benjamin Rosseaux]

Hi juga,

It's not SDL-related. It's because Micro64 emulates all components at
least cycle-exact, so:

- C64 CPU: cycle-exact (or as optional dawn slow transistor-
switchlevel simulation halfcycle-exact)
- C64 VIC II: selectively single-pixel-dot-clock-exact (single-pixel
for single-pixel) together with main-halfcycle-exact-logic or dynamic-
pixel-blockwise-exact (but never more than 4 pixels at once) together
with main-halfcycle-exact-logic
- C64 SID: cycle-exact + sample-exact (in 6581 mode, it emulates also
the analog parts (ADCs/DACs,filters,etc.,) as possible exact, here the
CPU time usage killer no. 1 after the transistor-switchlevel CPU
simulation)
- C64 CIAs: cycle-exact
- Cartridge logic: cycle-exact (supports the most .CRT's from the web)
- REU: cycle-exact and complete
- GeoRAM/NeoRAM: cycle-exact and complete
- 1541 CPU: cycle-exact
- 1541 VIAs: cycle-exact (and complete incl. original-buggy shift
register and so on)
- 1541 motor physics: physically time-exact (see http://vserver.rosseaux.net/stuff/m64b.png
for the option setting screen screenshot for it )
- 1541 head logic: cycle-exact and complete including GCR electronics
confusion random bit emulation on invalid raw bit sequences.
- IEC bus: also as optional option time-exact incl. latency delays
- and so on

This all do require simply a lot of CPU time usage.

For example VICE uses here a very dirty trick, VICE emulates the CPU
instruction-for-instruction (not really cycle-for-cycle) together with
in-instruction-clock-increment-macros and dirty cycle difference
compensation tricks, so that VICE is thereby faster than Micro64,
Hoxs64 and so on, only together with loss of some accuracy, but anyway
still a good emulator and competitor to Micro64, without regard to the
weakness in the CPU emulation of VICE.

And Hoxs64 is a very good competitor to Micro64, but it does not all
the components, which Micro64 emulates (optional IEC bus latency,
cartridges, REU, NeoRAM/GeoRAM, PAL emulation, etc.), so that Hoxs64
is thereby also a bit faster than Micro64, but not much. And Hoxs64 is
currently only for Win32/Win64.

BeRo

[juga]

Hi Bero, thanks for your complete answer, this post could be a start
point for micro64 documentation!

Anyway, About the cpu use, it is an innovative and interesting aproach
to develop an emulator that doesn't constraint itself for work with
slow old CPUs.

On 5 dic, 16:42, Benjamin Rosseaux <rosse...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi juga,
>

> It's not SDL-related. It's because Micro64 emulates all components at
> least cycle-exact, so:
>
> - C64 CPU: cycle-exact (or as optional dawn slow transistor-
> switchlevel simulation halfcycle-exact)
> - C64 VIC II: selectively single-pixel-dot-clock-exact (single-pixel
> for single-pixel) together with main-halfcycle-exact-logic or dynamic-
> pixel-blockwise-exact (but never more than 4 pixels at once) together
> with main-halfcycle-exact-logic
> - C64 SID: cycle-exact + sample-exact (in 6581 mode, it emulates also
> the analog parts (ADCs/DACs,filters,etc.,) as possible exact, here the
> CPU time usage killer no. 1 after the transistor-switchlevel CPU
> simulation)
> - C64 CIAs: cycle-exact
> - Cartridge logic: cycle-exact (supports the most .CRT's from the web)
> - REU: cycle-exact and complete
> - GeoRAM/NeoRAM:  cycle-exact and complete
> - 1541 CPU: cycle-exact
> - 1541 VIAs: cycle-exact (and complete incl. original-buggy shift
> register and so on)

> - 1541 motor physics: physically time-exact (seehttp://vserver.rosseaux.net/stuff/m64b.png

[juga]

Thanks for the testings Ed!

On 5 dic, 14:36, Ed Spittles <ed.spitt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> (Wow - tce was fast to boot!  micro64 didn't run on my existing tce machine
> - out of memory - had to boot a different laptop.)
>
> Yes, it does run! I had to load the 'SDL' package.  ('ab' is a text-mode

> package manager. Seehttp://wiki.tinycorelinux.net/wiki:package_management_cheat_sheet

> )
>
> It's reporting 46% 24 FPS, just running the built in BASIC.
> This is on a 1.66GHz Atom N455 laptop (with hyperthreading - I don't think
> it's a genuine dual core, but it thinks it is) with 2G ram.  It's
> saturating one core.  The graphics is integrated. So this is a low-end
> machine.
>
> Having also loaded the 'alsa' package, I have some semblance of sound
> working too.
>
> I typed in these POKEs, in separate lines:
> POKE 54296,15:POKE 54278,240:POKE 54273,100:POKE 54276,33
> (max volume, full sustain ADSR, medium pitched note, sawtooth waveform)
> and got a rough 'boing' sound. I think I'm supposed to get something
> continuous.
>
> What's the quickest and easiest route to running something more multimedia?
>
> Cheers
> Ed
>