![]() It can receive the input from the PC, but it may take a frame or 2 before it updates the video to show the input. Emulator - Depending on how well the emulator is coded, some of them can contribute to input lag.So, when you press the button, the controller polls the buttons to see what was pressed, and then the PC polls the controller to get the input. On top of that, the PC will poll the controller, which also contributes to input lag (though this is usually 1-2 ms). Some poll quicker than others (2-4 ms), some take longer than others (11-16ms). Controller - Your USB/Bluetooth/wireless controller polls the button inputs every couple of ms.How soon you see a reaction to your input is called the input latency. If the input arrives before that time, it will update the video on the screen. The emulator checks for controller input during a specific time during a frame. A lot of things happen within those 16.7ms, one of which is preparing for the next video frame. This may seem like very little time, but in regards to computer processing, this is a ton of time. So, the fastest an emulator can show a change on the screen is 16.7ms. The video on the screen refreshes every 16.7ms (1 second / 60 frames = 16.7ms). Most emulators use an ~60Hz refresh rate (similar to the consoles they emulate), which means it displays 60 video frames per second. Latency is usually displayed in ms (milliseconds).Īn emulator displays video by frames. In our case, the amount of time it takes to for one player's button press to show up on the other player's screen. Network Latency - The delay in communication from one computer to another. Input Latency - The delay from pressing a button, to the display of that button action on the screen. ![]() Maybe they'd get inspired to try it now, and extend it to a bunch of other consoles and try more games.There are 2 major forms of latency (or lag, whichever you'd like to call it): Brunnis did test the SNES 240p suite on emulators, and it showed 1 frame less lag than SMW2, probably that relation of game processing time vs 240p suite processing time is still present on actual hardware, but of course it's unknown to me if this is the absolute minimum processing time that a real SNES can achieve.Īdditionally, I thought I might post the links here because (iirc, I might be misremembering here) both RetroRGB and Voultar has been talking about one day use this type of test setup (controller hardwired to a LED), but didn't get around to it yet, afaik. Right, it might be more correct to call it SNES game engine lag, as it seems to be variable depending on the game. Older generations of videogame don't have the same problems with input lag but they still probably have some depending on how the physics are programmed, what the frame rate is like, if its a port, what genre it is, etc. as I recall digital foundry and Linus media group both did small investigations into a few different game engines and found that some AAA games (call of duty, battlefield, crisis) could have nightmare scenarios of over 90ms - 120ms of input lag (even in off-line single player player scenarios!) so even if you do your best to completely eliminate input lag with your display and hardware you are still likely going to have to deal with a potentially crazy amount of input lag just because of the way modern games are coded. outside of a few rare instances of modification there isn't much we can really do to affect the input lag of most game engines. (main display, secondary image processor, input device, vsync settings). Since we (end-users) can only control a few variables in our set-up, to minimize input lag best we can. So this is essentially measuring the input lag of various game engines on the super Nintendo? otherwise they would be using the super Nintendo version of the 240p test suite as I believe that has built-in input lag testing without the added variables of an underlying game engine. Last edited by Harrumph on Wed 9:51 am, edited 1 time in total. Note that this is not intended to start some flaming debate over the use of emulators, but I'm thinking many (like myself) might have overestimated the "laglessness" of playing a real console on a CRT (at least for the SNES). Original post, which summarizes and links to all his other test posts: The author noted that some games have less lag, e g he claims Super Metroid had 1 frame less lag than noted above. In view of this, emulators managing 4-5 frames of lag for SNES are actually not doing too badly. I'd have expected this to be more like 2 frames. For SMW2, the average delay was 3.6 frames. To me, the resulting delay in character movement after button press was surprisingly high. Brunnis on Libretro forums has tested SNES (actual console) input lag using a controller with a hardwired LED, and filming at 240 fps on a CRT. I thought this could be interesting to some (didn't see any post about this here before).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |