/vr/ - Retro Games

You could easily run PS1 and older systems. Maybe some Gamecube games if you don't increase the resolution. PS2 and up is a no go.

If you bought that laptop to play videogames you were robbed.

That laptop is more than powerful enough for most PS2 games with that emulator. You probably won't be able to max the resolution all the time.

>>10019315

I didn’t buy it to play video games. I bought it for school work as I’m in college

>>10019345
Here's some PS2 games if you want to try it anyway: https://myrient.erista.me/files/Redump/Sony%20-%20PlayStation%202/

>>10019292
The only way to be sure is to try it. Emulation is free anyway so it's worth trying. Just make sure to grab the Nightly version, NOT the stable one

>>10019315
He won't be playing GT4, but he'll easily be able to play PS2 at native with that laptop.

>>10019292
emulation is mostly cpu bound so dont really concern yourself with other stuff. Just download the emu and try desu. theres no other way to know. google reddit roms and that will bring you where you need to go for links to everything you will need.
https://youtu.be/KQsamcbPBzA

Runs everything from atari to nintendo switch

>>10019315
Nice try to bullshit him.

>>10019387
People genuinely think it's 2007 in their heads and PS2 is still taxing on hardware. I think that's the issue more than anything.

>>10019396
>tfw 2007 feels like only 10 years ago but it's closer to 20

>>10019414
I know anon, i know. I was in the final year of my undergrad and hadn't even bought a PS3 yet. Unironically PS2 was still my main console at the time.

FUCK

>>10019362
where can i get nightly version?

>>10019463
It's on the main site. They even tell you to choose the nightly version if you mouse over stable

>>10019292
There was a list on github, the main requirement is per cpu core speed
https://github.com/PCSX2/pcsx2

>>10019513
"Note: Recommended GPU is based on 3x Internal, ~1080p resolution requirements"

I didn't even realise they're basing the recommended off that and it only needs a 1650 or equivalent. I could play in 8k with my 3070.

>>10019292
Yes, no problem.

>>10019292
I was emulating it fine a few years back on a much less powerful laptop, don't remember the exact specs but I know it was a 7000 series i3, 2 core 4 threads and clocked at 2.4ghz with integrated graphics.

You shouldn't have have any real issues, just don't go too crazy with the internal resolution. Keep it to 2x or 3x and if you're having performance issues that's the first thing to lower.

>>10019396
Ironically OG Xbox emulation is still very taxing on modern hardware for many games.

>>10019591
Weird considering it's the same architecture as a PC with DX (or close to it). Look at the Saturn though, I couldn't dream of how good that generation is now.

Then we had Gamecube/Wii/Switch emulation which was good from the start...

>>10019608
GCN emulation wasn't good at the start. It had some games going good by 2006.

>>10019632
Very early from console release is what i'm getting at. It took ages to get PS2 up to speed, i remember trying to run games and it being terrible. N64 still isn't perfect, from what I hear but imagine it's much much better than it was.

>>10019524
About a decade ago i tried running Metal Gear Solid 2 on an i5-2500 with a GT 430 and I couldn't keep full speed during the opening level once the rain started even after dropping the internal resolution to native, and yes it was GPU-limited, I checked and it was running at 100% with the fans at full blast.

Playing through it today on my modest i5-9400 and 1660 Super at 6x native res, GPU usage is hovering around 30%.

>>10019292

Laptops are shit period. They're never good.

>>10019649
The emulator has come a long way in itself, never mind hardware. Also had a 2500 (based) and a 6870 and it was ok. Could do about 2x res.

I remember SSX3 and Timesplitters 3 weren't really playable and i'd rage about it.

>>10019680
I remember Shadow of the Colossus and Zone of the Enders 2 being games only those with elite hardware could run full speed back in those days and I was so disappointed I couldn't play them. Nowadays of course they're easy to run, though SOTC still had a few parts where I had to drop the IR down to 4x to keep full speed. Damn it's still a beast.

And yeah the i5-2500 was based. *bro fist*

>>10019643
N64 is excellent now if you use paraLLEl-RDP, though it's much more demanding but it shouldn't be a problem if you have a GPU that supports Vulkan

>>10019709
That CPU kept going and going, it was insane how much value i got out of it. Had 4 years out of it, and went to a 6600 but didn't need to really.

Very good for emulation, at the time.

>>10019710
I may give that a shot, i've not tried it since Project64 which was ok if you were in a bind....

Was never that great with the amount of HLE baked into it.

>>10019292
As long as your single-core performance is a bit over 3GHz you should be fine, provided you don't want to upscale the picture too much. The lack of GPU hurts but you can run on software.

>>10019362
Why

>>10019759
The last 'stable' version is years old, since then the emulator has gotten a new dev team and it's been completely rebooted, it's unimaginably improved now from how it was before.

You'll need the Nightly build to get the latest and best version.

>>10019772
Well that's fucking retarded. You're telling me they've been developing for years and haven't managed to release a stable product once in all that time? Sounds like shit software desu

>>10019591
Weird how two completely different systems require different hardware to run smooth. The Xbox is like 2-3x as powerful as a ps2 in terms of raw GPU compute, no wonder that can be more taxing.
>>10019608
It’s really not the same, thinking that was the mistake that held Xbox emulation up for years trying to make a x86 compatibility layer. Turns out a GeForce 3 with an extra vertex shader isn’t just a PC.

>>10019292
Don't even know why you're axeing b4 trying it out. Grab the nightly build+bios and try an ISO that you like/has good compatibility.

What I can see from here is that the integrated graphics might be a problem. But yeah... Just try it out!

>>10019784
Oh it's you. Go back to /v/ with your garbage.

>>10019872
The fuck are you talking about? This is the first conversation about this apparently dogshit emulator I've ever had

>>10019872
Meds anon
>>10019879
Some people spend too much time here and develop a head-cannon about recurring characters that they think they see here.

>>10019292
If you already have the laptop as you say then why do you ask, you can just give it a try.

>>10019879
It's an amazing emulator desu, most of the library is perfect or near to. Some odd games don't work iirc.

>>10019292
Just keep it to 720.

>>10019292
You can play games like Front Mission just fine. Not Grand Turismo and other demanding games.

You should avoid any fighting / rhythm / shmup games or anything that has strict timing. The emulator is doing decent progress but the input lag is very noticeable on those type of games.

>>10019345
Nta but thank you, I have not downloaded a rom in years but will try a couple for a laugh.

>>10019354
Thanks

>>10019292
when did you get that laptop? what year?

>>10019337
you dont need more than 3x resolution anyway

>>10019937
How can a piece of software that hasn't been stable for years be considered "amazing"? I think your standards are too low anon.

>>10020289
Has any official community tested the input lag on these games I have seen that PCSX2 runs some games too fast and then they don't play as intended.

>>10019784
The Nightly version is more stable than the 'Stable' version. The new devs cba to do an official release until all the withstanding emulation bugs with specific titles are fixed.

>>10020479
If it's stable then why don't they call it stable? That doesn't make any sense anon.

>>10020276
what about fight night 2004, fight night round 3, and GTA san andreas?

>>10019292
download the emulator and see if it works
>end thread

>>10019292
Most games will probably work just fine.

>>10020454
You clearly haven't used it, clown.
Refrain from commenting on topics you know nothing about.

>>10020454
>>10020503
Shut up bitch, this isn’t zoomer tech support general the board. If you can’t figure this shit out or don’t understand the whys you don’t belong here. You’re just trying to bait people into fixing your faggot setup.

>>10019784
God, I hate autistic people.

>>10020503
The emulator is progressing so quickly at the moment that if you were to release a "Stable" version right now, it would be completely obsolete after a short time. I'm guessing that they're waiting for the progress to slow down a little before doing it.

>>10019751
>As long as your single-core performance is a bit over 3GHz you should be fine
clock speed on CPUs is like revolutions per minute on a car's engine. it means nothing outside comparing against other CPUs of the same model, or microarchitecture
this 5 GHz CPU would never be able to run most games on PCSX2 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0jQZxH7NgM&t=110s

>>10022429
Mostly due to it being a 32-bit processor.

>>10022456
PCSX2 still compiles for 32-bit and has 32-bit binaries for its stable release? and all the games are 32-bit?
so no, it's because netburst is total ass compared to CPUs made after 2008

>>10022429
For cycle accuracy in emulation, a minimum CPU clock speed and IPC is required. For HLE and most other purposes, IPC x clock speed shouldn't need to meet a minimum requirement individually.

https://emulation.gametechwiki.com/index.php/Emulation_accuracy

>>10019364
They bought a laptop that was just barely faster than most phones