Hardware Vita vs N3DS for emulation.

[TheCasketMan]

Well it is obvious that the Vita is stronger than an Old 3DS, but what about a New 3DS?
Asking this to see which device I should use for emulation (NOT to start a console war).

Vita:
1. severely underclocked Cortex A9 CPU*
2. Default clock speed: 333mhz. Max clock speed: 444mhz
3. Quad core
4. Higher resolution meaning more pixels the CPU has to process.
*an A9 was designed to be clocked at 2ghz.

New 3DS:
1. ARM11 (not sure if underclocked or not) with ARM9 (only used for DS games?)
2. Default clock speed: 268mhz. Max clock speed: 804 mhz
3. Quad core
4. Lower resolution, less pixels to process.

The Vita specs looks lower, but I heard people saying that clock speed isn't everything. Plus I am not adding in both system's GPU and RAM.

 

[KingVamp]

I think the Vita still has an edge in emulation, but the DSTwo+ is coming out. So the N3ds and that might be enough for your needs. Plus cheaper memory.

 

[ferret7463]

Has there been any recent news on the DSTWO+ ? I thought it became Vapor ware.

 

[Deleted member 370671]

Has there been any recent news on the DSTWO+ ? I thought it became Vapor ware.

https://gbatemp.net/threads/dstwo-plus-will-be-released-in-october.398443/

 

[ferret7463]

thank you

 

[Foxi4]

The Vita's Cortex-A9 is a newer, better and more efficient architecture (2.50 DMIPS/MHz/Core versus 1.25 DMIPS/MHz/Core) and the GPU is far superior (quad-core PowerVR SGX543MP4+ delivers "133 million polygons per second and fill rates in excess of 4Gpixels/sec @ 200 MHz" while the PICA200 only delivers around 15.3 million polygons per second at a fill rate of 800Mpixels/sec @ 200MHz. To be sure, it runs at 266Hz, but even if boosted by those 66MHz it's still no match). The CPU has little to do with resolution, which by the way isn't all that different since the 3DS has two screens (400x240 + 320x240). The Vita still has the edge in emulation and rendering, which is no biggie anyways as both are relatively capable for homebrew use.

 

[Deleted User]

At the moment the vita has the edge in emulation, but with the progress that home-brew is making and the new DStwo being released I'm sure the NDS is going to catch up real fast!

 

[teampleb]

I think the Vita still has an edge in emulation, but the DSTwo+ is coming out. So the N3ds and that might be enough for your needs. Plus cheaper memory.

Just use the 3DS retroarch emulators. They work great. No need for a DStwo+.

 

[Deleted User]

Just use the 3DS retroarch emulators. They work great. No need for a DStwo+.

Doesn't it have speed issues still or did that change?

 

[teampleb]

Doesn't it have speed issues still or did that change?

It never had speed issues on n3DS. It was always faster then the DSTwo.

 

[the_randomizer]

It never had speed issues on n3DS. It was always faster then the DSTwo.

Of course though, I believe that the N3DS is more of a PITA to deal with if it's above 9.2, which I recall can't be downgraded, that, and those who have an O3DS are pretty much screwed out of any future prospects when it comes to speed improvements. I don't even know if developers will bother improving O3DS emulators' performance.

 

[teampleb]

Of course though, I believe that the N3DS is more of a PITA to deal with if it's above 9.2, which I recall can't be downgraded, that, and those who have an O3DS are pretty much screwed out of any future prospects when it comes to speed improvements.

Nope. I'm on 10.1. Works fine and RetroArch can still implement GPU rendering. That'll speed up the o3DS (and n3DS even more).

 

[the_randomizer]

Nope. I'm on 10.1. Works fine.

Interesting, I was under the impression it couldn't be downgraded easily, but my concern with the O3DS still stands (updated post above) as far as developers not bothering with speed improvements. I also heard the 804 MHz won't do much for emulators.

 

[teampleb]

Interesting, I was under the impression it couldn't be downgraded easily, but my concern with the O3DS still stands (updated post above) as far as developers not bothering with speed improvements. I also heard the 804 MHz won't do much for emulators.

The 804Mhz is the reason why emulators run so much faster on the n3DS. The o3DS is limited to 268 Mhz. RetroArch can add GPU acceleration to speed up both the o3DS and n3DS even more.

 

[the_randomizer]

The 804Mhz is the reason why emulators run so much faster on the n3DS. The o3DS is limited to 268 Mhz. RetroArch can GPU acceleration to speed up both the o3DS and n3DS even more.

Ah, but what about those who have an o3DS? GPU rendering is all well and good, but the question is will it ever be implemented? I mean, surely, there will be nothing compelling about getting an o3DS if one can't afford an N3DS? I would assume that o3DSs are all but useless for emulation, that's how I feel about getting one, personally.

 

[teampleb]

Ah, but what about those who have an o3DS? GPU rendering is all well and good, but the question is will it ever be implemented? I mean, surely, there will be nothing compelling about getting an o3DS if one can't afford an N3DS? I would assume that o3DSs are all but useless for emulation, that's how I feel about getting one, personally.

There's a very high chance of it being implemented. I don't know what effect it'll really have on o3DS. But it'll take the n3DS from being great to perfect. If you want emulators get an n3DS.

 

[planetofthemage]

.

 

[Duo8]

N3DS is looking better just for the support it's getting. Plus moving files to the Vita is an absolute pain.

As for specs, both should have 2 cores dedicated to application (N3DS also have 80% of another core). N3DS is 2x804MHz (if you can set it) and 2x268, Vita is 4x333 or 444.
Emulation relies more on single thread performance, especially on older systems.

 

[gbaboy123]

I think new 3ds would be better because of the improvement of the new 3ds but comparing it to the ps vita, the ps vita has better gpu but new 3ds has a fcram that its better than the psvita sd ram and of what it see you guys are telling me if the vita is clocked at 444mhz and the new its clocked at 804mhz probably then the new 3ds its better in cpu and ram, while vita has better in gpu so I think the new 3ds its better for emulation its just taking time to be better its not like psp that had emulators like a week after it was release but I think new 3ds its better. just my opinion. you can see how retro arch's pcsx ps1 emulator its running on new 3ds really well and its just a beta

 

[Joe88]

I'm pretty sure the clock speed of the Vita was said to be something like 1.2ghz. Where did you get these numbers?

Also resolution will mean nothing for emulation, since the emulators are all going to have the same output and they both support hardware scaling which puts very little strain on the GPU.

Yifan said it runs at that speed, he is the only source that said it. The official documentation for the cortex A9 says the lowest speed is 800mhz, so either sony had a custom designed A9 soc to run at a quarter of its speed to conserve battery and lower heat output or its a bunch of bull.