PCEngineFans.com - The PC Engine and TurboGrafx-16 Community Forum
NEC TG-16/TE/TurboDuo => TG-16/TE/TurboDuo Discussion => Topic started by: Bake on June 17, 2005, 03:12:42 PM
-
Quick question... is it a bad idea to play CD-R's is the tg 16 cd player or duo?
-
I used to play them on the Turbo CD. They worked fine but the thing eventually died. Hard to say if that was a factor.
A CDR literally broke my Duo though, almost. It would play other discs fine, but every time I tried this one (which had no scratches) I could hear the Duo reving up, trying to read the thing. Like an idiot I let it keep trying and pretty soon the discs would no longer spin when I started up. MONTHS later, I read somewhere that the laser housing was merely jammed and managed to unjam it, but since then I try to avoid CDRs.
Others will report no problems though, so its up to you. I'd listen carefully when it loads though.
-
I tried playing a couple CDRs of games on my Duo and now it cuts out on music on some original games. Don't know if they're related, but the timing is quite the coincidence, so I've decided to stay away from CDRs just to be safe.
-
CDRs killed the CD part of my old Duo. It just stares blankly at me now...
-
I used to use CD-Rs on my Duo every now and then before I read ab00t how they can kill your Duo. Now I try to avoid CD-Rs because of this, but I would like to know this for sure: Can CD-Rs officially break your Turbo Duo console?
-
I don't really think that CDRs actually "cause" damage to the drives. Note that everyone here seems to have experienced it on DUO systems (not systems with the CDROM add-on). I've used CDRs with my TG-16 for years. It's true that they are a bit harder for the drive to read, but I don't believe that they cause actual damage to the reader. I feel that the DUO has some serious design problems that don't also affect the standard TG16/PCE CDROM2 system.
I've had some disagreements on the subject with some folks on the board. My general opinion is that, if your machine has problems reading disks, it's likely that the drive is on its way out to begin with. I'm not sure if there is a way to recalibrate the drive (most CDROM drives can be calibrated by a professional), but since I don't actually own a DUO though (yet) I cannot prove this theory.
I'm currently playing a patched Xak III (and soon will play English Ys 4 thanks to RIGG) on my system, with a 15 year old reader, and it works great.
You'll get a different response from everyone on this, depending on their perception. My opinion is that, if you want to play any CDs are all (pressed or burned), avoid the standard DUO altogether and buy a CDROM2 addon or DUO-R(X). The failure rates just seem to be way too high when it comes to the audio problems and general CDROM read failures.
-
Its worth mentioning that many cheaper cd players like off-brand boomboxes and the like can't play cdrs, at least as of a few years ago. The reason given is that they cannot read the darker dyes of the cdrs, the lasers being too cheap. Likewise before I quit using cdrs in my Duo a few worked and a few didnt- the very same ones that all worked in my TGCD. So maybe the Duo was made with what would now be considered cheap parts.
-
The main reason I believe it's a bad idea to play CDRs in a Duo is the fact that the Duo, being very early generation CD hardware, has crap error correction. Realize that burned discs are subject to writing errors, especially if you burn them past 4X. Hell, even 2x discs don't always work. The Duo has poor/no error correction and will often struggle to play these discs. This is largely compounded by the fact that the lasers go off-calibration over time and need to be redone.
In a side note, I was able to have a few e-mails exchanged with Bob Frasure at Retrogames and he indicated that he fixed Duo lasers with some equipment for realigning the laser. I'm hoping to add this capability soon ;)
-
D-Lite, as soon as you are able, please let me know. I'd love to get my old Duo up and running again. I emailed that guy at Retrogames I don't know how many times with no response.
Thanks!
-
I think Jammaniaclord said how he found a way to fix this problem awhile ago. Hopefully there is a easy way to fix it someday.
-
The main problem with CDR's in Duo's is the Duo itself. The Duo is cheaply made, and very likely to fail on you at one time or another, whether you use CDR's in it or not. I have 3 of them, and they have all crapped out at one time or another. Even the one I bought new from Telegames 5 years ago, with less than 20 hours TOTAL play time on it, quit working. No way I'd send it to Retrogames, and pay them $65 to swap my dead one for one of their refurbished ones. Try calling game stores, and electronic shops around your area first. Theres a place called Games N More here close by that does system repairs, and even though they had never repaired a Duo, he was willing to take a look at it, and figured out the problem. Long as its not an exclusive component, or something you can't get anywhere, you might get lucky. So, now I have all my Duo's working, but I'll stick with my original CD unit. Its never failed me.
-
The main problem with CDR's in Duo's is the Duo itself. The Duo is cheaply made, and very likely to fail on you at one time or another, whether you use CDR's in it or not. I have 3 of them, and they have all crapped out at one time or another. Even the one I bought new from Telegames 5 years ago, with less than 20 hours TOTAL play time on it, quit working. No way I'd send it to Retrogames, and pay them $65 to swap my dead one for one of their refurbished ones. Try calling game stores, and electronic shops around your area first. Theres a place called Games N More here close by that does system repairs, and even though they had never repaired a Duo, he was willing to take a look at it, and figured out the problem. Long as its not an exclusive component, or something you can't get anywhere, you might get lucky. So, now I have all my Duo's working, but I'll stick with my original CD unit. Its never failed me.
Big question: what was wrong with it?
-
The main problem with CDR's in Duo's is the Duo itself. The Duo is cheaply made, and very likely to fail on you at one time or another, whether you use CDR's in it or not. I have 3 of them, and they have all crapped out at one time or another. Even the one I bought new from Telegames 5 years ago, with less than 20 hours TOTAL play time on it, quit working. No way I'd send it to Retrogames, and pay them $65 to swap my dead one for one of their refurbished ones. Try calling game stores, and electronic shops around your area first. Theres a place called Games N More here close by that does system repairs, and even though they had never repaired a Duo, he was willing to take a look at it, and figured out the problem. Long as its not an exclusive component, or something you can't get anywhere, you might get lucky. So, now I have all my Duo's working, but I'll stick with my original CD unit. Its never failed me.
Big question: what was wrong with it?
Probably a pot on the CD reader. Just another wild guess though. :)
-
Believe it or not, they all had power supply problems. Worked fine one day, then the next it would do nothing. Like it wasn't plugged in at all. I didn't ask for the technical explanation of what it was, just happy he could actually solve the problem.
-
I must know, if I play CD-Rs on my PCE CDROM 2 system, will it damage it in any way like they damage Turbo Duo units?
-
Quick question... is it a bad idea to play CD-R's is the tg 16 cd player or duo?
Yes, it is a bad idea to use CDRs on any pce/duo systems. Download the magic engine emu and play your CDRs on your cpu if you must.
The lenses on these systems tend to gear off track, if this has happened, you might need to manually adjust the laser lens. I can't tell you how this is exactly done, but it definitely works.
Or just have someone with knowledge take the machine apart, and manually adjust the laser lens.
-
I must know, if I play CD-Rs on my PCE CDROM 2 system, will it damage it in any way like they damage Turbo Duo units?
I use them with mine and have had no problems with it.
Again... I still think it's a myth that they "damage" drives, but that's just my opinion. By that logic, scratches and dust can "damage" the laser even though nothing ever touches it.
The DUO's CDROM drive is just poor quality compared to the CDROM of the TG16/PCE add-on.
-
The CD drive that NEC used in the CDROM addon is a standard model that they also used for other types of computer equipment, so it'd been in use for a few years. Not so with the Duo...obviously, the machine was a brand new design and like all brand new designs, was subject to imperfections. That's probably why the later Japanese models have reportedly far fewer problems...they were revised from the original Duo design. I've seen other NEC equipment using the standard drives (one of the offices I used to visit was full of them) and they came in all kinds of nifty colours too. :D
-
I've heard from different sources that Duo systems actually have slightly faster loading times. Has anyone else heard this and confirm it's true?
-
The spinup time is faster, giving the appearance of faster initial load times. The old drive doesn't spin up quite as fast. Data transfer is still the same speed.
-
The spinup time is faster, giving the appearance of faster initial load times. The old drive doesn't spin up quite as fast. Data transfer is still the same speed.
This is not true. The Turbo DUO uses a 2X CD drive while the older CD attachment used a 1X CD drive.
Anyway just to give my 2 cents, when I purchased my Turbo DUO back in 1992 I noticed that the optical pickup mechanism had difficultly reading the outside tracks of games and even music CDs. I came to this conclusion because the CD drive would skip more often if I tapped the cover of the DUO while it was reading the outer tracks of a disc. When it was reading the inner tracks of the disc, it required a harder tap to force it to skip. Upon closer inspection I noticed that the orange ribbon cable that was connected to the optical pickup mechanism would tension higher when the pickup was reading the outer tracks of the disc. In other words when the pickup is at the farthest point from the spindle, the ribbon cable would have the most amount of tension and hence try to pull the pickup back towards the spindle or center of the disc. I came up with an idea to fix this design flaw and so I glued part of the cable to the pickup so as to minimize the tension. My fix worked for the post part, but later I contemplated writing a letter to TTi to notify them of this problem. In the end I never did write them a letter since I had more important things to do during that time and just forgot about it.
In summary the laser and pickup itself in the DUO was of fair quality. The problem was actually the way the ribbon cable was mounted and the length of the cable. The cable restricted the laser from doing a full inner to outer track stroke without increased cable tension. I don't know if NEC fixed this in later Japanese DUOs or not, but it was indeed a design flaw. The irony in all of this is that NEC now makes one of the top DVD burners on the martket today and command almost 1/3 of the worldwide DVD burner market. In fact the first 16X DVD-RAM burner will be using their 16X microchips. They will also release their own drives using this chip later in the year.
What I would love for NEC to do is release a little PC Engine PCI card with a single controller port that you simply plug into your computer and play all the CD games that were available on your computer CD or DVD drive. It would also be cool if they released all of the HuCard games on CDs too for play on this PC card. They could sell this card at maybe $40 and hardcore oldshcool gamers would buy it in a heartbeat. Anybody want to start a petition? :twisted:
-
This is not true. The Turbo DUO uses a 2X CD drive while the older CD attachment used a 1X CD drive.
Come again? I've never heard a single thing about the Duo using a 2x drive...in fact, everything I've ever read always stated that it was a 1x drive. If you can provide some further information about this, I'm sure everyone would be interested in seeing it. If it really was a 2x drive, load times would have been roughly half the time for the Duo when playing 1mbit CDROMs, and this was simply never the case. I had a hardware spec sheet a long time ago that listed, among other things, the spinup time for the model of CDROM that the original system used (as stated before, I used to spend a lot of time in an office where these things were widely used), but I don't have a similar spec sheet for the CDROM that the Duo used because it was proprietary. Also, it wouldn't make sense for them to use a 2x drive for the Duo, since at 2x, the data transfer rate would be 300kb/s max, and that only comes into play at max spin which takes a second or two to get up to, and the machine only had 256kb of RAM so that would make it somewhat of a wasted effort...and we all know how console manufacturers, even NEC, like to cut costs by going the cheapest way possible. :)
-
It was stated in a print TTi advertisment I saw in a game magazine. It was a long time ago but the advertisement compared the DUO to a the speed of a car or something. It was along the lines of "turbocharged and double the speed" or something like that then listes the features as 2x CD-ROM speed. If someone else has seen this ad then they can corroberate what I'm saying. I even remember the SCSI addon prototype NEC was working on to allow the DUO to function as an external SCSI 2x CD-ROM drive.
-
I don't remember the ad, but I've certainly seen probably a hundred or so sites mentioning that the Duo had a 1x drive. What we see in advertisements doesn't reflect what is actually produced, especially when it comes to NEC. :D Also, the "drive card" as I usually call it ;) was abandoned and with good reason...quad speed drives were available at the time it was being developed and were obviously hella faster than a 1x or even, if this was actually the case, a 2x. Anyone remember NEC's big SGX hype push, then how they produced a phenominally inferior machine? Or how about the PC-FX's 3D hype? None of that ever came to fruition, so the Duo having a 2x drive after being hyped about it is equally unlikely. :D Some solid specs would lay this issue to rest and the real truth about the system could be known...unfortunately, a single advertising block before the machine is actually released doesn't tell us very much. :D
-
Well if NEC themselvs said you can use your DUO as a 2x SCSI CD-ROM drive with the adaptor then it indeed is 2x. Regardless the point is not that you're going to be buying a DUO to function as an external computer CD-ROM. The point is you could use it as an external one if your pc didn't have a CD-ROM by simply buying the adaptor.
-
That still doesn't prove that it actually is a 2x though, and the point was not to use the machine as an external drive, but rather to know why the Duo's drive seems to be slightly faster by some people's perception. The thought that it's a 2x drive would explain why it is slightly faster by some people's perception, since the drive might exceed 1x speed (but still likely won't quite reach 2x to read in a max of only 256kb) but since there are, as I've said before, scores of information sites out there that list the drive as a 1x, and since I have a bit of knowledge of the original drives (slower spinup), I'm still not even remotely convinced that the Duo used anything higher than a 1x. :) As I said before...how about some solid information on this subject?
-
Until somebody has some solid info then I guess we'll never know. I don't think websites posting the same wrong information is proof that it's 1x. BTW I'm not even sure why you keep mention 256K since it has nothing to do with anything.
-
256k has everything to do with everything when it comes to the Duo, because that's the size of the RAM the machine has to load Duo games. 256KB, or 2mbit. A 1x drive can transfer data at 150k/s at max spin. A 2x drive can transfer data at 300k/s at max spin. So on and so forth.
-
I have been having a great time reading you two's conversations! But I have to agree with nod on this one because I have always heard and read the Turbo Duo having a 1x speed CD drive.
-
It seems like 2x would be overkill anyway since Duo games really don't take very long to load in the first place, I don't know why they would have bothered beefing up the CDrom when there wasn't a problem to begin with.
-
I love how the Duo can have fast loading time at times, but every now and then there will be a moment where it's loading something for an awfully long time.
-
Look guys, the original System 1.0 CD had less memory than System 2.0, did you forget about this? The DUO had the system 2.0 integrated into the console. The system 2.0 had more memory so it makes perfect sense that the newer system 2.0 included a 2x CD drive than the system 1.0's 1x CD.
In fact if you look into the CD window of the DUO while it's playing a game the speed of the CD is faster than the original TG16CD. You can see the CD labels spin faster.
Again 256k thing has nothing to do with not requiring a 2x CD drive. The games took decades to load on the orginial system 1.0 card, but according to your logic since it only has a little amount of RAM you didn't need a faster drive. According to your logic the game should be able to load in 2 seconds at 150kb/s... :roll:
-
Yeah but don't you think it's a little odd that you're the only guy on the entire internet who thinks the duo has a 2x cdrom?
-
Yeah but don't you think it's a little odd that you're the only guy on the entire internet who thinks the duo has a 2x cdrom?
I don't think it's odd, I just think people have been believing in urban legends. :wink:
-
Look guys, the original System 1.0 CD had less memory than System 2.0, did you forget about this? The DUO had the system 2.0 integrated into the console. The system 2.0 had more memory so it makes perfect sense that the newer system 2.0 included a 2x CD drive than the system 1.0's 1x CD.
In fact if you look into the CD window of the DUO while it's playing a game the speed of the CD is faster than the original TG16CD. You can see the CD labels spin faster.
Again 256k thing has nothing to do with not requiring a 2x CD drive. The games took decades to load on the orginial system 1.0 card, but according to your logic since it only has a little amount of RAM you didn't need a faster drive. According to your logic the game should be able to load in 2 seconds at 150kb/s... :roll:
A little snippy, aren't we? :roll: System 1.0 wasn't released in the US afaik, we got System 2.0 and then System 3.0 in the Duo. And everyone knows that the original unit had less memory, hence the massive hype when the 3.0 system was being primed for release stateside.
Don't forget about seek time by the way...I have no solid specs or information on the laser seek time but it's obvious that the Duo's head moved faster, since it was a later model CDROM and technology had certainly improved by then (you can hear the thing move slowly on the original CDROM unit but it was quite fast on the Duo, and I'm sure that this too contributes to the perceived speedup). I never noticed games in the Duo spinning faster than the regular CDROM, but I did notice the obvious fact that discs spin faster or slower depending on where the head was. I don't remember games loading any faster or slower on either setup, frankly...the system always loaded pretty fast for 64k and 256k games. I'll run some tests myself once I get my setup working. It may be a 2x drive in the Duo (unlikely) and it may not be (more likely), we shall see, but my original point, which you were very quick to dismiss, is still valid...the Duo drive has a quicker spinup than the original CDROM unit NEC used and that contributes to the perceived difference in speed that some people have.
Incorrect information does often get passed around (anyone remember the "betting the powerup items" in half of the Internet sites' description of Ninja Spirit? or half of everyone calling it "Martial Champions" instead of its real name, "Martial Champion"?) but I'm pretty sure that after all these years, what's known is known...
-
System 1.0 wasn't released in the US afaik, we got System 2.0 and then System 3.0 in the Duo. And everyone knows that the original unit had less memory, hence the massive hype when the 3.0 system was being primed for release stateside.
It was a long time ago, but yeah thanks for the correction. Regardless the point still stands->more memory so 2x CD makes more sense.
-
OK we get the point...you think it's a 2x. I still haven't seen any proof of this, so I'm just gonna let you believe what you believe and drop the subject because it's not exactly a pressing issue. They load at 32x in Magic Engine on my PC and even faster when booted using Daemon Tools. :D
-
:D
-
I'm in the process of scanning old magazines that feature the Duo. Rest assured the CD ROM in the Duo is double speed and I will post the relevant clippings when I find them.
When I finally got the Duo I was expecting much faster load times due to the double speed CD ROM, and was pretty surprised not to get them in a terribly pronounced way.
-
I'm no expert on the subject, but I remember "back in the day" when I was debating on whether to get the duo or the sega CD - I was seriously considering the duo because of the PC interface I had heard about (my computer at the time did not have a CD rom drive). I had a few flyers about it and had seen some of the aforementioned magazine articles and ads. I really do remember hearing that the duo had a 2x cd rom drive.
Well - I ended up making the wrong decision and purchased the sega CD - didn't get my duo till much later. But I did get an awesome deal on the duo when I got it :)
just my $0.02
-
System 1.0 wasn't released in the US afaik, we got System 2.0 and then System 3.0 in the Duo. And everyone knows that the original unit had less memory, hence the massive hype when the 3.0 system was being primed for release stateside.
It was a long time ago, but yeah thanks for the correction. Regardless the point still stands->more memory so 2x CD makes more sense.
The read speed of the drive has absolutely nothing to do with the memory in the system card.
-
System 1.0 wasn't released in the US afaik, we got System 2.0 and then System 3.0 in the Duo. And everyone knows that the original unit had less memory, hence the massive hype when the 3.0 system was being primed for release stateside.
It was a long time ago, but yeah thanks for the correction. Regardless the point still stands->more memory so 2x CD makes more sense.
The read speed of the drive has absolutely nothing to do with the memory in the system card.
care to elaborate?
-
care to elaborate?
Certainly.
A single speed CDROM drive has a read speed of 150 KBps. That's about 9MB per minute. A standard 74 minute CDROM is about 650.3 MB in total available data storage capacity. The speed is relative to music playback time. At 1x, it will take you about 74 minutes to play the entire audio content of a standard CDROM.
This is what it means to have a "1x" CDROM drive. A "2x" drive is simply twice that, under optimal conditions.
The TurboGrafx 16 (USA) came with a System 2.0 card. This is merely a BIOS and scratch space to store data that is cached off of the CDROM drive. It is possible to achieve the same performance as a DUO system when upgrading to a System 3.0 card. The DUO system has essentially the same functionality as a System 3.0 card internally. No additional card or upgrade is needed.
No matter what, in spite of the "memory upgrade" of the System cards in question, you *can not* increase the maximum read speed of the CDROM drive. It's not designed to operate any faster than it already does. That said, it's possible to cache more data into a System 3.0 card, requiring less access to the CDROM drive for general game data.
-
care to elaborate?
Certainly.
A single speed CDROM drive has a read speed of 150 KBps. That's about 9MB per minute. A standard 74 minute CDROM is about 650.3 MB in total available data storage capacity. The speed is relative to music playback time. At 1x, it will take you about 74 minutes to play the entire audio content of a standard CDROM.
This is what it means to have a "1x" CDROM drive. A "2x" drive is simply twice that, under optimal conditions.
The TurboGrafx 16 (USA) came with a System 2.0 card. This is merely a BIOS and scratch space to store data that is cached off of the CDROM drive. It is possible to achieve the same performance as a DUO system when upgrading to a System 3.0 card. The DUO system has essentially the same functionality as a System 3.0 card internally. No additional card or upgrade is needed.
No matter what, in spite of the "memory upgrade" of the System cards in question, you *can not* increase the maximum read speed of the CDROM drive. It's not designed to operate any faster than it already does. That said, it's possible to cache more data into a System 3.0 card, requiring less access to the CDROM drive for general game data.
So basically you just proved my point. It's a cache buffer for the CDROM. To fill up the larger memory buffer in the same amount of time requires a faster CDROM. This is exactly why I asked why 256k of RAM was brought up as an argument. Oh btw nobody said more memory from the System 3.0 means it can magically increase the speed of the CD drive. What was said is that if you have more buffer to fillup, it makes more sense to have a faster drive to fill up this larger buffer hence the 2x drive found in DUO. A TG16CD with a System 3.0 card will take twice as long to fill up the memory buffer than the DUO.
-
So basically you just proved my point. It's a cache buffer for the CDROM. To fill up the larger memory buffer in the same amount of time requires a faster CDROM. This is exactly why I asked why 256k of RAM was brought up as an argument. Oh btw nobody said more memory from the System 3.0 means it can magically increase the speed of the CD drive. What was said is that if you have more buffer to fillup, it makes more sense to have a faster drive to fill up this larger buffer hence the 2x drive found in DUO. A TG16CD with a System 3.0 card will take twice as long to fill up the memory buffer than the DUO.
I didn't prove your point at all. You're talking out of your ass. This memory upgrade does not make it a 2x drive. What part of that do you not understand? You're simply trying to make your concept of a 2x drive less asinine.
Adding more cache memory to a 7,200 RPM hard drive does not give you a 10,000RPM hard drive just as adding more memory to a game system does not double the rate at which the drive spins and data is read from the CDROM. Stop trying to invent new laws of physics.
By your logic, one of the drives on this site is a 96x CDROM reader:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16827130043
And the other is a 48x CDROM reader:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16827136050
Because it has half as much cache memory. Please... Don't even try to argue this point anymore, because it's just retarded.
Next time I buy a CD burner, I'll be sure to get the one with more cache memory, because it'll most certainly be twice as fast (bacause you say so).
-
NEC Avenue, if you can give your source of the 2X CD drive in the Duo, then I could possibly agree with you, but for now I think a 1X CD drive in the Duo ultimately makes the most sense. Sorry :( .
-
This memory upgrade does not make it a 2x drive.
Nobody said it did. The point is the more buffer you have to fill the longer it takes. A 2x CDROM can fill a buffer in half the time as a 1x CDROM.
-
I think there's probably only one way to ultimately test to see whether or not the Duo has a 2x drive in it, and that's to run the Duo (region-mod of course) with an arcade card, running a heavy memory game, and then running the exact same game on an original setup with the arcade card pro and testing the time differences. The usage of the arcade card should bring both drives to their max spin, which is the only time you can accurately test their speeds. Obviously this test wouldn't apply to the Duo-R or Duo-RX, because we're not comparing those...we're talking the US models here. Who knows...they might have actually put a 2x drive into the RX, since it was designed to run ACD games...and there, a 2x drive WOULD help a whole lot....a 4x drive moreso...
Regardless though...doing a speed test on normal 64k or 256k games isn't going to do much, since there's so little data to be transferred. A 2x cdrom has 2 or 3 seconds spinup time before it reaches max spin, and by that time, most all the data's going to be loaded anyways...it would take approximately 3 seconds to fill the entire 256k, and then we can be generous and say we're also going to fill the 64k ADPCM buffer...let's assume we're loading an entire 256k overlay...3 seconds, it's loaded, then reseek to the overlay with the ADPCM data...we're already at max spin, so our transfer rate is 300k/s...it should take less than .2 seconds to load that 64k buffer once the laser is in the right position. Now let's look at the same test in a 1x drive...max spin is achieved in under a second, our data rate is halved, so it's only 150k/s. But wait a second here...we've only got to load 256kb, so we're probably going to load 150kb in the first two seconds, then fill the rest of the buffer in the next second...max three seconds. Then the 64k ADPCM buffer fill...still at max spin now, reseek and load, we're looking at less than .7 seconds. Look mah...our fourth grade math course has probably taught us that we've saved a whole .5 seconds...at best. :D This whole test, of course, is not taking into account the speed of the read head, which is instrumental in changing tracks and also affects the seek speed on the same track. We already know that the Duo's CDROM drive has a faster read head...as I stated before, you can tell this from listening to both drives in action...the system 2 drive is quite the slow one, but the Duo's read head zip back and forth pretty fast. On games with heavy track seeking (such as CF2), this makes quite a difference in load times. But the fact that the read head is that much faster will indeed account for the load speed difference...even if the Duo does indeed have a 1x drive. :D
-
The best way to test it is to look at how fast the disc spins. :)
You also have to keep in mind that we're not just talking about initial load times since games are constantly loading when you change levels etc.
-
Yeah...REAL conclusive. :roll: :lol: How about just coughing up the proof, eh?
-
You also have to keep in mind that we're not just talking about initial load times since games are constantly loading when you change levels etc.
Depends on the method they use to load the new data. Some games precache everything in huge overlays to reduce the frequency of future loads and some use dynamic loading of data segments which keeps load times down but more frequent. I can't think of any examples off the top of my head but I believe more games use method #2...which further narrows the speed difference and makes your argument even less fathomable. :D (Of course, this more frequent loading of data results in more reseeks...and again, look at the speed of the read heads for both drives...)
For Mysterious Song, we use method #1, since there's a lot of data to be loaded and having to dynamically load data between battles or whatnot is going to be a pain in the tail no matter what system you play it on. But for Neutopia III, we're using method #2 since the precache method isn't very effective for larger games.
-
I can't think of any examples off the top of my head but I believe more games use method #2...which further narrows the speed difference and makes your argument even less fathomable.
The thing is most games use red book audio so you cannot be constantly accessing the disc. You have to load big chunks of data.
-
I can't think of any examples off the top of my head but I believe more games use method #2...which further narrows the speed difference and makes your argument even less fathomable.
The thing is most games use red book audio so you cannot be constantly accessing the disc. You have to load big chunks of data.
You missed the point...ah well fsckit, you're just going to keep arguing this anyways. :roll: I'm still waiting on the evidence...
I never said ANYTHING about constantly accessing the disc. Frankly, I bore of this discussion since you don't have the foggiest clue as to what I'm talking about...ever...and you don't read what I say. Ever. :roll:
-
I'm still waiting on the evidence...
What are you talking about? As of right now nobody has evidence for or against 2x CD in DUO. What's up with all the drama anyway? :roll:
-
What are you talking about? As of right now nobody has evidence for or against 2x CD in DUO. What's up with all the drama anyway? :roll:
You told me I was wrong on a subject I am pretty knowledgable about...time to put up or shut up. And all of a sudden you say nobody has any evidence? I thought YOU did? That's what we're all waiting for...
-
Hahaha, this will never end.
-
Seems to be a lot of fights going on lately, and for once, I'm not starting...most of them. :D
-
I looked through a lot of old magazines but didn't find anything that tells the speed of the drive. And yet it seems like read it was double somewhere- because this was one reason I was considering a Duo even though I already had a TGCD. All I found was an ambiguous reference in Gamepro to slightly faster load times. One thing I haven't checked is Turboplay and the dedicated magazines on steve's site.
-
What are you talking about? As of right now nobody has evidence for or against 2x CD in DUO. What's up with all the drama anyway? :roll:
You told me I was wrong on a subject I am pretty knowledgable about...time to put up or shut up. And all of a sudden you say nobody has any evidence? I thought YOU did? That's what we're all waiting for...
The only evidence you have is a bunch of websites that are parroting the same information..doesnt' make it correct. The evidence that I've shown actually supports my claims like the SCSI adapter announcement. The DUO came out before the adapter anouncment. Now I ask you why the adapter allows you to use your DUO as a 2x CD drive if it wasn't already 2x? Doesn't make any sense at all. No offense, but it seems you are not that familiar with what kind of drive is used in the DUO otherwise you would know it's 2x. :wink:
-
Are you gonna keep going, or are you actually gonna give us the facts rather than speculation? You're getting pretty damn annoying. And I've already explained about six times why a 2x drive would be impractical and so have others. But I guess you missed all that, didn't you...relying on one advertisement, a very inconclusive "but discs look like they spin faster" argument, and a product which was never released, officially because drives were cheaper then...or could it be that it wasn't released because the hardware didn't live up to the claims they made? Like all the OTHER claims they made and never went through with?
-
there is a rather simple way to test this. assuming there were no special commands needed to enable this, if you have any pce programmer friends out there, they could do sequential reads from the cd and time them. with the magic engine kit it's a rather simple program. you shouldn't even need to care about the ram as you would repeatedly do disc reads from an increasing position back and ignore what was read in.
from what i've seen of the system card disassemblies, it's possible that the drive could've been 2x as they never seem to guarantee a specific seek or read time for any operation. they just do it until it succeeds or timesout.
perhaps if no one has done it in a few months, i'll do it so you can end this ;)
-
Fragmare suggested a similar thing, but the only real way to test this would be to use the arcade card, since that's the only way you're going to get a sustained rate long enough for any noticeable differences that could prove its speed. Since there's no acd api developed yet, it's gonna be awhile before this can be tested. Just using the standard functions isn't going to work because of the very small amount of RAM the normal setup has. A track jump test would only further prove the seek time difference that is already well-known, and doing a spinup time test isn't likely to be possible through code.
-
unless the hardware access method changed between the drives the amount of ram is irrelevant, simply because the cdrom drive has an internal sector buffer, that the system cards read out byte by byte. there no DMA from the drive to system ram (only to ADPCM RAM). thus the amount of ram is irrelevant.
you just keep sending commands to read one sector, wait until it's returned success, and then read the next, without transferring the data back to system ram. this is enough to keep the rate up to what it should be.
you shouldn't need the acd library, because you can access the hardware directly, inthe same way the card does.
if the hardware differs in some access way, then yes you would need to use the ACD. however, i thought the ACD only added extra memory and the special shifting registers to the system card.
a spinup test wouldn't really help much, but i think it should be possible by simply stopping the drive and checking the hardware that it's spundown. then start a timer, play a track, and read the Q channel data or the PCM data.
-
I'm in the process of scanning old magazines that feature the Duo. Rest assured the CD ROM in the Duo is double speed and I will post the relevant clippings when I find them.
When I finally got the Duo I was expecting much faster load times due to the double speed CD ROM, and was pretty surprised not to get them in a terribly pronounced way.
Did you find the relevent ads?