AVS - New hardware based NES/Famicom console being released.

Good shit thanks for sharing! I would def pick one of these up for the collection

 

emulate, in computing terms in different. "reproduce the function or action of (a different computer, software system, etc.)." Which means exact. Which means, most software emulation is not emulation.

 

Dafuq did you just write?

Let me try to break this down.

No, its not. Using the definition you provided, emulation is to "reproduce the function or action of (a different computer, software system, etc.)". Lets compare that to "effort to act like someone/something else". Now, if I where to "act like someone else" and mimic their behaviour, would that be any different then trying to "reproduce the function or action"? The answer would be no.

Umm, no it doesnt. If I laugh, and then you laugh. The function is the same but the output (the sound coming from your mouth) is different because we are two different people.

Uhh.... ???.... I... Uhh....

 

@Niko quit comparing human actions with computer actions. For fun sakes. Lets say we are all robots with the same computer brains. I laugh, and then you laugh. Its exactly the same. Thats why when you look up the defintion of emulate they separate computers out:







I'm done with this argument.

 

Im with Niko, you sound like a dumbass. Reproducing the function or action of a different system in computing is you imitating it. You are saying the same exact thing in two different ways and trying to act like it means two different things. It does not... emulating in the computer world works just like emulating something anywhere else. You are just making one thing act like something it is not. And you say it has to be exact but in emulation things are never exact. If it is the exact same thing you are not emulation you just have that thing. Example: take an SNES... zsnes is an emulator and is not exactly the same as a SNES. A retron is an emulator and not exactly the same as a SNES but, another SNES is not an emulator and is exactly the same as a SNES.

 

Its the process in how it does it that is the important difference.

For examples:

• You burn a CDR with data from a CD - are you emulating that CD? you have just put all the same data on it. You have gone through the process of putting all the pits and groves into the CDR to be the same as the CD, the same way this device has copied the logic of the original chips. Yet, if you build an optical drive emulator, that loads the data from an sd card - that is called an emulator, because its not a direct copy of the original device, its something new that copies its output, but in a different way/design.

• NES clones from back in the day - someone had reverse engineered the CPU and copied it - no one claims those are emulators and this new device works in a similar way.

• Same for an EPROM - you dont call an EPROM programmed an emulator of a ROM- its just the same content copied to it. But its gates are just programmed to be a certain way and boom - you have the same function chip as the original.

For a car analogy - lets say you wanted to experience driving an old car that isnt available anymore. You have 2 options:

Someone painstakingly goes over all the drawings/engineering for the car and reproduces each part in exactly the same way/function. They assemble the car and you get to drive it.

The other way is a 4d simulator something like this:



Would you say the first car is emulating the experience or the second? Most would say the second I assume, where as the first isnt an emulation, but a reproduction down to the exactly details and is the same.

The way this works, is much the same. The FPGA has the original chips function, the only difference between an FPGA and the hardware clones back in the day - the FPGA can be configured at runtime, rather than "static" like a normal chip.

However, if you all think hardware clones are also emulation, then it doesnt seem like we will ever agree.

Op and eveyone else - sorry for the derail. Should have just kept quiet!

 

Nice, a prebuilt FPGA NES. It'll probably have noise and jailbar free video and maybe some boons like save states.
Very interesting!

 

Yes, all hardware clones are emulation. I don't understand why this isn't easy to understand. You are building a piece of hardware that is not the original piece of hardware but imitates it and has the same functionality. That is emulation. The CD-R example is null and void, that is obviously not emulation because the CD-R is not what you are cloning, the software is what you are making a duplicate of but, the duplicate you have made is the exact same as the origin software. It would be different if you had 2 cds that appeared to have the same software but one was the real origin software and one was something you wrote from scratch that just acts like the origin software. Sorry maybe im ranting but to me this is very cut and dry. If you have something that is supposed to act identically to something else but is not that first something, it is emulation.

 

Well, that is the first time ive ever heard anyone refer to hardware clones as emulators.

So, we will have to agree to disagree.

 

That we will good sir xD

 

Great you agree with me so you are a dumbass too. SINCE MANY SOFTWARE EMULATORS DO NOT ACT IDENTICAL TO THE REAL THING. (AKA A SHITTY EMULATOR)

 

Regardless of if it is done poorly or not if the intention is to imitate another piece of software or hardware it is a emulation. Just because it is poorly written or buggy does not mean it is not emulation. Also I like how your literally calling it an emulator as your trying to tell me its not an emulator

 

I guess I'm gonna have to find a new word for those things that go on computers that play old console games. "Emulator" just got really fucking confusing.

On another note, this magical NES replication device looks pretty cool. I like the prototype Nintendo design, definitely a cool tribute.

 

To me it sounds similar to the 3do. Different companies manufactured it and the hardware had differences such as top cd drive/sliding drive or the different controllers. Both were still a 3DO tho. To me these are just NES's manufactured by different companies. The famicom sounds to be emulation tho, but the nes sounds to be hardware.

 

An FPGA clone is in the same ballbark as the SNES mini to me. They're not original but close enough and "real hardware", meaning true parallel / instant processing just like the real machines did. No extra delays or buffers, at least in the core. Dunno what the HDMI stuff will do

 

For those wondering what the menu looks like. They showed it in a couple youtube videos.




Looks like the menus are powered by NES.

 

Hey Bad, if old time nes clones or the AVS are not emulation and are just an exact copy like an eeprom of a rom. Why some games would work on original nes and display audio or video glitches in other systems?

A cd-r plays exactly like it's original.
AVS claims 99.9% compatibility. Is that just for marketing sake? Or it's because there might be a game that plays fine on the original nes and won't work with it?

The reason for that it's because they are different and the clones are "mimicing" the funcitions of the first. In other words it's emulating it.

 

the .1 percent could be for game genie/par or maybe unliscensed games. You never know.

 

Snes mini has compatibility problems vs phat snes.

Ps2 slim has compability issues with some games.

1.6 xbox has compatibility issues with a couple of games.....

Are those emulation or just unforeseen issues with switching to a different chip with same functions?

They are basically doing the same thing as the AVS console - taking original chip functions and making a new chip that functions the same for size/cost reduction etc.

The 99.9% is likely marketing/legal reasons. Gives an out if there's an odd game they have not fully tested. All the official consoles listed above only have 99.9% too

 

It's not the same at all. Nintendo used their original design and tried to optimise it to make the 1 Chip SNES. It is an upgrade.
The first Playstation had issues with colour banding, which were corrected with later GPU version.
Each time they try to optimize their hardware, they face compatibility issue, but they own the original design.

Bunnyboy didn't copy the PPU/CPU down to the circuit level. Neither did the NES clones. They mimic the behaviour of the original, enhancing it in the process. This is hardware emulation.

There are other projects, like the Minimig, Mist, or FpgaArcade, even if they say that their project isn't an emulator. Maybe you don't agree with Wikipedia definition, but unless you recreate exactly the same chip, down to the transistor level, you are emulating it ...

Your comparison with the CIC Clone is unaccurate, as the CIC is mainly a CPU + software The various CIC Clones implement the software, and not the 4-bit CPU used in the original CIC.