Comparison To Traditional Models
Compared to LLE, HLE has a very different set of design decisions and trade-offs. First, as the complexity of modern (fifth generation and above) video consoles rapidly increases, so does their computational power, and also the distance to the commodity PCs, which are the most common host systems for the emulators. Thus, the requirements on the quality of the emulated services increases, together with the difficulty of doing so. Hardware chips in consoles are usually extremely specialised towards specific functionality needed by games written for them, often in directions which are completely different than those taken by the hardware in an average PC machine. For example, 3D graphics might be realised by an extremely fast integer processor, coupled with the assumption of main system memory being the same as graphics memory, taking away the separate step of loading textures.
Emulating such an architecture programmatically on a PC, characterised by the emphasis put on floating-point operations, and specialised graphics hardware with memory separate from the system memory would be extremely difficult, especially taking into account the scarcity of documentation typical for specialised, proprietary hardware. Even if such an emulator could be created, it may be too slow for use. An HLE emulator would take the data to be processed, along with the operations list, and implement it using the means available on the host systems. Floating-point math and GPU operations could be performed natively. The result is not only a much better match with the host platform, but often significantly better results, as floating-point computation yields higher quality graphics suitable for high resolution displays available for PCs.
Read more about this topic: High-level Emulation
Famous quotes containing the words comparison to, comparison, traditional and/or models:
“In comparison to the French Revolution, the American Revolution has come to seem a parochial and rather dull event. This, despite the fact that the American Revolution was successful—realizing the purposes of the revolutionaries and establishing a durable political regime—while the French Revolution was a resounding failure, devouring its own children and leading to an imperial despotism, followed by an eventual restoration of the monarchy.”
—Irving Kristol (b. 1920)
“The difference between human vision and the image perceived by the faceted eye of an insect may be compared with the difference between a half-tone block made with the very finest screen and the corresponding picture as represented by the very coarse screening used in common newspaper pictorial reproduction. The same comparison holds good between the way Gogol saw things and the way average readers and average writers see things.”
—Vladimir Nabokov (1899–1977)
“The invention of photography provided a radically new picture-making process—a process based not on synthesis but on selection. The difference was a basic one. Paintings were made—constructed from a storehouse of traditional schemes and skills and attitudes—but photographs, as the man on the street put, were taken.”
—Jean Szarkowski (b. 1925)
“The greatest and truest models for all orators ... is Demosthenes. One who has not studied deeply and constantly all the great speeches of the great Athenian, is not prepared to speak in public. Only as the constant companion of Demosthenes, Burke, Fox, Canning and Webster, can we hope to become orators.”
—Woodrow Wilson (1856–1924)