So what does that mean practically?
Speed running SNES games on og hardware is about to become extremely expensive at the top level
Would it make a difference though? I’ve only got a passing interest, but I thought top end speedruns were measured per frame rather than RTA?
something something bus something something 0.35 seconds
e: perhaps the answer is already there, RTA would likely be the only ones with significant differences.
I guess it depends if the frame count is an in-game frame, or a recording of the gameplay.
If it’s in-game frames, then a slower newer snes has the advantage. You have more IRL time per “scored” unit of time.
If it’s frames of the video, then the faster barrel-aged SNES have the advantage, at the cost of requiring faster button presses
From the sound of it, nothing, really. It says in the article the CPU is stable, it’s the APU that’s speeding up. It’s possible that some games that tie in-game events to when a sound completes might be affected (I have no examples), but otherwise the effects seem cosmetic.
It’s very possible. Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe the CPU and APU do a little acknowledgment handshake every time an audio program finishes. I’m willing to bet there a lot of instances of the CPU subroutine waiting on the APU, e.g. an animation waiting for a sound cue to finish can advance slightly faster.
The increases, if they’re even confirmed, seem to be in the ceramic actuator’s factory defined range of variation. And even if they weren’t, it only affects audio, and would be imperceptible without instruments.
Somewhere between nothing and very little. It’s only on the audio side, but if games ran faster as if they were somehow timed by the audio the difference is about up to 0.6% faster.
