‘Remix OS Player’ Is Jide’s Own Android App Emulator For Windows

[Lucian Armasu]

Jide Technology released its Remix OS Player, which is a new Android Marshmallow-based PC emulator for Android apps and games.

‘Remix OS Player’ Is Jide’s Own Android App Emulator For Windows : Read more

 

[Math Geek]

if it works better than bluestacks it will be a welcome product for that niche market.

i love remix os itself. works great on new and old hardware but a simple windows program like this player should make it easier to share files between the 2 os's. remix os is not very easy to do this with.

 

[Jeff Fx]

A have no desire to play Android games on a Windows PC, since I have a ton of Windows games to play, but it will be nice to be able to run some of my Android apps from a Window.

 

[getochkn]

No AMD love.

 

[bloodroses]

I wonder how this compares to Nox, my currently favorite Android Emulator.

BlueStacks runs laggy as heck on any machine I throw it on since version 2 on. Andy has been getting just as bad performance wise each release. AMIDuOS is quite unstable for me as it continuously hard crashes. Droid4x caused me to do a rollback on my OS as it screwed windows up. Genymotion lacked some needed features I wanted (mapping mainly). The others that I know of (Leapdroid, MEmu) I haven't tried yet.

Maybe if I have a slow day, I'll give Remix (and the other 2) a whirl to see how they compare.

 

[ammaross]

If you have a K-series Intel CPU, Intel in their infinite wisdom decided to permanently remove (hardware-disable) the virtualization extensions in the CPU, so RIP.

 

[bloodroses]

All the virtualization extensions are removed on their newest? I know with the Haswell i5 (which I have), it was only vt-d that it was missing. I wish I had known that at the time since I use VMs quite a bit outside my gaming.

 

[ammaross]

All the virtualization extensions are removed on their newest? I know with the Haswell i5 (which I have), it was only vt-d. I wish I had known that at the time since I use VMs quite a bit outside my gaming.

The as of the 6700K, the CPU itself supports the VT-X, VTx-D, etc if you slot it in a non-Z chipset. The 4770K and 3770K get progressively worse virtual extension support. None of which is able to work in a Z-series chipset. Skylake may be the first, but I know my 3770K and 4770K are missing support.

 

[bloodroses]

All the virtualization extensions are removed on their newest? I know with the Haswell i5 (which I have), it was only vt-d. I wish I had known that at the time since I use VMs quite a bit outside my gaming.

The as of the 6700K, the CPU itself supports the VT-X, VTx-D, etc if you slot it in a non-Z chipset. The 4770K and 3770K get progressively worse virtual extension support. None of which is able to work in a Z-series chipset. Skylake may be the first, but I know my 3770K and 4770K are missing support.

If I remember correctly at the time, Intel stated that the reason for for the disabled extensions on the k series of CPUs was that they would become unsteady under overclocked speeds. Personally, I think it was an excuse (cripple) on their part to help sell more non-k high end CPUs.

 

[ammaross]

If I remember correctly at the time, Intel stated that the reason for for the disabled extensions on the k series of CPUs was that they would become unsteady under overclocked speeds. Personally, I think it was an excuse (cripple) on their part to help sell more non-k high end CPUs.

Correct. Virtualization can also become unstable using C-States as well. It makes sense that they would worry about the viability of the virtual extensions, but for those of us that would use them would also (hopefully) know and accept the risks involved. I do think they used it to artificially tier their product line, as the HEDT CPUs on the X99 chipset don't have this limitation IIRC.

 

[bloodroses]

If I remember correctly at the time, Intel stated that the reason for for the disabled extensions on the k series of CPUs was that they would become unsteady under overclocked speeds. Personally, I think it was an excuse (cripple) on their part to help sell more non-k high end CPUs.

Correct. Virtualization can also become unstable using C-States as well. It makes sense that they would worry about the viability of the virtual extensions, but for those of us that would use them would also (hopefully) know and accept the risks involved. I do think they used it to artificially tier their product line, as the HEDT CPUs on the X99 chipset don't have this limitation IIRC.

I definitely agree about knowing and accepting the risks. If I need vt-d (or other extensions at the time), I'd gladly give up the overclock during then to be able to use them. It certainly beats having to buy a different CPU. Surprisingly, this has never been an issue with AMD CPUs. It just sucks the CPU performance isn't there in comparison; for now.