IMO: the only real advantage is that it allows you to meet the precise timing needed to interface with physical hardware, like cartridges and other consoles (with link cables).
I think they're also really fun to write, because you think more like a hardware designer than a software engineer.
Am I correct in thinking that FPGAs have an advantage over software emulators when it comes to latency? In particular the latency from the host operating system before input has even been received by the software emulator? I.e. FPGAs don't have a host OS and will have the same latency as original hardware?
This is very much a genuine question, I just want to know if my intuition about this is right or wrong.
FPGAs not only have no host OS, but they are actual hardware. The only thing you program are lookup tables which then represent logic gates/multiplexers which only have the normal hardware latency. There is literally no software involved in execution.
That's why you can build "any" hardware with them. Even CPUs which then execute your desired software
Yeah, that's another advantage. Theoretically you can get down to <1 frame of input latency with an FPGA. I haven't found the latency on a software GBA emulator running on a computer to be noticeable, but some people might find this to be another advantage.
I think with a dedicated emulation handheld (non-FPGA), you could probably pull some tricks to bring down the latency though.
IMO: the only real advantage is that it allows you to meet the precise timing needed to interface with physical hardware, like cartridges and other consoles (with link cables).
I think they're also really fun to write, because you think more like a hardware designer than a software engineer.