Re: tips for silencing a pentium II noisey fan?
Posted on 2016-11-19, 19:22
Here's my HP Vectra Pentium II 400. Admittedly, there's a ducted exhaust fan mounted over it. Filename pentiumII.jpg File size 969.15 KiB Views 1197 views
Re: Let's benchmark our systems with caches disabled
Posted on 2016-11-19, 18:09
I've never tried that, not sure it will work. But MS-DOS 6 is hardware-agnostic. I have a spare hdd with DOS and games, apps, benchmarks installed that I move from machine to machine to run benchmarks. Once you set it up on a device that you can boot from (compact flash, hdd, etc) then its easy to …
Looking for 2D desktop graphics benchmark for Win98
Posted on 2016-11-19, 18:02
...besides Winbench 99 Graphics Winmark. The Graphics Winmark tests crap out on very fast (>1Ghz) systems, giving errors that say "Measured CPU speed during the test higher than expected". Are there any other 2D graphics benchmarks that work on Win98?
Re: tips for silencing a pentium II noisey fan?
Posted on 2016-11-19, 17:30
Some fans don't have a good lube point. Be careful not to lube electronics, only cylinder/shaft areas. Like squareguy said, pics?
Re: Let's benchmark our systems with caches disabled
Posted on 2016-11-19, 16:25
MTRFFLBE (or FASTVID) does not work on a Pentium 1. I don't have experience with 7.1, so can't help there. I use 6.22 for DOS benchmarking. Can I simply downgrade to 6.22 by overwriting all system files? I don't want to reinstall everything in config.sys and autoexec.bat. I'm pretty sure that is …
Re: Work in progress: 486 VLB system
Posted on 2016-11-19, 16:19
486 is probably not the most practical choice for a second DOS machine (as opposed to 386) Good luck, man! 486s are fun to mess with. You may have some success with combinations of L1, L2 and Turbo. My DX2-66 has speed points in the slow 486, fast 386, slow 386, and 286 ranges, through various …
Re: Let's benchmark our systems with caches disabled
Posted on 2016-11-19, 16:08
MTRFFLBE (or FASTVID) does not work on a Pentium 1. I don't have experience with 7.1, so can't help there. I use 6.22 for DOS benchmarking.
Re: Let's benchmark our systems with caches disabled
Posted on 2016-11-19, 16:01
MTRRRLFBE should work on your slot 1 cpu. If you're still underclocking, set it back to stock speeds and try again. Same thing for Quake, see if it works without any changes to your system. BTW, are you running these in pure DOS, MS-DOS mode, or from a Win98 command prompt? You should be running in …
What determines DOS graphics card speed?
Posted on 2016-11-19, 15:42
We've had lots of discussion and benchmarks on DOS graphic card performance which got me thinking. In Windows we have drivers, core and memory clocks, driver optimizations, overclocking, etc. I have two PCI TNT2 M64s that are clocked differently according to Powerstrip--they both have a core clock …
Re: Let's benchmark our systems with caches disabled
Posted on 2016-11-19, 15:23
You've got other issues that should be addressed first if benchmarks are failing. Can you be more specific about how Quake is failing? What's MTRF?
Re: Let's benchmark our systems with caches disabled
Posted on 2016-11-19, 14:25
Landmark is meant for much older systems. I would use the benchmarks that are on the spreadsheet of this thread: 3DBENCH2, PCPBench, Speedsys, and Doom. Then you can compare to other systems in the spreadsheet with the same benchmarks and their results. :) Speedsys claims 26.4. Since I only really …
Re: Guess the track
Posted on 2016-11-19, 14:18
Re: Pentium 1@150mhz at 3 different fsb and Multiplier settings benchmarks
Posted on 2016-11-19, 14:13
Really interesting results, thank you for taking the time to make up the charts and post them. Look at how much 3dbench is effected by the increase in RAM speed compared to the other benchmarks. It is also the least-demanding benchmark in the bunch. Less pixels to push=greater jump in performance …
Re: Let's benchmark our systems with caches disabled
Posted on 2016-11-19, 03:25
Landmark is meant for much older systems. I would use the benchmarks that are on the spreadsheet of this thread: 3DBENCH2, PCPBench, Speedsys, and Doom. Then you can compare to other systems in the spreadsheet with the same benchmarks and their results. 😀
Re: What retro activity did you get up to today?
Posted on 2016-11-19, 02:14
stamasd wrote: clueless1 wrote: Impressive collection, stamasd. 😀 The USPS boxes in the middle are full of CPUs that I have yet to go through and categorize. 😁 Drool...
Re: What retro activity did you get up to today?
Posted on 2016-11-19, 01:57
Impressive collection, stamasd. 😀
Re: More DOS PCI Benchmarks
Posted on 2016-11-19, 01:39
I forgot that I had an S3 Trio64 V2/DX, so I benched it and added it to the chart in the OP. With the exception of Doom, it's noticeably faster than the Virge. I also separated out the S3 and CL results with and without VESA BIOS Extensions. So they get a ZERO on Quake 640x480 without VBE, and a new …
Re: need advice about 3d graphics card
Posted on 2016-11-18, 19:39
MrMateczko wrote: But FX series require newer drivers, and newer drivers do not mean beter performance/stability under 98SE. For Geforce FX cards I use 56.64 drivers with success in Win98SE. I don't have a ton of games, but I haven't had any compatibility or stability issues so far. To each his own …
Re: need advice about 3d graphics card
Posted on 2016-11-18, 19:24
The FX cards get a bad rap, but they are actually really good for certain situations. the 64-bit FX5200 is faster than a GF2 MX400, but slower than a GF3 Ti200. The 128-bit FX5200 is about equal in performance to a GF3 Ti200. Both cards are fanless and run cool, so they will be silent and use less …
Re: Let's benchmark our systems with caches disabled
Posted on 2016-11-18, 16:28
Each run is randomly different? I wondered the same thing, but I think what he meant is that his results are varying from other systems on the list with similar CPUs. bluejeans-can you clarify? Are your results varying from run to run, or just different from other systems with similar CPU to yours?
Page 131 of 226