DonutKing wrote:

OK cool, thanks for that, saves me a lot of effort 😁

I suspected that would be the case. My understanding is that with identical bus speeds and wait states, RAM with a lower NS rating won't increase performance.

I think you just got a freakishly good motherboard 😀

Nope, the info is just the maximum the memory can run at.
You could see it like this:
If you drive a Porsche and a Citroën on a freeway with a speedlimit of 100km/h, both will be exactly the same speed! Even though the Porsche could go much faster.
The speedlimit on the freeway is the memory settings in your BIOS here btw 😉

Yes that's what I meant.
I've already maxed my BIOS settings so lower NS memory gives no advantage

Markk wrote:

Yesterday, while I was using my 386, I thought to set the bus speed to 20MHz, to see if windows (I'm running version 3.11) were going to run any faster. As I knew already, the vga and the hd controller didn't have any problems with the 20 MHz setting. But unfortunately I can't say say the same thing about the SB AWE32 I use on that... I doesn't work at all. Which makes me think, that in the end it's not worth trying to make the 386 perform the fastest possible... For me it's only about compatibility and durability from now on, rather than maximum performance.

I had the same problem with my SBPro2 CT1600 card. It works OK in DOS with the mobo set to "insane performance", but as soon as Windows 95 is involved, the sound card fails to function.

I agree with you about compatibility and durability. However, just for temporary fun, doing mad experiments is an interesting learning process. Although I learnt today that using a screwdriver to remove SIMMs can cause a lot of damage. 😦

I'm really sorry about that 🙁 Usually I manage to remove them fine using a screwdriver, or any other similar object. I press with my finger the simm right in the middle towards the direction where it "falls", and using the screwdriver I press the first clip and then the second. If you do it quickly, almost every time it comes out very nice. Is it perhaps that you boards are relatively new, and the clips are a little tight?

Markk wrote:

I'm really sorry about that 🙁 Usually I manage to remove them fine using a screwdriver, or any other similar object. I press with my finger the simm right in the middle towards the direction where it "falls", and using the screwdriver I press the first clip and then the second. If you do it quickly, almost every time it comes out very nice. Is it perhaps that you boards are relatively new, and the clips are a little tight?

I just use a finger to first pull 1 clip to the side until it snaps free, then the other one. When the second one snaps free, the simm will come out by itself.
You don't really need a screwdriver, just need a little force for the 2 tabs.
I wouldn't use a screwdriver on a simm slot unless the clip was malfunctioning somehow, and then I hope I don't break anything 🤣!

OK, thanks a lot for the advice. I think these mobos are NOS, and consequently the SIMM clips are rather inflexible at the moment.

Tetrium wrote:

I just use a finger to first pull 1 clip to the side until it snaps free, then the other one. When the second one snaps free, the simm will come out by itself.
You don't really need a screwdriver, just need a little force for the 2 tabs.
I wouldn't use a screwdriver on a simm slot unless the clip was malfunctioning somehow, and then I hope I don't break anything 🤣!

Yes, that's the right way to do it. However, I'm reffering to more complex situations, when the board is in the case, and perhaps the board's power connectors leave little or no space for fingers... If you combine that with "hard to move" clips, it may be very difficult sometimes to remove them! Of course, all depends in the amount of time you have available... But in general I think we ought to be very careful with such old hardware, as it's not something that you'll find very easy in a store the next day if it brakes. 😀

I wish my camera's macro mode was working. Because looking at some of the Contaq 386 mobos, the SIMM clips are styled differently, depending on what board I am looking at. The one I am working on at the moment has extremely convenient "outer" clips, whereby you simply press on them with your finger tip, and they go outwards, allowing the SIMM to "fall over", and out of the SIMM socket itself.

The other boards are evil, because they don't have this, only one very tight clip on either side, that requires a lot of force to move them. After you move them, you have to move the opposite clip a bit. Then you have to go back to the first clip, and move it a bit more. Etc etc. Until it finally lets go of its tight grasp on the SIMM, and it can be pushed over, and then removed from the socket.

I'd rather remove anything obstructive rather then prying on a board with a screwdriver in hard to reach places.

Hey RG100, I think I just spotted a relative of yours:

🤣

🤣

I'm guessing this is RG100's father?

Looks more like grand dad! 🤣

Actually, this is one of my (many! 😜) offspring:

Edit:Zomg it's huuge!

Anyway, anyone know if theres some website which has all the logos handy?

What do you guys get from running the Doom 1.9S timedemo demo 3?

AMD 386DX-40
128KB L2 Cache (20ns)
8MB
ATI 28800-6 1MB ISA
128MB Compactflash HD
Caldera DR. Dos

Settings:
Low detail, screen size is 1 under max (full statusbar), no sound.

11.43FPS

TheLazy1 wrote:

What do you guys get from running the Doom 1.9S timedemo demo 3?

I really like challenges like this. Can you bear with me for a bit please? I'm finishing some 486 testing, then I'll go back to the 386. When I do, the first thing I'll do is this Doom bench...

AMD 386DX-40
Soyo 019R1 (ALI M1429 Chipset)
128kb L2 Cache
64meg ram
Tseng Labs ET4000
Future Domain Enhanced Controller Card
20GB Maxtor D740X-6L

Settings - As Above

Windows 95 Version of Dos

High Detail - 7fps
Low Detail - 11.6fps

Dos 6.22

High Detail - 6.9fps
Low Detail - 12.1fps

DOS 6.22 FTW

Is there some already setup bench software available with manual how to run it?

I have here some Doombench version that gives Realticks results, but thats probably something different?

fps=gameticks*35/realticks