VOGONS

Common searches


DOSBox-X branch

Topic actions

Reply 2340 of 2349, by finalpatch

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
hail-to-the-ryzen wrote on 2023-01-25, 08:29:
There is a pull request "Sync dh fpu state with normal fpu": https://github.com/joncampbell123/dosbox-x/pull/3965 […]
Show full quote

There is a pull request "Sync dh fpu state with normal fpu":
https://github.com/joncampbell123/dosbox-x/pull/3965

"...fixes the fpu state out of sync problem when dynamic core calls normal core to handle self modification code."

On testing the latest commits in the above patch with core=dynamic, there is a significant performance penalty, such as for win32 games as available to a Win95 guest OS. It may be worth verifying in other environments. Otherwise, a better option is to test performance (and the above fpu state issue) while running core=dynamic with a build based on the non-x86 fpu (instead of the x86 fpu emulation).

I'm the author of this patch. There is more discussion on this issue in dosbox-staging repo https://github.com/dosbox-staging/dosbox-staging/pull/2248

Reply 2341 of 2349, by Alevam-Inc.

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Can anyone please help me? None of my games will launch anymore, I just get this error message:

Attachments

  • Win98 error.png
    Filename
    Win98 error.png
    File size
    6.53 KiB
    Views
    679 views
    File license
    Public domain

Reply 2342 of 2349, by songo

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
Azarien wrote on 2022-02-19, 22:18:
songo wrote on 2022-02-19, 21:13:

I cannot run 3dfx-patched version of Blood 1 on DosBox-X.

I have the same problem. Other games work but Blood always says that it cannot load DLL.

I have finally found a working solution - running DosBox-X with "-set memsize=63 -set output=opengl" did the trick.

Reply 2343 of 2349, by hail-to-the-ryzen

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
finalpatch wrote on 2023-01-26, 04:56:
hail-to-the-ryzen wrote on 2023-01-25, 08:29:

There is a pull request "Sync dh fpu state with normal fpu":
https://github.com/joncampbell123/dosbox-x/pull/3965
...

I'm the author of this patch. There is more discussion on this issue in dosbox-staging repo https://github.com/dosbox-staging/dosbox-staging/pull/2248

With the recently submitted commits to dosbox-x the major performance penalty in Win95 is no longer present. However, my tests are in a small sample. With the improvements to the patch I will continue to test since it improves the accuracy in a crucial area of the x86-specific emulation. One example where a major slowdown still occurs is in the win32 program BGB, such as version 1.03:
Re: Emulation on Windows NT 4.0

This case was not tested against core=dynamic where the non-x86 fpu emulation is used.

Reply 2344 of 2349, by Sallow

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I have a question about swapping big, 8gig VHDs between DOSBOX-X and PCEM. Unless I'm missing something, I see that PCEM has a max limit of 16 heads, so an 8gig hd has 16302 cylinders - whereas in DOSBOX-X the standard VHD will have 255 heads and 1023 cylinders which will get it rejected outright by PCEM.

I have tried using the VHD from PCEM, first by putting -size 512,63,16,16302 into the conf (which made the contents of the disk seem garbled) and then by putting the standard DOSBOX-X -size 512,63,255,1023. This seems to work just fine, but, as I know computer code is incompatible with common sense, I kinda suspect it might cause file/directory/vhd corruption in some way.

Are there any experiences with this? Of course, a workaround would be to take the two VHDs, attach them in Disk Management and just copy the stuff from one to the other.

Reply 2345 of 2349, by Duffman

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

@Sallow

If you want larger VHDs switch from PCEM to 86BOX.
I'm not sure what the limit is for 86BOX but I've used 100GB VHDs without issue.

MB: ASRock B550 Steel Legend
CPU: Ryzen 9 5950X
RAM: Corsair 64GB Kit (4x16GB) DDR4 Veng LPX C18 4000MHz
SSDs: 2x Crucial MX500 1TB SATA + 1x Samsung 980 (non-pro) 1TB NVMe SSD
OSs: Win 11 Pro (NVMe) + WinXP Pro SP3 (SATA)
GPU: RTX2070 (11) GT730 (XP)

Reply 2346 of 2349, by Sallow

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Ok, I think I have given 86BOX a fair try... apologies to the devs, but it just isn't for me. It is absolutely DROWNING in roms that a lay person wouldn't know to pick from. I kept trying to find a BIOS that would let me install DOS 7.1 CDU on an 8GB drive, but they ALL kept giving me the "not bootable disk" error. Some even when I tried to boot with the DOS 6.22 floppies (yes, I did a hard reboot.) There are no help files, it got so frustrating I went to YouTube to hopefully watch some tutorials. I found the devs' official channel (I think) which was all just videos about running pre-3.1 versions of Windows and I watched a video by some guy who was playing a bunch of games and just stating matter-of-factly "this one had buggy sounds" "this one had problems with the keyboard" for practically every game he played. And the UI... When I wish to change/eject a floppy I have to click on Media and then move my mouse all the way to the edge of the screen, to access the side-menu (because it has to print out the entire directory path... in the drop-down menu)

The plus side is that, even though by default it uses the PCem format for virtual HD files, with 16 heads and 16302 cylinders, it does accept the 255,1023 DOSBox-X format.

But still... no. My question about whether it's fully safe to use the PCem-created VHD files in DOSBox-X still stands. Anyone?

Reply 2347 of 2349, by _Rob

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I created today a Pentium MMX class machine in 86Box 3.11, and gave it a 2GB RAW HDD image with Win98SE pre-installed that had been created with DOSBox-X.

On first launch, it obviously found tons of new hardware, but it worked just fine. In fact, on my system, the guest OS felt a lot smoother in 86Box then in DOSBox-X.

The machine I chose in 86Box was a:

  • Machine Type: Socket 7 (Dual Voltage)
  • Machine [i430TX] Intel YM430TX
  • CPU type: Intel Pentium MMX 233
  • Video: [PCI] ATI Mach64GX

Reply 2348 of 2349, by DosFreak

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

That's nice but this thread is for dosbox-x not 86box or pcem so no one cares.

DOSBox Compilation Guides
DosBox Feature Request Thread
PC Game Compatibility List
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Running DRM games offline

Reply 2349 of 2349, by DragonSlayer

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I have a question that may be a bit difficult to answer.

I'm running Windows 98 SE and using it to listen to MIDIs using the Yamaha S-YXG100 Plus synthesizer, because running it under Windows 98 is the only way to activate the Sondius drivers, which sound spectacular, if configured correctly. You can run this Yamaha player under Windows 10, but so far as I can tell, nobody has found a way to activate the Sondius drivers under a modern OS so it must be run under Windows 98 to get the best sound quality.

What I'm trying to do is to run Windows 98 under DOSBox-X, set up a MIDI playlist to play in the background, while I surf the Internet, and run DOSBox-X minimized in the background.

The problem that I'm having is that if I use the SDL1 version of DOSBox-X, when I alt-tab out of it, it automatically goes from fullscreen to windowed, and if I minimize it, all programs running in DOSBox-X become muted. Also, if I leave it unminimized, and switch to any web browser, it also becomes muted. Strangely enough, I can switch to other windows, but as soon as I switch to my web browser, DOSBox-X always mutes itself.

If I use the SDL2 version of DOSBox-X, and alt-tab out of it, it will stay fullscreen, but for some odd reason, any audio player used starts stuttering and skipping after a short while, and I have a very fast, modern computer. If I switch back to DOSBox-X, the player plays perfectly, without stuttering, but when I alt-tab out, it will start stuttering again in a short amount of time.

I have already changed the priority setting to highest,highest so that isn't the problem.

Is this a known bug in DOSBox-X or is there some obscure setting that I'm missing that will fix this situation?

BTW, I know that I can do what I want to do under 86Box, but the sound quality under 86Box is very poor compared to DOSBox-X, and that defeats the point of what I'm trying to accomplish.

Sorry for the long post, but this is as succinct as I could think to explain the situation without leaving out any important details. Thanks in advance for any help with this problem.

"There are only 10 types of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those who don't."