theelf wrote on 2024-05-11, 22:10:

DarthSun wrote on 2024-05-11, 22:07:

Modern drivers have already overwrote this. ETC, Sound - Sbemu/vsbhda.

No way, not even close. Sbemu/vsbhda are nice projects but compatibility very low and still full of problems

No, Ryzen runs nicely, you have to learn a little use, but it's all in place.

DarthSun wrote on 2024-05-11, 22:28:

No, Ryzen runs nicely, you have to learn a little use, but it's all in place.

Love sbemu project, but to say in a nice way... compatibility is terrible yet

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-05-11, 22:18:

theelf wrote on 2024-05-11, 22:03:

ISA is a must for DOS compatibility, even best PCI cards have much lower compatibility. Did not tested SB Link in my life yet

I've done some testing with the ESS Solo-1 on a few platforms. It has generally good compatibility. Most of the issues I ran into are either with problematic games (e.g. Tyrian) or due to speed sensitivity which isn't exclusive to the Solo-1.

ESS Solo-1 DOS Compatibility Testing on Multiple Systems

Yes, i tested ESS card in my thin client futro and a pentium 3 tualatin only PCI board, good card, i also found very good the ALS4000, but still lot of problems, specially with older games

theelf wrote on 2024-05-11, 22:33:

Love sbemu project, but to say in a nice way... compatibility is terrible yet […]
Show full quote

DarthSun wrote on 2024-05-11, 22:28:

No, Ryzen runs nicely, you have to learn a little use, but it's all in place.

Love sbemu project, but to say in a nice way... compatibility is terrible yet

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-05-11, 22:18:

theelf wrote on 2024-05-11, 22:03:

ISA is a must for DOS compatibility, even best PCI cards have much lower compatibility. Did not tested SB Link in my life yet

I've done some testing with the ESS Solo-1 on a few platforms. It has generally good compatibility. Most of the issues I ran into are either with problematic games (e.g. Tyrian) or due to speed sensitivity which isn't exclusive to the Solo-1.

ESS Solo-1 DOS Compatibility Testing on Multiple Systems

Yes, i tested ESS card in my thin client futro and a pentium 3 tualatin only PCI board, good card, i also found very good the ALS4000, but still lot of problems, specially with older games

I was able to operate everything on the R3800X, Tyrian was a stubborn title, but it was also resolved under DOS/W98. In addition, speed -sensitive early titles are okay (CPUSPD), retro programmers have done excellent work, and more can be better.

I don't know ESS, I'm pushing SB0060, but it's a backward compatible, regular SB ...

There's quite a difference to getting things working under Windows with its audio compatibility layers and natively in DOS.

Even with a real ISA soundcard in real DOS you will never get 100% compatibility. Of the 290 titles I have tested on my most recent system I probably have somewhere in the region of 5% audio issues.

It's great that things like sbemu exist, but they've got a long way to go...

megatron-uk wrote on 2024-05-11, 22:54:

There's quite a difference to getting things working under Windows with its audio compatibility layers and natively in DOS.

Even with a real ISA soundcard in real DOS you will never get 100% compatibility. Of the 290 titles I have tested on my most recent system I probably have somewhere in the region of 5% audio issues.

It's great that things like sbemu exist, but they've got a long way to go...

Well, it's good now, all my favorite titles are trying to be better than that ...

megatron-uk wrote on 2024-05-11, 22:54:

Even with a real ISA soundcard in real DOS you will never get 100% compatibility. Of the 290 titles I have tested on my most recent system I probably have somewhere in the region of 5% audio issues.

This is why I install at least 3 sound cards in every build. 😅

......
Deleted, rather than a problem ... thread off my part end.

megatron-uk wrote on 2024-05-11, 22:54:

Even with a real ISA soundcard in real DOS you will never get 100% compatibility. Of the 290 titles I have tested on my most recent system I probably have somewhere in the region of 5% audio issues.

This.

The main benefit to having an ISA slot for a sound card in a retro system is flexibility, in that if you run into that one game which doesn't work on your existing sound card you're not going to be limited out of a known-to-work option because you haven't got anywhere to plug it in. It's not essential but if you're foregoing ISA slots then you might wanna do some more research to ensure the alternative options are going to suffice for what you're planning on doing.

I have experienced problems with Isa sound, but it turned out to be most of the setting. PCI is even more problematic, but the proportion of success is getting better.

P4 worth trying:

1Device = C: \ Config \ Limitmem.sys 32
2
3Rem New Version EMS
4Device = C: \ Config \ Himemx.exe /Noabove16 /x /x2max32 /max = 32768
5Device = C: \ dos \ umbpci.sys
6Device = C: \ dos \ emm386.exe ram
7Dos = high, umb, auto
8Rem End New Version EMS
9
10Shell = C: \ dos \ Command.com C: \ /p
11rem Devicehigh = c: \ dos \ setver.exe
12rem Devicehigh = c: \ dos \ ifshlp.sys
13Shell = C: \ Command.com C: \ /E: 1024 /P
14Lastdrive = z
15DeviceHigh = C: \ Hxcd-Rom \ ltnide.Sys /D: MSCD000
16Stacks = 9.256
17Switches =/f
18Files = 20
19Buffers = 20

After the PCI sound init for Autoexec.

Output:

It seems like the P4 is the CPU equivalent of Schrödinger's cat; it is simultaneously overrated and underrated!

Seriously though, as I noted in a previous post, the P4 is perfectly adequate for a number of applications. If you can get past the power consumption of some models, which isn’t that hard with a little perspective and decent air conditioning, the P4 had pretty darn good performance for the time. Older P4 motherboards have good software compatibility and newer P4 boards have modern features. I think the P4 platform represents it’s time period pretty well. I’m sure some computer enthusiasts will look at the P4 fondly because they grew up using them.

I also noted in my previous post that there is more to retro computing than DOS and DOS gaming. In my case, a super-fast P4 on a motherboard with ISA slots represents the best possible platform for non-DOS operating systems that require ISA sound cards for audio. I wish motherboards with fully function ISA slots existed to support newer, faster CPUs. They, unfortunately, don’t exist today. I would definitely use such a thing to push performance a little higher. As it is, the P4 on an industrial motherboard gives me the best possible performance.

I suspect that industrial P4 motherboards with ISA slots will become more available as that equipment ages out and gets replaced by newer control systems. These boards may seem expensive, but you can get good deals. I have three of these boards: 2x DFI/Itox G4V620s and 1x G7S620. I got the two G4V620s together for $100 US shipped (although one has display problems on the integrated VGA). I paid a bit more for the G7S620; $180 US shipped, but it came with a Cedar Mill 3.4GHz CPU and 2GB of RAM. That was a bit expensive, but not outrageous in my opinion given the marginal cost of the CPU and RAM alone.

I’m just saying that the P4 has it’s uses. You can do better with different hardware for certain applications, but the P4 can handle those applications just fine too.

I don't disagree - if you have a need for the fastest possible system with fully working ISA, then the P4 is your best option.

I have one myself (ibase mb800) purely for hosting an ancient Transputer interface card in a (relatively) modern system with a current version of Linux.

It worked well for XP gaming, too. But in my case the P4 for gaming was a unintended bonus.

While i think Netburst in general is great for retro computing, i definitely don`t think its mainly retro-only. Its retro but it has CPU power depending on what you run. There are plenty of people running new 32-bit linux kernels with underground distros, or BSDs, or Haiku or other alternative OSes, with good enough performance if you minimize thread overhead and context switches and use fast, clean code software which well uses its micro-ops caches. There are also the 64-bit ones:

Would a cedar mill pentium 4 for overclocking be a good upgrade for a Optiplex GX620 for running UNIX?

As i have done here, i have installed a full system with a Pentium D 935 and a geforce 210, for daily use and no gaming, and installed OmniTribblix/illumos to it. Its extremely fast. I still run everything by software rendering as i said there, as its fast enough, 1920x1080 resolution over HDMI. All new software and a Debian LX zone (a headless, no overhead virtualization interfacing linux to the illumos kernel) runs normally with linux software alongside it. I don`t game.

So, Netburst is underestimated. A lot. Its extraordinarily fast for its time with software which has clean code and OSes with fast schedulers. I even managed to get some scores in some multi-core benchmark workloads equal or better to newer CPUs such as the ARM Cortex A710 (i have the scores to show it). And they were not running natively, but on the Debian LX Zone. I also checked the power usage, which is quite ok. It generally runs mostly on 2.4ghz, sometimes scaling up to its default 3.2ghz speed. And i can run 1080p 60FPS video.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-05-10, 22:26:

On a related note, I never intended for this thread to be a debate about whether the Pentium 4 is consider retro.

Rather, it was a question whether the Pentium 4 is underrated when used for retro computing. IOW, using it for software and games from the 80s and 90s.

Whether or not a platform is considered retro is different from what one uses it for.

I would say the Pentium 4 is slightly underrated, particularly considering the legacy of hate for the P4 which is probably no longer fully deserved. As some others have mentioned, I think the P4 isn't really ideal for most use cases... but it is "fine" for a great many use cases. Being fine for a wide variety of things can be very very useful! There are a lot of people who owned a P4 back in the day and have nostalgia for it, and I think it can be a great choice for a retro computer. Even in cases where the P4 is not objectively better than an alternative, it could still be a fair subjective preference for certain users.

Pros:
Pentium 4 systems (particularly with Intel motherboard chipsets) tend to have relatively good compatibility with other hardware & software, good stability, good drivers
P4 uses ATX power supplies using the 12V connector, and are thus easy to power using modern power supplies
Early P4's are fine for Windows 9x... but probably not better than PIII, Athlon, or early Athlon 64
Late P4's are fine for Windows XP... but probably not better than Athlon 64, Core 2, Phenom, etc

Cons for DOS:
Most P4 motherboards don't have ISA slots which isn't ideal for sound
P4 is getting pretty far from period correct for pure DOS... Is fiddling with a P4 to run Pure DOS better than running DOS games in DOSBox? Personal preference there...

Cons versus Core 2 Duo:
Using a Pentium 4 for Windows XP is a bit of a hard sell compared to Core 2 Duo or maybe something even faster
Pentium 4 systems are not really much cheaper than Core 2 Duo/Quad... they're both almost free these days

Cons specifically versus early Athlon 64 (s754/939):
P4 generates more heat than a similar performing Athlon 64, and generally slower
Socket 478 3rd party coolers are harder to find and usually less effective than what's available for AMD s754/939/AM2/AM3/AM4 which incredibly all use the same clip
Most P4 systems don't support x64 which limits options for dual booting with modern OS (not a huge deal)

Socket 478 3rd party coolers are harder to find and usually less effective than what's available for AMD s754/939/AM2/AM3/AM4 which incredibly all use the same clip

Irrelevant at this day, because you can 3D print Socket 478 mountings brackets for Socket AM2 coolers.

P4 is getting pretty far from period correct for pure DOS

Period correctness is not something you would to strive for in most cases, because late DOS games can easily utilize 1 GHz+ processors at high resolutions.

bZbZbZ wrote on 2024-05-14, 18:16:

Pros: Pentium 4 systems (particularly with Intel motherboard chipsets) tend to have relatively good compatibility with other har […]
Show full quote

Pros:
Pentium 4 systems (particularly with Intel motherboard chipsets) tend to have relatively good compatibility with other hardware & software, good stability, good drivers
P4 uses ATX power supplies using the 12V connector, and are thus easy to power using modern power supplies
Early P4's are fine for Windows 9x... but probably not better than PIII, Athlon, or early Athlon 64
Late P4's are fine for Windows XP... but probably not better than Athlon 64, Core 2, Phenom, etc

Cons for DOS:
Most P4 motherboards don't have ISA slots which isn't ideal for sound
P4 is getting pretty far from period correct for pure DOS... Is fiddling with a P4 to run Pure DOS better than running DOS games in DOSBox? Personal preference there...

Cons versus Core 2 Duo:
Using a Pentium 4 for Windows XP is a bit of a hard sell compared to Core 2 Duo or maybe something even faster
Pentium 4 systems are not really much cheaper than Core 2 Duo/Quad... they're both almost free these days

sensible summary, though for me P4 is more than fine for windows XP and a late P4 around 3ghz is a rocket (and core duo is creeping into compatibility with W7 / linux territory)

i tend to see it as good for 9x or xp gaming

later P4 boards combined with nice agp is good for mid 2000's games

but even an early P4 with very modest graphics is going to be fine for late 90s games, even some from later. in that sense the early P4 may have had a bad reputation at the time, but its fine if we're not spending lots of money and feeling poor against a later P3 or Athlon for example

At the time, I was an Athlon fan because I found Intel's high heat and marketing hijinks to less desirable when the P4 was introduced.

In hindsight, I'll admit that P4 boards are nice and probably have better compatibility. They are certainly more available, which sometimes is 90% of the battle when it comes to retro.

But like most systems from that period, you have to be willing to break out the soldering iron if all your capacitors turn into popcorn.

bZbZbZ wrote on 2024-05-14, 18:16:

P4 is getting pretty far from period correct for pure DOS... Is fiddling with a P4 to run Pure DOS better than running DOS games in DOSBox? Personal preference there...

In my experience there isn't any more 'fiddling' required than any other system to run DOS games, including period correct hardware.

Memory configurations, system throttling, video card or sound card compatibility, finicky games... these are all things persist in pretty much the entire DOS era of gaming regardless of hardware.

Anything after 1997's far from period correct for DOS to me so I find that a weak argument...

leileilol wrote on 2024-05-15, 00:05:

Anything after 1997's far from period correct for DOS to me so I find that a weak argument...

And even with pre-1997 hardware, there are arguably 4 or 5 'periods' that one could build a DOS system around.

gerry wrote on 2024-05-14, 20:00:

sensible summary, though for me P4 is more than fine for windows XP and a late P4 around 3ghz is a rocket (and core duo is creeping into compatibility with W7 / linux territory)

i tend to see it as good for 9x or xp gaming

later P4 boards combined with nice agp is good for mid 2000's games

That's exactly how I see it, and it must be because this is how I used my P4 desktop at the time it was built. It's this one:

1Motherboard	ASUS P4C800-E Deluxe, 2GB RAM
2CPU		Intel Pentium 4 HT 3GHz (Northwood)
3Video		Gigabyte GeForce 6600GT AGP + VIVO
4Audio		Creative Audigy 2 ZS
5OS		Windows XP SP3
6Case		Thermaltake Lanmoto (Silver)
7PSU		Enermax Modu82+ 425W
8Monitor		DELL 2007FP, IPS 1600x1200
9Speakers	Creative Inspire T7700
10Keyboard	Silver Line Multimedia (white-label)
11Mouse		Logitech MX310

I realized that by now I have enough hardware in spare parts to build a second almost similar system. I have a P4P800-E, another 2GB of RAM, a couple more s478 800MHz HT Northwoods (maybe even one Prescott, not sure), a 8400GS PCI, an Aureal Vortex, and even a spare monitor and PSU. The only thing I don't have is a case, or room to put one. If I do get around to building it, I would probably set up 98SE or Millennium to cater to the 9x generation of games.

gerry wrote on 2024-05-14, 20:00:

but even an early P4 with very modest graphics is going to be fine for late 90s games, even some from later.

My first P4 computer was such a system. It is a Compaq Evo N610c with 1.8GHz P4-M Northwood and ATI 7500. The only game I recall playing on it was Rayman 3, but there must have been a few others. The problem with that laptop is the poor thermal design which cooks the hard drive. Nowadays if I needed to revive it, I would probably use an IDE-to-SSD adapter of some sort.