its unlikely for me to assemble a 486 platform again, because i am too lazy to pick up a grandpa AT power supply.
AFAIK there are intel, via, sis, ali, opti and more chipsets in the 486 age, which one supports the highest fsb?
still, my ideal 486 is amd5x86-133 oc to 50*4, or even better, 66*3 if the board can support this. how fast will it run quake2(either in soft mode or use a pci mx400)?
You can use an ATX PSU with a 486. You'll need an AT to ATX PSU adapter. They can be found on ebay. Regarding the highest FSB, Vogons user Tetrium posted the following message about an Elitegroup UM8810P-AIO rev 1.0 mobo running at 66 FSB:
Test:486 undocumented jumper settings (first post)
Also, Vogons user BastlerMike posted a message about a Shuttle-HOT433-UMC8881 running at 60 x 3 = 180:
3DBENCH CPU Benchmark Database (2/3rds way down)
wrote:still, my ideal 486 is amd5x86-133 oc to 50*4, or even better, 66*3 if the board can support this. how fast will it run quake2(either in soft mode or use a pci mx400)?
Around 10-15fps. Quake2 actually runs better than Quake on the 486 due to the less precise and strict timer.
Instead of going for a fast and over clocked 486, why not go for a slow Pentium?
I have 2 Super Socket 7 boards which are ATX, use ATX PUSs, have button batteries, latest BIOS directly from the manufacturers website, documentation for every jumper, PS/2 ports and even USB!
Slowest Chip I had running was a Pentium 100 which should be similar to an overclocked 486 133...
Theres also the Pentium Overdrive, it'll fit in Socket 3 and has great FPU performance.
I think you can forget about running any 486 motherboard at 66Mhz, afaik it's never been tried
I remember experimenting with a 486/133, and using the need for speed 1, and having and s3 trio 64 pci card, it wouldn't run fast enough,even with the cpu overclocked to 160MHz. After that I tried with a pentium 75Mhz, and even with a simple Cirrus Logic 1MB card it would run great. So for me the "P75"486/133 is not even close to a real 75MHz pentium. The pentium is much more powerful. Except from the higher fsb, it has two integer units instead of one like the 486.
wrote:I remember experimenting with a 486/133, and using the need for speed 1, and having and s3 trio 64 pci card, it wouldn't run fast enough
Did you press the turbo button? NFS runs great on my 486 with the same card.
yes, I did. It was playable, and certainly way better than a dx2/66 with CL VL-BUS card I tried before, but the movement was worse compared to the pentium.
wrote:Theres also the Pentium Overdrive, it'll fit in Socket 3 and has great FPU performance.
I think you can forget about running any 486 motherboard at 66Mhz, afaik it's never been tried
I think that is the perfect reason to try it, not before adding a heatsink to the chipset though.
Yea my memory is a bit fuzzy. I had a DX4-100 as a kid and the next upgrade was a Pentium 133.
Didn't AMD mark these CPUs with a "Pentium 70" equivalent or something like that?
wrote:Yea my memory is a bit fuzzy. I had a DX4-100 as a kid and the next upgrade was a Pentium 133.
Didn't AMD mark these CPUs with a "Pentium 70" equivalent or something like that?
Yep, the 5x86-133 was the P75.
http://www.x86-guide.com/en/cpu/AMD-5x86-P75- … -cpu-no840.html
wrote:yes, I did. It was playable, and certainly way better than a dx2/66 with CL VL-BUS card I tried before, but the movement was worse compared to the pentium.
Impossible! NFS has a framerate cap and my 486 meets it fine. I don't know what's up with yours though
Does 3DBENCH on yours report a number of 71.4? Mine does.
NFS was SVGA wasn't it? I seem to remember that on my P133 (as a kid) I got better performance when overclocked to 166...
NFS will refuse to run in SVGA. Vendor lock-in sucks and NFS doesn't even use real fully blown SVGA (320x480 is more like it, with a 640x480 dashboard)
wrote:Vendor lock-in sucks
Not sure what that means...
I did a quick run of the Demo and it doesn't look like VGA to me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rh5jtEc39sU
So I believe it's possible that this game struggles on a 486 to be honest.
You can find VGA game recordings on my YouTube channel if you like to compare them.
I struggled with the details setting (F2 key). Took me a while to get the setting for max. details but in the end the game is max. details 🤣
EDIT: Just checked and the game won't launch with a non VESA card (or "just" VGA card)
NFS Special Edition has SVGA 640x480. It even has a native Windows 9x exe that uses DirectX 2 😉.
wrote:wrote:Vendor lock-in sucks
Not sure what that means...
It'll only allow SVGA for Pentium or better, even if you have an armed-to-the-teeth-and-overclocked 486.
Oh I see! So it checks if you have a Pentium chip inside...
Interesting! The readme does state min. 486DX2-66 so surely a 5x86-133 should easily run this game in VGA...
Just tried in DOSBox with 35000 cpu cycles:
3bench score: 83.8
CPU mode: Slow 486
NFS has SVGA title screens, but dashboard is VGA. Game plays well
CPU mode: Slow Pentium
NFS has SVGA title screens and dashboard. Game lags. 100000 CPU cycles and it's super smooth.
DON'T DEPEND ON DOSBOX FOR APPROXIMATING "486" RESULTS. It's bad!
Well it confirms that the game is less demanding / simpler graphics when it doesn't detect a Pentium and more demanding / better graphics...
What would happen with a Cyrix or AMD K6? Would it load up like on a 486?
