leileilol wrote:

Only the 486SX (and 386SX too. Yes a 386dx can run Quake)

you mean 387 right ?

387 is just the co-processor, but yes, a 386dx system would need a co-processor to run Quake.

mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:

d1stortion wrote:

Probably still a first-person shooter game with lots of brown blocks.

I agree, the color scheme on Quake (and to a certain extent Quake II) was quite bland. They really could've done a lot more with 256 colors. 🤣

This is why I prefer Duke Nukem 3D. Quake is a cool game for sure, but way too many people seem to be entranced by "It was the first textured fully 3D game, maan". It was definitely not the first textured 3D game (pretty much every 32-bit console game was and those arrived in late 1994) and it was not the first full 3D FPS with textures either (Descent arrived earlier, was a decent game and actually used 3D to the fullest as opposed to just making a Doom style game in 3D). Duke 3D just feel way more alive and colorful and has humor in it, I don't mean just the "naughty" stuff either, the monsters are way more original (such as the mutated L.A pig cops with the words L.A.R.D on their uniforms or the octobrains) than the generic Quake demons and zombies. Quake would be a tech demo game, if it didn't have such an awesome multiplayer mode.

mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:

387 is just the co-processor, but yes, a 386dx system would need a co-processor to run Quake.

I doubt any game released in 1996 would run any better than a slideshow on a 386 system even with a FPU.

Minimum requirements calls for a Pentium 75 or better according to this

http://gamesystemrequirements.com/games.php?id=606

Even with a 386DX-40 with matching 387 speed would be measured in frames per minute instead of frames per second.

sliderider, Quake 1 on my 386DX40 + Cyrix 387 40, give me from 2 to 4fps on 320x200, full screen, not too bad!

From my point of view, is NOT important that a game is slow, the only important is that you can RUN the game

The point is that there is nothing preventing a 386 with an FPU from running Quake. Of course it won't even produce a single frame per second, but it runs.

F2bnp wrote:

The point is that there is nothing preventing a 386 with an FPU from running Quake. Of course it won't even produce a single frame per second, but it runs.

Same for running Quake 3 on my 486, not playable, but is a confirmation that the game not required a pentium

Anyway, Quake 1 on a 386+387 at 40mhz, is playable in small maps

Years ago, i did the test, load a simple small map, and i get from 4 to 8fps, slow but playable

I recommend that you try a flip book for entertainment instead of computer games if you consider 4 FPS playable.

d1stortion wrote:

I recommend that you try a flip book for entertainment instead of computer games if you consider 4 FPS playable.

Im sorry, did you had a slow 386 with 4mb ram back on time? and played Doom all days, until the keyboard died? maybe not...

If you get more than 6-10fps on a slow 386SX is a miracle, and still a lot of people, including me, destroy the game 😀

If back on time, i play Doom over and over again with this slow framerate, how I can say that 4-8fps in Quake in a 386DX40+387 is low or not playable........ ?¿ almost same than doom on a slow 386..

Nope, I did not. If I had such a configuration I would have played other games that would rather fit the PC though. The same goes for modern games where it is far more advisable to play older games in full detail than new games with broken downcranked graphics. I remember UT3 in lowest detail, ewww...

d1stortion wrote:

Nope, I did not. If I had such a configuration I would have played other games that would rather fit the PC though. The same goes for modern games where it is far more advisable to play older games in full detail than new games with broken downcranked graphics. I remember UT3 in lowest detail, ewww...

pff... it seems that even if we argument for ages, for sure, will be never agree... jeje

Well d1stortion is half right. Obviously 4-8 fps is not playable. The only reason leileilol initially stated that you can run Quake on a 386 is for shits and giggles. You can do it, that's the only thing that matters. The demoscene was based around that idea and is still in some cases. Doing impressive things on low end hardware. 8088 corruption anyone? Some guy hacked Wolf3D and made it runnable on his 8088. It's dog slow. And awesome. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5f7gW5X24ao

If you're looking at these and saying, "ok what's the point, it's slow" then clearly these are not meant for you. You really have to be a little bit crazy, be in the right mindset, to appreciate that a 386DX+387 will indeed RUN Quake 1. It's the same reason people create beast 486 machines and run Quake 2 with Voodoo 2 cards. Same reason people overclock the PIII-S 1.4 to 1.6GHz and install a 6800 Ultra or 9800 XT.
Shits and giggles.

When I post in this forum, my mind is not in 2013, is in 1993 or so...

I had a 386DX until 1996 I think, when I jump to a 486. I remember that when Windows 95 was on the streets, I still had the 386

Back on time, I played Doom, Doom2, Heretic, etc on my 386DX and for me was "the shit"

I still have a 386DX40 + 387, and if i play now Doom or heretic on this machine... well... is just "shit" jajaja

Really, with the 386DX40 even on steroids, is not possible to get more than 7-8fps on high details

Thats my point, if in 1993-94 I played and enjoyed Doom in a 386, for sure If I had the chance to play Quake 1 at 4-8fps, i will not think "Oh, this game is crazy slow"

Anyways, Quake 1 on a 386DX is not much more than 2fps, 4-8fps is on small and empty maps, just for test, not regular one player game

About Quake 2 and 3, here some screenshots of my 486 + voodoo 1.. nice

PD: I need to test this Wolfenstein 3D in my XT!!

I have a ultra clocked XT at 12mhz, with a ET4000 ISA card

For sure Wolf3D is a little better than in the video!! my first 286 was at 12mhz, and was a big step from my old XT at 4.77mhz...

But this XT at 12mhz, i think is very close to a 8mhz 286?¿ maybe

theelf wrote:

Same for running Quake 3 on my 486, not playable, but is a confirmation that the game not required a pentium […]
Show full quote

F2bnp wrote:

The point is that there is nothing preventing a 386 with an FPU from running Quake. Of course it won't even produce a single frame per second, but it runs.

Same for running Quake 3 on my 486, not playable, but is a confirmation that the game not required a pentium

Anyway, Quake 1 on a 386+387 at 40mhz, is playable in small maps

Years ago, i did the test, load a simple small map, and i get from 4 to 8fps, slow but playable

When they make up the minimum specs for a game, they don't mean minimum to execute, they mean minimum to be playable so using that standard, Quake is not usable with a 386 even if it does boot and run at a snail's pace. If they had published the minimum specs to run as a 386 with 387 FPU there would have been hell to pay.

theelf wrote:

But this XT at 12mhz, i think is very close to a 8mhz 286?¿ maybe

You can check that with TOPBENCH (tests and compares your score against a database of known systems). Should be interesting to see...

sliderider wrote:

When they make up the minimum specs for a game, they don't mean minimum to execute, they mean minimum to be playable so using that standard, Quake is not usable with a 386 even if it does boot and run at a snail's pace. If they had published the minimum specs to run as a 386 with 387 FPU there would have been hell to pay.

If you read my posts, you will see that i talk about the game tested in custom maps for speed in a 386

When I discover that Quake runs in a 387, the first thing i made is tried to find a way the game more playable, with a custom map, less polygon, because normal mode is too slow

Think for example in the Quake 2 for PS1, they made smaller maps, lower polygons, etc to fit in the slow PS1 CPU

2fps is too slow, but up to 8fps, is just same speed all 386 users played Doom on the time

VileRancour wrote:

theelf wrote:

But this XT at 12mhz, i think is very close to a 8mhz 286?¿ maybe

You can check that with TOPBENCH (tests and compares your score against a database of known systems). Should be interesting to see...

Oh, interesting, i will do tomorrow, and a 3dbench too !

theelf wrote:

When I discover that Quake runs in a 387, the first thing i made is tried to find a way the game more playable, with a custom map, less polygon, because normal mode is too slow

You might try looking into PocketQuake community levels where they had to design each map for performance by stretching up the textures to have a smaller overall surfacecache usage.

I should do a simple DOS-based Quake port that just adds options for better performance where I can, as Quake never came with any choice for lower detail. Engoo was this but it got too bloaty. Quake on PCs below a Pentium 75 isn't much of a lost cause as sliderider is constantly annoyingly implying. I've completed Quake and even played online on the 486 and there definitely is room for improvement 😀

Quake2 on a 486 could probably benefit from gl_flashblend 1 and s_loadas8bit 1. The former will replace dynamic lights with glow balls (a voodoo can handle no problem) and the latter makes Quake2 use less memory for sound as well as using faster integer mixing code.

sliderider wrote:

I doubt any game released in 1996 would run any better than a slideshow on a 386 system even with a FPU. […]
Show full quote

mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:

387 is just the co-processor, but yes, a 386dx system would need a co-processor to run Quake.

I doubt any game released in 1996 would run any better than a slideshow on a 386 system even with a FPU.

Minimum requirements calls for a Pentium 75 or better according to this

http://gamesystemrequirements.com/games.php?id=606

Even with a 386DX-40 with matching 387 speed would be measured in frames per minute instead of frames per second.

I knew that, but I meant that a 386 would need a 387 just to get Quake to execute, never mind actually running it at a playable speed. 😜 Trust me, I've tried playing Quake on a 486 DX2-66 box, it wasn't a pleasant experience. 😜

F2bnp wrote:

Well d1stortion is half right. Obviously 4-8 fps is not playable. The only reason leileilol initially stated that you can run Quake on a 386 is for shits and giggles. You can do it, that's the only thing that matters. The demoscene was based around that idea and is still in some cases. Doing impressive things on low end hardware. 8088 corruption anyone? Some guy hacked Wolf3D and made it runnable on his 8088. It's dog slow. And awesome. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5f7gW5X24ao

If you're looking at these and saying, "ok what's the point, it's slow" then clearly these are not meant for you. You really have to be a little bit crazy, be in the right mindset, to appreciate that a 386DX+387 will indeed RUN Quake 1. It's the same reason people create beast 486 machines and run Quake 2 with Voodoo 2 cards. Same reason people overclock the PIII-S 1.4 to 1.6GHz and install a 6800 Ultra or 9800 XT.
Shits and giggles.

I can definitely understand the idea of pushing old hardware to its limits "for shits and giggles". 😁 In fact, now that I see that's what the OP's goal is, well, power to him. 😁

I can't remember saying that it's "pointless" to do something like this. I merely think it's silly to describe Quake running on a 386 as some kind of technical miracle or something. A technical miracle is something that actually holds at least a minimal amount of practical use of what kind whatsoever, although I'm aware that definitions here differ.

The human brain needs about ~15 FPS for motion to appear barely fluent (opinions on this differ again, this is just a rough figure). Considering that you are not only watching the game but are supposed to run, jump, target stuff in a three-dimensional environment (not like Wolf3D) calling 4 FPS "playable" is really fudging the definition of that, to say the least. If I were to have such a computer back in the day I simply would have played Wolfenstein 3D (and derivatives) instead of trying new games at all costs, because it's already a great game.

leileilol wrote:

theelf wrote:

Quake on PCs below a Pentium 75 isn't much of a lost cause as sliderider is constantly annoyingly implying.

How do you define "constantly"? This is only the second thread where I have commented on Quake running on a 386 and how is it annoying when it is the simple truth that Quake on a 386/387 is not playable?