K5 PR166's are actually 116 MHz IIRC.

116 MHz? Why is that relevant?

Firstly, instead of the 80s Donkey Kong release, why not try CHAMP Kong? It's freeware, it doesn't have speed issues on newer machines, and it's a pretty decent recreation of the original arcade game. http://www.champ-em.com/kong.htm http://www.champ-em.com/download.htm

As far as running other XT-era games, you might have luck disabling your CPU caches from the BIOS and running something like Mo'Slo. http://www.hpaa.com/moslo/basic.asp Now, it appears they've updated it since the last time I used about ~10 years ago to slow some games down on a 486 DX2 66MHz, but I remember even on that particular machine, it was tricky to get Mo'Slo to approximate a 4.77MHz 8088, so it would probably be easier with a slower CPU. By disabling the caches on your CPU, I'm sure you can bring it well below the level of a 486 DX2 66MHz.

...We're still on the subject of "I wanna slow down a machine that might not run Windows 95", right? CHAMP Kong and Mo'Slo would run on DOS 6.22? Additionally, I have no idea what a CPU cache is (plus I don't think the BIOS supports it).

Maxaxle wrote:

116 MHz? Why is that relevant?

because you said:

Maxaxle wrote:

My DOS machine's CPU is an AMD-K5-PR166, and although I'm not certain of its exact speed

Generally, cache is what makes your cpu go fast and when you disable it, you cripple the cpu and it becomes much slower.

With cache disabled even a fast k6-3 can be crippled to be as fast as a 386, so it should work on yours. It is in the bios and i am certain most bios let you set it to disabled...

mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:

Firstly, instead of the 80s Donkey Kong release, why not try CHAMP Kong? It's freeware, it doesn't have speed issues on newer machines, and it's a pretty decent recreation of the original arcade game. http://www.champ-em.com/kong.htm http://www.champ-em.com/download.htm

As far as running other XT-era games, you might have luck disabling your CPU caches from the BIOS and running something like Mo'Slo. http://www.hpaa.com/moslo/basic.asp Now, it appears they've updated it since the last time I used about ~10 years ago to slow some games down on a 486 DX2 66MHz, but I remember even on that particular machine, it was tricky to get Mo'Slo to approximate a 4.77MHz 8088, so it would probably be easier with a slower CPU. By disabling the caches on your CPU, I'm sure you can bring it well below the level of a 486 DX2 66MHz.

The links in the downloads section for the champ games don't work anymore 🙁

AlphaWing wrote:

The links in the downloads section for the champ games don't work anymore 🙁

Wayback Machine works great:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110309033129/ht … om/download.htm

Yep they do, I always forget about trying that.
Thanks.

fyy wrote:

Maxaxle wrote:

116 MHz? Why is that relevant?

because you said:

Maxaxle wrote:

My DOS machine's CPU is an AMD-K5-PR166, and although I'm not certain of its exact speed

In retrospect, I guess the "PR166" bit could theoretically mean that it runs at 166 MHz, but then again it could just be marketing fluff. At the time, I didn't see any reason to think that the name was significant.

AlphaWing wrote:

Yep they do, I always forget about trying that.
Thanks.

I swear I've seen the ship for your avvy somewhere...What's it from?

I swear I've seen the ship for your avvy somewhere...What's it from?

A Star Wars flight sim this must be, young padawan. Recognize an Assault Gunboat you should 😀

Jolaes76 wrote:

I swear I've seen the ship for your avvy somewhere...What's it from?

A Star Wars flight sim this must be, young padawan. Recognize an Assault Gunboat you should 😀

Well yes, but which flightsim?

Maxaxle wrote:

In retrospect, I guess the "PR166" bit could theoretically mean that it runs at 166 MHz, but then again it could just be marketing fluff. At the time, I didn't see any reason to think that the name was significant.

Well its significant to me because that exact CPU was in my very first computer. And it confused me for years seeing its speed as "166 mhz" during POST, but seeing utiliies actually say its at 116 mhz. 😉

Maxaxle wrote:

...We're still on the subject of "I wanna slow down a machine that might not run Windows 95", right? CHAMP Kong and Mo'Slo would run on DOS 6.22? Additionally, I have no idea what a CPU cache is (plus I don't think the BIOS supports it).

They would. I used to run Mo'Slo and play all of the CHAMP games on my aforementioned 486, running DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.11.

mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:

Maxaxle wrote:

...We're still on the subject of "I wanna slow down a machine that might not run Windows 95", right? CHAMP Kong and Mo'Slo would run on DOS 6.22? Additionally, I have no idea what a CPU cache is (plus I don't think the BIOS supports it).

They would. I used to run Mo'Slo and play all of the CHAMP games on my aforementioned 486, running DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.11.

Wow. I'll need to track it down.

My DOS machine is capable of running Quake at a fairly decent speed, so the specs are actually kind of impressive.

"I wanna slow down a machine that might not run Windows 95"

Huh? 😕

I actually once used a 386 running Win95 at someone's house (a friend of my grandparents) just to see what it was like, and it was not bad. From what I can tell, the machine mainly seemed to be used for running older 16-bit applications, but it wasn't overly slow or choppy. I think it had a 33MHz 386DX and 8MB of ram. I never tried any games on it though, mainly because there weren't any installed besides probably Minesweeper and Solitaire. Looking back, if I beat a hand of Solitaire on there, I could have roughly used that to gauge its performance.

Anyway, my point is that if you can run Win95 on a 386, you can certainly run it on a faster machine.

smeezekitty wrote:

My DOS machine is capable of running Quake at a fairly decent speed, so the specs are actually kind of impressive.

"I wanna slow down a machine that might not run Windows 95"

Huh? 😕

I have no idea if it can run Windows 95, but it is capable of running Quake relatively nicely.

mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:

I actually once used a 386 running Win95 at someone's house (a friend of my grandparents) just to see what it was like, and it was not bad. From what I can tell, the machine mainly seemed to be used for running older 16-bit applications, but it wasn't overly slow or choppy. I think it had a 33MHz 386DX and 8MB of ram. I never tried any games on it though, mainly because there weren't any installed besides probably Minesweeper and Solitaire. Looking back, if I beat a hand of Solitaire on there, I could have roughly used that to gauge its performance.

Anyway, my point is that if you can run Win95 on a 386, you can certainly run it on a faster machine.

Thanks for the advice.

My 486/33 runs Windows 95 fine. It is a little slow to startup but fine once it runs.
A K5 will run it very very easily. A K5 would even run 98 although 95 would be faster