MalcomYork wrote:

I'm planing to build a P4 DOS and Windows 98 gaming computer. The pieces I am planing to buy are the following: […]
Show full quote

I'm planing to build a P4 DOS and Windows 98 gaming computer. The pieces I am planing to buy are the following:

-Intel D865PERL
-Intel Pentium 4 610 3.2GHz
-2GB of DDR RAM
-Some 120GB SSD
-SoundBlaster X-Fi SB0640
-USB floppy emulator
-Some AGP video card

I have a couple of questions:

1-Will this machine be able to run DOS games? I know some games are CPU speed sensitive, so I'm trying to understand if its posible to do underclocking.
2-Would any AGP GPU be able to play DOS 2D and 3D games? (ATI Radeon 9550, for example)
3-Does the sound card have retro compatibility with SB16 for DOS games?
4-Will I be able to install Windows 98/DOS in the SSD?
5-Will I have any troubles with the setup I have planned?
6-Any other recommendations I should be considering?

I also happen to have an Am486 DX4-120, so I might be looking to build a 486 build as well.

1) Yes. Newer DOS games will work fine most likely. But the older ones will start to fail. It's known that some games written in Borland Turbo Pascal will fail due to one of the standard library modules. This can be patched, however. Older DOS games otherwise might run too fast.
2) Any older GPU should be fine. Your success will be greater with cards that were made in the 1x, 2x and 4x AGP form. 8x cards have a lower chance of success due to them being, by that time, optimized for something other than DOS.
3) Sound card compatibility will be really bad without an ISA card. If you can run the game from within Windows, you can avoid some of these issues. But if you're in pure DOS mode, without an ISA card, you're going to have a bad time.
4) Yes. I have installed it on both an SSD and a CF. Note that neither of these operating systems understand very well how to optimize use of an SSD. In Windows, I use a healthy amount of RAM and disable virtual memory. In DOS, I load a drive cache TSR such as Smartdrv.
5) I had issues booting using pure DOS on media with a partition that was anything but FAT16. Your mileage may vary. Also, keep in mind the limitations of the FAT32 file system especially with large modern drives.
6) Having an amount of RAM greater than 512MB in your machine will give you issues in Win98 without modifications. Someone else here will have to give you more information to get around it. A beefier CPU than any kind of P3 will not gain you anything for games that aren't CPU bound (Build engine games, turn-based games that are CPU heavy)

I have quite a lot more information that might be relevant. Check my sig. Or, if it's gone by the time some future reader finds this:

https://blog.purplepa.ws/pentium-4-dos-gaming/

dr_st wrote:

xjas wrote:

[...] You may not be maxing out a 3GHz P4 on those, but you're certainly gonna get high framerates with no slowdowns. Throw Vsync on and play at 1280x1024 @ 60FPS all day.

That's the question - what CPU are you going to be maxing out? My feeling is that even a mid/high P-III is going to handle most things OK. Maybe I'm wrong about that?

Okay, I'm game. 😜 I have a P4/3.0 right here. When I get some time later I'll throw Quake & Descent 2 on it and see how they do in 1280x1024, pure software. I suspect they'll be playable but probably not hundreds of FPS. They might not even hit 60.

dottoss wrote:

Now that's an idea I like more. I play lots of DOS games via DOSBox myself on my P4 3GHz (except it runs WinXP).

The reason I am building this system is because I want to experience how DOS/Win9x games work on a real host. If I just wanted to play the games, I could use DOSBox in my current system, but that's not the point.

xjas wrote:

Okay, I'm game. 😜 I have a P4/3.0 right here. When I get some time later I'll throw Quake & Descent 2 on it and see how they do in 1280x1024, pure software. I suspect they'll be playable but probably not hundreds of FPS. They might not even hit 60.

We also need someone with a P-III system to pitch in on how it works for them. 😀 Unfortunately, it seems that neither you nor I have such a system. 🙁

MalcomYork wrote:

The reason I am building this system is because I want to experience how DOS/Win9x games work on a real host. If I just wanted to play the games, I could use DOSBox in my current system, but that's not the point.

You can certainly do this, and as was pointed out, a P4 system would be easily available and affordable. But you have to keep in mind, that at least, when it comes to pure DOS - you will have sound problems, so the experience will not be 100% genuine.

xjas wrote:

Okay, I'm game. 😜 I have a P4/3.0 right here. When I get some time later I'll throw Quake & Descent 2 on it and see how they do in 1280x1024, pure software. I suspect they'll be playable but probably not hundreds of FPS. They might not even hit 60.

I am very curious to see how a Pentium 4 performs in Quake compared to Athlon 64 4000+ San Diego! Without any tweaks or configs... just jumping straight into "Restart in MS-DOS mode" from a fresh 98SE install, I was getting 39.4FPS in Quake at 1280x1024 Demo1.

dr_st wrote:

We also need someone with a P-III system to pitch in on how it works for them. 😀 Unfortunately, it seems that neither you nor I have such a system. 🙁

There are plenty of benchmarks on these forums for P3 systems in Quake... though none of them are run in 1280x1024. As I said though, downclocking my Athlon64 to the speed of a P3 ~800 gives 21.5FPS

SaxxonPike wrote:

I have quite a lot more information that might be relevant. Check my sig. Or, if it's gone by the time some future reader finds this:

https://ilovepa.ws/2017/07/29/pentium-4-dos-gaming/

Great stuff!

[Geforce 3 Ti 500] This is a pleasantly speedy card, and is reportedly the last Geforce card that was optimized for VESA video modes. However, whenever I switched to a video mode that wasn't text mode, I couldn't get anything on the screen. The resolution switches properly, but the display is just blank. Others have gotten one of these to work in their own machines, so I suspect it's just my setup.

Any more info on what makes a card optimized for VESA modes or not? Here's what happens in PCPBench with my G4Ti4200 --
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_xP5jkz6XE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvtj82uRzFA

Also... when it comes to using a PCI sound card like an MX300 (Aureal Vortex 2) in DOS is it just a matter of loading AU32DOS.COM with the LOAD or LH command in your autoexec? I have to imagine it is more complicated than that. I've seen a few "PCI sound cards in DOS" threads here but they mostly talk about which cards are compatible and with what... but they don't seem to include things like autoexecs or configs... what must be done?

dr_st wrote:

xjas wrote:

Okay, I'm game. 😜 I have a P4/3.0 right here. When I get some time later I'll throw Quake & Descent 2 on it and see how they do in 1280x1024, pure software. I suspect they'll be playable but probably not hundreds of FPS. They might not even hit 60.

We also need someone with a P-III system to pitch in on how it works for them. 😀 Unfortunately, it seems that neither you nor I have such a system. 🙁

I have a couple P3s but nothing over 500MHz at the moment. I do have a laptop with a Pentium-M 1.6GHz and an onboard Radeon 9000 which might be a good stand-in for a (really) high-end P3.

Didn't have much luck with my "working" P4 - it's running XP and is really not set up for DOS stuff (the main problem is its drive is NTFS so I can't just boot from a floppy.) I'll try another one I have in my office tomorrow which I can throw FreeDOS on.

dr_st wrote:

We also need someone with a P-III system to pitch in on how it works for them. :) Unfortunately, it seems that neither you nor I […]
Show full quote

xjas wrote:

Okay, I'm game. 😜 I have a P4/3.0 right here. When I get some time later I'll throw Quake & Descent 2 on it and see how they do in 1280x1024, pure software. I suspect they'll be playable but probably not hundreds of FPS. They might not even hit 60.

We also need someone with a P-III system to pitch in on how it works for them. 😀 Unfortunately, it seems that neither you nor I have such a system. 🙁

MalcomYork wrote:

The reason I am building this system is because I want to experience how DOS/Win9x games work on a real host. If I just wanted to play the games, I could use DOSBox in my current system, but that's not the point.

You can certainly do this, and as was pointed out, a P4 system would be easily available and affordable. But you have to keep in mind, that at least, when it comes to pure DOS - you will have sound problems, so the experience will not be 100% genuine.

I have a pentium 3 800 mhz (coppermine) coming in the mail hopefully today, what are we benching? 😎

xjas wrote:

Didn't have much luck with my "working" P4 - it's running XP and is really not set up for DOS stuff (the main problem is its drive is NTFS so I can't just boot from a floppy.)

There's NTFSDOS which worked well for me in such situations in the past, although it's not free.

dr_st wrote:

I believe you. I do think that probably a 1GHz P-III with a Voodoo3 is going to be enough, and you may get it with ISA slots more easily. However, you do have a point for a first retro build, if one accepts the limitation, a P4 is reasonable.

That's the question - what CPU are you going to be maxing out? My feeling is that even a mid/high P-III is going to handle most things OK. Maybe I'm wrong about that?

A 1GHz PIII with a Voodoo3 will handle most things DOS you throw at it, but not everything. The Build games in higher resolutions comes to mind, and to me, that's one of the main reasons of building a high performance DOS rig.
My PIII machine used to have a 1.1GHz Coppermine CPU. In 1024x768 everything was butter smooth, and became my preferred resolution. With higher resolutions, the FPS drop was very noticeable. Upgraded to a 1.4GHz Tualeron, and while 1280x1024 now feels smooth, and is my resolution of choice, there's still a subtle difference. Even though not really necessary, more CPU power wouldn't hurt.

The latest DOS games, among them the Build ones, also works very well with the emulation drivers for SB Live.

If you really want to max out those last DOS games, a P4 DOS/W98 rig makes sense, and might even be the best possible alternative, if we consider factors like cost and availability. You will however sacrifice versatility, for older DOS games it will be very much hit-and-miss.

I have a socket 423/P4 1.7GHz/Intel D850GB/384MB RDRAM/SB Live/geForce3 Ti500 PC for late DOS and early 2000's Win 3D stuff. Despite using WinME, I'm a happy camper as far as compatibility goes 😊 Don't think I'd have the patience to build something like this on a 478+sata or 775 board though. Running DOS games through Windows, sound works fine (VXD drivers) and with a little tinkering you can also get EMS. Can't get any better than this. Sometimes the nV Detonators can be a little unstable/too temperamental, but all in all it's a better choice than ATi from that period.

Ok, so this whole thing of P4 compatibility with elder DOS games looks complex. I found some good deals in my country to build a PIII Taulatin 1.2GHz + MSI 815E Pro; this motherboard has 1 ISA port, so I could plugin a AWE64, which I also found very cheap. I could get a Voodoo 4500, but I am not sure if it would be compatible with DOS games. I'm quite sure that the Voodoo 4 will be enough for early 2000 games.

Am I correct?
Is this a better choice over the P4 or even the k6-2/500?

MalcomYork wrote:

Ok, so this whole thing of P4 compatibility with elder DOS games looks complex. I found some good deals in my country to build a PIII Taulatin 1.2GHz + MSI 815E Pro; this motherboard has 1 ISA port, so I could plugin a AWE64, which I also found very cheap. I could get a Voodoo 4500, but I am not sure if it would be compatible with DOS games. I'm quite sure that the Voodoo 4 will be enough for early 2000 games.

Am I correct?

The Pentium 4 isn't the biggest problem itself, but rather the chipsets and motherboards for it. i815 based boards for Pentium III aren't any better for DOS games than an i865P if they lacks an ISA slot (or SBLINK header).

Is this a better choice over the P4 or even the k6-2/500?

I think the K6-2 would be better if you going to run speed sensitive DOS games as it's easier to tune, Pentium III isn't much better than the Pentium 4 in that approach.

Kamerat wrote:

The Pentium 4 isn't the biggest problem itself, but rather the chipsets and motherboards for it. i815 based boards for Pentium III aren't any better for DOS games than an i865P if they lacks an ISA slot (or SBLINK header).

This is a very true statement. For DOS - lack of ISA/SBLINK would be the killer, everything else is pretty much not an issue. For Win9x - the RAM limit / lack of stable drivers on newer systems may be a hindrance, but it provides good SB emulation over PCI cards for DOS games that run from within Windows.

Kamerat wrote:

I think the K6-2 would be better if you going to run speed sensitive DOS games as it's easier to tune, Pentium III isn't much better than the Pentium 4 in that approach.

True; however for later DOS games, if you want very high resolutions, and for many many Win9x games, a K6-2 will easily be out of its depth.

The way I see it:

K6-2/3 - great machine for DOS games (probably all around best), good for early Win9x games
High-end PIII with ISA/SBLINK - great for non-speed sensitive DOS games and very good for almost all games that specifically benefit from Win9x
P4 - Great for all Win9x games and early-mid WinXP games (basically pre-Vista).

All depends on which games you target most. There is no one-size fits all system, we've been through this many times. 😀

dr_st wrote:

K6-2/3 - great machine for DOS games (probably all around best), good for early Win9x games
High-end PIII with ISA/SBLINK - great for non-speed sensitive DOS games and very good for almost all games that specifically benefit from Win9x
P4 - Great for all Win9x games and early-mid WinXP games (basically pre-Vista).

This resumes what I'm trying to achieve. I guess the best way would be to experiment a little bit with what I already have and buy more stuff if I need to resolve something.

SaxxonPike wrote:

https://ilovepa.ws/2017/07/29/pentium-4-dos-gaming/

An excellent article, I have only 2 minor remarks: AT brought the 16-bit expansion bus (should we call it ISA right away or not) and that Intel's unsuccessful venture with RDRAM was the i820/840 chipset (and of course i850).

Oh, and one more thing: the AU8830A2 DOS driver works on an AsRock 865-based board where SB Live! and Philips Edge drivers fail to load (due to its more advanced PCI implementation), so it may be the saving grace for modern systems. I'll experiment with it on newer rigs too, I have test boards up to LGA1155. Okay, its OPL3 emulation is really abysmal. But at least I could try Blood on an AGP system with an extreme overkill P4 Prescott 3.4GHz... Man, that CPU is power hungry... but ran Blood perfectly in 1600x1200 once I applied MTRRLFBE. I'll try with something smaller later because it's crazy hot.

I found an offer for a Dell Ultrasharp 2007fp, which is a 20.1" 1600x1200 IPS display. It is very tempting for it's preferred resolution, but the response time is 16ms, so I don't think it will be very good for gaming. Do you think it will be good?

Which video card would you recommend me to buy to be able to play newer 3D Win98 games at that resolution (Shogo Mobile Armor Division, for exampl)? I was thinking of a 6800 GT, but I've read that there are some driver issues that cause some DOS games to work improperly.

Guess I'm going to have to get a PCI video card for DOS gaming, or would a 6800 suffice my needs for DOS?

MalcomYork wrote:

I found an offer for a Dell Ultrasharp 2007fp, which is a 20.1" 1600x1200 IPS display. It is very tempting for it's preferred resolution, but the response time is 16ms, so I don't think it will be very good for gaming. Do you think it will be good?

It will be as good as any display of that time. And since 20" 4:3 displays are no longer manufactured en masse, and have not been for a long time, it will be as good as any 20" 4:3 1600x1200 display you will find. Incidentally, this is the display I use on my P4 system, and I am very happy with it.

alvaro84 wrote:

AU8830A2 DOS driver works on an AsRock 865-based board
...I'll try with something smaller later because it's crazy hot.

Well, a 2.4/800 Northwood got the job done too.

But the Vortex2 SB emulator wasn't a huge success and it's quite the understatement. I've tried it on a couple of platforms and the results are disappointing.

- 478: Blood 1600x1200 runs fine, 30-50fps with the NW 2.4/800. When I start it from a PATA HDD. It dies at sound system init when it's run from a SATA device. Triple checked.
- 479: An 1.6/400 Dothan performs very similar to said Northwood when played without sound. Dies the same way when loaded from SATA. Dies from PATA the same way...
- FM2: There was no sound at all, in anything. Blood ran beautifully, sometimes it could hit 100fps in 1600x1200. But without sound it's no fun.
- AM3: Again, no sound at all.
- LGA1155: Blood died at sound system init. Without sound it chugged at like 15fps. With or without a video card or MTRRLFB.
- LGA775: It seemed to be the best. With the onboard G33 video and the smallest Core 2 duo I found on my desk (E6320, 1.86GHz/4M) it runs at 60-100fps in 1600x1200, complete with emulated SB. Then it freezes within a minute or so. Always.

So I'll stick with P4 for this game. My Tualatin P3 (MSI 694T, complete with an ISA slot) I found 1280x1024 the maximum playable resolution.

alvaro84 wrote:

Well, a 2.4/800 Northwood got the job done too. […]
Show full quote

alvaro84 wrote:

AU8830A2 DOS driver works on an AsRock 865-based board
...I'll try with something smaller later because it's crazy hot.

Well, a 2.4/800 Northwood got the job done too.

But the Vortex2 SB emulator wasn't a huge success and it's quite the understatement. I've tried it on a couple of platforms and the results are disappointing.

- 478: Blood 1600x1200 runs fine, 30-50fps with the NW 2.4/800. When I start it from a PATA HDD. It dies at sound system init when it's run from a SATA device. Triple checked.
- 479: An 1.6/400 Dothan performs very similar to said Northwood when played without sound. Dies the same way when loaded from SATA. Dies from PATA the same way...
- FM2: There was no sound at all, in anything. Blood ran beautifully, sometimes it could hit 100fps in 1600x1200. But without sound it's no fun.
- AM3: Again, no sound at all.
- LGA1155: Blood died at sound system init. Without sound it chugged at like 15fps. With or without a video card or MTRRLFB.
- LGA775: It seemed to be the best. With the onboard G33 video and the smallest Core 2 duo I found on my desk (E6320, 1.86GHz/4M) it runs at 60-100fps in 1600x1200, complete with emulated SB. Then it freezes within a minute or so. Always.

So I'll stick with P4 for this game. My Tualatin P3 (MSI 694T, complete with an ISA slot) I found 1280x1024 the maximum playable resolution.

I'm a bit confused by your post -- so a 478 P4 system works well with AU30DOS.COM ? Or doesn't? Assuming you don't try to use SATA, it seems?

I'm currently testing S939 and whileI have not got up to trying the MX300 for SB emulation yet I can say that with sound disabled build engine performance at high resolutions is quite bad - under 10-11 FPS. I'm not sure if there are some tweaks or something I have to do but with MTRRLFBE the same cpu (Athlon 64 4000+ @ 2.4) gives 40 FPS in Quake Timedemo1 at 1280x1024. It would seem Athlon 64 CPUs are inferior to Pentium 4s for these purposes.

Unless build engine is picky about graphics cards? What GPU are you running those tests on? I've been testing on a G4Ti4200.

It seems it is indeed picky with the graphic card! And in many cases write combining seemed to be off on the LFB area and Blood ran a lot better with NOLFB loaded! My Tualatin+R9250 system is a good example. Or my Abit KT7A. So I don't know the real potential of the K7(->K12) clade here 🙁 S939 should be okay but I don't have a test board right now 🙁

Yes, MX300+i865 works just fine to me, not with Quake, though. Blood is good, except for the weak OPL emulation, of course.

Edit. Oh I forgot about the GPU. In the 478 build it's a humble Asus TNT2 now, this may be my smallest AGP4x card as GPU power doesn't count under these DOS games.