That's totally fine.

MMX CPU has twice the cache inside it, which makes it a whole step faster - that might be something you DON'T want, to get authentic experience. 😀

I'd use a P54C just for the fact that by the time the MMX came out, Pentium was more or less finished.

GigAHerZ wrote:

That's totally fine.

MMX CPU has twice the cache inside it, which makes it a whole step faster - that might be something you DON'T want, to get authentic experience. 😀

PArt of me misses that Civ II took day's to play through, wear as when i played it again on a K6-2 450 it took a day to play through it, and on faster systems i can play the entire game a few hours, i really kinda miss the old experince 🤣.

So here is my spec list for this, some items i have laying around and that's why they are getting used, plus i want to also play the games I played on my parents Aptiva with a 6x86 PR166 chip, had some sort of 3d accelerator so i could play Starfleet Command and Starfleet Academy on theirs, so I'm adding one to mine that's overkill but as I said I have it laying around.

Pentium 166 downclocked to 133 or use the 233mmx if I'm going to use an MMX
64mb SD-Ram
Creative TNT PCI 16mb
Soundblaster 128 (The first soundcard I bought at walmart so I want it in this, even though I have a real SB16 and a Live doing nothing i want my 128
Intel Pro 100 Nic
Maxtor Promise Ultra100/TX so i can support a bigger HDD
28.8k ISA Modem cause I had one, I won't use it but i want it 🤣.

40GB HDD
DVD-Rom
300W Powerman PSU pulled from a Pentium3 700 it has no bad caps
AT to ATX Adapter
Generic ATX Desktop case

Sort of missing the motherboards in this story. That might be relevant. Which PB board with no cache (PB630?) and which board did the P233MMX come on?

It's a Tekram P5T30-B4 motherboard

Intel 430TX

no idea on the PB board, but memtest nor any other utility i have identify's any L2 cache, its a multimedia F170

candle_86 wrote:

It's a Tekram P5T30-B4 motherboard

It should have 256kB/512kB of cache on board as far as i was able to quickly google about it.
Did you run cachechk as well, to confirm exitence/lack of cache? (Check your bios settings as well)

candle_86 wrote:

It's a Tekram P5T30-B4 motherboard

Intel 430TX

Not bad, those Tekram boards are a bit 'clunky' but very reliable in my experience. I have an MVP3 Tekram here in my son's retro gaming system.

no idea on the PB board, but memtest nor any other utility i have identify's any L2 cache, its a multimedia F170

Those PB model numbers don't say much at all, different countries had different models, sometimes even different shops in same country had different models, and frequently the internal hardware was changed during a model run.

Take a look here, it's most likely somewhere between the PB620 and PB683.
http://uktsupport.co.uk/pb/mb/pbmb1.htm

The layout should allow pretty easy identification.

These are Intel OEM boards, by the way - the PB68x are different revisions of the Intel NV430VX.

If you are targeting a 1995 build, then the P54C (the 133MHz in particular) is a great target. Also, the P54C is more closely related to DOS in my mind - it was actually the ultimate DOS CPU, whereas the MMX/PII were Win95 CPUs. Of course, that is just how I remember things.

appiah4 wrote:

If you are targeting a 1995 build, then the P54C (the 133MHz in particular) is a great target. Also, the P54C is more closely related to DOS in my mind - it was actually the ultimate DOS CPU, whereas the MMX/PII were Win95 CPUs. Of course, that is just how I remember things.

Eh? The P55C has the exact same optimization for 16b instructions as the P54C, only difference is the larger L1 cache, which benefits DOS as much as Windows, and MMX instructions, which were basically useless at the time regardless of operating system.

Sure you're not mixing up MMX and Pentium Pro? With its optimization for 32b instructions and very poor 16b performance (downright abominable when compared to price), it was most definitely not a DOS - or indeed Win9x - CPU.

It's a mix of Dos/Win95 games, here is the full game list from my childhood

Agile Warrior F111X - Win
Blackknight Marine Warrior - Dos
Civilization II - Win
Sid Meier's Colonization Win95 - Win
Simcity 2000 - Win
SimCopter - Win
Starfleet Academy - Win
Starfleet Command - Win
Flight Simulator 98 - Win
Doom - Dos
Duke Nukem 3d - Dos
Command and Conquer 95 - Win
Red Alert - Win
Starwars X Wing -- Dos
Star Wars Tie Fighter - Dos
Star Wars X wing vs Tie Fighter - Win

I'm down clocking to 133

candle_86 wrote:

It's a mix of Dos/Win95 games, here is the full game list from my childhood […]
Show full quote

It's a mix of Dos/Win95 games, here is the full game list from my childhood

Agile Warrior F111X - Win
Blackknight Marine Warrior - Dos
Civilization II - Win
Sid Meier's Colonization Win95 - Win
Simcity 2000 - Win
SimCopter - Win
Starfleet Academy - Win
Starfleet Command - Win
Flight Simulator 98 - Win
Doom - Dos
Duke Nukem 3d - Dos
Command and Conquer 95 - Win
Red Alert - Win
Starwars X Wing -- Dos
Star Wars Tie Fighter - Dos
Star Wars X wing vs Tie Fighter - Win

You may be blending different memmorys from different systems in to one. I say that because Starfleet Command I was released in 1999 with a windows 98/me/2k/XP requirement, directx 8, and a 450MHz CPU.

dionb wrote:

appiah4 wrote:

If you are targeting a 1995 build, then the P54C (the 133MHz in particular) is a great target. Also, the P54C is more closely related to DOS in my mind - it was actually the ultimate DOS CPU, whereas the MMX/PII were Win95 CPUs. Of course, that is just how I remember things.

Eh? The P55C has the exact same optimization for 16b instructions as the P54C, only difference is the larger L1 cache, which benefits DOS as much as Windows, and MMX instructions, which were basically useless at the time regardless of operating system.

Sure you're not mixing up MMX and Pentium Pro? With its optimization for 32b instructions and very poor 16b performance (downright abominable when compared to price), it was most definitely not a DOS - or indeed Win9x - CPU.

I was not classifying them by operating systems due to architectural differences, but due to my experience in using these CPUs with the respective OSs, it's a memory and nostalgia thing, nothing more. Of course the MMX is a better DOS CPU than the P54C, it's just that I never used an MMX for DOS only back in the day (and I actually never used an MMX at all, went straight from P54C and Warp 3 to PII and Win95)

I may be mistaken, but don't all the MMX CPUs run at a lower voltage? Or maybe that includes the later P54Cs as well. At any rate, less heat is a good thing.

SirNickity wrote:

I may be mistaken, but don't all the MMX CPUs run at a lower voltage? Or maybe that includes the later P54Cs as well. At any rate, less heat is a good thing.

Yep, P55C was 2.8V/3.3V split voltage. The P54C(S) CPUs ran on 3.3V single voltage. That said, clock for clock, the TDP was only marginally lower and the max power draw was actually higher, so lower voltage != lower heat.

pico1180 wrote:

candle_86 wrote:

It's a mix of Dos/Win95 games, here is the full game list from my childhood […]
Show full quote

It's a mix of Dos/Win95 games, here is the full game list from my childhood

Agile Warrior F111X - Win
Blackknight Marine Warrior - Dos
Civilization II - Win
Sid Meier's Colonization Win95 - Win
Simcity 2000 - Win
SimCopter - Win
Starfleet Academy - Win
Starfleet Command - Win
Flight Simulator 98 - Win
Doom - Dos
Duke Nukem 3d - Dos
Command and Conquer 95 - Win
Red Alert - Win
Starwars X Wing -- Dos
Star Wars Tie Fighter - Dos
Star Wars X wing vs Tie Fighter - Win

You may be blending different memmorys from different systems in to one. I say that because Starfleet Command I was released in 1999 with a windows 98/me/2k/XP requirement, directx 8, and a 450MHz CPU.

I am to a degree I played Starfleet command on parents 686 166 system, it requires dx76 compatible hardware, and a pentium 166. My personal system didn't have 3d I want to be able to play the games my p133 and my parents 686 played 🤣.

Pentium® 166 with hardware acceleration or Pentium 200 without 3-D card
Microsoft Windows® 95 or 98
32 MB RAM
200 MB of free hard drive space
DirectX 6.0 or later
640 x 480 or better monito

candle_86 wrote:

So I'm building another socket 7 system this time on a real board not that horrible packardbell with zero L2 that runs like hot garbage. I remember my first computer had a Pentium 133, but I've got a Pentium 166, 166mmx and this new board came with a 233. I know the 233 is faster and the 166mmx is faster than the normal 166, but I'm somewhat tempted to make the P54C run at 133mhz just like my first computer, any compelling reason not to do this? It's going to run things like Hover, Civilization II, Colonization 95, Duke 3d, Doom all games i played on my first computer.

I like MMX CPUs for flexibility. I'd say as an ultimate DOS CPU they're better than the classic in all speed regimes (386DX to full clock), but if you want to go with a P54c like you had back then and aren't particularly interested in making a time machine, I say go for it!

candle_86 wrote:

...horrible packardbell with zero L2 that runs like hot garbage.

The lack of L2 only drops performance a few percent and actually helps achieve lower speeds more easily when disabling cache. I tested my Packard Bell with no L2 against a SS7 board awhile ago and noticed this. The amount of performance the L2 adds on SS7 was not enough to make SVGA games go from sluggish to smooth, and VGA games were already as fast as they could get. Yet, max slowed down speed was enough to run Wing Commander perfectly on the Packard Bell while I couldn't make the SS7 platform slow enough to run it playably. This with a 200MMX and TNT2 M64 PCI. Still, if you don't care about slowing the PC down for speed sensitive games, then that's all moot.