If you want practical build for DOS and early Win9x, find 430TX board and use Pentium MMX. This setup is very tweakable for gaming.

Except for apps that use FPU (Quake), the DX4-100 delivers performance is roughly comparable to the P66 if not slightly better in many non-pentium optimised apps. At least when using DX4 on a fairly modern 486 motherboard and not on some old junk.

There are also faster CPU options for both platforms AMD 5x86, Cx 586, Pentium overdrive 63/83 for Socket 2/3 and somewhat rare Pentium Overdrive 120/133 for the Socket 4 if you want best what's available which close the gap or even eat well into entry S5/S7 performance levels.

I would like to know if it's worth it having a Socket 3 and a Socket 4 build or if it's better to just skip Socket 4 and go 3, 5 and 7.

A DX4-120 will beat a P66 in integer maths, but not in floating point maths. But the DX4 is not even the fastest Socket 3 CPU. The fastest Socket 3 CPU you can buy is the Cyrix 5x86 @ 120 MHz. Having that and a P66 doesn't make much sense - at least to me - because the Cyrix 5x86 is much faster. Not to mention that Socket 3 can also take a Pentium Overdrive with 83 MHz. But I would rather skip Socket 3 than Socket 4. If you go for Socket 1 instead of 3, you are limited to 5V CPUs, which means fastest is Cyrix DX2-80 or Intel DX2-66 (5V version, it exists as 3.3V version, too) and this will give you the most commonly used 486 configuration of the chip's heyday.

If you do both Socket 5 and 7, you'll face a similar problem, since all Socket 5 CPUs are working in Socket 7 as well - and the difference between Socket 5 and Socket 7 is much smaller than between So7 single-voltage and So7 dual-voltage anyway. Better skip So7 in favor of Super Socket 7.

it's worth knowing that playing with the test registers on pentiums gives you extra slowdown options, see here. for example i recall reading that the 2nd pipeline can only be used 10% of the time on code not compiled for pentiums, and the results there (VPD switch) seem to roughly confirm that.

it seems the practical way would be to build a socket 7 pentium/pentium mmx machine for DOS, and a fast coppermine or tualatin for win9x. the k6+ chips are liked for their open multipliers but they (and the motherboards for them) are quite expensive nowadays. socket 4 can be skipped unless you want it for the novelty factor. there were also plenty of cacheless intel socket 5 p75 boards that should perform right about like a p60/p66, or even slower, as cacheless socket 4 doesn't appear to have been a thing.

auron wrote on 2020-01-22, 16:04:

it's worth knowing that playing with the test registers on pentiums gives you extra slowdown options, see here.

That's completely irrelevant, as he stated his goal:

My idea was basically getting the best hardware for each socket

Hey and welcome! :-)

Tobi19 wrote on 2020-01-22, 14:53:

I would like to know if it's worth it having a Socket 3 and a Socket 4 build or if it's better to just skip Socket 4 and go 3, 5 and 7.

A Socket 4 system is a cool thing to have but it does not fill a performance gap between what's offered on the Socket 3 and Socket 5 platform.
That being said for gaming I wouldn't bother with specifically looking for a Socket 5 board either. My advice would be to look for a decent late Socket 7 motherboard for both Pentium and Pentium MMX or skip P5 altogether and get a K6-2 and slow it down as needed via SetMul.
Have fun! :-)

derSammler wrote on 2020-01-22, 17:17:

auron wrote on 2020-01-22, 16:04:

it's worth knowing that playing with the test registers on pentiums gives you extra slowdown options, see here.

That's completely irrelevant, as he stated his goal:

My idea was basically getting the best hardware for each socket

Since I made a similar suggestion as auron I want to point out Tobi19 also asked

I would like to know if it's worth it having a Socket 3 and a Socket 4 build or if it's better to just skip Socket 4 and go 3, 5 and 7.

so I guess it is indeed relevant info.

derSammler wrote on 2020-01-22, 17:17:

auron wrote on 2020-01-22, 16:04:

it's worth knowing that playing with the test registers on pentiums gives you extra slowdown options, see here.

That's completely irrelevant, as he stated his goal:

My idea was basically getting the best hardware for each socket

as Doornkaat remarked, it's not a set goal judging by the OP and really if it were there would be not much point in asking about it, as he could just look up the fastest CPU/max RAM support for each platform and go for it, no?

just out of curiosity, why do your posts frequently have this condescending tone to them?

Technically the best performing Socket 4 cpus would be the Pentium Overdrives at 120mhz or 133mhz but really you should be considering socket 5 at that point.

Bottom line:
PCI Socket 3 with Am5x86 160Mhz will provide better experience for the most games they both can run adequately. Or at the very least it will be on par with Socket 4 P66 in some scenarios (Quake).

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2020-01-22, 19:06:

Bottom line:
PCI Socket 3 with Am5x86 160Mhz will provide better experience for the most games they both can run adequately. Or at the very least it will be on par with Socket 4 P66 in some scenarios (Quake).

Assuming your Am5x86 actually runs at 160MHz. I have four, all do 150MHz (3x50) without complaint but either don't boot at all or aren't stable at 160MHz (4x40). YMMV. Same applies to bus speed - some boards and CPUs (like the very late UMC-based PCI board I ran those 5x86 on) are happy to do 50MHz, many 40MHz, but for trouble-free operation on pretty much any hardware 4x33=133MHz is a safer bet. And still faster than a P66 in anything other than FPU (=Quake).

I have four, all do 150MHz (3x50) without complaint but either don't boot at all or aren't stable at 160MHz (4x40).

With 4V?

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2020-01-22, 19:33:

I have four, all do 150MHz (3x50) without complaint but either don't boot at all or aren't stable at 160MHz (4x40).

With 4V?

Nope, that makes the difference between not booting at all and booting but hanging somewhere after POST at 160MHz, but doesn't make it stable. Looks like I've just been unlucky in the lottery. It's also not bus speed related as 3x50MHz is solid.

My favorite board is a Socket 3 with VLB and PCI running a Cyrix 5x86-120. Fast and versatile.

dionb wrote on 2020-01-22, 20:31:

Nope, that makes the difference between not booting at all and booting but hanging somewhere after POST at 160MHz, but doesn't make it stable. Looks like I've just been unlucky in the lottery. It's also not bus speed related as 3x50MHz is solid.

Just get another one. Late date -ADZ or -BGC. Many of them work well at 160. At least all mine do (I have three 5x86's). No extra voltage and standard cooling.

However, the 150/50 is preferable over 166/40 as it is better in most apps as soon as your board can handle 50 MHz with no extra ws.

Like me, if you want a P60/66, is just "to have it", to experiment with such rare and historically milestone. It is the only x86 system in which there is practically only one CPU, 60/66 is a very small difference. This makes it, together with other features, a very mysterious collector's piece.

Like me, if you want a P60/66, is just "to have it", to experiment with such rare and historically milestone. It is the only x86 system in which there is practically only one CPU, 60/66 is a very small difference. This makes it, together with other features, a very mysterious collector's piece.

HIstorical value, hardware collecting, period specific benchmarking? Sure. Practical use for games? Eh, not really. Unless you can find Socket 4 CPU and motherboard extremely cheap and don't have PCI Socket 3 already.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2020-01-22, 21:51:

Like me, if you want a P60/66, is just "to have it", to experiment with such rare and historically milestone. It is the only x86 system in which there is practically only one CPU, 60/66 is a very small difference. This makes it, together with other features, a very mysterious collector's piece.

HIstorical value, hardware collecting, period specific benchmarking? Sure. Practical use for games? Eh, not really. Unless you can find Socket 4 CPU and motherboard extremely cheap and don't have PCI Socket 3 already.

If you point to retrogaming to a specific restricted area of 486 era games without asking him for 3D games that require fast Pentium and 3D card... it might be a fascinating option.

mpe wrote on 2020-01-22, 20:54:

dionb wrote on 2020-01-22, 20:31:

Nope, that makes the difference between not booting at all and booting but hanging somewhere after POST at 160MHz, but doesn't make it stable. Looks like I've just been unlucky in the lottery. It's also not bus speed related as 3x50MHz is solid.

Just get another one. Late date -ADZ or -BGC. Many of them work well at 160. At least all mine do (I have three 5x86's). No extra voltage and standard cooling.

Three are -ADZ...

However, the 150/50 is preferable over 166/40 as it is better in most apps as soon as your board can handle 50 MHz with no extra ws.

Yes, and that gives me a little dilemma - I originally wanted to make my 'ultimate' So3 build with Cx5x86-100@120 and 40MHz VLB. But that board does 50MHz FSB which makes it almost a shame not to use the Am5x86 with 3x50MHz on it. My PCI late So3 board also can handle 50MHz, but that drops PCI to 25MHz, which nerfs performance too much. Maybe I should put the Cx5x86 on there. But then I have *yet another* system with no room and no valid software reason.

Oh, and I also have a nice So4+P60 board sitting around looking pretty...

/FWP 😉