Assuming that the chipset is supported by it, Throttle would probably be the best choice.

http://www.oldskool.org/pc/throttle/DOS

http://www.foredu.com/

maybe try this?

Well there's a lot of slowdown utils here.

By the way, what games you're having problem with? And are you using P4 3.06 GHz CPU, ain't you? I take it that your mobo is Soyo SY845PE ISA, isn't it? I also have one, but I have yet to build my "booting from pure DOS" system.

How about Origin games? Which game(s) do you have problem with? It seems that most Origin games are very clockspeed-sensitive. Wing Commander 1, for example, is way too fast even on Pentium 100. How about games like Strike Commander, Wing Commander Armada, or Pacific Strike on P4 3.06 GHz?

And how about Microprose games? So far, Microprose games are relatively stable/consistent when it goes to fast CPUs --well, at least compared to Origin games.

And how about gameport joysticks? Do you have problems when playing old DOS games using gameport joystick, due to the very fast CPU? Or does clockspeed really matter when it goes to joystick?

Dosbox or search Moslo as those are the best slowdoown programs.

Maybe re-read what GreatHierophant exactly wants.

Actually, I don't own a Soyo yet, but I am fascinated with being able to use ISA peripherals on a 3GHz machine. I wonder if such a beast can be tamed by software.

Well DOSBox works very nicely with an MT-32 or any hardware from the host machine. The speed and memory size problems might not be that much of an issue, so maybe it is more of an issue with the host OS. If 9x, you might have problems with finding drivers for the newer hardware. If 2k/XP/Vista, can you find drivers for the legacy ISA cards?

Sometimes I wish for less emulation from DOSBox. For example, if you have a true Sound Blaster, Gravis Ultrasound or Roland MPU-401 unit inside your computer, it would be wonderful if DOSBox could utilize them directly rather than through emulation. The same goes for a good video, compatible video card. That way, DOSBox could devote more of the system's resources to CPU emulation.

try dosemu.
with dosbox not possible nor really wanted.

One of the best features of DOSBox is that its CPU emulation is so flexible, you can always find a right speed for the game you are using, (unless it demands a 4.77MHz 8088.) What I would do is to transfer only the CPU emulation to Windows 9x as a slowdown method. It should be able to easily reach 5-100MHz processors with a 3GHz Pentium 4. For games requiring something lower, other slowdown methods should work just fine.

However, suppose the game in question will not run in Windows 9x. Some games, like Ultima 7 + 8, will not run in a Windows box without third party-patches. Other games have not had such attention and will never run in Windows. Some games refuse to run because the machine has too much memory. Well, for this I would suggest an "environment manager", in which a program fools the game into thinking its being run in real-mode DOS instead of in a virtual mode DOS windows. This would be a poorer performer, but it would still be using almost all the host hardware and software to reduce the strain.

What you're asking for is a strange hybrid of command interpreter and CPU emulator which would need to waste copious CPU cycles passing data out to real hardware - that stuff won't just 'happen' on it's own. Unless you're running an OS with a hypervisor, I really can't see a performance or convenience benefit to your approach as compared to DOSBox.

Also, I'm not sure why you keep referring to Win9x. Windows XP, 2000 and 2003 are all based on Windows NT kernal as is Vista. Win9x is no longer supported by MS.

dh4rm4 wrote:

What you're asking for is a strange hybrid of command interpreter and CPU emulator which would need to waste copious CPU cycles passing data out to real hardware

Except that CPU waste doesn't seem to be much issue here --Great Hierophant wants to slow the game down, remember?

I remember fine but what he's asking for is unlikely to acheive anything useful for anyone else but himself and even that's hardly a given as he doesn't actually own said SOYO Mobo that he wants this for.

The cunning plan here is to build a system that can properly run all DOS and Windows up to Windows 98SE/ME but not including 2000/XP/Vista. Naturally, give the huge differences in games that ran early in DOS's lifespan and games that ran later in Win 9x's lifespan, high end hardware will be required.

I remember fine but what he's asking for is unlikely to acheive anything useful for anyone else but himself and even that's hardly a given as he doesn't actually own said SOYO Mobo that he wants this for.

Which is why I am hesistant to take the plunge. But imagine if you had one system that could play any DOS, Win 3.1 or Win 9x game as they were meant to be played. No need to waste real CPU time on drawing pixels or calculating waveforms. You could use MS-DOS rather than some lesser implementation. Naturally it would have to be tied to a PC architecture, but the less to emulate, the less that can go wrong.

I suppose what I am describing is "modular emulation." My idea of the modular concept is that you only emulate what you need to emulate. If the video card works properly with the game, you should be able to save on performance by turning off the video emulation. The same goes for the sound and I/O emulation. If all it takes to get them to work properly is to emulate a slower CPU, so be it.

Which is why I am hesistant to take the plunge.

Excuse me for saying that but I'm all for you taking that plunge. I'd really like to know if you could get somewhere with that. I would never buy and build such a beast myself but I'd really like to know how such a system fares with what you have in mind 😀

Well for me, DOSBox is a better course of action than wasting money, time and effort on a complete hardware solution. I've had many DOS/Win9x systems in the past, most if not all ran well above spec and all performed admirably for their times. I wouldn't and seriously couldn't be bothered with going through the irritation of IRQ conflicts with multiple soundcards, nor am I interested in VESA drivers - universal and otherwise, swapping in/out 3Dfx Glide dlls/tsrs, GUS 14+ sound channel limits (which DOSBox's emued GUS doesn't exibit), Sound Blaster variances, memory manager configs or any number of other stupidities that I left behind. I prefer to play DOS games as I want to and not as 'they should be' because the latter is less convenient and truely offers no real benefit over the former. Just my point of view on the matter.

One of the things I am trying to do is to close the 16/32bit Windows hole. This includes games that will not run on 2000/XP, either because the hardware is too fast or the operating system is incompatible with the game. On the other hand, the game is too demanding for DOSBox or requires/supports some hardware DOSBox does not to work at its best. Effectively, the game cannot be run without a whole system.

Great Hierophant wrote:

But imagine if you had one system that could play any DOS, Win 3.1 or Win 9x game as they were meant to be played. No need to waste real CPU time on drawing pixels or calculating waveforms. You could use MS-DOS rather than some lesser implementation. Naturally it would have to be tied to a PC architecture, but the less to emulate, the less that can go wrong.

I suppose what I am describing is "modular emulation." My idea of the modular concept is that you only emulate what you need to emulate. If the video card works properly with the game, you should be able to save on performance by turning off the video emulation. The same goes for the sound and I/O emulation. If all it takes to get them to work properly is to emulate a slower CPU, so be it.

I don't think your concept is too far-fetched. VDMSound is already a "modular emulation", although not exactly in that sense --it only emulates the sound part, but you cannot activate/deactivate emulation for a specific hardware. The emulation is far from perfect nonetheless. For instance, many Gremlin games (like Fragile Allegiance and Sandwarriors) tend to have stuttering sound even when using VDMS. Furthermore, I just discovered that VDMSound cannot play CD Audio from DOS games if I'm using Nero's virtual CD ROM drive (mounted CD image).

That being said, there are instances when I prefer VDMSound instead of DOSBox. For instance, when I run DOS games in SVGA resolution --using DOSBox tend to be slower than VDMSound unless I have the ultimate kickass CPU (TM).

However, a weakness of VDMSound is that it cannot run DOS games if the said games cannot run under Win2000/XP command prompt on the first place (Star Rangers is an example). Thus, I'm really interested in your particular idea below:

Great Hierophant wrote:

Well, for this I would suggest an "environment manager", in which a program fools the game into thinking its being run in real-mode DOS instead of in a virtual mode DOS windows. This would be a poorer performer, but it would still be using almost all the host hardware and software to reduce the strain.

I think it will be great if somehow this "environment manager" can be made --for instance, if we somehow can replace Windows 2000/XP NTVDM with something that is more "DOS games friendly".

Consider this: there are already many hardware emulators out there. GLide Wrapper is an example, VDMSound is another. If, somehow, we can combine the (conceptual) environment manager with existing hardware emulators, then I guess it may be close to your concept of "modular emulation". Furthermore, people already doing that on some cases, such as combining VDos32 with GLidos, or GLidos with VDMSound.

Actually, I prefer video emulation from a quality standpoint if you are using a good LCD monitor with a proper resolution and DVI-D input. Voodoo 1 Glice, which generally used a 640x480 resolution, looks much better pixel-doubled to a 1280x960 resolution within a 1280x1024 LCD display and digital connection than it ever did using the pass-through VGA cable. The chief downside is that it is always slower.

Audio is different. I just can't beat the sound of a real OPL2/3 or a Roland LA or GS device. I have never heard an acceptable substitute. I also like knowing that, having spent plenty of time and money for the hardware, it will work. VDMSound just doesn't cut it as far as I'm concerned. Thats why I prefer to use Win 9x with ISA for sound support.