VOGONS


First post, by Sphere478

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

So, while dual MMX is cool as heck, the lack of MPS/SMP support in 9x creates a bit of a challenge when trying to select a OS.

On one hand the best benchmark and gaming results will probably be from loading it up with 95 RTM and only using one cpu, but that totally ignores the sexond cpu, and we can’t have that. So what’s second best? NT? 3.5? 4.0? Win2k? Some kind of linux?

The system:
Dual 233 mmx
Radeon 9200
512mb ram, 512mb cachable
Sata II SSD
Tyan s1564d

The goal: utilize second cpu for windows tasks, and apps that can use it, while being able to play classic 9x games as fast as possible given the cpu(s) at hand.

Currently I am running xp rtm, but I get the sense that I should try win 2k.

However I fear that NT might be too far back, and not work right with games? Thoughts?

Sphere's PCB projects.
-
Sphere’s socket 5/7 cpu collection.
-
SUCCESSFUL K6-2+ to K6-3+ Full Cache Enable Mod
-
Tyan S1564S to S1564D single to dual processor conversion (also s1563 and s1562)

Reply 1 of 9, by Babasha

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

WinXP (for slowpokes) -> Win2K (for all) -> WinNT (for max speed)
Linux (for geeks) -> BeOS (for dreamers “as it should be”)

Games are not the best usage for SMP systems 😉

Need help? Begin with photo and model of your hardware 😉

Reply 2 of 9, by Shadzilla

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

You could give NT4 a go. I had friends that gamed on it back in the day. From recent experience with NT4 though it's definitely a challenging operating system to setup and use. Win2k is probably a safer bet, and I gamed a lot on that platform, probably my favourite OS.

Reply 3 of 9, by PD2JK

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I guess you have multiple systems, so dual boot W98/2K is not necessarily important?

A vote for 2k then, most compatible/versatile and still snappy.
But XP SP1 with all bells and whistles turned off could be just as fast.

I had XP installed on a P133 / 64MB / Banshee PCI for my dad in his garage for John Deere EPC (parts program), it ran.

i386 16 ⇒ i486 DX4 100 ⇒ Pentium MMX 200 ⇒ Athlon Orion 700 | TB 1000 ⇒ AthlonXP 1700+ ⇒ Opteron 165 ⇒ Dual Opteron 856

Reply 4 of 9, by progman.exe

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I used to run a 98lite/NT4 dual boot, single CPU, and under NT4 OpenGL was faster than 9x on my TNT. I replaced the dual boot with Win2k once I got a copy (thanks, The Tower FTP, I miss you. She was my first love, er, first dodgy FTP server account).

I also have, in storage, probably now dead, dual P200 on a Tyan board. That started as dual P100s, and with searching slowly got it to the fastest the board could take. That machine ran NT4, a software firewall, with a PCI ISDN card as my home internet gateway over 20 years ago. The amount I spent to get something better than dial up! 64k each way, or 128k at twice the phone call costs, was stunning for the time.

I was Low Ping Bastard, I'm ashamed to admit 😀

I did try 2000 on the dual pentium, and what I remember was the install being staggeringly slow. I guess that is single threaded? The text boot during install I think doesn't use the SMP HAL. 2K didn't last on the machine, it ended up running NT4 Terminal Services Edition and being the file server for MP3s. Ripping station too, had SCSI Plextor drives in at some point. I did find a copy of LAME compiled for SMP, too.

With either NT4 or 2k, that dual machine was very snappy for a Pentium based system. 128meg of RAM helped.

Games back then did not use SMP, and Quake 3 was a famous example of one that did. No chance getting any performance out of that on a pentium, though. And I think Q3's SMP implementation wasn't great.

Probably best for gaming is to use the machine as a server. Running many dedicated servers on it at once would be the best use of resources. Some 9x-only games with a dedicated server mode might work on NT, too. Don't put them on the internet, but I hope you already knew that 😀

Reply 5 of 9, by Sphere478

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Sounding like win 2k will be the one I will use, which service pack? Or rtm?

Sphere's PCB projects.
-
Sphere’s socket 5/7 cpu collection.
-
SUCCESSFUL K6-2+ to K6-3+ Full Cache Enable Mod
-
Tyan S1564S to S1564D single to dual processor conversion (also s1563 and s1562)

Reply 6 of 9, by progman.exe

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

SP4, and I think the a final pack of updates if it exists.

Unless someone know of a major show-stopper, I can't think of why you might not want to be as up to date as possible. Win2k wasn't quite as DRM'd up and anti-user as later versions of Windows, and there was never a major overhaul like before and after XPSP2.

IMHO the best version of 2k on the desktop was 2k Server 😀 Once you disable server features/services, set foreground programs to be prioritised, it is great. Same as Pro, but with Terminal Services as a choice. And not a remote desktop like XP, actual multiple GUI sessions at once.

Reply 7 of 9, by swaaye

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

I guess people have a wide range of tolerance but I found Win2K to be very sluggish on a dual Pentium Pro running 233 MHz. Those were even the 1MB cache versions.

And I was building Pentium II Xeons for NT4 once upon a time so I don't really think of that as something for Pentium MMX either.

NT3.5 seems more appropriate. More likely to actually be fast.

Reply 8 of 9, by matze79

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

With 512Mb RAM Windows 2000 would be the best choice.
If you want to run some games.

Windows NT 4 is faster but the lack of directx support is a real problem.
Unless you only play OpenGL or glide titles.

https://www.retrokits.de - blog, retro projects, hdd clicker, diy soundcards etc
https://www.retroianer.de - german retro computer board

Reply 9 of 9, by chinny22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

I have Win98 and NT 3.51 on my dual PPro 200.
Win98 for gaming including dos games
NT 3.51 for messing around with server software. NT4 would be fine as well but have another PC for that.

On my dual P3 I run Win2k and 95% of my win9x games run just fine, I actually prefer it over Win98 now as 2k behaves so much better then 98.
Just not sure how much of a performance hit you'll get as 2k is a bit more resource heavy then 98