64bit replacement of ntvdm

Getting old DOS games working on modern hardware. (DOSBox topics belong in DOSBox areas below, not here).

64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby noshutdown » 2019-2-22 @ 00:55

there is dosbox, but i never liked it much, its an emulator which is meant to be slow, and the speed is inconsistent aswell.
what i want is some equivalent of ntvdm that can run most real mode or protected mode dos programs in 64bit windows at full speed, despite lacking of sound support.
noshutdown
Oldbie
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: 2010-7-23 @ 17:04
Location: China

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby Errius » 2019-2-22 @ 06:24

vDOS will run your text-mode DOS programs, but it can't handle anything with graphics, won't play sound (not even beeper), and won't run in 25x40 mode.
"EA simply loved Syndicate so much they did it IRL."
User avatar
Errius
Oldbie
 
Posts: 1489
Joined: 2015-12-16 @ 19:16
Location: Lave Station

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby ripsaw8080 » 2019-2-22 @ 10:17

vDos and vDosPlus are based on DOSBox, which the OP doesn't seem interested in using due to CPU emulation.

Though problematic in some ways, the OP may be interested to follow developments here: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=48443
User avatar
ripsaw8080
DOSBox Author
 
Posts: 4407
Joined: 2006-4-25 @ 23:24

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby JosSchaars » 2019-2-22 @ 22:25

“Microsoft Windows NTVDM on 64bit Windows” is also ‘just’ an emulator. Outdated, buggy, slower than DOSBox, the limitations and troubles (though some insist it is a Holy Grail) of Windows integration. That is clicking a DOS program to start. Those programs should then be real simple, w/o any further configuration.
Be careful with installing this NTVDM64, it could well bring down your Windows system.
vDos supports only VGA 640x480 graphics and the simple DOS beep. Anything beyond that is considered not needed by ‘serious’ DOS applications.
JosSchaars
Newbie
 
Posts: 52
Joined: 2014-1-26 @ 21:58

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby Jo22 » 2019-2-23 @ 01:28

There's also MS-DOS Player. It started out as a 80286 + text-mode emulator with DOS emulation,
but has grown in functionality since. Running Protected Mode programs is a challenge i guess, but so it is on NTVDM.
OS/2's VDM was much more complete, IMHO. It supported things like DOS software for EPROM writers (direct I/O to Parallel port) etc.
"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//
User avatar
Jo22
l33t
 
Posts: 3892
Joined: 2009-12-13 @ 07:06
Location: Europe

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby cyclone3d » 2019-2-23 @ 06:14

noshutdown wrote:there is dosbox, but i never liked it much, its an emulator which is meant to be slow, and the speed is inconsistent aswell.
what i want is some equivalent of ntvdm that can run most real mode or protected mode dos programs in 64bit windows at full speed, despite lacking of sound support.


Just because it is an emulator doesn't mean it is meant to be slow. What is the newest version you have tried? If you haven't used 0.74-2 or a newer SVN build yet, you might be pleasantly surprised.
User avatar
cyclone3d
l33t
 
Posts: 3379
Joined: 2015-4-08 @ 06:06
Location: Huntsville, AL USA

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby noshutdown » 2019-2-23 @ 07:27

cyclone3d wrote:Just because it is an emulator doesn't mean it is meant to be slow. What is the newest version you have tried? If you haven't used 0.74-2 or a newer SVN build yet, you might be pleasantly surprised.

i tried 0.74-2 and its still equally slow, its usually between 5~30 times slower than ntvdm depending on application, which is not remotely acceptable.
noshutdown
Oldbie
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: 2010-7-23 @ 17:04
Location: China

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby robertmo » 2019-3-24 @ 02:08

vmware player, virtual pc, virtualbox, qemu
User avatar
robertmo
l33t
 
Posts: 4761
Joined: 2003-6-18 @ 10:35

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby kjliew » 2019-3-25 @ 04:43

noshutdown wrote:i tried 0.74-2 and its still equally slow, its usually between 5~30 times slower than ntvdm depending on application, which is not remotely acceptable.

I wonder what type of non-game DOS application that you would consider it slow running on DOSBox with modern machines. On today Core i3/5/7 with over 3GHz, especially the desktop-class CPUs, DOSBox is extremely fast. And, on which version of Windows NTVDM that you run the same stuffs which is faster than DOSBox.

I would look from the user experience perspective of "fast" vs "slow", so please don't quote benchmark figures as comparison. For eg. if a game running on emulation would sustain 60FPS while getting 600FPS on native machine, then the extra 10x FPS is not really making any difference on user experience. DOS is a long dead platform commercially, so no new DOS games/application are being published with CPU/GPU heavy contents to make them relevant for modern machines. Hence, DOSBox is really good enough, with just a few exception of DOS games. I run the last version of AutoCAD DOS R13 on DOSBox and it was the fastest experience I ever had using AutoCAD.

No 64-bit version of Windows has ever shipped with NTVDM. It is obvious that 64-bit runtime is not suitable for legacy 16-bit real-mode, and if Microsoft were to support this they would have to do this in pure emulation similar to DOSBox. Both Intel/Microsoft has been keen on killing off DOS/16-bit real-mode for the last 20 years. The era of 64-bit computing has just made it even more compelling. Intel will put the final nails on the coffin by year 2020 when every new system will be at least UEFI class 3. And as I looked into the crystal ball, it painted the vision that Intel/AMD would completely remove 16-bit real-mode from CPU by 2030.
kjliew
Member
 
Posts: 480
Joined: 2004-1-08 @ 03:03

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby noshutdown » 2019-3-26 @ 00:59

kjliew wrote:I would look from the user experience perspective of "fast" vs "slow", so please don't quote benchmark figures as comparison. For eg. if a game running on emulation would sustain 60FPS while getting 600FPS on native machine, then the extra 10x FPS is not really making any difference on user experience. DOS is a long dead platform commercially, so no new DOS games/application are being published with CPU/GPU heavy contents to make them relevant for modern machines. Hence, DOSBox is really good enough, with just a few exception of DOS games. I run the last version of AutoCAD DOS R13 on DOSBox and it was the fastest experience I ever had using AutoCAD.

you got one point, i do want the speed of running on native machine, or at least close to that.
noshutdown
Oldbie
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: 2010-7-23 @ 17:04
Location: China

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby cyclone3d » 2019-3-26 @ 01:24

Have you tried increasing the cycle count in DOSBOX?

And yes, I know that DOSBOX has some very serious overhead. I am working on an optimized fork of 0.74-2 that should speed it up significantly.
Last edited by cyclone3d on 2019-3-26 @ 01:29, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
cyclone3d
l33t
 
Posts: 3379
Joined: 2015-4-08 @ 06:06
Location: Huntsville, AL USA

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby noshutdown » 2019-3-26 @ 01:26

cyclone3d wrote:Have you tried increasing the cycle count in DOSBOX?

i set it to max, but its usually between 5~30 times(depending on application) slower than native machine.
noshutdown
Oldbie
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: 2010-7-23 @ 17:04
Location: China

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby kjliew » 2019-3-26 @ 07:22

noshutdown wrote:you got one point, i do want the speed of running on native machine, or at least close to that.

You didn't get my point. How would the speed of running on native machine make any difference in usability? A game at 60FPS and a game at 600FPS would feel the same. In addition, in near future there will be no native machine for 16-bit/32-bit DOS codes anymore. For instance, machine X is the last and fastest available platform to run the code natively. Machine Y is not capable of running Machine X native code, but is 100x faster than Machine X. So, Machine Y would still run Machine X native code in emulation faster then Machine Y running it natively.

And, you still don't tell the actual stuffs that you wish to run on DOSBox vs NTVDM.
kjliew
Member
 
Posts: 480
Joined: 2004-1-08 @ 03:03

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby DosFreak » 2019-3-28 @ 00:26

Usually the ones complaining about DOSBox speed are raspberry pi or mobile users attempting to run games that their processor isn't powerful enough for single threaded DOSBox or people who for some reason want to compile in DOSBox and who are very harsh on DOSBox performance whenever it's brought up when they should really be using something else. Just ignore them, it's like talking to a brick wall except less productive.
User avatar
DosFreak
l33t++
 
Posts: 10444
Joined: 2002-6-30 @ 16:35
Location: Your Head

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby awgamer » 2019-3-28 @ 02:02

noshutdown wrote:
cyclone3d wrote:Have you tried increasing the cycle count in DOSBOX?

i set it to max, but its usually between 5~30 times(depending on application) slower than native machine.


Have you set cpu to dynamic? I am curious if you have some specific games in mind to run that DOSBox isn't able to run at full speed.
awgamer
Oldbie
 
Posts: 568
Joined: 2014-7-26 @ 07:42

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby ripsaw8080 » 2019-3-28 @ 02:33

Another thread of the OP's gives some idea of purpose and intent: viewtopic.php?f=31&t=65417 (hint: it's not playing games).
User avatar
ripsaw8080
DOSBox Author
 
Posts: 4407
Joined: 2006-4-25 @ 23:24

Re: 64bit replacement of ntvdm

Postby awgamer » 2019-3-28 @ 02:43

He neglected to bench DOSBox's BIOS handling which isn't interpreted, now I'm curious how it compares to his other results.
awgamer
Oldbie
 
Posts: 568
Joined: 2014-7-26 @ 07:42


Return to DOS

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest