Laucian wrote:

Thanks in advance. Sorry for my noobiness - I was just a wee lad when I was playing those things. Heck. I'm still a wee lad.

Np 🤣 😉

TNT2 Model 64 is basically as fast as a TNT(1), but it is underpowered for the rest of the system.
Depending on which (windows) games you intend to play, I'd recommend replacing the TNT2 M64 with a Voodoo 3 (AGP) or even something with the name GeForce in it.
512MB is perfectly fine, though it should work just as fine with just 256MB installed.
There are actually some extras you could install, if you wanted to, including an unofficial Service Pack for 98SE (has many hotfixes etc) and other guides at tweaking 9x, but that's much a matter of choice really. How much time would you want to spend on it?
I remember 98SE had many annoying issues (one of the reasons I prefer ME over 98SE) like not being able to read USB mass storage devices, though most of these annoyances can be patched.

A link with LOTS of information about the unofficial service pack and many more can be found here:
http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/91-windows-9x … ember-projects/

About DOS games in true DOS, it would appear that many DOS games could have problems with the P3-933 being too fast, even when underclocked to 466Mhz.
Maulwurf did some comprehensive testing with underclocking more modern hardware to more 486-ish levels of speed 😉

I remember 98SE had many annoying issues (one of the reasons I prefer ME over 98SE) like not being able to read USB mass storage devices, though most of these annoyances can be patched.

Oh? ME has native support of USB mass storage, with the 'Remove Safely' thing and all? If so, then I am definitively going to install it.

TNT2 Model 64 is basically as fast as a TNT(1), but it is underpowered for the rest of the system.
Depending on which (windows) games you intend to play, I'd recommend replacing the TNT2 M64 with a Voodoo 3 (AGP) or even something with the name GeForce in it.

Eh, don't worry. Nothing modern. I think the most recent one I intent to play is Starcraft. (Yes, it works on modern systems. But well. ) All of them are pre-2000 games.

And about the video card, well, I would like something with both DOS and Windows support. Are there any 'magic' cards for that?

About DOS games in true DOS, it would appear that many DOS games could have problems with the P3-933 being too fast, even when underclocked to 466Mhz.
Maulwurf did some comprehensive testing with underclocking more modern hardware to more 486-ish levels of speed Wink

I could also plug in a Celeron 466 Mhz. Would that be acceptable for DOS?

Here's a comparison between both: http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=27386,42097,

Laucian wrote:

Oh? ME has native support of USB mass storage, with the 'Remove Safely' thing and all? If so, then I am definitively going to in […]
Show full quote

I remember 98SE had many annoying issues (one of the reasons I prefer ME over 98SE) like not being able to read USB mass storage devices, though most of these annoyances can be patched.

Oh? ME has native support of USB mass storage, with the 'Remove Safely' thing and all? If so, then I am definitively going to install it.

TNT2 Model 64 is basically as fast as a TNT(1), but it is underpowered for the rest of the system.
Depending on which (windows) games you intend to play, I'd recommend replacing the TNT2 M64 with a Voodoo 3 (AGP) or even something with the name GeForce in it.

Eh, don't worry. Nothing modern. I think the most recent one I intent to play is Starcraft. (Yes, it works on modern systems. But well. ) All of them are pre-2000 games.

And about the video card, well, I would like something with both DOS and Windows support. Are there any 'magic' cards for that?

About DOS games in true DOS, it would appear that many DOS games could have problems with the P3-933 being too fast, even when underclocked to 466Mhz.
Maulwurf did some comprehensive testing with underclocking more modern hardware to more 486-ish levels of speed Wink

I could also plug in a Celeron 466 Mhz. Would that be acceptable for DOS?

Here's a comparison between both: http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=27386,42097,

The general accepted view is that it's very hard to have 1 rig that has it all, there will always be "some" DOS games that won't work properly no matter what rig you use 😉

For DOS (mind you, I am not exactly one of the local DOS gurus, some of the other members know far more then me about this 😉) I'd think the TNT2 M64 should be ok.
It was a budget card, but having used a M64 16MB card for a couple years in a Celeron 400 rig, it's really not a bad card actually per se. It's only "problem" could be that theres better alternatives out there. But afaik this card shouldn't cause major headaches. It should "simply work" 😁

You could view it in this way: If you have no further experience with building retro rigs, you can be pretty much sure you won't get everything right the first time anyway, keep in mind that it's ok to make mistakes 😉
(though you seem like someone who knows how to put matching parts together, a plus for you 😉)

I'd say, just build it and see how it goes! 😁
I find there will always be somekind of unexpected problem popping up, so you can't really plan it 100% in advance anyway. That's something I had to learn the hard way by simply trying and keep trying.

If you have any more questions, feel free to ask 😉

Laucian wrote:

I could also plug in a Celeron 466 Mhz. Would that be acceptable for DOS?

In a nutshell

Slot 1 systems will get you a 386SX - 386DX once you disable the CPU cache. Because these boards don't have mainboard cache, that's as fast as you will go.

Socket 7 systems are more flexible because of mainboard cache. Here you get a 386 with CPU cache and mainboard cache disabled. If you only disable the CPU cache, but leave the mainboard cache enabled, you will get a 486DX - 486DX2 depending on CPU and bus speed.

I have done quite a bit of testing and I can't recommend Slot 1 / S370 systems for "slow down" projects. They are much better suited for a SVGA DOS gaming machine / W98SE.

For DOS games that have issues with speed I recommend building a 486 or Pentium.

However, most games work fine on fast machines. So it's really only these few games that have speed issues: Wing Commander, Test Drive 3 or Sierra games unpatched.

Didn't MS cripple DOS support in ME, though? I thought that was the big reason why everyone uses 98SE instead.

sliderider wrote:

Didn't MS cripple DOS support in ME, though? I thought that was the big reason why everyone uses 98SE instead.

That is correct 😉
(I'll assume your remark is directed at me?)

But I play few real DOS games, my interest is mostly in the early Windows games and the couple DOS games I do play from time to time seem to work well enough in ME.
And 98SE costs more time to tweak and I'm a lil lazy. Also I'm used to ME, it works perfectly fine for what I do with it.

It should "simply work" Very Happy

Hopefully. Well, we'll see.

However, most games work fine on fast machines. So it's really only these few games that have speed issues: Wing Commander, Test Drive 3 or Sierra games unpatched.

Well, I'll stick to the Pentium 3 800mhz that is coming with the motherboard and see how it goes. Maybe I'll build a DOS-only machine on the future.

Didn't MS cripple DOS support in ME, though? I thought that was the big reason why everyone uses 98SE instead.

Yep. That's why I'll be using two systems: ME and DOS 6.22. GRUB bootloader, probably.

-

Thanks for all the answers. I got this sorted out for the moment, I think.

Mau1wurf1977 wrote:

In a nutshell […]
Show full quote

Laucian wrote:

I could also plug in a Celeron 466 Mhz. Would that be acceptable for DOS?

In a nutshell

Slot 1 systems will get you a 386SX - 386DX once you disable the CPU cache. Because these boards don't have mainboard cache, that's as fast as you will go.

Socket 7 systems are more flexible because of mainboard cache. Here you get a 386 with CPU cache and mainboard cache disabled. If you only disable the CPU cache, but leave the mainboard cache enabled, you will get a 486DX - 486DX2 depending on CPU and bus speed.

I have done quite a bit of testing and I can't recommend Slot 1 / S370 systems for "slow down" projects. They are much better suited for a SVGA DOS gaming machine / W98SE.

For DOS games that have issues with speed I recommend building a 486 or Pentium.

However, most games work fine on fast machines. So it's really only these few games that have speed issues: Wing Commander, Test Drive 3 or Sierra games unpatched.

Does the bios need to support disabling the cache on a S1 system, or is there a way to do it from a program. Semi OT I know, but I'm just a bit curious.

Does the bios need to support disabling the cache on a S1 system, or is there a way to do it from a program. Semi OT I know, but I'm just a bit curious.

Probably BIOS. Or perhaps some weird jumper thing-y. Not entirely sure, I didn't mess with hardware back then. Just software.

Here's my setup:

Dell Optiplex Gs
-------------------
CPU: Pentium I at a screaming-fast-for-its-time 90MhZ
Memory: 64MB RAM, technically this is supposed to be 128 but I think one bank is bad or not seated.
Gfx: PCI-slot 32MB NVidia GeForce 2
Sound: ISA-card AWE32 CT-3900, Gravis Ultrasound 2.4, Roland SC-55/MT-32
Speakers: 2.1 K-Mart speakers of awesomeness
CD drive: basic IDE Dell thing that it came with
HDD: two 40GB IDE drives, one was free
Monitors: 20" CRT VGA monitor, 22" 1st Gen LCD VGA monitor
Keyboard: Big, Hefty IBM PS/2 that may be used as a weapon. I spilled Pepto Bismol down it once as a kid and it still works.
Beer: Yes, Guinness or something comparatively dark
USB slots: no, but those would be nice on occasion.

SavantStrike wrote:

Does the bios need to support disabling the cache on a S1 system, or is there a way to do it from a program. Semi OT I know, but I'm just a bit curious.

L1 Cache can be disabled through software, but not L2 (mainboard) cache.