villeneuve wrote:

The Pentium II in 1997 was Klamath. Pentium II Deschutes came out in 1998. Pentium III wasn't available at all in 1998. 64 MB RA […]
Show full quote

The Pentium II in 1997 was Klamath.
Pentium II Deschutes came out in 1998.
Pentium III wasn't available at all in 1998.
64 MB RAM in 1997 was over the top. Most ran 16 to 24, few ran 32 MB.
1997 could've some different soundcards added, for example I think the first DirectSound 3D compatible cards came out.
Phenom came out 2007 indeed, but Athlon 64 X2 AM2 it was for most of the year.

My experiences with RAM mirrors your own but other users above crucified me for underrepresenting RAM amounts..

I suppose you can't make everyone happy 😵

I will fix the Klamath/Deschutes and Pentium III issues.

I updated the document to reflect the corrections pointed out in this thread; this is what I think as good a representation of contemporary hardware as I can get, hope it's useful to someone:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Fqh7a … dit?usp=sharing

Thank you, appiah4! I just checked it out and its very well done. Concise, to the point, no fluff. I agree with most of what's on there, but even when I don't, it's close enough that it's not worth being a pedant about. The only suggestion I'd make is to freeze the first column so when you scroll to the right you can still see each row's year.

I did a freeze panes at B2, should be easier to navigate now. Cheers 😀

Very nice list, definitely bookmarking it for future reference. Sure, it's relatively easy to remember many of those release years or google the ones you don't remember off the top of your head, but having it organized by year like this is super convenient for quickly checking what hardware and software makes sense together. Also makes for a great build ideas stimulator 😀

Good, very good. I built somewhat similar table for myself (from the hardware I have for the moment) and was satisfied to see it matches yours in general.

There is missing S423 Pentium for year 2001 (was presented on November, 2000) and RDRAM. Short-living, but I like it.

I realize this is an old thread, but Pentium MMX CPUs weren't released until 1997.

In 1996, you'd either be using a regular Pentium or Pentium Pro.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-01-16, 23:30:

I realize this is an old thread, but Pentium MMX CPUs weren't released until 1997.

In 1996, you'd either be using a regular Pentium or Pentium Pro.

1993 is Pentium 60/66 on S4 - very expensive, while most of the users were still sitting on DX2/66(80)
1994 Pentium 75/90/100 on S5, DX4 appears
1995 Pentium 120, quite silent year. Pentium Overdrive, 5x86 - Windows 95 just appeared.
1996 is Pentium 133-200 year, Pentium Pro is very expensive and appeared on servers only.
Then end of 1996 and beginning 1997 is a year of MMX extension to the leaving Pentiums with high frequencies. And Pentium II - is a PPro core came from the parallel universe. BTW, DVDs also started to sale on that year, I remember our local PII presentation when intel showed PII with DVD playback.

This is very good topic, I think something like this (or like, you know Wikipedia stripes for rock bands) would be very helpful to get period correct memo. So you could choose among different options - like totaly fresh stuff, dying technology, typical, pro, time paradox 😀 Lots of things existed simultaneously with absolute crazy period of 1996-2003. In 1995 you still could buy 386 (or even worse). And even use it for lots of applications. In 2000 your Pentium 133-166 was meh.

rkurbatov wrote on 2024-01-17, 00:21:

1996 is Pentium 133-200 year, Pentium Pro is very expensive and appeared on servers only.

There were some people that had Pentium Pro systems for desktop/gaming usage.

When I was doing research on the Pentium Pro, I came across an old newsgroup thread from 1996 where people were debating the merits of the regular Pentium versus the Pro for gaming: https://groups.google.com/g/comp.sys.ibm.pc.g … eyj3iuudg?pli=1

Then end of 1996 and beginning 1997 is a year of MMX extension to the leaving Pentiums with high frequencies.

First quarter of 1997 is when the Pentium MMX CPUs were released. They were originally supposed to release in 1996, but were delayed until Q1 1997.

rkurbatov wrote on 2024-01-17, 00:32:

Lots of things existed simultaneously with absolute crazy period of 1996-2003.

I was thinking it would be neat to create an infographic chart to show different system builds for different time periods. Define some builds based on release dates for specific CPUs, then show the period of time in which these builds were applicable.

rkurbatov wrote on 2024-01-17, 00:32:

This is very good topic, I think something like this (or like, you know Wikipedia stripes for rock bands) would be very helpful to get period correct memo. So you could choose among different options - like totaly fresh stuff, dying technology, typical, pro, time paradox 😀 Lots of things existed simultaneously with absolute crazy period of 1996-2003. In 1995 you still could buy 386 (or even worse). And even use it for lots of applications. In 2000 your Pentium 133-166 was meh.

Hi there! Well said, I think.

The 386/486 PCs were around for the whole 90s, as far as I can remember.
Shareware CDs had specs like a 486DX33, MS-DOS 5, 4MB, SVGA, Sound Blaster

In the years ~1993 to 2000, my dad had a 386DX-40 PC with 16 MB RAM and a 150 KB single-speed CD-ROM drive (Lu005S).
Two hard disks were installed, one for Win95 and applications, the second one for data.

He also had an internal Towitoko chip card reader (smartcard reader), an Epson (?) color ink printer, an 33k6 modem and a DCF-77 radio receiver.

Monitor was a 20" single-frequency type, I believe (switching between 800x600 and 640x480 required manual adjustment).

With this thing he surfed the world wide web (Netscape 2), did home banking, visited CompuServe,
did write his invoices, printed his business cards, did his programming work (VB, Delphi, etc)..

In short, it was a solid business PC for development and paper works.

Other users had higher specced PCs (486DX, 486DX2, 486DX4, CX586, Pentium etc),
but maybe less memory, a smaller CRT or no modem. The 90s were full of diversity.

For example, the Amstrad Mega PC was totally underpowered at the time.
386SX, 1MB, 256KB VGA RAM, no CD-ROM drive, no modem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amstrad_Mega_PC

In short, it wasn't very up-to-date for its time.

Such systems weren't too uncommon, though.

Notebook users usually had to struggle with memory limitations, too.
Some users tried to run Windows 95 on a model with 4 MB of RAM.
That was because the hardware was made with Windows 3.1x in mind, still.

On the other hand, there were video game fans and multimedia fans who didn't want anything less than a 486DX2-66 with a double-speed drive and a VLB graphics card and a VLB IDE host adapter.

Virtual Reality also was a factor in the mid-90s.
I still remember the ads for Forte VFX-1 or CyberBoy in those Pearl Agency magazines..
Here, owning a Pentium 120 was no waste. It was more of a minimum requirement, rather.
Due to the use of alternating fields, twice the work had to be done in order to keep the same effective resolution.

Astronomy fans had a need for a fast 486 (no SX please!), too.
Simulating the night sky was quite resource heavy. I still remember SkyGlobe.

The fans of "Ballerspiele" (shooter) couldn't get enough raw power, either.
That's were Pentium systems were about good enough. Pentium MMX and II were preferred, though.

Most full VGA titles with 640x480 (RPGs, Visual Novels) did want a quick 386/486.
No matter if it was early or late 90s.

In my place, the localized release of Knights of Xentar with new voice acting was released in the late 90s on CD.
It needed a 386SX-16 with 4MB of RAM, DOS 5 and a 2x CD-ROM drive to run (crawl).
A fast 486 was very welcome anytime, though.

Similarly, Seasons of the Sakura (DOS), which was freshly released about same time, asked for a 486, too.

Another reverse extreme was the Windows 3.0 game "TRACON". A 1991 simulation about the work of an air traffic controller.
It recommended to get a 486DX33 PC with 4 MB of RAM or more and an 20" SVGA monitor.
A Super VGA card with 800x600 or better yet, 1024x768 was recommended.

A Sound Blaster, too, to hear simulated radio communications between tower/atc and pilots.
This was being done before Windows had an official audio support, even!
Creative's own Sound Blaster SDK for Windows was being used here. The game was linked against a Sound Blaster DLL.

And all this in 1991, when many here still had an Amiga 500 or IBM XT with Hercules or CGA graphics.. Amazing. 🤯

PS: The site dosdays has a excellent overview of the individual years.

https://www.dosdays.co.uk/topics/typical_pc_per_year.php

It also covers so called "clearance PCs", which were sold off for cheap.

Users of little money or humble needs (kids, students, home users etc) did buy them, despite being obsolete.

That's why shareware/freeware scene was still holding onto lower minimum specs, I believe.
Here, private users weren't just consumers, but also authors.

Edit: I think that the years 98/99 might be a special case.
Because, the release of Windows 98 marked the very end of the 16-Bit era.

Windows 95, by contrast, still did feature a 16-Bit legacy.
Development tools of the late 16-Bit era still got to know Windows 95 (Win95 awareness).

In the days of Windows 95, Visual Basic 3 and Delphi 1, old Fox Pro etc were still being used to develop new 16-Bit applications meant for use under Windows 95.

So 98/99 strictly didn't belong to the 90s anymore, maybe.
They might have been already in the 2000s, technology wise. Like Windows 98SE.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-01-16, 23:30:

I realize this is an old thread, but Pentium MMX CPUs weren't released until 1997.

In 1996, you'd either be using a regular Pentium or Pentium Pro.

This is correct, and I will make the correction at the earliest opportunity, thank you kind sir. I hope the list in general was to your liking though 😀

appiah4 wrote on 2024-01-17, 06:43:

This is correct, and I will make the correction at the earliest opportunity, thank you kind sir. I hope the list in general was to your liking though 😀

It is!

I've been comparing your list with my own. I created a detailed list of hardware and software by specific release dates. Just curious how our respective lists sync up. 😀

I am thinking about the small webapp allowing to get the build info for any given month and year in interval, say, 1991-2011.
Probably with some screens of magazine ads as a guide - like prices and typical configurations. Need to plan that better.

rkurbatov wrote on 2024-01-19, 00:24:

I am thinking about the small webapp allowing to get the build info for any given month and year in interval, say, 1991-2011.
Probably with some screens of magazine ads as a guide - like prices and typical configurations. Need to plan that better.

That would be awesome and something I've wished existed for a long time.

I started something similar using Power BI for an interface. Though a web application would be a better and more flexible tool.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-01-16, 23:30:

I realize this is an old thread, but Pentium MMX CPUs weren't released until 1997.

In 1996, you'd either be using a regular Pentium or Pentium Pro.

Fixed now.

But strangely enough there was never a year where the Pentium MMX was the top dog. I never realized Klamath came only a few months after P54C. It almost feels like the MMX was Intel's own kind of Super Socket 7 platform..

Around here memory tended to be on the low side as well.

My DX4-100 initially had 4MB, which I later upgraded to 12MB.

I remember P100’s with 8MB. Absolute swapfest in w95.

My Klamath 300 had 64MB, later upgraded to 96.

My s478 Willamette 1.7 had 256MB PC800 rambus, I built that one end of 2001.

I had 8 MB of RAM on my DX4-100 in 1997 and it was the average, not the worst PC - some friends of mine were using DX2-66. 16MB would be quite nice build for that time.

And for year 2002 128MB was still an option for something like Celeron/Duron.

In 1993 my 486-33 had 4MB, in 1994 I got a CD-ROM Upgrade kit and upgraded to 8MB. In 1995, I upgraded to a DX4-100 and had 16MB. In 1996 I upgraded to a P133 with 32MB. In 1998 I had a PII-300 with 64MB. I remember RAM becoming INCREDIBLY expensive in the late 90s due to some factory fire or whatnot..