God Of Gaming wrote on 2024-07-28, 06:57:
if you gonna dualboot, I say it makes more sense to dualboot 98se with XP, than XP with 7 or 10, because, most of the games you would need XP for, would be made for 4:3 aspect ratio, so then you can have one desk set up with a CRT and your harrdware for winXP and below, and another desk with your modern widescreen setup with win 7 or 10 or linux or whatever. I am saying this after using a XP + 7 dualboot build with a gtx980 for a few years and becoming displeased with having CRT and LCD both on same desk side by side in order to have both plugged into the same PC, and having to move keyboard, mouse, speakers, mic and webcam to the other monitor each time I switch OS, not to mention being limited to five 2TB hard drives and unable to upgrade to 8TB hard drives since XP doesnt support GPT
Obviously you'd use the same monitor for both systems. There are about as many issues running 7 on a CRT as there are running XP on an LCD.
And lets not forget that "made for XP" also incorporates all those 2006-2010 games from the period when 16:10 was the common gaming resolution (think 1680x1050 and 1920x1200). I still remember 16:10 being used in reviews in 2012 when Sandy Bridge was around. So I'd say that is absolutely an XP aspect ratio.
The XP/7 dual boot is more an idea of having less machines sitting around. No need to have a 2001 system, a 2003 system, a 2006 system, a 2010 system, a 2013 system, etc. when one single 2012 system can do all the stuff.
With XP you get hardware audio, including EAX, while 7 gives access to D3D11, and thus games made after 2013-ish. (when a D3D9 path wasn't included anymore)
On my 7 system I can run games up until around 2018 pretty much maxed out, and it isn't even using the fastest hardware supported by the OS.
A high end, late XP system with a widescreen TFT could easily do all the games that run on XP, while also having enough performance to do well in many D3D11 games.
And if any of them are better played in 4:3, it is always possible to set up a custom resolution. I ran my CRT back in the day in 2048x1536 and can convince my 1080p TFT to do 4K with downsampling.
I can also run 1440x1080 for 4:3 with pixel accuracy or any other 4:3 res I want. Sure, there are black bars on the side, but on a large enough screen that shouldn't be an issue.
A 21.5'' 16:9 or a 27'' 21:9 screen is about the same height as a 17.5'' 4:3 or a 17'' 5:4 screen
A 23.5'' 16:9 or a 29'' 21:9 screen is about the same height as a 19'' 4:3 screen
A 27'' 16:9 or a 34'' 21:9 or a 49'' 32:9 screen is about the same height as a 22'' 4:3 screen
A 32'' 16:9 screen is about the same height as a 26'' 4:3 screen
So physical screen size is not an issue.
I wouldn't worry about hard drive size either. 2TB is plenty.
Sure you could run 5 drives plus a DVD, but who needs 10 TB on a dedicated retro setup. One drive should be plenty.
Those games will be in the low double digit GB as worst, even a modded Skyrim would barely take over 20-25 GB, Half Life 2 is under 5 GB, Bioshock is about 6 GB, Fallout New Vegas just over 9 GB, Borderlands 2 about 20 GB.
And even games for booting into 7 won't be huge. The largest I have around (that runs under 7) is GTA V with about 112 GB, followed by a couple in the 40-70 GB range.
Many games will even be below a GB. How many of the really huge 2015 and later games would one install?
For input, either a KVM or a separate set would do the trick.
Speakers can even be simply linked together with a Y-cable. I have my three systems all running on the same pair of speakers without issues.
I'm not really sure about the purpose of a webcam on a retro setup, but to each their own.
P3 933EB @1035 (7x148) | CUSL2-C | GF3Ti200 | 256M PC133cl3 @148cl3 | 98SE & XP Pro SP3
X5460 @4.1 (9x456) | P35-DS3R | GTX660Ti | 8G DDR2-800cl5 @912cl6 | XP Pro SP3 & 7 SP1
3570K @4.4 GHz | Z77-D3H | GTX1060 | 16G DDR3-1600cl9 @2133cl12 | 7 SP1