*rofl* That's pretty sad dude. Brought a 700MHz computer to its knees by emulating 2 DOS prompts? 😜 Are you guys sure something isn't wacked-out in DOSbox so that that part of it is hogging more CPU power than it needs?

Originally posted by HunterZ *rofl* That's pretty sad dude. Brought a 700MHz computer to its knees by emulating 2 DOS prompts?

Hunter, what is the deal here? Have you never heard "use the proper tool for the job"? DosBox is good for some things...VDMSound for others... You and all the other people who insist on treating them like football teams (rooting for one at the exclusion of others) just cause grief...

Having said that, I would like to see you take out "Homer J" in a Gladiatorial arena...complete with "Gamesters of Triskelion" soundtrack...

Would it be possible to create a standalone Windows Slowdown utility from this info?

Actually DosBox is so small it doesn't really matter....heck for those old games with speed problems just stick DosBox into a batch file twice and then execute game for a shortcut....

Any reason why DosBox need's to be loaded twice? Will upping cycles remove that requirement?

when dosbox is running as a prompt it consumes full "screen rendering power" but no cpu cycles so increasing the cycles doesn't matter. (only more dosbox prompts with frameskip)

The power of dosbox in this case is that dosbox redraws the screen(which involves massive calculation while in textmode) at a frequency of 70 Hz/ frameskip. So it's not aggressive consuming cpu power all the time. So there is plenty off time left for other programs and somehow my win2k box schedules it perfect in comparrison to other slowdown utils

HunterZ: dive into textmode specs and see why it's so damn slow.

Nicht Sehr Gut wrote:

Hunter, what is the deal here? Have you never heard "use the proper tool for the job"? DosBox is good for some things...VDMSound for others... You and all the other people who insist on treating them like football teams (rooting for one at the exclusion of others) just cause grief...

Having said that, I would like to see you take out "Homer J" in a Gladiatorial arena...complete with "Gamesters of Triskelion" soundtrack...

Huh? I don't think that VDMSound is better than DOSBox in every situation. There are a few games that I keep DOSBox around for (although I can't think of any off the top of my head). I was just commenting on how funny Qbix's use of DOSBox was in this case.

Qbix said:
when dosbox is running as a prompt it consumes full "screen rendering power" but no cpu cycles so increasing the cycles doesn't matter. (only more dosbox prompts with frameskip)

WTF? "Screen rendering power"? Can you give a technical description? That just doesn't make any sense. Are you saying that you're somehow lagging the video card instead of the CPU? 😕

Originally posted by HunterZ I don't think that VDMSound is better than DOSBox in every situation. There are a few games that I keep DOSBox around for (although I can't think of any off the top of my head). I was just commenting on how funny Qbix's use of DOSBox was in this case.

Well your reply was drenched with sarcasm about how DosBox uses resources. Obviously it needs a lot more than VMWare or VPC because its truly emulating a PC...not just a "DOS prompt".

Compared to Bochs, its blazingly fast.

HunterZ wrote:

WTF? "Screen rendering power"? Can you give a technical description? That just doesn't make any sense. Are you saying that you're somehow lagging the video card instead of the CPU? 😕

Ah sorry: I mean the creation of the virtual dosbox screen from the textmode buffer. So the step->
vidmemory in dosbox(textmode) 16 color to a 640x480x32 bit sdlwindow.That step consumes a lot of cpu power. (but not all the time only at a dosbox screen update (70/fameskip Hz)