Get rid of the couches to make room for the old PCs. The guests can sit on the floor.

You got to think in 3D. Buy a bunk bed, sleep at the top, PCs go down the bottom 🤣

Mau1wurf1977 wrote:

You got to think in 3D. Buy a bunk bed, sleep at the top, PCs go down the bottom 🤣

Yes, 3D is teh magic word!!
You can put 4 AT cases next to your bed and put another 4 on top of them and you got a perfect bedroom table for putting your glasses on!! 😁

...or just get a place that has an attic, like mine 😁 (pics are in the pics thread ;D )

Or just make your bed your computer bench

CRT face plant waiting to happen. 😁

I don't want to know what amount of radiation that setup produces

TheMAN wrote:

I don't want to know what amount of radiation that setup produces

So you get a free tan also, the girls will love you!

See? Just gotta be creative 😁

I've taken your comments on board and have come up with another plan for saving space while avoiding the problem of 'CRT faceplant' and possibly reducing radiation.

I daresay this solution is even more effective on space. especially if you have kids you can duct tape your parts to. I suggest you don't go too far from a power outlet, or just carry a really long extension cord.

DonutKing wrote:

I've taken your comments on board and have come up with another plan for saving space while avoiding the problem of 'CRT facepla […]
Show full quote

I've taken your comments on board and have come up with another plan for saving space while avoiding the problem of 'CRT faceplant' and possibly reducing radiation.

I daresay this solution is even more effective on space. especially if you have kids you can duct tape your parts to. I suggest you don't go too far from a power outlet, or just carry a really long extension cord.

Haha, great post!!

+1 😁

What about this:

Everyone has some space in the bathroom / toilet 🤣

I discovered something very interesting, by accident... As I told you guys some time ago, I had a 2GB CF as a second drive on my 386, which even if in BIOS was recognised as 1954MB, it would create a single partition of 504MB. I remember discussing about that, and concluded that it might be a limitation of the HD controller. After that, I removed the card, where I used it on a pentium PC as a disk for dos only games. I had made a partion of 2gb and formated in dos 6.22.
A couple of weeks ago, I changed my mind, and installed a physical disk on the pentium. So I had the CF card free for the 386 again. This time, I forgot I had a partition, and I run fdisk again. There I see the partition, and leave it as it is. Now imagine my surprise, when I format the card, and it says formatting 1953,sth Mbytes!!!!! And it seems to work ok. However I would like to fill it past the 500MB limit to see if it is still ok.

What CHS settings does your CD card have in the BIOS of your 386?

I would be very surprised if your 386 supported LBA- which means that even though the partition table says its got a 2GB partition on it, as soon as you go past 504MB the BIOS will 'loop around' back to the beginning of the drive, since it can't actually address anything past that- end result, drive corruption.

If you really want to use >504MB with a system that doesn't support LBA you need to use a Dynamic Drive Overlay like Ontrack, although you need to reformat the drive to install it. I jhave successfully used the Quantum version of Ontrack with a 2GB CF card in my 486.

Hey RG100, I tried removing the SIMM's on one of those Contaq boards...works fine just using my fingers 😜

Tetrium wrote:

Hey RG100, I tried removing the SIMM's on one of those Contaq boards...works fine just using my fingers 😜

Same here. But they're not all the same though. Some are much harder to remove than others. On one of them, it was very easy. On a couple of them, it was practically impossible.

Very nice build to see!!

now that you guys mention it, the contaq board that I have has NO problem with the 6.4gb hard drive I have in it right now. Maybe it was because of my siig i/o board but this contaq is a real nice 386 board.

What sort of SIIG I/O board are you using? A lot of them had a ROM that added LBA support so I'd suspect this is what you have.

i put a buildlog on antother website here: http://forums.extremeoverclocking.com/showthr … ad.php?t=353775

Also, on your 386, did you upgrade your tag ram? in the first picture it wasnt changed, but that may be why your board is slightly slower than mine.

Yes I did because I went from 128kb cache to 256kb. I'm using the same 20ns 256 kilobit chips for TAG as I'm using for cache.

I might try putting in a 15ns TAG chip and see what it does.
I wouldn't have thought it would make much difference though seeing as I'm running cache at lowest possible wait states.

EDIT: Are you referring to the smaller QS888 chip and not the mistubishi chip (same size as the other cache chips?) I only upgraded the mitsubishi chip. I wouldn't work with 256kb otherwise.

I'm not really that fussed about it being slower as we are talking fractions of a frame per second in 3DBENCH, which, as I've discovered, isn't really a good paradigm for gaming performance. It's basically fast enough for what I'm doing with it 😀 The biggest impediment to performance is probably the CDU33A CD-ROM drive I'm using, really makes CD games chug.

luckybob wrote:

i put a buildlog on antother website here: http://forums.extremeoverclocking.com/showthr … ad.php?t=353775

This is great, and also it would be a perfect Vogons/Marvin thread. 😀

What's your most successful top speed jumper setting on this mobo? I am guessing that you are using the factory supplied 80 MHz oscillator at the moment. Have you tried running Windows 95? I appreciate that it's not a suitable OS for a 386, but I found that it's a good stability test for OC'd settings. I also discovered it's a good way to test 8MB of RAM. w95 can use 8MB, but if any of it's bad, it quickly goes wrong and "blue screens".