Is Windows pointless on a 486? \ VOGONS

Is Windows pointless on a 486?

Topic actions

Post a reply

First post, by Ampera

Posted on 2017-01-04, 12:20

Ampera Offline

Rank Oldbie

Rank: Oldbie
Posts: 900
Joined: 2016-11-16, 22:31

I want to bring this into discussion.

I have an AM486 system, DX4-100-SB8B OC'd to 120Mhz.

It has 32MB of memory, VLB EIDE card and a VLB Trio32 in Diamond Multimedia Stealth SE.

The HDD is 4-5x times an appropriate size of 500MB, and the CD drive is OP.

And it BLOWS at running Windows. I mean SimTower runs like absolute Arse! It was playable at first on Windows 95, but started to slow to a crawl.
A quick switch to 3.1, and it is unplayable from the get-go. I don't get this. I can BLOW Duke 3D out of the water with 320x400 res mode (I think it's 640x400 interlaced).
I mean it is amazing how well the system can do Duke 3D, but something like SimTower it can't handle.

It does run some Windows games well, like Winciv (Which is honestly worse than the DOS version due to the crippled audio, and inability to buy city improvements/units), and of course
Sim City (A C64 can run Sim City) but both those games are available in DOS.

So I pose the question, is Windows useless except for very minor games for a 486? I mean DOOM and Duke is in DOS (lol what else do you need), and SO many games functioned on DOS.
I think that aside from a casual Windows 3.1 install, PC/MS/DR/Free DOS is all you need.

But I write this to get the opinion of the frankly amazing VOGONS community.

Reply 1 of 37, by kixs

Posted on 2017-01-04, 12:30

kixs Offline

Rank l33t

Rank: l33t
Posts: 3368
Joined: 2013-01-31, 02:08
Location: Slovenia

It's probably pointless for Windows games - unless you want simple GUI games (Mines, Solitaire and tons of others...).

Requests are also possible... /msg kixs

Reply 2 of 37, by 386SX

Posted on 2017-01-04, 12:31

386SX Online

Rank l33t

Rank: l33t
Posts: 3132
Joined: 2014-10-27, 12:56

Well, I think that it depends of what should be right to consider "slow" or "fast enough". I don't know about native win games but I lately used a 386DX-40 with Win 98 (!) and with the right level of patience I was happy with it thank also to the GD5429 cards and its acceleration but many probably would not even think to build a similar absurd config.
The very concept of what we could define "slow" nowdays is often something to think about and that is changed in the last years.

Reply 3 of 37, by shock__

Posted on 2017-01-04, 13:07

shock__ Offline

Rank Oldbie

Rank: Oldbie
Posts: 1162
Joined: 2010-12-22, 01:53
Location: Berlin, Germany

No.

Current Project: new GUS PnP compatible soundcard

[Z?]

Reply 4 of 37, by Jo22

Posted on 2017-01-04, 13:21

Jo22 Offline

Rank l33t++

Rank: l33t++
Posts: 9601
Joined: 2009-12-13, 07:06
Location: Europe

386SX wrote:

I don't know about native win games but I lately used a 386DX-40 with Win 98 (!) and with the right level of patience I was happy with it thank also to the GD5429 cards and its acceleration but many probably would not even think to build a similar absurd config.

Hey, that sounds interesting! I heard this was possible, but I never tried myself.
Out of curiosity, did you ever try this with a 486DLC also ?

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 5 of 37, by Ampera

Posted on 2017-01-04, 13:26

Ampera Offline

Rank Oldbie

Rank: Oldbie
Posts: 900
Joined: 2016-11-16, 22:31

shock__ wrote:
No.

Care to explain why not?

Reply 6 of 37, by Anonymous Coward

Posted on 2017-01-04, 13:39

Anonymous Coward Offline

Rank l33t

Rank: l33t
Posts: 4819
Joined: 2008-03-20, 05:37
Location: Shandong, China

In my opinion SimTower should run decently on a DX4-120. I ran it on a DX-33, in 256 colours at 800x600. I thought it played acceptably, but maybe I had a higher tolerance for slowness back then. BTW, there is a DOS version of the game, which would probably crash less than the 3.x version.

Are you running an accelerated graphics driver?

"Will the highways on the internets become more few?" -Gee Dubya
V'Ger XT|Upgraded AT|Ultimate 386|Super VL/EISA 486|SMP VL/EISA Pentium

Reply 7 of 37, by PhilsComputerLab

Posted on 2017-01-04, 13:51

PhilsComputerLab Offline

Rank l33t++

Rank: l33t++
Posts: 6174
Joined: 2014-09-28, 03:33
Location: Western Australia

I never put Windows on a 486. The slowest machine I used it was a Pentium 100, mostly for easy networking.

YouTube, Facebook, Website

Reply 8 of 37, by Ampera

Posted on 2017-01-04, 13:53

Ampera Offline

Rank Oldbie

Rank: Oldbie
Posts: 900
Joined: 2016-11-16, 22:31

Anonymous Coward wrote:
In my opinion SimTower should run decently on a DX4-120. I ran it on a DX-33, in 256 colours at 800x600. I thought it played acceptably, but maybe I had a higher tolerance for slowness back then. BTW, there is a DOS version of the game, which would probably crash less than the 3.x version.

Are you running an accelerated graphics driver?

I am using the S3VBE20 driver. And I don't know if my disc contains the DOS version.

Reply 9 of 37, by Cyberdyne

Posted on 2017-01-04, 13:55

Cyberdyne Online

Rank Oldbie

Rank: Oldbie
Posts: 898
Joined: 2011-09-18, 18:45
Location: Estonia, Tallinn

Windows 3.11 good, Windows 95 original... ookay... maybe, but after that OSR2 and 98 are absolutely pointless.

I am aroused about any X86 motherboard that has full functional ISA slot. I think i have problem. Not really into that original (Turbo) XT,286,386 and CGA/EGA stuff. So just a DOS nut.
PS. If I upload RAR, it is a 16-bit DOS RAR Version 2.50.

Reply 10 of 37, by firage

Posted on 2017-01-04, 14:04

firage Offline

Rank Oldbie

Rank: Oldbie
Posts: 1198
Joined: 2013-01-06, 21:43
Location: Finland

Windows is totally secondary to me on my 486, which is why 3.1x was the way to go. I have about 20 games that feel more at home on the 16-bit version, although they would all work fine on 9x.

My big-red-switch 486

Reply 11 of 37, by Jorpho

Posted on 2017-01-04, 14:18

Jorpho Offline

Rank l33t++

Rank: l33t++
Posts: 8168
Joined: 2003-02-14, 19:50
Location: Canada

Ampera wrote:
I can BLOW Duke 3D out of the water with 320x400 res mode (I think it's 640x400 interlaced).

Some people would insist that it is pointless to run Duke 3D at such a low resolution.

Anonymous Coward wrote:
BTW, there is a DOS version of the game, which would probably crash less than the 3.x version.

Are you sure about that? That's news to me.

Reply 12 of 37, by Ampera

Posted on 2017-01-04, 14:20

Ampera Offline

Rank Oldbie

Rank: Oldbie
Posts: 900
Joined: 2016-11-16, 22:31

Jorpho wrote:
Some people would insist that it is pointless to run Duke 3D at such a low resolution. […]
Show full quote
Ampera wrote:
I can BLOW Duke 3D out of the water with 320x400 res mode (I think it's 640x400 interlaced).
Some people would insist that it is pointless to run Duke 3D at such a low resolution.

Anonymous Coward wrote:
BTW, there is a DOS version of the game, which would probably crash less than the 3.x version.
Are you sure about that? That's news to me.

You haven't seen it. It looks and plays pretty good for that sorta machine.

And yea, I've never heard of SimTower for DOS.

EDIT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SimTower

No, it's not.

Reply 13 of 37, by Darkman

Posted on 2017-01-04, 18:01

Darkman Offline

Rank Oldbie

Rank: Oldbie
Posts: 651
Joined: 2013-09-08, 10:39

on a 486 I would stick with Win3.11, if only for the easier file management (at least for me) and occasional Win3.11 game, like some of the Sierra games.

Win95 works of course, its just not ideal

Reply 14 of 37, by Jade Falcon

Posted on 2017-01-04, 18:12

Jade Falcon Offline

Rank BANNED

Rank: BANNED
Posts: 3216
Joined: 2016-05-08, 19:23
Location: Nar Shaddaa.

It really matters what your doing wit the system. Gamming would not be fun but there is more to computers then gamming.

For 3.1 I don't see anything wrong with it on a 486 system, keep in mind the P5 came out about a year after 3.1 and another year latter when the first 100mhz pent came out if I recall right. 95 on the other hand is like running a piii on vitsa if you ask me. yes it will work, but is it worth it?

Reply 15 of 37, by 386SX

Posted on 2017-01-04, 19:39

386SX Online

Rank l33t

Rank: l33t
Posts: 3132
Joined: 2014-10-27, 12:56

Jo22 wrote:
386SX wrote:

I don't know about native win games but I lately used a 386DX-40 with Win 98 (!) and with the right level of patience I was happy with it thank also to the GD5429 cards and its acceleration but many probably would not even think to build a similar absurd config.

Hey, that sounds interesting! I heard this was possible, but I never tried myself.
Out of curiosity, did you ever try this with a 486DLC also ?

I will try the 486DLC-40 I have soon. When I tried the 386DX-40 I also had the external FPU @ 40Mhz. The video card probably helps a lot with the window acceleration but I think that the 16Mb SIMM @ 60ns was also a nice thing to have there.

Reply 16 of 37, by SRQ

Posted on 2017-01-04, 21:46

SRQ Offline

Rank Member

Rank: Member
Posts: 438
Joined: 2013-04-18, 19:25

Windows is useful at the very least for doing complex file management tasks from a GUI.

Reply 17 of 37, by FFXIhealer

Posted on 2017-01-04, 21:54

FFXIhealer Offline

Rank Oldbie

Rank: Oldbie
Posts: 709
Joined: 2016-06-22, 17:42
Location: Lake Charles, Louisiana (U.S.A.)

On my dad's original 486 PC, we had Windows 3.1 and it was, for me, only really useful to run Word when I needed to type a report up for school. We had an old line dot-matrix printer, the one where after you printed, you had to tear the paper off, then tear all the sheets apart, then tear the holes off the sides of the papers. Ahh, nostalgia.....

Reply 18 of 37, by brostenen

Posted on 2017-01-04, 22:01

brostenen Offline

Rank l33t++

Rank: l33t++
Posts: 6654
Joined: 2014-05-07, 21:13
Location: Northern Jutland, Denmark.

The newest Windows that I want to install on a 486 is Win 3.11 For Workgroups.
And that would only be for word processing, so I would probably not install the network support disk.

Don't eat stuff off a 15 year old never cleaned cpu cooler.
Those cakes make you sick....

My blog: http://to9xct.blogspot.dk
My YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/brostenen

001100 010010 011110 100001 101101 110011

Reply 19 of 37, by Anonymous Coward

Posted on 2017-01-04, 22:12

Anonymous Coward Offline

Rank l33t

Rank: l33t
Posts: 4819
Joined: 2008-03-20, 05:37
Location: Shandong, China

Ampera wrote:
You haven't seen it. It looks and plays pretty good for that sorta machine. […]
Show full quote
Jorpho wrote:
Some people would insist that it is pointless to run Duke 3D at such a low resolution. […]
Show full quote
Ampera wrote:
I can BLOW Duke 3D out of the water with 320x400 res mode (I think it's 640x400 interlaced).
Some people would insist that it is pointless to run Duke 3D at such a low resolution.

Anonymous Coward wrote:
BTW, there is a DOS version of the game, which would probably crash less than the 3.x version.
Are you sure about that? That's news to me.

You haven't seen it. It looks and plays pretty good for that sorta machine.

And yea, I've never heard of SimTower for DOS.

EDIT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SimTower

No, it's not.

I will look, but I am pretty sure that I have a DOS version floating around.
*edit*
It appears all of mine are windows versions, despite the downloads links claiming to be for DOS. Too bad it doesn't exist though, because I seem to remember it as a game plagued by GPFs.

I don't know if the S3VBE20 driver is suitable or not. Can you get a driver tailored specifically to your hardware?

"Will the highways on the internets become more few?" -Gee Dubya
V'Ger XT|Upgraded AT|Ultimate 386|Super VL/EISA 486|SMP VL/EISA Pentium

Go to top of page Go to top of page

Back to General Old Hardware

Main menu

Common searches