I know late 90s Dells are built rock solid because I have one, and they have a decent amount of BIOS options. Their 386 or lower machines might not be of similar quality. I have had good success with my AST Bravo/286 so far. Because of this, I can make an guess that AST computers as a whole are probably good. I've had it for about a year, and so far nothing has blown on it and nothing has gone bad. I've even gone the extra mile and successfully overclocked the CPU to 10 mhz, and I'm still pushing for more 😉. It's pretty straightforward to work on, and other AST's of the era seem to be easy to work on too. It dosen't have very many bios options at all, but i've figured out that some of the AST bioses are rebranded Award bioses, so maybe you could upgrade the bios setup to another Award setup. Mine has a proprietary board form factor and power supply form factor, but nothing else is proprietary. My late 90's Dell is another story. While quite easy to get the side panel off, the rest of the stuff is quite hard to get out. In the early 90's this might of been different though. Another brand you might consider is Compaq. Compaqs have been pretty reliable in my past experience. While maybe not the easiest to work on, I do have a Compaq laptop that has a 3/4 inch deep gash in the screen casing because of a burn and it still works fine. I think early Compaqs have a bit of proprietary stuff, but they have a lot of brand recognition so support is probably pretty decent for them. I wouldn't go with an IBM PS/2 for your next DOS PC. Micro channel architecture does not have a lot of support, and I think some PS/2s only used MCA. They also use a lot of proprietary stuff and special ESDI drives, which can be a bit of money. Even though I don't know as much about all the brands as some other guys, I think AST,Compaq, and Dell would be decent options for your next DOS pc. As far as the era you should pick from, it depends on what you want to play. Pick 386 if you want to play games that require 386 instructions or a fast CPU. If you just want to play 16 bit games that do not require 386 instructions, a fast 286 (12 MHZ + with VGA) would suit you well. If you just want to play like CGA/early EGA, a turbo XT might do this. If you buy a 386, get a DX 33/40 or if you want a bit slower go SX 16/25. I hope you find the right retro system to collect 😉

Intergraph, everything else is the stuff that you see everyday. 386 was launched in 1985. i wouldn't consider it early 90s even if you could still buy one. Really early 90s is more of 486 came out in 1989, and 1st Pentium 1993 Id consider Pentium overdirves in 486 motherboards to be the sweet spot for early 90s.

Warlord wrote on 2020-01-03, 04:06:

Intergraph, everything else is the stuff that you see everyday. 386 was launched in 1985. i wouldn't consider it early 90s even if you could still buy one. Really early 90s is more of 486 came out in 1989, and 1st Pentium 1993 Id consider Pentium overdirves in 486 motherboards to be the sweet spot for early 90s.

386s were early 90s. My family bought a 386SX computer in 1992. It was pretty much run of the mill for its time. 1985 was only two years after the IBM XT came out. Nobody was buying a 386 in 1985 except for people like scientists doing number crunching who needed the highest performance available regardless of cost. 386s certainly weren't in people's homes.

Back then, people didn't buy the latest CPU right when it came out. In 1993, if you were rich you might have had a 486 which was state of the art at the time. You definitely weren't going out and buying a Pentium 60. Pentiums didn't even begin becoming mainstream until the later half of the 90s.

seanneko wrote on 2020-01-03, 05:16:

Warlord wrote on 2020-01-03, 04:06:

Intergraph, everything else is the stuff that you see everyday. 386 was launched in 1985. i wouldn't consider it early 90s even if you could still buy one. Really early 90s is more of 486 came out in 1989, and 1st Pentium 1993 Id consider Pentium overdirves in 486 motherboards to be the sweet spot for early 90s.

386s were early 90s. My family bought a 386SX computer in 1992. It was pretty much run of the mill for its time. 1985 was only two years after the IBM XT came out. Nobody was buying a 386 in 1985 except for people like scientists doing number crunching who needed the highest performance available regardless of cost. 386s certainly weren't in people's homes.

Back then, people didn't buy the latest CPU right when it came out. In 1993, if you were rich you might have had a 486 which was state of the art at the time. You definitely weren't going out and buying a Pentium 60. Pentiums didn't even begin becoming mainstream until the later half of the 90s.

^^^^^^^ what he posted. Even 286s were still in reqular use in the very early 90s. An example is my Zenith Z286LP Plus which was designed to run Windows 3.0 that came out in 1990. Of course Dos was definately still the defacto standard back then though. I got my first x86 new, a 286/16 , in the early 90s. All my freinds were buying/upgrading to 386DX33/40s before upgrading to 486s.

I really don't understand the OPs comment about older than 486 hardware being messy to deal with. Especially when modern add-ons are readily avaible, xt-ide for example. Proprietary kit such as the PS/2 range and early PS/1s are probably the worst archs to deal with imho. Generic stuff not at all.

I have a variaty of OEM systems, Zenith, Dell, IBM, Dec, Acorn, HP, Compaq AIOs, ACER and a few gemeric systems ranging from TurboXT class upwards. I personnally don't think any particular one is better than the others. They all have different configurations and are representative of the time they were released. Some are upgraded and some not. Three 486s were manufactured early-mid 1995. The P75 system I have was manufactured after Windows 95 was released and installed/bundled with MSDos 6.22/Win3.11 with a Windows 95 upgrade cd included.

Caluser2000 wrote on 2020-01-03, 06:16:

I really don't understand the OPs comment about older than 486 hardware being messy to deal with. Especially when modern add-ons are readily avaible, xt-ide for example. Proprietary kit such as the PS/2 range and early PS/1s are probably the worst archs to deal with imho. Generic stuff not at all.

I have a variaty of OEM systems, Zenith, Dell, IBM, Dec, Acorn, HP, Compaq AIOs, ACER and a few gemeric systems ranging from TurboXT class upwards. I personnally don't think any particular one is better than the others. They all have different configurations and are representative of the time they were released. Some are upgraded and some not. Three 486s were manufactured early-mid 1995. The P70 system I have was manufactured after Windows 95 was released and installed/bundled with MSDos 6.22/Win3.11 with a Windows 95 upgrade cd included.

Well, the older you go, the more work the hardware needs because of the more abundant use of certain components that are more prone to breaking or leaking. Also, the older you go, the less well documented since PC users grew exponentially so the older you go, unless you go for well known hardware like IBM, the less info you find. Not to mention I've read often before on this forum that older hardware has a lot of quirks - the more PCs "grew up" the more standardised things get.

But yeah, a 386SX or DX with a turbo button would be ideal really. The main problem is speed - some Sierra games are very iffy in combination with my MT32. I got everything covered from 1990 on-wards but it's the 80's games that are a bother sometimes.

386 in 1985 or 486 in 1989 would have cost more than any normal person could afford. In 1988 I bought a 286 which was my first pc and it cost more in today's money than a top new gaming pc costs nowadays. It felt like 386 or 486 PCs were priced that only a business could afford when they were first released in 80s. It changed in mid 90s because I was able to build a 90Mhz pentium PC with 16Mb of ram in 1995 just when windows 1995 launched and it didn't cost too much to build.

It might have just been like that in my country and I don't know if it was same elsewhere, but it depends on if you consider it an early 90s PC when normal people could afford one or if you just consider when the hardware was first released no matter the cost of the PC. For me a 286 was late 80s PC and a 386 was early 90s PC.

If you want a fast 486 computer then build your own with an Intel 486dx4-100 , 256kb or more of cache, 16mb ram, Compact flash for hard drive.
VLB motherboard. You can use an Intel Overdrive dx4-100 CPU which will work with any 486dx-33 motherboard. VLB controller and VLB video card.

OEM computers are usually NOT performance builds just like OEM computers today.

seanneko wrote on 2020-01-03, 05:16:

Warlord wrote on 2020-01-03, 04:06:

Intergraph, everything else is the stuff that you see everyday. 386 was launched in 1985. i wouldn't consider it early 90s even if you could still buy one. Really early 90s is more of 486 came out in 1989, and 1st Pentium 1993 Id consider Pentium overdirves in 486 motherboards to be the sweet spot for early 90s.

386s were early 90s. My family bought a 386SX computer in 1992. It was pretty much run of the mill for its time. 1985 was only two years after the IBM XT came out. Nobody was buying a 386 in 1985 except for people like scientists doing number crunching who needed the highest performance available regardless of cost. 386s certainly weren't in people's homes.

Back then, people didn't buy the latest CPU right when it came out. In 1993, if you were rich you might have had a 486 which was state of the art at the time. You definitely weren't going out and buying a Pentium 60. Pentiums didn't even begin becoming mainstream until the later half of the 90s.

My grandfather had a 486 in the early 90s and we upgraded it to an overdrive in and put windows 95 on it. Maybe OP should change the thread to say, what computers were people still using in the early 90s. Than that would fit your narrative. OP said "GOOD" in the early 90s a 386 might of been good enough, just like I still run a quad core duo in 2020 becasue thats good enough for what I do with it. But a 486 would of not been good enough it would of been "GOOD" at that time. Just like now a AMD ryzen would be consider "GOOD"

OP did not ask what computers in the early 90s would of been considered low end or cheap computers, he said what computers in the early 90s would of been considered "GOOD"

TLDR obviously.

i love my sony vaio pcv-129.
200mhz P1 w mmx.
downclockable to 75mhz at 50hz bus i beleive, plus i can turn the cache off.
has pci slots and isa slots for sound and video
onboard rage ii installs in win98se, no drivers needed
2 usb ports plus ps2 ports.

Warlord wrote on 2020-01-03, 18:34:

My grandfather had a 486 in the early 90s and we upgraded it to an overdrive in and put windows 95 on it. Maybe OP should chan […]
Show full quote

seanneko wrote on 2020-01-03, 05:16:

Warlord wrote on 2020-01-03, 04:06:

Intergraph, everything else is the stuff that you see everyday. 386 was launched in 1985. i wouldn't consider it early 90s even if you could still buy one. Really early 90s is more of 486 came out in 1989, and 1st Pentium 1993 Id consider Pentium overdirves in 486 motherboards to be the sweet spot for early 90s.

386s were early 90s. My family bought a 386SX computer in 1992. It was pretty much run of the mill for its time. 1985 was only two years after the IBM XT came out. Nobody was buying a 386 in 1985 except for people like scientists doing number crunching who needed the highest performance available regardless of cost. 386s certainly weren't in people's homes.

Back then, people didn't buy the latest CPU right when it came out. In 1993, if you were rich you might have had a 486 which was state of the art at the time. You definitely weren't going out and buying a Pentium 60. Pentiums didn't even begin becoming mainstream until the later half of the 90s.

My grandfather had a 486 in the early 90s and we upgraded it to an overdrive in and put windows 95 on it. Maybe OP should change the thread to say, what computers were people still using in the early 90s. Than that would fit your narrative. OP said "GOOD" in the early 90s a 386 might of been good enough, just like I still run a quad core duo in 2020 becasue thats good enough for what I do with it. But a 486 would of not been good enough it would of been "GOOD" at that time. Just like now a AMD ryzen would be consider "GOOD"

OP did not ask what computers in the early 90s would of been considered low end or cheap computers, he said what computers in the early 90s would of been considered "GOOD"

TLDR obviously.

Wrong. The OPs first post does not even mention "GOOD". Sure it's in the title. He's wanting suggestions on systems from manufacturers that would be suitable for '80s early 90s games. His Vetra is covering most of the '90s stuff but wants a system to run even older games. Most 286/12s up, like my Zenith, and 386s are more than capable of that task. Compaq had some really nice 386s as did Gateway and a few others. Personnally I'd go the generic route using a mobo that excepts 30-pin simms in a mini AT case like my 386DX33 set up from 1989 which was used for survaying back then. Parts are readily available and if it's a popular mobo it's likely on TH99, so specs and jumper settings are easy to get hold of. Plenty of slots for video cards, sound cards and networking etc.

A nice thing about later OEM 486s was the intigrated VLB video and hdd controllers so the expansion slots were mainly ISA. Some had the ability to upgrade video memory some didn't.

Baoran wrote on 2020-01-03, 14:41:

386 in 1985 or 486 in 1989 would have cost more than any normal person could afford. In 1988 I bought a 286 which was my first pc and it cost more in today's money than a top new gaming pc costs nowadays. It felt like 386 or 486 PCs were priced that only a business could afford when they were first released in 80s. It changed in mid 90s because I was able to build a 90Mhz pentium PC with 16Mb of ram in 1995 just when windows 1995 launched and it didn't cost too much to build.

It might have just been like that in my country and I don't know if it was same elsewhere, but it depends on if you consider it an early 90s PC when normal people could afford one or if you just consider when the hardware was first released no matter the cost of the PC. For me a 286 was late 80s PC and a 386 was early 90s PC.

It was pretty common around the planet. I've still got Australian , I live in New Zealand, magizine compilations from '90-93 and most of the issues, even on 386/486s, involved Dos with a bit of Win 3.x/OS/2 thown in.

Well I almost bought an IBM PS/2 386-25. I stopped bidding once I realized that the hard drive inside uses a very special connection meaning you can't replace the drive with a SD or CF card. This is the kind of stuff I was talking about earlier when I said "Not to mention I've read often before on this forum that older hardware has a lot of quirks - the more PCs "grew up" the more standardised things get." These special connectors that only existed in the PS/2 is DEFINITELY a quirk.

I've been looking for an early Gateway in good condition for many months now but they only pop up in the US. I always loved the style of the cases and the magazines I read at the time had tons of ads for them which I always drooled over. Even a 486 would be good if it had a TURBO button which Gateway PCs had back then.

PS/2 386DX 25MHz? These model A series are rare. You should had bought it or refer someone to rescue if it is a model 70 with "A" in the model. Very rare high end models as they have 64K cache. If model 80, still rare with cache at 386DX 25MHz too. I possess model 80-A motherboard with parts. 16 and 20mhz ps/2 models are dime a dozen.

PS/2 with B model uses 486 daughterboard in place of 386dx 25 with cache daughterboard is even rarer. Requires set of bios and 486 daughterboard to upgrade A models.

Cheers,

All IBM MCA systems have propriotory hdd and fdd set ups. Anyone who has dealt with late 8-0s-early 90s x86 arch for a while knows this. Especially those of use who live through that era.As I mentioned earlier those and early PS/1s are the worst x86 arch to deal with. It's certainly not because it is pre 486 era. Try getting a deecent video card, sound card or ethernet card for a reasonnal price for an MCA IBM PS/2. There are PS/1 models with 386 cpus that are pretty standrd wrt parts. IBM realised they were losing market share so put out the PS/1 and PS/ValuePoint range more or less similtainiously.

I usually opt for no-name computers and peripherals simply because that means I can mix and match and not worry that my PC, my screen and my mouse and keyboard are all from different brands.

Also, no-name computers are more customisable, allowing for much more interesting and powerful builds.

jheronimus wrote on 2020-01-05, 23:23:

I usually opt for no-name computers and peripherals simply because that means I can mix and match and not worry that my PC, my screen and my mouse and keyboard are all from different brands.

Also, no-name computers are more customisable, allowing for much more interesting and powerful builds.

Some folk must have matching kb, mouse, monitor etc. Or at least from the same manufacturer. It's a "collector" thing. But you are right wrt mixing and matching with regard to no-name systems. I've a few OEM systems and each has their own differnces wrt mobo layout but all of them will except most ISA 8/16 bit cards, vga/svga monitors, and other peripherals. That was the whole point of fitting expasion cards slots. On most of them you can disable the onboard video and fit something better. Generally the PS/1 line wasn't particularly startling to begin with. Build quality was as good as any other OEM, so nothing starling. I've had a few over the years.

red_avatar wrote on 2020-01-02, 23:17:

I own a handful of early to mid 90's PCs but decided not to use my original IBM PCs anymore for actual gaming because I want to leave them in original condition and that means not adding better sound cards or CD drives which sucks for actual gaming.

My main DOS rig right now is my HP Vectra which is a really solid machine from 1995 - a Pentium 75. It's a bit fast for older DOS games though so ideally I'd like one more PC to use for the older games - a 386 perhaps? I know the older you go, the messier the hardware gets and since I only got into PCs from the middle of 1993, the 386 was a bit before my time. Basically, which brands would you recommend that are reliable, have decent BIOS settings, are easy to work on, etc. ?

IBM has been my go-to brand since that's what I grew up with and they are the easiest to find (the IBM PS/2 looks attractive to me) but what are your thoughts?

IBM 386 systems would be quite low down my list actually, unless you want to experience the joys of MCA, decomposing brittle plastic, non-standard everything in terms of hardware, and brain-dead RTC recovery procedures...

Tbh, by far the easiest 386 would be a late Am386DX-40 (very small) babyAT motherboard in a generic case. Those things had regular AMI/Award BIOSs and basically could be configured like any Pentium system you're used to. If you want a brand name, any Asus 386 board would be highly recommended, but one of those no-name tiny boards would probably be MUCH easier to work with than any brand-name system.

However, you're talking about collectibles, and no-name stuff isn't exactly considered collectible (although any working 386 has value and will only increase in value as time goes by). Collecting stuff is so terribly subjective that I really would suggest googling what's out there. In terms of decent-ish looks (IMHO 386 era wasn't a beautiful one, and the good-looking ones tended to be brain-dead and fall apart too soon), standards-driven usability, reasonable availability and good build quality, I'd say take a look at Olivetti's machines like the M386/25.

I personally have only owned one 386 (a generic 386DX-33 AT full tower manufactured by Insight Computers) but I definitely recommend Gateway 2000 when it comes to the 486 era. My Gateway 2000 486DX2 tower is one of the centerpieces of my collection.

Good brands of early 90's (assuming pre 1995) to collect: Acer, Ast, Compaq, Gateway, Packard Bell, HP, Olivetti, NEC, SuperMicro, Vtech's Laser, Unisys and Leading Technology are some....just off the top of my head. I stay away from IBM due to issues already mentioned above.

added: I really would like a Unisys CWD-4002 to go along with my CWD-5001 but prices when available are way too high....