Wow! Glad to see this! I always loved maximum-integrated systems. It's ergonomical, it's beautiful, it's elegant. Thank you. I got a lot of pleasure during watching this video.
Thank you for your nonstandard decision. I'm not indifferent for these things and made myself a similar computer. Yours can 1986-2000, great! My machine is slightly faster and can play the games 1993-2009. It is a middle-later DOS, all Win9X, all WinXP and a little part of Win7. If I do not break the rules I can show it here. Not videos but photos and describe.

P.S.: slot-1 CPUs can't play many old DOS-games with any multiplier. The reason is architecture of Pentium Pro/2/3. But they are 100% compatible with middle-later DOS-games, 1993+. My system is based on newer CPU and compatible 100% with 1993+ also. But it can work with a lot of older games 1990-1992 too.

blank001 wrote:

Really nice video. I'm thinking of reconfiguring my III+ rig now. I believed your games list all the way until deus ex 😉 You need a way beefier CPU for that no? That would be ideal for your 1400S / V5500 rig.

I just grabbed an audician from the UK! Very cool.

Yes, Deus Ex is clearly too demanding. The indoor introduction is not to bad, but step outside and it becomes too much to handle. Clocking the chip at 550 MHz helps a but, but I kinda wanted to show that the machine does have it's limitations.

alexanrs wrote:

AFAIK many Slot1 CPUs have locked multiplies, and I don't think you can change multipliers on the fly on the unlocked ones. Too bad K6+ are pretty much non-existant here in Brazil, but hey, I've got plenty of space and older PCs to run those titles =)

And the lack of motherboard Cache means you can't have this "middle" speed setting. You might be able to import the chip from Germany or US. They shouldn't be hard to find.

alexanrs wrote:

philscomputerlab wrote:

There are benefits of being able to clock down to 133 MHz. 200 MHz could be too fast for some games. But, and I talk about this in the video towards the end, it's your machine. You decide if you want to be better at the higher performance end, or slower and more compatible for older games. It's all up to you 😀

I believe his question was why not just use a regular Socket 7. ATX form factor, jumpers for higher multipliers and USB keyboard support in BIOS are probably good reasons.
If one goes for an AT board, though, the system might be even more flexible. Using the jumpers to switch the FSB between 66MHz and 100MHz could make this even more practical (though not modern looking). One could always mod an ATX case, though, and fixate a latched switch to a bracket or an unused RS232 opening on the back (easier) or on a bay cover (harder to make it look good).

The main issue is support for these mobile chips. Later Super Socket 7 boards mostly support it, on older boards you might have to use a modified BIOS or something like that. With changing the FSB, and I could have mentioned this, or uses such a board, there are machines that allow you setting the FSB in BIOS 😀 Iwill does one I believe.

blank001 wrote:

If anyone knows where to find a switch that fits over jumpers, I would be thrilled to know.

That said SS7 gets you 100Mhz FSB and AGP at the very least. Also are there non-SS7 boards that support K6-iii+ chips?

The CPU intensive windows games can ramp up to 5.5x100 when needed (although really better served by a different system).

You can put switches in the front panel. The newer boards use dip switches though. So that doesn't work. But keep an eye out for boards that let you change the FSB in the BIOS.

firage wrote:

Is the 486 mode too fast for Ultima VII, I wonder?

Wing Commander VII is a game that won't work with the disabling caches method. Because, it turns the caches on 😀 It's one of the few games I know that does this.

anthony wrote:

Many s370 and even 478 and 775 systems are able to run such speed affected games as wc1, testdrive3 with throttling management software. As for me, don't see any profits on super sok7

I've done extensive tests in this regard. A basic Slot 1 machine, with caches disabled, you get a 386 SX. Even old games like Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade will feel too slow. On a very fast Pentium III, like 1.4 GHz, Wing Commander becomes playable. But with such a high clock speed, fast memory, other issues crop up.

All I'm saying is that running a few benchmarks isn't enough to test this. You got to actually play a few games. Many games will also refuse to initialise the sound card on such a fast machine. The SS7 is simply the best platform for this.

Evert wrote:

Awesome video and build Phil, but you should've used this as your background audio.

Thank you! Love your Indiana Jones references 😀

Skyscraper wrote:

Nice video!

I have no issues with running many different systems for different games but I do like Super Socket-7 nonetheless 😀

Thanks!

squareguy wrote:

Thanks Phil,

You just single-handedly drove the cost of that motherboard up by at least another $100. Thanks again, really.

Great video!

🤣 Sorry. Plenty of other great boards though. Asus, DFI, IWill, FCS...

PARUS wrote:

Wow! Glad to see this! I always loved maximum-integrated systems. It's ergonomical, it's beautiful, it's elegant. Thank you. I got a lot of pleasure during watching this video.
Thank you for your nonstandard decision. I'm not indifferent for these things and made myself a similar computer. Yours can 1986-2000, great! My machine is slightly faster and can play the games 1993-2009. It is a middle-later DOS, all Win9X, all WinXP and a little part of Win7. If I do not break the rules I can show it here. Not videos but photos and describe.

P.S.: slot-1 CPUs can't play many old DOS-games with any multiplier. The reason is architecture of Pentium Pro/2/3. But they are 100% compatible with middle-later DOS-games, 1993+. My system is based on newer CPU and compatible 100% with 1993+ also. But it can work with a lot of older games 1990-1992 too.

Sure, please share your machine!

Thanks for the kind words. I know my thinking is often a bit non-mainstream, but I also know than many have similar thoughts. And even if you don't, there is always something to learn and apply to your own project 😀

Great video Phil. Love it. Mostly because of my love for SS7 boards.
I have a somewhat special frankenpc for old Dos games. And it is running MS-Dos 6.22 only.

It's an Epox MVP-3c with an non-mmx P-133, CL54-something PCI gfx and a SB16.
This is actually better geared for Dos than with an K6 series of CPU's
As I only have to reboot and disable cache in the bios for slowdown.

Have not seen anyone go this path at all. (yet)
It might come, as SS7 boards are more easy to obtain at the moment.

I have had trouble finding a proper BIOS for my Soyo 5EMA+ Super Socket 7 Board that supports K6-2/3+ but I think I just did;) Will test tomorrow and see. If it works I will build one of these.

brostenen wrote:

Great video Phil. Love it. Mostly because of my love for SS7 boards. I have a somewhat special frankenpc for old Dos games. And […]
Show full quote

Great video Phil. Love it. Mostly because of my love for SS7 boards.
I have a somewhat special frankenpc for old Dos games. And it is running MS-Dos 6.22 only.

It's an Epox MVP-3c with an non-mmx P-133, CL54-something PCI gfx and a SB16.
This is actually better geared for Dos than with an K6 series of CPU's
As I only have to reboot and disable cache in the bios for slowdown.

Have not seen anyone go this path at all. (yet)
It might come, as SS7 boards are more easy to obtain at the moment.

My main SS7 machine, runs a Pentium 200, but clocked at 100. Very happy with it and it does indeed run more games than the K6-III+, especially the slow ones.

squareguy wrote:

I have had trouble finding a proper BIOS for my Soyo 5EMA+ Super Socket 7 Board that supports K6-2/3+ but I think I just did;) Will test tomorrow and see. If it works I will build one of these.

Nice 😀 Yes there are lots of modified BIOSes around for these processors.

Very informative. Definitely a good alternative if you have limited space.

philscomputerlab wrote:

Slot 1 can't do what this machine can do 🤣 Don't get me wrong, I love a Slot 1 computer, but nothing beats the Super Socket 7 platform when it comes to flexibility and covering a huge range of games over many years.

i don't think so.

for dosgames mostly to fast, deactivating caches cause some sync problems
and for 3D with Win9x far slower then a PII because of the shitty FPU.

it is better to go for a 386/486 with a turbo button.

most of the real old dos-games a better played on the amiga 😀

below my PII I also have a P75 that runs lots of Dosgames very well. For later 3D-Dosgames like Doom/Quake/Hexen/Heretic/Swarrior etc. it's better to go for a Win9x-OpenGL/Glide Adaption then playing it on a real Highend Dos-PC like a P200(mmx).

Would be good to do something similar optimum on Intel CPUs. Intel set standards and such system would be more stylish.

dr.zeissler wrote:

For later 3D-Dosgames like Doom/Quake/Hexen/Heretic/Swarrior etc. it's better to go for a Win9x-OpenGL/Glide Adaption then playing it on a real Highend Dos-PC like a P200(mmx).

Software Quake has its own charm. 😀 OpenGL version is a little blurry. Also it has more nostalgia as most started to play it in software only, as 3D accelerators have become common later (1998-..) Same for other games of that period.
Highend DOS PC is P3 600 MHz or may be even a little higher, - the fastest until ISA existed in MBs and issues appeared with sound and video, some from pre-Tualatin times. There were demanding in late 90s DOS games as Pyl.

dr.zeissler wrote:

i don't think so. […]
Show full quote

i don't think so.

for dosgames mostly to fast, deactivating caches cause some sync problems
and for 3D with Win9x far slower then a PII because of the shitty FPU.

it is better to go for a 386/486 with a turbo button.

most of the real old dos-games a better played on the amiga 😀

Clearly, as shown in the video, and used my many, many others, Socket 7 machines are awesome for DOS games.

I also think that you are confused about the point of this project. If you want to play on a 386, please do so. If you want to play Unreal on a fast Slot 1 machine, please do so. We all know about this, it's obvious that a dedicated Unreal machine will have different specs and do a better job at running Unreal.

The point of this machine is to cover an extremely wide range of games, from the DOS and Windows era, and it does this very well.

However I'm always keen to learn, so please document your Pentium II machine on Vogons. I'm sure many would find it very interesting and looking forward to it.

dr.zeissler wrote:

most of the real old dos-games a better played on the amiga 😀

And even C64's. It was a different time, when the big "C" ruled here in Europe.
Most of the "bells and wistle" games of that time, was for those systems.
Pc (Dos/Basic) games, were merely conversions of sometimes questionable quality.
I remember games such as Stuntcar Racer, being awesomme on the a500.
And played on the pc, the game had bad sounds and other issues.

Yeah...
Games released from 1987 to 1989 was mostly Amiga's first.
Only a handfull of games, were PC only. I think Settlers was the first that the other way around.
Being that the Amiga-port was a conversion of the PC edition.
I can be wrong though. Just remember the PC-Version as being slightly better.

philscomputerlab wrote:

My main SS7 machine, runs a Pentium 200, but clocked at 100. Very happy with it and it does indeed run more games than the K6-III+, especially the slow ones.

True that....
I had this "pain in the **" game, wich did'nt want to run on any of my machines. I tried to downclock, turn off cache, changing ressource settings and so on. Only when I had a Pentium1-Cpu, turned off all cache, turned off all seriel and parallel ports (freeing up resources) and setting the soundcard for IRQ7. Then (and only then), the game would run as if it was 1993 again. The game in question was DynaBlaster.
Wich is basically the first and probably only reason for me to hang on to that particular system.

So...
If you wanted to make the same type of machine, limited to 80's and early 90's stuff. Then change the parts for a P-133 and a CL-5446-PCI or other type of GFX card. That delivers some of the same features. I have actually not tried any CGA games, as I mainly play VGA games.
Monkey and Loom EGA-Editions run good enough on this card. Even Lotus-III can be played.

Having one pc for everything is ok - but i'm leaning more and more to having a kvm setup with multiple computers.. i still don't know what the right setup is for ultima vii for instance (e.g 386 moves right but loads slow) & you may as well use dosbox if you have to fiddle around with moslo. It may be that there is no correct configuration, but at least with original hardware you have certainty it is authentic.

With a rack and some rack mountable cases + a kvm, you could make a fairly space efficient multi retro setup. You would lose a bit of the charm, but that's an ok sacrifice for me.

philscomputerlab wrote:

dr.zeissler wrote:

The point of this machine is to cover an extremely wide range of games, from the DOS and Windows era, and it does this very well.

in german we call it "weder fisch noch fleish"

philscomputerlab wrote:

dr.zeissler wrote:

However I'm always keen to learn, so please document your Pentium II machine on Vogons. I'm sure many would find it very interesting and looking forward to it.

I already did: My main Retro-PC but it's far away from being complete.

Don't get me wrong the K-III+ is a nice machine, I also use one as you know, but in the end I am disappointed and changed back to an Intel-machine.

Doc

dr.zeissler wrote:

I already did: My main Retro-PC but it's far away from being complete. […]
Show full quote

philscomputerlab wrote:

dr.zeissler wrote:

However I'm always keen to learn, so please document your Pentium II machine on Vogons. I'm sure many would find it very interesting and looking forward to it.

I already did: My main Retro-PC but it's far away from being complete.

Don't get me wrong the K-III+ is a nice machine, I also use one as you know, but in the end I am disappointed and changed back to an Intel-machine.

Doc

Maybe you could add some benchmarks with and without cache, that would be quite useful to compare.

Great video, you obviously put a lot of work into it. This has got to be the ultimate "time machine PC" video.

I especially like the fact you use easily obtainable and in some cases new hardware, e.g. K6-3+, Voodoo3 AGP, YMF718 and the wavetable board. On the subject of the Dreamblaster, it's got to be an ideal match for the YMF718 as it doesn't need an extension cable.

I watched the video again and I only noticed one thing I would have done different, add a real PC speaker. They are still available brand new just not with new PC cases, unfortunately.

bjt wrote:

Great video, you obviously put a lot of work into it. This has got to be the ultimate "time machine PC" video.

I especially like the fact you use easily obtainable and in some cases new hardware, e.g. K6-3+, Voodoo3 AGP, YMF718 and the wavetable board. On the subject of the Dreamblaster, it's got to be an ideal match for the YMF718 as it doesn't need an extension cable.

Thanks 😀 Yes it was quite some work, but well worth it. In 20 years I can watch it again and do a big grin 😁

squareguy wrote:

I watched the video again and I only noticed one thing I would have done different, add a real PC speaker. They are still available brand new just not with new PC cases, unfortunately.

Could you please link me one? I only realised when I did this video that the Audician 32 Plus doesn't have a PC speaker header 😊

please test this for me:

- Does "Bodyblows" work with sound and no issues on the K6-III+ ?
- Does "Desert-Strike" run without problems?
- What about "pinball illusions"
- Has JazzJack2 smooth Hardwarescrolling with 640x480 or with 640x400 ?

What should tests should I do for you?

Doc