A small comparison of the dosbox (0.74-3) distribution version from Archlinux (x86-64) compared to the svn version (r4271). Core2 2GHz lame.3.97 lame.exe --nohist --abr 64 -mm test.wav test.mp3 2.1348x | 0.8133x lua 5.2.2 (fannkuch-redux, spectral-norm, start time in seconds) runtime.exe lua.exe …

The end of support for i686 in Archlinux came in November 2017. I use this distribution and I have no problems running and building applications under x86-32. In this and various versions of dosbox (32-bit), now with good support for x86-64 will be unnecessary for me and multilib will mainly be used …

I just built r4267 and the Windows version blow away the Linux version in: - PCPBENCH at 800x600-16bpp LFB - Quake1 3Dfx Voodoo chip emulation 800x600 (time demo1) - Quake2 3Dfx OpenGlide pass-through 1024x768 (demo1.dm2) output=surface Try not to compare different implementations of graphics …

It is not a good idea what you are trying. It certainly can be done. Create the appropriate group (dosbox). Create a directory in which users from the dosbox group will have write access (/var/dosbox/games). Use mount -o bind,ro /var/dosbox/games /var/dosbox/games-ro Finally, use the overlay file …

x86_64 in the worst case is 2x slower. It's really a lot. If 5% can make a difference, then 100% can be described as a gap. With 64-bit dynamic_x86 patch the difference is not (I have not noticed) or is marginal.

Intel Core2 T5300 1.73GHz, VIA Chrome P4M900 Dosbox 0.74-2, Windows XP 32-bit Quake demo1 800x600 - 10.3 PC Benchmark - 30.0 Dosbox 0.74-2, Linux 4.19.0 32-bit Quake demo1 800x600 - 12.1 PC Benchmark - 33.5 dosemu2 (git), Linux 4.19.0 32-bit Quake demo1 800x600 - 72.7 Quake demo1 320x200 - 228.1 ( …