Well looking along the lists, the only bad parts are the ATI video cards - you've got the terrible ones of their generation. Ok they're fine for 2D, but... Rage II in 3d isn't something you want to play on. 😀

ATI Radeon 9000 also has some driver hell issues too IIRC, but then again, so does the Geforce2. There's no winning on 2000-gen video card compatibility there.

leileilol wrote:

Well looking along the lists, the only bad parts are the ATI video cards - you've got the terrible ones of their generation. Ok they're fine for 2D, but... Rage II in 3d isn't something you want to play on. 😀

I tried to play X-Wing Alliance with that graphics card back when my 300PL had a 500MHz Pentium III and it was just terrible. No such problem with my MS-DOS stuff; anything in 3D runs smoothly. I originally wanted that computer to work for both Windows 9x and DOS games, but it seems like if you optimize your computer for Windows 9x games, certain sound cards complain(like my OPTi 929A; I need to use a CPU slowdown tool for it work correctly when playing the floppy disk edition of Star Wars X-Wing) and when you downgrade your computer for better performance in DOS, Windows 9x performance suffers. I do like the Rage II's S-Video output, which is very sharp and very clear(I'm using all these computers on a CRT TV, FYI).

leileilol wrote:

ATI Radeon 9000 also has some driver hell issues too IIRC, but then again, so does the Geforce2. There's no winning on 2000-gen video card compatibility there.

Never had any issues with either graphics card except for the GeForce 2 MX. Its S-Video output has part of the screen cut off on the right side, but when using the VGA output, the screen is perfectly centered. And here's the thing: even though I recenter the screen with nVidia's tools, the screen is STILL cut off on the right side. I don't get it. This is why I want to remove the GeForce 2 MX's S-Video plug and use that to replace the Composite plug on my Radeon 9000, as text is very hard to read using Composite on ANY graphics card.

Just letting know the final specs on my IBM Personal Computer 300PL and almost final specs of my secondary MS-DOS computer:

IBM Personal Computer 300PL:

-Intel Pentium II 266MHz
-192MB of RAM
-5GB hard drive
-ATI Rage II graphics card
-5GB hard drive
-Intel motherboard with Intel chipset
-OPTi 82C929A ISA sound card(as odd as it might seem, this works BETTER than a real SoundBlaster Pro 2.0. I tried using a SoundBlaster Pro 2.0 on this computer, and it worked for the floppy disk edition of Star Wars X-Wing using the SoundBlaster sound option for a little bit, then never worked again. Now, with just the basic DOS drivers, my OPTi 82C929A works perfectly with the floppy disk edition of X-Wing) plus integrated Crystal CS4235(this sound card is still disabled)
-OS is Windows 95 OSR2.5

Secondary MS-DOS gaming PC(now a hybrid MS-DOS/Windows 9x gaming PC)

-Intel Pentium III 1GHz(now underclocked to 750MHz using a 100MHz FSB)
-384MB of RAM
-nVidia GeForce 2 MX graphics card(still need to find a good replacement graphics card for it)
-40GB hard drive
-Gigabyte motherboard with VIA chipset
-Various different sound cards I interchange(SoundBlaster Pro 2.0, SoundBlaster 16 WavEffects, SoundBlaster AWE64, SoundBlaster Live! 5.1, SoundBlaster Vibra128, ESS AudioDrive ES1868F, ESS Maestro-2, C-Media CMI8738, HP AZT1008 with Aztech AZT2320 chipset, Diamond Multimedia Monster Sound MX300 with Aureal Vortex 2 chipset, OPTi 82C931, Avance Logic ALS4000)
-OS is Windows 98 SE

Apologies for bumping, but I got a new rig which I will use as my primary MS-DOS gaming box. It's a true gem; the best DOS gaming PC I've used so far. Here are its specs:

-Intel Pentium 1 120MHz
-16MB of RAM
-7GB hard drive
-S3 Trio 64 graphics card(will get rid of this since it doesn't have S-Video output)
-Unknown motherboard with Intel chipset
-OPTi 82C929A ISA sound card(this used to have an AOpen AW32 Pro, which uses a Crystal CS4236B chipset. Its OPL3 is nothing spectacular, but it does have a fairly nice integrated Crystal wavetable, although it does like to output garbage from the left speaker. I initially replaced this with a SoundBlaster Pro 2.0, but the quality of the digital sound is crap. At least I can say goodbye to CPU slowdown tools since at 120MHz, the YMF262s on my SoundBlaster Pro 2.0 and OPTi 82C929A don't output garbage with the floppy disk edition of X-Wing)
-OS is MS-DOS v6.22(I finally went to true DOS. It's a pain to set up, but once it's set up, it works better than Windows 95)

Also changed the specs of my IBM Personal Computer 300PL:

-Intel Pentium III 500MHz
-192MB of RAM
-5GB hard drive
-Intel motherboard with Intel chipset
-ESS AudioDrive ES1868F ISA sound card(not 100% authentic when it comes to OPL3(probably about 99.99% accurate, since the only flaw is the output of the white noise), but it's generally more stable on a fast computer than sound cards with discrete Yamaha YMF262s)
-OS is Windows 95 OSR2.5, but will be replaced with Windows 98 SE

And a new rig: a Packard Bell Legend 316SX. This thing gave me hell until I FINALLY found a hard drive that works on it. Specs:

-AMD 386SX 25MHz(might add a 387SX if I find one)
-4MB of RAM
-1GB hard drive
-Unknown graphics card(it's a VGA graphics card)
-Unknown motherboard with an unknown chipset
-Not decided on the sound card yet(I'm thinking to use either one of these: SoundBlaster Pro 2.0, SoundBlaster 16 WavEffects model CT4170, SoundBlaster AWE64 model CT4500, HP AZT1008 with Aztech AZT2320 chipset - might go for the SoundBlaster Pro 2.0. FYI, this computer has 3 ISA slots, so only ISA sound cards will work)
-OS is MS-DOS v6.22

This computer has no CD-ROM drive, but I will install one if I find a good spot to place the hard drive.

Now for a quick question: will it be worth it to add a 387SX to the Packard Bell computer? How much of a performance boost should I expect from it?

I don't think you'll see much benefit at all from the 387SX. The only things I know of that will use it are certain CAD programs and Falcon 3.0. There's not even that many 486 era games that make use of a maths copro.

In other words, it would be completely pointless, hmm? Well then, would there be some way of upgrading that 386SX or am I stuck with it?

Other than changing out the clock crystal to overclock it a bit, there's not really much you could do to upgrade it. But more importantly, for what purpose would you want to upgrade it? I mean, a 386 is going to perform like a 386, no matter what you do with it, but such performance has its place... it'd be a good choice for some of the older speed-sensitive DOS games. An SX is normally less desirable than a DX, but honestly, for retro gaming purposes, it's not that big a deal.

Well there were some upgrade processors released. There was the Cyrix 386SLC which will give it a bit of a boost, but I'd imagine it might be hard to track down. There was also the Intel RapidCAD which is basically a 486DX modified to run in 386DX boards, but as far as I'm aware this was only for 386DX machines- I could be wrong.

I take it your motherboard has a CPU socket and the CPU isn't just soldered to the board? you *might* be able to track down a faster 386SX chip. You could always try overclocking the one you have 😀

Keropi has such an upgrade chip in his 386SX machine. SX 20 upgraded to 40 MHz. Still slow because of the bus limitation of SX.

But if you look at our 3bench database you can see that nothing beats the AMD 386DX 40. Aitotat has a 386/486 hybrid board with VLB and this is the fastest 386 machine in our database...

I always chuckle a little bit when someone builds a slow machine and tries to make it as fast as possible 🤣.

If you need more speed a 486 is the way to go which starts off where the fastest 386 finishes (with a 25MHz 486) and from there on you have plenty of chip options.

I'll just use the Legend 316SX for DOS games that run too fast on my Pentium 1 DOS computer. I'm actually thinking of installing Windows 3.11 because I used to use Windows 3.1 a lot on that computer before the original hard drive crashed, but since I don't have Windows 3.1 install disks(only Windows 3.11), I'll install Windows 3.11.

Why am I usually stuck with hardware that can barely be upgraded or that is crap to begin with(my original DOS gaming computer had a VIA chipset and no ISA slots, which meant a lot of problems, not to mention the very first sound card I ever used to play a DOS game, the ESS Maestro-2, sounded completely wrong. Then, I took an old computer my parents bought in 2000 and set it up for some DOS gaming, and AGAIN the motherboard has a VIA chipset! This caused me hell with my SoundBlaster AWE64 back when it was the only ISA sound card I had)?

Yea I try to stick with intel chipsets, although my current SS7 board has an ALI V cjipset which works great. The primary controller gave me read errors with my CF cards, but swapping it to the secondary fixed the issue!

Ever since I got my IBM Personal Computer 300PL, I've always used computers with Intel chipsets, but somehow, I got my ISA sound cards to produce sound with the SoundBlaster and SoundBlaster Pro sound options in X-Wing on my DOS text box, which has a VIA chipset. I don't know how I did it, but so far, all the ISA sound cards I have tried in that computer aside from my OPTi 82C931(that sound card sucks, anyways), which are my HP AZT1008, ESS AudioDrive ES1868F and SoundBlaster 16 WavEffects, all work the way they should.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but VIA chipsets are supposed to be the most unstable for DOS games. Is this correct?

Yea VIA is pretty bad I heard...

VIA chipsets certainly are bad. Motherboards with those chipsets are better with PCI sound cards than ISA sound cards for DOS, even though not all PCI sound cards work right on them. For instance, the ESS Solo-1 in my Windows 9x gaming PC(which is in need of a new power switch and a new case since the one it's in is discolored and, quite frankly, looks ugly) outright refuses to produce FM Synthesis, only General MIDI using Microsoft's Roland Sound Canvas-based software wavetable and digital sound with SoundBlaster Pro compatibility.

Now, I'd like to try and understand something with my C-Media CMI8738: for whatever reason, I can't get the SoundBlaster 16 part of the sound card to work. If I use Windows drivers with that sound card, the SoundBlaster 16 part doesn't work at all, but with DOS drivers, the SoundBlaster 16 part works, but plays everything at double speed(FM Synthesis is unaffected and sounds just like a real YMF262, but more muffled). I don't get it. Is this sound card just bugged or are my drivers crap? FYI, this sound card, for whatever reason, does not seem to address port 388(the AdLib port) unless I use DOS drivers.

But there's one thing that's left me scratching my head more than anything: why in hell does the DOS initialization program for the CMI8738 say it's been initalized on IRQ I? IRQ I? Where the hell did that come from???

With sound cards I feel similar like with chipsets. For me it's Creative Labs and Roland all the way.

Compatibility is fantastic and everything just works.

double post

I tried the CMI8738 before, and wrote this:

I just tried a PCI CMI8738 that I had stored, and in DOS it is odd and not that useful: SB16 works in half of the games, sometimes playing samples too fast. No audible noise in the output. I cannot set the legacy SB16 IRQ, it uses IRQ10... FM is detected properly, and adplay runs, but I cannot hear any FM output? I did not try out the MPU-401. The DOS utility has lots of options, including record and S/PDIF options, looks nice.

Creative Labs != Everything just works

gerwin wrote:

Creative Labs != Everything just works[/quote]

Well I couldn't disagree more 😒

Never had any issues and for me they indeed "just works".

Except... the exclamation mark before the = makes it an "is not equal".
Edit: Nevermind, you got it. I really need to learn how to delete a post...