What era of DOS games are you most interested in? The K6-2, through cache manipulation, will give you the flexibility to run at fast 386/slow 486 speeds, so rough games from 1991. And it's fast enough to run DOS games through 1996. If you're interested in games older than 1991, then you need to look at a 2nd PC, such as a 486, which can go down to 286 speeds when you disable turbo and caches.

I don't recommend a Sound Blaster Live! if your primary interest is DOS. It will only work with DOS games in MS-DOS Mode, which you boot into from within Win9x. An ISA soundcard will be your best bet if you want to run in native DOS. A favorite around here is the Audician 32 Plus coupled with a MIDI device on the wavetable header. Something like a DreamBlaster S1 or X2.

Welcome to Vogons! Once you get some more feedback and settle on some hardware, share your build with some pictures. We love to ogle the retro pics. 😉

Cheers!

Hi!

I agree with clueless1, it depends on what games you're looking to play with this rig. Bear in mind the K6-2 may run some older games way too fast, so you'll want a utility that can throttle the processing speed (one such game with a speed sensitivity is Apogee's Dark Ages).

Actually L2 cache has no real effect on compatibility, as most CPUs in the Socket 7 platform will run whatever is timing-sensitive bonkers fast, far beyond the point of playability, cache or without. L2 cache simply makes repeat memory access faster, which is generally very desirable. I'd say never skimp on cache. Besides, it can usually be disabled in the BIOS SETUP if you're intent on getting speed-sensitive games working.

Sound Blaster Live! is really not a good choice for DOS. You could use an ISA sound card, or you can have two sound cards: an ISA for the DOS support, and a PCI one for Windows. (Watch out for driver / resource conflicts though.) I recommend a ISA card with a Yamaha YMF262 OPL3 chip for 'real' AdLib support.

Don't worry too much about Ultra DMA/66 - most hard drives that support UDMA/66 rates barely deliver 33 MBytes/second per second in reality, and the ones that do deliver more typically support Ultra DMA/100 or higher. On top of that, hardly any Socket 7 boards support anything higher than UDMA/33, and (if they use unmodified Award BIOSes) will cause problems with hard drives that support higher levels unless you force the UDMA speed to a lower level via either BIOS or a hard drive utility. Just use one that has a balance of decent seek rate, reasonably big caches (512KB as a bare minimum) and a good RPM like 7200 RPM. If you absolutely must have UDMA/66 or higher, use a Promise Ultra/100 or Ultra/133 PCI IDE card (relatively fuss-free, except that it usually requires Windows 98 as for some silly reason the drivers don't work on Windows 95.)

One gotcha though: the BIOS of many Socket 7 boards out-of-the-box don't like IDE drives larger than 32GB, and most of the older ones choke on 8GB or larger. Generally the newer Socket 7 boards have better HDD support, but some OEM-branded machines may still have BIOSes with HDD limits. Of course, if you're using the Promise Ultra/100 or Ultra/133 card anyway, this will likely matter little as they support drives up to 132 GB, on-card BIOS permitting (most do).

(And never use drives larger than 132 GB unless you have a PCI IDE adapter that offers support for such drives; even then, DOS and Win9x generally don't like 48-bit LBA / > 132 GB drives so it's dicey getting them to work with very large drives.)

clueless1 wrote:

If you're interested in games older than 1991, then you need to look at a 2nd PC, such as a 486, which can go down to 286 speeds when you disable turbo and caches.

That requires a more precise definition. What is correct is that if one is interested in specific, timer-sensitive games older than 1991, then one may need a second PC. Many games written before 1991 are completely insensitive to the CPU speed. Some others may be sensitive, but software utilities a la Slowdown / MoSlo can slow the PC down enough to play them.

dr_st wrote:

clueless1 wrote:

If you're interested in games older than 1991, then you need to look at a 2nd PC, such as a 486, which can go down to 286 speeds when you disable turbo and caches.

That requires a more precise definition. What is correct is that if one is interested in specific, timer-sensitive games older than 1991, then one may need a second PC. Many games written before 1991 are completely insensitive to the CPU speed. Some others may be sensitive, but software utilities a la Slowdown / MoSlo can slow the PC down enough to play them.

Good point, thank you for clarifying that dr_st. Although, in my game library, nearly every game I have from 1990 or earlier *is* speed sensitive. I have 23 titles, and I think maybe one or two out of those 23 are not speed sensitive. It is definitely more common the older you go and less common as game titles get newer.

To OP: One thing I forgot to mention is the SETMUL utility, written by gerwin, one of the forum members here. It is a tool that lets you disable caches through software and depending on the cpu, can let you change multipliers on the fly as well. I use it in my game batch file launchers to run speed sensitive games. Read more about it here:
SetMul - Multiplier control for VIA C3 / AMD K6+7+8 Mobile / Cyrix 5x86

WHAT!? wrote:

So (again) my main focus for this PC is DOS. This will be for old games, midi and MP3 playback. I have a passing interest in messing with old Windows installations. While its not a main concern I would like this machine to have enough power to handle it should I choose to tinker with it in the future.

Most Yamaha ISA soundcards are preferable because they tend to have good sound quality, don't have any issues with MIDI addons (as opposed to many Soundblasters) and have true OPL3. I'd also recommend ESS AudioDrive cards because they tend to be really cheap, common, and in my experience are really simple to configure in pure DOS.

and a good (looking for recommendations) Video Card.

For PCI cards S3 cards (such as Virge and Trio) tend to be the best pick — they have good compatibility and are easy to source. Some people prefer Matrox (Millenium, Mystique, etc) for a better image quality, though I have been unable to notice any difference myself.

Will possibly be going with Free Dos to alleviate some of those issues.

It has been discussed here somewhere — FreeDOS does not provide 100% compatibility with games and software. An easy approach is to use MS-DOS 7.1 from Windows 98 — here is the tutorial. That way you get support for FAT32 (that means you can use HDDs larger than 8GB and partitions larger than 2GB).

Note that in many cases you can use parts of FreeDOS in pure DOS. For example, a lot of people use ctmouse as a small mouse driver and Enhanced Doskey for a better command prompt.

I'd greatly appreciate any feedback yous guys could possibly provide regarding my general rambling.

Honestly, I'd recommend against having your primary PC as DOS-only. You can always revert to Windows' pure DOS mode. Otherwise this is what you get with Win 9x:

- networking. You really need a network card like a 3COM 905. Having Windows 95 or later means you can use proper NIC drivers and Total Commander for FTP transfers from your primary machine. Otherwise you'll have to burn CDs/write floppies every time you want to get drivers/data onto your DOS rig. Same goes for other useful stuff like Daemon Tools.

(networking in DOS is, of course, possible, but not too pleasant)

- compilation CDs/rereleases. In many cases a Windows rerelease solves many issues of the original game. Examples: Wing Commander Kilrathi Saga, X-Wing Collectors editions, etc.

- more sound options — at least, when it comes to MIDI. But that, of course, depends on your soundcard.

On the other hand, DOS is great because it's really simple, fast and pretty reliable. Two config files means you can easily revert any mistake.

jheronimus wrote:

Honestly, I'd recommend against having your primary PC as DOS-only.

Indeed. Especially for a K6-II. Just install Win98 SE and have it only boot into pure DOS by default. Run Windows manually when needed/desired.

jheronimus wrote:

It has been discussed here somewhere — FreeDOS does not provide 100% compatibility with games and software. An easy approach is to use MS-DOS 7.1 from Windows 98 — here is the tutorial. That way you get support for FAT32 (that means you can use HDDs larger than 8GB and partitions larger than 2GB).

Note that in many cases you can use parts of FreeDOS in pure DOS. For example, a lot of people use ctmouse as a small mouse driver and Enhanced Doskey for a better command prompt.

I have been unable to find any deficiencies in FreeDOS, but my testing is far from extensive. I don't currently use it strictly because of the limitations in menu structure in FDCONFIG.SYS.

The bottom line is that FreeDOS is probably a viable option, although if anyone has further information I would be very interested to hear about it.

I appreciate all the replies! I'm going to jump around a bit and I'll try to fill in the blanks as best I can.

Eep386 wrote:

Actually L2 cache has no real effect on compatibility, as most CPUs in the Socket 7 platform will run whatever is timing-sensitive bonkers fast, far beyond the point of playability, cache or without. L2 cache simply makes repeat memory access faster, which is generally very desirable. I'd say never skimp on cache. Besides, it can usually be disabled in the BIOS SETUP if you're intent on getting speed-sensitive games working.

So I don't really need to bring L2 cache into consideration when accounting for compatibility? So I might as well use a K-6 III+ since at the end of the day its likely going to give me about the same result, correct?

Eep386 wrote:

Sound Blaster Live! is really not a good choice for DOS. You could use an ISA sound card, or you can have two sound cards: an ISA for the DOS support, and a PCI one for Windows. (Watch out for driver / resource conflicts though.) I recommend a ISA card with a Yamaha YMF262 OPL3 chip for 'real' AdLib support.

I had Sound Blaster Live! stuck in my head because once upon a time a friend of mine had a PC with a Live Drive in it. I just remember thinking to myself that it looked like a fun toy. I'm sort of a sucker for oddities that fit into the drive bays. http://i.imgur.com/PCb9MCC.jpg

Is there any disadvantages to running an ISA sound card in Windows 98? Is it difficult to avoid hardware/software conflicts when running two separate sound cards (ISA/PCI)?

jheronimus wrote:

Most Yamaha ISA soundcards are preferable because they tend to have good sound quality, don't have any issues with MIDI addons (as opposed to many Soundblasters) and have true OPL3. I'd also recommend ESS AudioDrive cards because they tend to be really cheap, common, and in my experience are really simple to configure in pure DOS.

Are there any specific sound cards you would recommend that feature the OPL3 sound chip?

jheronimus wrote:

It has been discussed here somewhere — FreeDOS does not provide 100% compatibility with games and software. An easy approach is to use MS-DOS 7.1 from Windows 98 — here is the tutorial. That way you get support for FAT32 (that means you can use HDDs larger than 8GB and partitions larger than 2GB).

Thanks for that information. I think that's how I'll go about it. I'll also be taking your advice running a Windows 98 installation as well. Being that it is still possible to boot directly into DOS upon start up it really doesn't hurt to have an OS with more features just sitting on the disk for when it might come in handy. Being that I now plan to install Windows 98 I assume that's all I need to install, correct? DOS 7.1 comes with the Win98 installation, or have I misunderstood something?

clueless1 wrote:

To OP: One thing I forgot to mention is the SETMUL utility, written by gerwin, one of the forum members here. It is a tool that lets you disable caches through software and depending on the cpu, can let you change multipliers on the fly as well. I use it in my game batch file launchers to run speed sensitive games. Read more about it here:
SetMul - Multiplier control for VIA C3 / AMD K6+7+8 Mobile / Cyrix 5x86

Thanks! I'll take a look at that.

As for what era of DOS games I plan to go with (good question) I'd say mostly early to mid 90's. I think the earliest game I'd be likely to play is Indianapolis 500 which I believe came out in '89. The latest game I'd be tempted to try is Quake III, or at least Quake 2. My current PC runs Quake III without any issues, but I don't know how compatible software like Q3 Radiant would still be on something like my Windows 10 system. Since we are talking about a Win98 install as well now, that has sort of piqued my interest when it comes to level editors and the odd game utilities that I likely still have laying around.

jheronimus wrote:

For PCI cards S3 cards (such as Virge and Trio) tend to be the best pick — they have good compatibility and are easy to source. Some people prefer Matrox (Millenium, Mystique, etc) for a better image quality, though I have been unable to notice any difference myself.

What about something like a GeForce 256? Or an ATI Rage 128?

I'm also curious as to what you guys think of these...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nx1mu7TPtE8&t <---- SCSI2SD SD Card SCSI Drive
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yn9vwOf19XE <---- SD memory card to IDE adapter

I'm inclined to believe that the SCSI option is the better one, but I'd be interested in hearing other opinions.

clueless1 wrote:

Welcome to Vogons! Once you get some more feedback and settle on some hardware, share your build with some pictures. We love to ogle the retro pics. 😉

Cheers!

Thanks! Once I acquire the parts I'll be happy to share my build. Speaking once again of parts, any recommendations for a Super Socket 7 Mobo in ATX form factor? :p

Check out this sheet of benchmark results to see how various CPUs perform with different combinations of caches disabled.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1uKhCI … #gid=1720967797
There is a tab with K6-III+ 400 results, which is one of the more flexible CPUs in terms being able to run at a wide range of speeds.

Keep in mind, the faster the cpu, the better it will run newer DOS games and Win98 games, but the less likely it will be able to run an old game at an acceptable speed. There is no one CPU that will be able to run all games old and new at perfect speeds.

WHAT!? wrote:

Are there any specific sound cards you would recommend that feature the OPL3 sound chip?

Well, all Yamaha cards (like the Audician 32 that someone has already mentioned here) have OPL3. Some ESS cards have them as well, but most of AudioDrives have OPL3 emulation that most consider to be OK (better than Creative's CQM, at least).

Being that I now plan to install Windows 98 I assume that's all I need to install, correct? DOS 7.1 comes with the Win98 installation, or have I misunderstood something?

Yes, Win98 does have true DOS inside, but you'll have to configure it just like you would with normal DOS (e.g., add mouse support, sound configuration, etc). Here are some guides that might help with basic stuff. [1] [2]

What about something like a GeForce 256? Or an ATI Rage 128?

Here is a useful table. Can't say anything about performance, though. Typically, if you want 3D in your games, people tend to go for a S3+Voodoo 1 combo since it offers great compatibility and performance in Glide games (which is all of mid 90s games, basically). And in my region, for example, that would probably be cheaper/easier to source than GeForce 256/Rage.

WHAT!? wrote:

Is there any disadvantages to running an ISA sound card in Windows 98? Is it difficult to avoid hardware/software conflicts when running two separate sound cards (ISA/PCI)?

There are not big disadvantages to running an ISA sound card in Win98, except that it may be less efficient with the CPU cycles (but the difference is marginal anyway), and it will likely have less cool features that Win98 can take advantage of (for example - surround sound).

It is generally possible to run an ISA and a PCI card with no conflicts. In fact it's the ISA that's usually picky about resources. If you got that working, then adding the PCI will not be the problem. Plus, you can use the ISA for DOS and disable it under Windows, and use only the PCI for Windows.

WHAT!? wrote:

So I don't really need to bring L2 cache into consideration when accounting for compatibility? So I might as well use a K-6 III+ since at the end of the day its likely going to give me about the same result, correct?

Yep. Just grab a board with at least 512KB of cache, more is better but they can get spendy. If a speed-sensitive program (Apogee's Dark Ages, to name but one) complains about divide overflows, try disabling the caches in CMOS Setup and retry running the game. You could also try downclocking the CPU or a speed-throttle program too.

The K6-III+ is not supported by most boards, only the latest Super Socket 7 boards offer support for the chip's low sub-2.0 voltage level. (And those that do, usually require BIOS updates or even hacks - fortunately Jan Steunebrink and cohorts posted a lot of patched BIOSes somewhere.) I'd personally go with a regular K6-III with good cooling, if both the board and BIOS can support it. I am in favor of the K6-III idea though, as it is a good deal faster than the regular K6-2, and the onchip cache allows even cacheless wonder boards to perform reasonably well enough, provided they can support the chip.

The best way to tell if a board electrically supports a K6-2+ or III+ is to look for a voltage setting for 2.0 or below. Most K6-2+ and III+ chips tolerate 2.0v, but will require a little better cooling. The BIOS is a different matter, however.