Killermac wrote on 2023-03-03, 00:05:

As for the computer running Windows 95, I have no idea. Is it possible to have only one computer that can dual boot and reach the range of 95 and 3.1/MSDOS games? I've heard a lot of talk about K6's and 486's, but I don't understand much about it and I'm pretty scared of making a mistake.

For that era of gaming, I would recommend a Socket 7 Pentium MMX system. Anything in the 166 MHz to 233 MHz range would do.

I recently built such a system around a Pentium MMX 200 that I'm using for both DOS 6.22 and Windows 95.

I use Compact Flash cards for storage. Rather than dual booting, I just use separate cards for each operating system. Whichever OS I want to boot up, I just insert that particular card. It's easier than futzing around with setting up dual booting, plus there is more storage space for each dedicated OS.

For older titles that need speed throttling, you can use a utility like SETMUL, MoSlo, etc., to slow things down as needed.

For graphics, I went with a 4MB Hercules Terminator PCI card (S3 Virge/DX chipset). It's got great compatibility for DOS games which is a big reason I chose it. You could also throw in a 3DFX Voodoo card if you want 3D acceleration, but since you don't really list many 3D games that probably won't be as necessary.

For audio, there are a huge range of options and it really depends on how much you want to spend on audio, how clean you want your ouput, and/or if you have any preferences for specific sound cards and sound modules.

I'm sure you will get a lot of more knowledgeable hardware suggestions than mine so I'll make a more specific one: regarding the Impressions games (Caesar III, Pharaoh, Zeus, Emperor) as someone who has played them for over 20 years, look for the widescreen fixes for each and play them in a Win XP/7/10/11 PC, it's way better and much more fluid than the original experience, and you can always install them in Win98 too for completeness' sake. These games are particular in that regard, namely the fantastic Augustus mod for Caesar III, an incredible unofficial remaster.

If space is an issue, an overpowered Win98SE pc can allow you to compress the XP and Win7 era games on a single build probably, with Win 7 of course if you want to strech beyond say 2008/9 games, or dual boot if needed.

Lots of people here prefer or lean more towards DOS gaming so it's up to you to decide how important they are. If you overpower the Win98 pc you'll need an older build for a number of those, sounds like Win95 and DOS should be enough, Win 3.1 doesn't help you much here I think

Yah we can help with speccing another couple of computers, and help you to configure all four for your favorites, right through to getting the nine of them set up in your gaming lounge. 🤣

Another card that's supposed to have 2D support that goes backwards well is the i740 AGP cards, you can pair that with a 440LX slot1 board and a low end PII which would likely come out cheaper than good 233mmx boards and those CPU. Should be able to do DOS, Win3.1, win 95 and most of win98 with that. https://www.vogonswiki.com/index.php/Intel/Real3D

edit: I think I like my idea there, for bits I've got, got an ignored StarForce i740 because they are a bit meh for 3D, always something better to play with. But DOS to DX6 non intense stuff might be it's forte. Stick that in an Abit or Aopen 440LX board, PII-266, 64MB SDRAM. It's Yawny McComaface for riding leading edge and saying "For the 29th of March 1998, this was the best machine on the planet" but could be a solid machine for general 92ish to 99ish, but clipping the outliers. (My problem is coming down to a reasonable/sustainable collection.)

Killermac wrote on 2023-03-03, 00:05:

The computer that will have Windows XP will remain the same with that QX9650 e a GTX 285.

I'd advice againts the GTX285. It's nice to have a high-end GPU, but it's humongous and very hot. GTX650 Ti prices came down really nicely, you can probably pick one up for around $20. You'd have the same performance and compatibility with half the TDP.

Killermac wrote on 2023-03-03, 00:05:

For the Windows 98SE computer, I chose a Pentium 4 and a NVIDIA GeForce FX5500, but I need help choosing a motherboard.

And here you fall to the other end of the spectrum. The FX5500 (FX5200) is not a very good card. I wouldn't worry too much about the motherboard. The majority of s478 boards should be fine. A P4 based W98 PC, especially with an FX5500/5200 is a budget build, so whatever is available for cheap.

Killermac wrote on 2023-03-03, 00:05:

As for the computer running Windows 95, I have no idea. Is it possible to have only one computer that can dual boot and reach the range of 95 and 3.1/MSDOS games? I've heard a lot of talk about K6's and 486's, but I don't understand much about it and I'm pretty scared of making a mistake.

If it's not possible, and I have to separate those two machines as well, that's no problem.

And here you have to decide something. If you cover all of the XP era, for the DOS-W3.x-W9.x you can use the same one PC if you choose the parts carefully. Either s370 with ISA (VIA C3 CPU) or SS7 (K6-2). These are versatile enough if you want to cover a huge period. I have good experiences with XFDISK setting up multiboot systems with DOS-Win9x, with each partitions hidden from the other operating systems. This should have just enough power to carry you until the XP build can take over.

Another vote for slightly lowering the spec of the XP system to the point where Win98SE will run on it. Given your XP games are mostly early and mostly not the most demanding (RTS rather than FPS) that shouldn't be an issue. The elephant in the room is Oblivion, but that's a) a complete outlier in terms of performance that won't really run smoothly on any contemporary harfware from when it was released and b) should run perfectly well on your current daily driver. Drop Oblivion from the requirements here and you're left with software that would be happy with a last-gen AGP build, which is practically the last to have Win98SE support.

Take a look at some of the Asrock boards for getting the best performance possible there - they made some i865 boards with C2Q support and nForce3 boards that would run a Phenom2. That's about the upper limit of Win98SE and more than fast enough not to be CPU limited under XP. Graphics would be limited to AGP, but again, apart from Oblivion everything here should run on a 6800GS or HD4670.

As for the DOS / Win95 build, firstly, all the Win95 stuff will run on Win98SE, so you can do that on the faster build. But if you want something to cover everything from XT via the 386-era most of your listed DOS games are from - to Win95, I'd look at a Via C3 CPU; they have very extensive clocking options. If you drop the Win95 requirement for the DOS system (because running Win95 games on XP/98 system) a later 486 with turbo button should do the trick for the rest, or Pentium class, preferably K6Plus for extensive clocking options.

Agree you may still be able to get away with a couple of PC's if you wanted.

I'd start with the dual 98/XP rig and see how many games don't like that setup. You can then tailor the next build around those games requirements.

Here is a list of LGA 775 boards with AGP. Good starting point for a dual 98/XP rig. And don't think you have to limit yourself to a P4 for Win98's sake, It'll work just fine on say a Core 2, It'll just ignore the 2nd core.
or for Socket 478 the 845 or 865 chipsets had really good Win98 compatibility.
LGA 775 Motherboards with AGP Slots

While my games don't quite match yours I'm also more into RTS then FPS. On my S478 build with a 865 M/B and GF 6800 Ultra only game that had compatibility issues was C&C Generals. GTA SA which is probably my most demanding XP game was playable but much better framerates on something newer.

I've no doubt you'll need another PC for dos. but depending on how well the 98/XP rig goes you'll be in a better position to know if you need something higher spec like a P3 or lower round the 486/Pentium mark.

Of course if you WANT a PC for each era then thats fine as well

How i did it :
DOS/WIN98SE : Athlon XP/KT133 with ISA slot/1GB Sdram/modded FX5200/SSD with ide adapter.
XP/WIN7/WIN10 : XEON QC/P43(because i wanted com/lpt/ide/fdd)/8GB ddr2/GTX970/SSD
I tried the 775/agp variant and found that with a 5900 ultra you can cover win98 but for XP was not that great and with a better video card you lose DOS/win98 compatibility/stability.

I'd like to take the time to quickly thank all of you for leaving your answers and advice. I'm not in the habit of using forums, and it's quite special to put something on the internet and see people so readily help me achieve my goals. You guys are amazing and I really feel welcomed.

I've read all the responses and analyzed all the scenarios, and before answering each of you separately, I have a question.

If I gave up the idea of ​​having a Windows 95/3.1 machine, and I only had one Windows XP machine and one Windows 98 machine, and that 98 computer had, let's say, a AMD K6-3 with a Voodoo3, could I play all those Windows 95 and DOS games and also play the Windows 98 games without a problem?

Killermac wrote on 2023-03-03, 14:52:

I'd like to take the time to quickly thank all of you for leaving your answers and advice. I'm not in the habit of using forums, and it's quite special to put something on the internet and see people so readily help me achieve my goals. You guys are amazing and I really feel welcomed.

I've read all the responses and analyzed all the scenarios, and before answering each of you separately, I have a question.

If I gave up the idea of ​​having a Windows 95/3.1 machine, and I only had one Windows XP machine and one Windows 98 machine, and that 98 computer had, let's say, a AMD K6-3 with a Voodoo3, could I play all those Windows 95 and DOS games and also play the Windows 98 games without a problem?

Probably I assume, but Voodoo cards are more of a collectors' novelty type item, they're good for a very specific period in games and thus very specific uses, but not much more than that.

Personally, I would go the way chinny22 said, start with one build and move on from there. I would start with a fast (but much more period accurate than what you described) Win98SE machine, based on a socket 370 system, with a GeForce MX440 for example, it's a very DOS friendly card and holds its own in the Win98SE up to 2002 era, passive cooling, plus it's still very cheap to get, same for socket 370 boards/CPUs depending on where you live. That would at the very least tick DOS Games (let's say 1992 forwards but probably earlier too) that aren't speed sensitive all the way up to 2001/2002. Win98SE is a very good "home" retro OS, a good connection between early 90s and early 2000s if you choose the hardware accordingly, even if it's a picky system to configure.

Then after completing that, having now a clear idea of what games need more oomph, I would build the XP PC, and overpowering it with no problem if you already have the parts and there are drivers available for the OS. If the GPU is too noisy or large or whatever use it until you get a more silent and compact one. That would pick up the mantle from the Win98SE from 2002 forwards with ease.

Lastly having the complete list of DOS games that still wouldn't work due to speed or something else, I would consider if I would really want to build a PC just for that. But bare in mind that even a 486 is too fast for early DOS games like Bouncing Babies, etc. So if space is an issue you could play those in DOS Box for now and if an opportunity comes along you'll decide later. So for me, in conclusion: Win98SE PC, Win XP PC, one CRT and one 16:9 LCD, then see what you still want or need

What I did, is that I built a fast W98 PC for pre-2001 games and a middle of the road XP PC to cover games from 2001 to 2010.

For you, mixind W98 and XP on the same PC is I think not necessary. Or to be more precise, I don't think that it's optimal for a practical build in general. You have to compromise too much on both W98 (compatibility) and XP (performance) side. As chinny22 said, Oblivion is the only really performance-hungry game you list, but even that's not all that bad, if you limit it to period correct resolutions.

Where I'd start is that I'd draw one or two lines that marks years were you switch for a more modern setup. Like for example pre- and post 2000 or pre-1995; pre-2000 and post-2000 (up to whichever year to avoid power creep) for two or three builds. Once you have the periods you aim to cover each build, you can only then try and find the most optimal parts.

The problem here is Oblivion. Including this game with your list makes it hard. If you would settle for 1024/768 Medium settings for oblivion at 35 FPS than the only GPU that will work is a ATI X800.

Then your build is ATI X800 with a Pentium 4. Get a Asus 865 or 875 Chipset board and this will work. Maybe not all games will work,, but it probably has better compatibility than a Nvidia 6800 GT or a 7800 GT. These represent the 3 fastest GPUs that will run XP and 98se

The approach you guys are giving to the problem is perfect, and that's what I'm going to do. The lines have already been drawn.

I'm going to start with the Windows 98SE computer, as you advised me. And what I want from this system is that it run very smoothly, with no lag or anything, all games made up to 2001, the year Windows XP was released. So the idea now is not to limit the first years of the range, but the last ones, where the almighty Windows XP will take over the rest. With this, and as far as DOS gaming goes, I'm going to see how far this Windows 98SE computer can go back and do the work, and then ultimately build the slower computer as needed for what it can't. The order will be Windows 98SE>XP>9.5/3.1 as needed.

Having said that, and putting these rules into play now, could you please give me a windows 98 build that runs absolutely everything?

I'll confess about something: in terms of hardware, the K6 processors and Voodoos have always been very emblematic pieces for me, so this is something that has stayed with me since I was a little boy. I've always wanted to have them, and it's something I'd like to do, but I have no idea what period they were used for. Doing my research, Super Socket 7 was released in 1998, and among the compatible processors appeared the K6-III. Does Voodoo follow him well? Together, will they be enough to run everything that was released for Windows 98?

Please note that right now, the only thing I expect from this Windows 98SE machine is that it runs smooth the last games released until 2001.

Killermac wrote on 2023-03-03, 22:08:

Having said that, and putting these rules into play now, could you please give me a windows 98 build that runs absolutely everything?

These are the specs of my current dedicated Windows 98 build:

CPU: Athlon XP 2000+ (Socket A)
Motherboard: ASUS A7V600 (VIA KT600 chipset)
RAM: 512MB
GPU: GeForce4 Ti 4200
Sound cards: Diamond Monster MX300 (Vortex2) and Creative Labs Audigy 2 ZS (for EAX4)
Storage: 250GB SSD with SATA-to-IDE adapter

It's higher spec than a Windows 98 machine needs to be (hardware is 2002 era), but in the intent is to be as compatible as possible with Windows 9X era games and run them with good performance.

I also specifically used a motherboard with the VIA KT600 chipset for DOS sound card compatibility using PCI sound cards.

In practice, this machine can play games ranging from mid-90s DOS titles to late Win9X titles from the early 2000s.

ya that will probably be fine id stay clear of the vortex2 though. Audidgy will corrupt the A3D.DLL and they don't work well in the same system without fiddling around with driver files. It's not worth the trouble unless you have games that specifically benifit from that card and you must use the API, because really not many games use A3D 3.0.

Ah the emotional wildcard. This is very important consideration. You can build the worlds best rigs but if none of them scratch your k6 itch then you'll never be happy. So I would actually build this first and work out what you can and cant play.
On the plus side I don't think it'll cause much problems. With its ISA slot it should cover majority of dos gaming. It won't be able to play later Win98 games but your XP rig may be able to cover these.

chinny22 wrote on 2023-03-04, 09:58:

On the plus side I don't think it'll cause much problems. With its ISA slot it should cover majority of dos gaming. It won't be able to play later Win98 games but your XP rig may be able to cover these.

Oh, sorry if I didn’t understand it, English is not my main language, but do you believe the K6-III paired with a Voodoo won’t be enough to run smoothly the latest games before Windows XP was release? I think the heaviest games in my list would be Vampire The Masquerade Redemption, but I’m not sure.

For dual DOS / Windows 98 use PIII or Athlon due to ISA bus. My PIII 900 is fine for all games until 2001 and some from 2002 (Fifa 2003, NHL 2003).

For exclusive Windows 98 system use Athlon XP.

Killermac wrote on 2023-03-04, 14:31:

chinny22 wrote on 2023-03-04, 09:58:

On the plus side I don't think it'll cause much problems. With its ISA slot it should cover majority of dos gaming. It won't be able to play later Win98 games but your XP rig may be able to cover these.

Oh, sorry if I didn’t understand it, English is not my main language, but do you believe the K6-III paired with a Voodoo won’t be enough to run smoothly the latest games before Windows XP was release? I think the heaviest games in my list would be Vampire The Masquerade Redemption, but I’m not sure.

According to this minimum system requirements for Vampire The Masquerade Redemption are a P2 233. A K6 III 450 is definitely faster but then the game recommends a PIII so you may not be able to run at max settings or higher resolutions? This is why I recommend building this PC first and knowing what can and cant be done.
https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Vampire:_Th … de_-_Redemption

Personally I find my P3 600 may struggle in some Win98 games that are 3D heavy at modern resolutions but those games work fine in XP anyway. The P3 is more then enough for the older games that refuse to work in XP but as long as one of my PC's can play the game well I don't really care which PC it is.

To be completely honest with you I don't even know why would you use such a piece of trash OS like Win95. Sure I have it for fun with all of it's brokenness to boot it in for a causal 10 minute R&R but to play games on it or do anything on it? Just why? Win98SE can run the exact same games and far more superior ... in it's league