PcBytes wrote on 2024-05-10, 15:58:

If you need a wider range (98SE/2k/XP/7/10), Core 2 Duo E4600 on a 965 mainboard at best. Don't go further.

Why?

Cyberdyne wrote on 2024-05-09, 18:14:

Never came across any hardware like that... VXD... what hardware?

VXD drivers were the Windows driver programming model used until WDM came in with Windows 2000/Me. 98SE has some support for WDM.

mln wrote on 2024-05-10, 18:21:

PcBytes wrote on 2024-05-10, 15:58:

If you need a wider range (98SE/2k/XP/7/10), Core 2 Duo E4600 on a 965 mainboard at best. Don't go further.

Why?

I wonder if that was a typo and PcBytes meant an E4600 on a 865 mainboard.

That would make sense for a 98SE machine - the E4600 is 800MHz FSB which is ideal for the 865, and it's a 65nm C2D rather than a 45nm which means that there are a lot more 865 motherboards out there that can support it. And anything further gets you into PCI-E territory, etc.

Pentium 4 is not retro? Are you kidding?!
Just facts:
- Pentium 4 was developed as a replacement for Pentium 2
- Pentium 4 appeared earlier than Pentium 3 Tualatin
- Pentium 4 is older than VIA C3
- Pentium 4 is older than AMD Athlon XP
- Pentium 4 started selling a month after 3dfx Voodoo 4
- Pentium 4 was sold along with recently released 3dfx Voodoo 5, Nvidia GeForce 2, ATI Radeon (R100)
- Pentium 4 came out 2 months after Windows Millennium
- When Pentium 4 came out, new S3 Trio 3d/2x and Nvidia TNT 2 were still being produced
- Pentium 4 is older than any 3D GTA, Max Payne, Pro Evolution Soccer, Serious Sam, TES Morrowind and the same age as Diablo II, Counter Strike 1.0, Quake 3 and NFS Porshe Unleashed
- Pentium 4 production ceased a year after Windows 98 extended support ended
- Pentium 4 stopped shipping 3 months before Windows for Workgroups 3.11 Embedded support ended

On a related note, I never intended for this thread to be a debate about whether the Pentium 4 is consider retro.

Rather, it was a question whether the Pentium 4 is underrated when used for retro computing. IOW, using it for software and games from the 80s and 90s.

Whether or not a platform is considered retro is different from what one uses it for.

appiah4 wrote on 2024-05-10, 12:16:

i850 with PC/PCI literally has no advantage over a Socket A with an ISA slot.

The nonsensical P4 hate is real

Lets see from a performance perspective

KT133A vs D850xx (478)
$100+ vs $60+ on the bay (very variable)
Mobile Athlon 4/Thoroughbred/Barton for multipliers vs 2.0-3.06Ghz P4C Northwood 400/533

While a Barton is competitive on an Nforce or Kt333+ platform it's not going to be close here
Also mobile bartons are getting rarer

Flaky AGP 4x but really 1-2x vs Solid AGP 4x
Single channel sdram ~550MB/s vs Rambus ~3.2-4GB/s
Slow PCI speeds abound vs Expected 133MB/s
Via 4in1 driver fun vs Painless often OS integrated intel chipset drivers

And from a DOS perspective

1 Isa vs 1 PC/PCI SBlink
Vast choice of ISA sound cards vs a few SBlink pci cards
For Yamaha:
YMF718/9 ISA vs YMF724/744/754 PCI
Not really that much between these
Slightly better compatibility vs Cleaner DAC

Some slow down options and with lower mulpliers vs ODCM, ACPI not multiplier unlocked without a rare cpu

So I'd say a P4 is often underrated for DOS gaming while it also lets you enjoy a bit more performance for your 2000+ era games on the same machine.

The OPs P4 ISA machine looks great don't understand the discouragement

P4 also means early front USB ports

When it comes to slowdown, P4 with ODCM (and optional SpeedStep) is pretty straightforward.

swaaye wrote on 2024-05-10, 18:36:

Cyberdyne wrote on 2024-05-09, 18:14:

Never came across any hardware like that... VXD... what hardware?

VXD drivers were the Windows driver programming model used until WDM came in with Windows 2000/Me. 98SE has some support for WDM.

Hey i know what a VXD is. I just liked to have real examples of hardware. Besides that dual chip Ati Rage fiasco that only works dual in 9x.

VivienM wrote on 2024-05-10, 20:53:

And anything further gets you into PCI-E territory, etc.

What is wrong with PCI-E and Win98SE?

Well, you're quite limited in GPU options without AGP.

All DDR1 platforms seem a bit awkward to me, including the Pentium 4, Athlon XP and even the Pentium M.
- They don't have good Legacy DOS support like the Socket 370 platforms do
- For Win98, the Socket 370 platforms are cheap and easy to get.
- For Win2000/XP, DDR2 platforms (AM2, LGA775 Core 2) have better performance, lower power consumption, and are cheaper and easier to get.
- Also for Win2000/XP, Atom+i945/965 thin clients are very cheap and easy to get, with very low power consumption and small form factor.

The only graphics cards that can really benefit from a high end AGP platform are just 1 or 2 generations, Geforce 4 Ti (NV25/28), GeForce FX 5 (NV30) and Radeon 8500 (R200)

From a historical perspective, DDR1 platforms did have enough improvements that X86 Linux and NT workstations began to have the power to challenge traditional RISC workstations, but due to the extraordinarily long lifecycle of WinXP, there was very little that the DDR1 platform could and the DDR2 platform couldn't do, one exception is run Win98. However, the Socket 370 is clearly a better choice as it can run Win98 as well as DOS.

pengan wrote on 2024-05-11, 12:58:

All DDR1 platforms seem a bit awkward to me, including the Pentium 4, Athlon XP and even the Pentium M.
- They don't have good Legacy DOS support like the Socket 370 platforms do

What do you mean by legacy DOS support?

If you are referring to ISA slots, there are socket 478 and LGA775 boards with ISA slots that can be used with ISA sound cards in DOS.

However, the Socket 370 is clearly a better choice as it can run Win98 as well as DOS.

There are chipsets used with socket 478 and LGA775 boards that also run Windows 98. I believe the fastest supported chipset / processor for Windows 98 would be the i865 / X6800 combination?

Cyberdyne wrote on 2024-05-11, 05:25:

Hey i know what a VXD is. I just liked to have real examples of hardware. Besides that dual chip Ati Rage fiasco that only works dual in 9x.

Ah, I see.

Aureal cards are fully functional only on VXD drivers. Creative cards sometimes work best with old games if you run the VXD drivers. For the Sound Blaster Live! I like to run the Liveware 3 drivers/suite on 98SE. And I have some ISA sound cards as well.

Old graphics cards may not have WDM drivers. Rendition, MPACT, PowerVR PCX, S3's S3D and Metal (?) APIs, ATI 3DCIF, etc.

Win2K and XP include drivers for a lot of old cards, but those drivers often had been built by Microsoft and may be slow, buggy, and/or missing features.

Hanamichi wrote on 2024-05-10, 23:21:

So I'd say a P4 is often underrated for DOS gaming while it also lets you enjoy a bit more performance for your 2000+ era games on the same machine.

The OPs P4 ISA machine looks great don't understand the discouragement

Thank you!

Based on some of the comments, I do think there is some misunderstands about both the compatibility and power consumption of the Pentium 4 line.

Especially with respect to the latter, the higher power consumption P4 chips has unfortunately tainted the reputation of the entire P4 lineup.

pengan wrote on 2024-05-11, 12:58:

All DDR1 platforms seem a bit awkward to me, including the Pentium 4, Athlon XP and even the Pentium M. - They don't have good L […]
Show full quote

All DDR1 platforms seem a bit awkward to me, including the Pentium 4, Athlon XP and even the Pentium M.
- They don't have good Legacy DOS support like the Socket 370 platforms do
- For Win98, the Socket 370 platforms are cheap and easy to get.
- For Win2000/XP, DDR2 platforms (AM2, LGA775 Core 2) have better performance, lower power consumption, and are cheaper and easier to get.
- Also for Win2000/XP, Atom+i945/965 thin clients are very cheap and easy to get, with very low power consumption and small form factor.

The only graphics cards that can really benefit from a high end AGP platform are just 1 or 2 generations, Geforce 4 Ti (NV25/28), GeForce FX 5 (NV30) and Radeon 8500 (R200)

From a historical perspective, DDR1 platforms did have enough improvements that X86 Linux and NT workstations began to have the power to challenge traditional RISC workstations, but due to the extraordinarily long lifecycle of WinXP, there was very little that the DDR1 platform could and the DDR2 platform couldn't do, one exception is run Win98. However, the Socket 370 is clearly a better choice as it can run Win98 as well as DOS.

You are so right! DDR1 time is a death knell for DOS. Lets be real, those ISA motherboards are far and few. It is also the prime time for exploding cappacitors. And underpowered for later XP era gaming.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2024-05-11, 02:49:

When it comes to slowdown, P4 with ODCM (and optional SpeedStep) is pretty straightforward.

Interesting, I've never tested this. Do we know what speed points can be hit with a CPU like, say, a 3 GHz Northwood?
Last time I tried to slow down a P4 I was left... profoundly underwhelmed.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-05-11, 14:51:

Based on some of the comments, I do think there is some misunderstands about both the compatibility and power consumption of the Pentium 4 line.

Especially with respect to the latter, the higher power consumption P4 chips has unfortunately tainted the reputation of the entire P4 lineup.

Although the NetBurst microarchitecture wasn't great, I did use a computer with a P4 HT CPU for a very long time and the platform around it was very reliable on a motherboard with an Intel chipset.

Regarding inefficiency, Prescott (the equivalent for Pentium D was Smithfield) was the worst of the bunch. The higher CPU clock frequencies at the time they have didn't help.

bloodem wrote on 2024-05-11, 15:20:

Interesting, I've never tested this. Do we know what speed points can be hit with a CPU like, say, a 3 GHz Northwood?
Last time I tried to slow down a P4 I was left... profoundly underwhelmed.

I can't speak for Northwood processors, but the Cedar Mill (651) I'm currently using I've had it down to 286 speeds. My test for this has been Police Quest II which has speed sensitive intro animations.

With just L1 & L2 cache disabled it performs like a mid-range 486. With either ACPI or ODCM throttling, it can hit 386 speeds and lower.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-05-11, 16:06:

With just L1 & L2 cache disabled it performs like a mid-range 486. With either ACPI or ODCM throttling, it can hit 386 speeds and lower.

ACPI throttling is quite problematic on most chipsets except for VIA. It apparently works, but when you test enough games you will find that it can cause stuttering and other weird behavior.
Either way, this is very interesting and I'll definitely have to test it out myself. Thanks 😀