VOGONS


First post, by keenmaster486

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I want to put my 80502133 in my Socket 5 machine. Theoretically this should be possible since I can set the clock at 66 MHz and the multiplier at 2. But will it work? I keep reading that Socket 5 only supports up to 120 MHz but the jumper settings are there. What if I take my 133 and underclock it to 120?

On a side note, what is the "perfect match" video card for that processor, if there is one?

World's foremost 486 enjoyer.

Reply 4 of 13, by NJRoadfan

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Socket 5 always supported 133Mhz CPUs. I owned a Packard Bell that came with one. Socket 7 was needed for the higher clocked split voltage MMX CPUs.

As for video cards, a S3 Virge and ATI 3D Rage II were popular. I even ran a Voodoo 1 in said Packard Bell. Most circa 1995 machines came stock with pre-3D video cards though. Stuff like the Cirrus Logic CL-GD5430/34, ATI mach64, and S3 Trio64.

Reply 5 of 13, by keenmaster486

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

OK, sounds good, I'll try that later today...

As for the video card, right now I'm using an S3 Trio64. All I'm doing with it is DOS games and Windows word processing (no Windows games right now). But in games like Descent II, I can't crank up the resolution past 320x240 without severely reducing the framerate. Would the Voodoo 1 or some better main card change this?

ATI cards are completely out of the question due to their crappy EGA compatibility.

World's foremost 486 enjoyer.

Reply 6 of 13, by dondiego

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

The pentium 133 was a socket 7 cpu and if i remember right these had an extra pin so they would not fit in socket 5. However pentium mmx would, no dual voltage support tough so they would run overvolted.

LZDoom, ZDoom32, ZDoom LE
RUDE (Doom)
Romero's Heresy II (Heretic)

Reply 7 of 13, by clueless1

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
keenmaster486 wrote:

OK, sounds good, I'll try that later today...

As for the video card, right now I'm using an S3 Trio64. All I'm doing with it is DOS games and Windows word processing (no Windows games right now). But in games like Descent II, I can't crank up the resolution past 320x240 without severely reducing the framerate. Would the Voodoo 1 or some better main card change this?

I'm not sure there was a Voodoo patch for Descent2? I do know that D2 needs a LOT of cpu to run smooth at anything higher than VGA. It still gets a little choppy in spots with my POD 200MMX. In my experience, almost any DOS game ran too slow in SVGA at P133 speeds. But this is on a Triton chipset with no L2 cache and 72-pin SIMMs. Maybe a more modern platform would do more justice to SVGA with a P133.

If you're not concerned with period correctness, the TNT range of cards have some of the best DOS compatibility and speed.

The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know.
OPL3 FM vs. Roland MT-32 vs. General MIDI DOS Game Comparison
Let's benchmark our systems with cache disabled
DOS PCI Graphics Card Benchmarks

Reply 8 of 13, by keenmaster486

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
clueless1 wrote:

I'm not sure there was a Voodoo patch for Descent2? I do know that D2 needs a LOT of cpu to run smooth at anything higher than VGA. It still gets a little choppy in spots with my POD 200MMX. In my experience, almost any DOS game ran too slow in SVGA at P133 speeds. But this is on a Triton chipset with no L2 cache and 72-pin SIMMs. Maybe a more modern platform would do more justice to SVGA with a P133.

If you're not concerned with period correctness, the TNT range of cards have some of the best DOS compatibility and speed.

OK... well, I am kind of concerned with period correctness; I want this to be a ~1994-95 machine. What was the best PCI card of 1994, for instance?

And yeah, D2 does run slow at 640x480 even on my 166MHz MMX laptop. I guess I don't care about that very much 😀

World's foremost 486 enjoyer.

Reply 9 of 13, by melbar

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Intel Pentium 133 - A80502133 / A80502-133, Sockets:
Socket 5
Socket 7

www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Pentium/Intel-Pe ... -133).html

#1 K6-2/500, #2 Athlon1200, #3 Celeron1000A, #4 A64-3700, #5 P4HT-3200, #6 P4-2800, #7 Am486DX2-66

Reply 10 of 13, by keenmaster486

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

It works!

IMG_0258.JPG
Filename
IMG_0258.JPG
File size
732.8 KiB
Views
1232 views
File license
Fair use/fair dealing exception

YES! Instant bump in framerates, now Descent 2 is quite playable at 640x480. Nice.

World's foremost 486 enjoyer.

Reply 11 of 13, by devius

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
keenmaster486 wrote:

I want this to be a ~1994-95 machine. What was the best PCI card of 1994, for instance?

Probably something based on the S3 Vision 964 or 968, or a Matrox Millennium. The Millennium would have been more expensive though, not sure about performance. I'm not sure if the Trio64 was already out in 1994.

Reply 12 of 13, by clueless1

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
devius wrote:
keenmaster486 wrote:

I want this to be a ~1994-95 machine. What was the best PCI card of 1994, for instance?

Probably something based on the S3 Vision 964 or 968, or a Matrox Millennium. The Millennium would have been more expensive though, not sure about performance. I'm not sure if the Trio64 was already out in 1994.

Here's some candidates from 1994:
ET4000/w32p
S3 Vision 864/868/964
S3 Trio 32/64

1995:
ARK2000PV
MGA2064W (Millennium I)
S3 Trio64V+
S3 Vision 968

The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know.
OPL3 FM vs. Roland MT-32 vs. General MIDI DOS Game Comparison
Let's benchmark our systems with cache disabled
DOS PCI Graphics Card Benchmarks

Reply 13 of 13, by archsan

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Back then Cirrus Logic was pretty much all I knew from looking at boot screens. 😀

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."—Arthur C. Clarke
"No way. Installing the drivers on these things always gives me a headache."—Guybrush Threepwood (on cutting-edge voodoo technology)