Biomecanoid wrote on 2023-05-08, 18:28:
OldWingCommander wrote on 2023-05-08, 18:13:
If you want to use SBEMU for pure DOS on the t610, the answer is “probably.”
But to be honest, the t610 is so modern that you’re better off running DosBox for DOS games in Windows.
I believe the AMD T56N is more or less like an intel atom. I have some Netbooks with intel atom CPUs and all struggle in 3D dos games under DosBox but they have 3-4x the performance when running games natively .
I am not sure why you're still discussing AMD T56N, because it cannot run Win9x and my understanding is that's a key required feature by @Biomecanoid, but let me tell you that AMD T56N in terms of Futro S900 revision with that chipset is totally unique IMHO, because it's the fastest (at least that I can tell) thin-client with PCI slot - that makes it very precious if you have some PCI device you want to use (e.g. high-end sound card like Onkyo SE-90PCI), especially in totally silent fanless environment.
Also, the Futro S900 motherboard (its model number is "D3003") contrary to other thin-client is standard Mini-ITX size, which means if you want to use high-profile bigger in size PCI card you can move it to standard Mini-ITX case. So, here is something like comparison table between HP T610 with AMD T56N and Futro S900 ("D3003"motherboard) with AMD T56N:
1. T610 is PCI-Express (needs Riser card and case extension, the so-called "T610 Plus"), Futro S900 is PCI
2. T610 board format is not standard, Futro S900 "D3003"motherboard is Mini-ITX
3. for some reason T610 is 20% slower in 3DMark 2001 compared to Futro S900 "D3003"motherboard with AMD T56N: roughly 9000 points versus 11 000 points. In any way, that shows AMD T56N is not that weak at all, for example compare to:
Re: What is the best Thin Client for Windows 98 (SE)
it's like several times faster (3DMark 2000 vs 3DMark 2001) and many other thin-clients (of course, I am not talking about some ultra-new ones, because Fujitsu already have thin-client with Ryzen for example).
4. both AMD and Fujitsu Selling-point is that AMD T56N is faster than "Intel Atom N450" or similarly clocked 1.6Ghz, in fact they posted Benchmark results that put such Atom really as very very weak - to be honest it's even unbelievably weak - see the attached screenshot.
5. for me it doesn't matter, but HP T610 is made in China, but Fujitsu Futro S900 "D3003"motherboard is Made in Augsburg, Germany and I don't know about quality, but the board style itself is totally different Fujitsu looks aesthetically very nice.
I can continue go on and go on, but there really is no point - I mean my main point here is that not all AMD T56N-based solutions are equal and to some you cannot find anything better/faster as alternative, e.g. faster Mini-ITX motherboard with PCI slot, which is the case of Futro S900 ("D3003"motherboard) .
[EDIT] and just to make one more time note, that there are at least 4 versions of Futro S900 "D3003"motherboard - with AMD G-T44R (total crap), G-T52R (total crap), AMD G-T40N (nice for audio and some other none very heavy performance tasks, but it runs WinXP smooth - it's very common and cheap, good to have if you need PCI slot), AMD G-T56N (very nice, but rare and usually expensive).