I've been you, and solved it by building the computers in my signature, but I could probably get down to only 3 systems:

Fast 386 with ISA VGA (with proper EGA modes), SB Pro, MIDI Card, MT-32
Fast Pentium with PCI VGA (with fast VESA modes), Voodoo 1, AWE32, Sound Canvas
Fast Pentium III with GeForce 3, Voodoo 2 SLI, Vortex2, Sound Canvas

My 2c.

fitzpatr wrote:

The impetus behind this is that I have two Pentium II systems that are in great shape. One IBM Personal Computer 300XL (Pentium II 300, 440FX), and one Seanix (Pentium II 300, 440LX). I can't seem to figure out if they fit in anywhere or if they're just redundant.

IMO, every other generation is reasonable up to about the PIII, then you can skip two pretty easily. Every generation is only justified if you just like hardware for the sake of having hardware. (*raises hand* Hi.)

With an XT, 386, 486, MMX, PII, K6-III, PIII, and P4, I would probably drop the 486, PII, K6, and PIII. That leaves you with an XT for really old stuff and "gee wow early computers!" factor, the 386 for somewhat speed-sensitive DOS games, the MMX for speed-hungry DOS games and early Win9x games, and the P4 for XP that will run almost everything since 95 up to whatever your main PC would better handle.

If any of those builds are precious to you, I would adjust those around it. A 486 for me is non-negotiable, and as Goldilocks as an MMX can be, a PII can do all those things too. So, XT, 486, PII, P4 would be another possible combo.

It seems often that builds aren't really there for the proper experience of an era of software, but rather as a platform for certain hardware you want to use. Video and sound cards, typically, since that's what we would have been pining for back when they were new. That may move the priorities around to focus on VLB, or to pair with a Voodoo, or whatever.

There are many practical 2-3 system answers above. There are a few hardware limitations there (like proper CGA/EGA and "granularity" of speeds for video and how easily you can adjust the speed).

If you were in a "money is no object and I'm not collecting cases" mode you could build a larger number of systems into compact cases or a rack or virtual rack (there are actually a handful of AT rack mounts around). There are also what I used to call "book PC" computers or small form factor machines (some that can run cards without a backplane), which could be stacked so you have 4-5 of them in not too much space.

The advantage of having several systems is turnkey operation, no fussing with settings. Some people have kind of streamlined that process or spend most of their time at one setting so less of an issue.

There are RGB->VGA adapters so you can run one 4:3 monitor on say CGA/EGA/VGA systems in a stack and then maybe a stack with your XP/W7 system(s) with a widescreen. You could have two "desks" with 5-6 systems in a relatively small amount of space (or one desk with two monitors and all the systems at the one desk) with minimal configuration hassles.

I'm kind of thinking of that for myself, since my regular modern desk has 3 computers and 3 monitors (the server is mostly headless), but then I go off on a wild tear about building two PPro systems into one case to make a mini ASCII Red, which is horribly impractical and silly, and the next thing you know the whole room is filled with computers again.