I would strongly recommend changes your builds to:

1) Win98 (which covers DOS better than pure DOS does) (SS7 is fine)
2) WinXP (s775 is best)

Bridging Win98/WinXP is difficult and results in less than ideal builds, and Win98 is the best DOS gaming setup you can get. A MMX233 or a K6+ are both excellent CPUs as they can be slowed down to slow-386 speeds using setmul. Most Win98 games that are too demanding for your Win98 build will run fine under XP with tweaking.

Win98 the best DOS gaming setup? Would want to disagree with that. You're looking at memory management issues (try Ultima 7 on Win98...), the ideal sound cards are completely different etc etc.

Yes, it's possible to do an early to mid Windows 98SE build that also can handle DOS, but you're looking at compromises on both sides there. I'd argue the exact opposite: any "Windows XP" game too new to run on an XP/98 box can just run on a current Windows 10 machine, so no need to have a souped-up XP box unable to handle Windows 98. Tbh, the only added value I see in WinXP builds is that you can still run 16b Win3.x games on them...

So, back to OP's original question. For DOS games, the question is which era - there's a massive difference between Alley Cat and Quake. It's - sort of - possible to cover all of it, but if you want to go down that road you need to know it from the start and subordinate other choices to it. It's not just CPU speed, also sound and display options.

My main DOS games rig is aimed at 1989-1994 games (simply not that interested in older stuff, and for late DOS I have a different build - also if I change my mind about <1989 I have an Olivetti M240 XT with EGA to cover that). It's currently configured with a UMC U5S-33 CPU (a fast 486SX33 clone), UMC 85c418 VLB VGA (excellent raw DOS performance, although you don't want it in any GUI), an Aztech MMSN810 Sound Galaxy Basic 16 (1st gen Aztech, with Covox and DSS as well as AdLib, SBPro2 and WSS), Music Quest intelligent MIDI card and I intend to add my PAS16 if I can ever find the damned thing... The goal is ideal performance in Ultima 7, and for that I've boosted RAM to 64MB, so that I can have a 32MB Ramdrive to load the game onto before running. This is plain silly, for any normal purposes 8MB RAM would be more than enough for a system like this. But hell, I have the RAM so why not? Just remember to disable HIMEM.SYS ram check or boot takes a loooong time. With turbo off, the system runs at early 286-ish speeds, which is more than slow enough for the bottom end of my target. Storage is handled by CF cards, using a 2GB card for most stuff.

I used to have a more 1991-1996 build, based on a Pentium 200MMX. For sound I had a GUS and an SB16 with real OPL3 (iirc CT2910). However after I built a K6-2 together with my son to play OMF2097 (quality father-son bonding 😜 ) this P200MMX build was surplus to requirements, so I moved the GUS and an AWE64 Gold to the K6-2. No real OPL3, but with 1995 and later focus that's not an issue.

Now, my Win98SE system is a different beast. Pentium 3-1400S (Tualatin) on an ECS P6S5AT (SiS 635T DDR motherboard) with 512MB RAM, a GeForce3Ti200 and a Turtle Beach Montego II (Aureal Vortex 2) sound card. Storage is via SATA adapter and an SSD. No ISA and not missing it. Plus if I want to run Windows XP (which I don't tbh) this system can handle it easily. Again, any XP game that a P3-1400S can't handle will run on my modern i7, so not missing anything here (and yes, I still play CnC Generals ZH regularly in that way 😉 ). If you disagree and want more muscle, so long as Win98SE can still run, it will work. I'd say head for an i865-chipset system then, perhaps an Asrock version that can handle Conroe CPUs. But for me, that's more a slow modern system than something retro.

Bottom line: notice how often I say "I" or "for me". The only person to decide what you aim for is you. Once you have that clear, other people can help you with how to technically implement it.

No, almost all good soundcards run even better under 98. E.g. awe32, audician32. And you get to take advantage of various 32 bit drivers for IO. And early ISA soundcards without win98 drivers will still work fine as long as you reserve their irq/dma in bios.

Yes there are some games that won't run, but most of them will run just fine under dos7 which conveniently comes for free with 98. In the rare case one still doesn't, use dosBOX. I probably can't run early 80s XT games but sure as hell aren't going to buy a 8086 to run them.

> any "Windows XP" game too new to run on an XP/98

That isn't the point. The point is a box that can run early XP games needs to use either a radeon 9700/9800 or 6800 and you lose compatibility with earlier directx titles. If you get a FX500 for compatibility, dx9 performance for winxp games stinks. This is a well known conundrum.

And yes some XP games will run on win10, but many won't, and you lose EAX support. WINXP boxes are cheap and easy to build, they cover late win98 games quite well, and are worth having.

Are you building rigs around games or OS's both are valid reasons but change the priorities a little.
If your building around games which are the main ones your interested in as that'll decide which hardware is best.

Dos's #1 rule is it needs a ISA slot for sound. everything else is negotiable.
Win3.11 is (cool) but pointless for a games rig.

If your dos games don't feature on the list below you can probably get away with using your Win9x PC for dos gaming as well
https://www.vogonswiki.com/index.php/List_of_ … sensitive_games
"Phils K6" or a Slot 1 P3 are popular choices for dos/Win9x PC's (P3 is faster overall but locked, K6 CPU speeds can be adjusted for speed sensitive games)

Neither of the above make sense for pure Dos/3.11 PC though. Anything upto that 233MMX would be good I'd rekon, after that it gets a bit silly

XP is awesome on Socket 775 pair it with a relatively recent graphics and you can enable things like AA,AF, etc and still have great FPS
Win98 can be forced to work on S775 but you'll be limited in what graphics cards you can use which may limit its usefulness as a XP gaming PC.

Socket 478 is fully supported and stupid fast for Win98 but again limits XP side of things.

dionb wrote on 2020-05-07, 07:00:

Win98 the best DOS gaming setup? Would want to disagree with that. You're looking at memory management issues (try Ultima 7 on Win98...), the ideal sound cards are completely different etc etc.

Well, pure DOS is a subset of Win98. Whatever works in DOS6, works in "DOS7". Exceptions are generally small and meaningless.

dionb wrote on 2020-05-07, 07:00:

For DOS games, the question is which era - there's a massive difference between Alley Cat and Quake. It's - sort of - possible to cover all of it, but if you want to go down that road you need to know it from the start and subordinate other choices to it. It's not just CPU speed, also sound and display options.

Other than Alleycat being a bad example, because it runs on everything and is not speed-sensitive, I'd say it is mostly about CPU speed and little else. Since SB16 is SB/Adlib-compatible and a Voodoo3 is compatible with pretty much all useful modes, I don't know what issues with sound and display options there can arise.

dionb wrote on 2020-05-07, 07:00:

Now, my Win98SE system is a different beast. Pentium 3-1400S (Tualatin) on an ECS P6S5AT (SiS 635T DDR motherboard) with 512MB RAM, a GeForce3Ti200 and a Turtle Beach Montego II (Aureal Vortex 2) sound card. Storage is via SATA adapter and an SSD. No ISA and not missing it. Plus if I want to run Windows XP (which I don't tbh) this system can handle it easily. Again, any XP game that a P3-1400S can't handle will run on my modern i7, so not missing anything here (and yes, I still play CnC Generals ZH regularly in that way 😉 ). If you disagree and want more muscle, so long as Win98SE can still run, it will work. I'd say head for an i865-chipset system then, perhaps an Asrock version that can handle Conroe CPUs. But for me, that's more a slow modern system than something retro.

I kinda like this setup, and maybe I would set it up with XP/98SE dual setup to begin with. Or actually, if I already have an older 98SE system, I would use XP/Millennium for this one.

dionb wrote on 2020-05-07, 07:00:

any "Windows XP" game too new to run on an XP/98 box can just run on a current Windows 10 machine

There are two reasons why you might want to stick with XP instead of a more modern OS, though both have workarounds:

1. Games with craptastic copy protection mechanisms like Starforce or Securom. These straight up won't work on Windows 10, but this can usually be worked around by using *ahem* modified executables.

2. If you want hardware EAX support, you are pretty much limited to WinXP (or lower). For Vista and up, you can use Creative Alchemy or something like DSOAL as a workaround, and they both sound pretty decent in my experience.

All that said, I agree that using a single machine for DOS/Win98 and WinXP is suboptimal, to say the least.

dr_st wrote on 2020-05-07, 11:03:

[...]Well, pure DOS is a subset of Win98. Whatever works in DOS6, works in "DOS7". Exceptions are generally small and meaningless.

CTCU and CTCM immediately spring to mind (and yes, I know there are modified versions) - and I stand by Ultima 7. But it's more than just whether it works, there's (in my opinion) also the issue of elegance/good fit.

[...] Since SB16 is SB/Adlib-compatible and a Voodoo3 is compatible with pretty much all useful modes, I don't know what issues with sound and display options there can arise.

For old stuff, you might well want Covox and CMS as well as AdLib and SB non-pro. There are lots of options that offer that, but they tend to be noisy and below the WSS spec you really want for Windows. On the other hand ideal Windows cards tend to have iffy AdLib implementations and there's the whole nasty 44kHz <->48kHz resampling to contend with as well. Yes, you can compensate by adding lots of sound cards, with the old ISA ones not installed or used under Windows and the new PCI ones not initialized under DOS, but this turns into a franken-build.

And as for the Voodoo - yes, it has great DOS (S)VGA compatiblity, but talking really early DOS means wanting composite CGA as well.

I kinda like this setup, and maybe I would set it up with XP/98SE dual setup to begin with. Or actually, if I already have an older 98SE system, I would use XP/Millennium for this one.

Nah, I like the ME interface, just not the rest. I'd much sooner go for Win2k actually. In fact, I'm just starting on an i840-based system. Only have one CPU for now, but will install Win2k regardless 😉

dionb wrote on 2020-05-07, 12:33:

and I stand by Ultima 7.

Ultima 7 works perfectly fine in DOS 7.1. It even works with UMBPCI.

But I agree it’s one of the games that play best on a period-correct setup.

Well, thanks for the replies!
And yes, I want to use them for old games.
No, I'm not going for the best audio card yet. Future update though.

I'm not multi quoting as there would be too much to reply to. 😀

a) 775 needs special attention, and I see it more like an XP/W7 box; maybe a future project for newer games, and as noted, a newer machine should handle it well.
b) I did a P-III 98se/ 2k / xp multi boot (1gb ram limit bc of win 98, but more than enough) and I have many issues already: same disk different partitions, sometimes it gives registry issues at startup (some error or recovery with many reboots) and other minor stuff. Rebooting from one to another isn't really useful. As suggested I'm going for a separate dos/98, win xp. Win 2K does not have any function if I have XP (that I can see, but backup os).
c) my P166MMX with 98 works like a charm, no issues, no problems; just waiting to see if a vxd goes nuts like good old times, and dos games just work, except some old games that can't use the mouse. A dedicated machine is the thing.
d) same P166 with dos + w3.11, on a different hd, works great; no problems at all. My thought is to use an old laptop for dos (an old 486).

I don't have to play every retro game after all.

So,
1) one Win 98 SE
2) an Xp only
3) laptop for Dos

Windows 2000 hasn't really a place beside a recovery OS if Xp dies? just a thought.

Thanks!!

dionb wrote on 2020-05-07, 12:33:

CTCU and CTCM immediately spring to mind (and yes, I know there are modified versions) - and I stand by Ultima 7.

Then why do you mention examples you know are false? Just for the sake of argument? It's no different than the various CPU-sensitive games that are easily patched with TPPatch or the like. As far as Ultima 7 goes, I never tried it, but the post below yours suggests it also runs fine.

dionb wrote on 2020-05-07, 12:33:

But it's more than just whether it works, there's (in my opinion) also the issue of elegance/good fit.

These things are in the eyes of the beholder, I guess. Personally I see no elegance in building and maintaining unnecessary systems. I can understand if you already have such a machine, but to build one from scratch now - why?

For old stuff, you might well want Covox and CMS as well as AdLib and SB non-pro. There are lots of options that offer that, but they tend to be noisy and below the WSS spec you really want for Windows. On the other hand ideal Windows cards tend to have iffy AdLib implementations and there's the whole nasty 44kHz <->48kHz resampling to contend with as well. Yes, you can compensate by adding lots of sound cards, with the old ISA ones not installed or used under Windows and the new PCI ones not initialized under DOS, but this turns into a franken-build.

An SB16/AWE pretty much covers 99% of the stuff compatibility-wise. You can get one with a Genuine OPL3 if it's important to you. It will work on Windows as well. Surely you can get better Windows cards, but it's actually trivial to have an ISA and a PCI card in one system with no conflicts. On the other hand if you are into esoteric stuff, external MIDI, etc, you need multiple cards anyways. I'd rather have an extra sound card in my computer than have two computers to achieve the same compatibility.

dionb wrote on 2020-05-07, 12:33:

And as for the Voodoo - yes, it has great DOS (S)VGA compatiblity, but talking really early DOS means wanting composite CGA as well.

How far back do you need to go for it to matter? Which cards offer composite CGA and do you need a special monitor too? (Composite CGA was before my time, so I really have no idea).

dionb wrote on 2020-05-07, 12:33:

Nah, I like the ME interface, just not the rest.

What advantages does 98SE has over Me, if you don't use it for pure DOS?

dr_st wrote on 2020-05-07, 15:50:

How far back do you need to go for it to matter? Which cards offer composite CGA and do you need a special monitor too? (Composite CGA was before my time, so I really have no idea).

Very, very far back. This is relevant for the original Kings Quest games, Lode Runner, Bards Tale - that sort of thing. Mid 1980s.

I specifically mentioned this as a reason you want to define which "DOS" games you want to play. You probably don't want to go this far back. Neither do I. But if you do, you would probably prefer a card with composite out - and if you live in PAL-land you also need some way to get NTSC 60Hz displayed - ideally an MCE2VGA, but there are other options.

What advantages does 98SE has over Me, if you don't use it for pure DOS?

Nostalgia more than anything else - that and a much lower RAM footprint (although with 512MB to play with the latter is utterly irrelevant). I have to admit native USB support (can be backported to 98SE) and a decent TCP stack (can't be backported) are better, and boot times are faster (then again: with SSD you hardly notice that) on ME. There's also a lot of hardware out there without explicit WinME drivers - but generic Win9x drivers tend to work anyway.

a) 775 needs special attention, and I see it more like an XP/W7 box; maybe a future project for newer games, and as noted, a newer machine should handle it well.
Special attention? but yep agree, really it's Vista/Win7 era hardware but that excess in power makes it great for XP.
Now is the time to be grabbing bargain for this era hardware. Alot is been disposed of thanks to Windows 7 going end of life.

b) I did a P-III 98se/ 2k / xp multi boot (1gb ram limit bc of win 98, but more than enough)
Build this as a pure Win98 build, P3 is what I'd call the sweet spot for that era. It'll run XP sure but the performance hit is not worth it IMHO

c) my P166MMX with 98 works like a charm
d) same P166 with dos + w3.11, on a different hd, works great
Sounds like your all set, on both fronts. no need to change anything

486 are a bit pointless from a gaming point of view (too slow for newer games too fast for older) and that's coming from someone who owns 2 of them.
They are fun to play with and benefit of laptop is doesn't take up much space. The lack of upgrade options doesn't really matter as you have the 166 anyway.

Win2k can make a good alternative to Win98 on something like the P3. It'll play 95% of your games and crash a lot less. What limits it's usefulness is that other 5%
My main Win9x rig is a dual P3 so "need" Win2k and actually do most my gaming here as well. I still can drop back to Win98 for those few games. Just need to ask yourself if you want that extra level of complexity

chinny22 wrote on 2020-05-07, 16:36:

a) 775 needs special attention, and I see it more like an XP/W7 box; maybe a future project for newer games, and as noted, a new […]
Show full quote

a) 775 needs special attention, and I see it more like an XP/W7 box; maybe a future project for newer games, and as noted, a newer machine should handle it well.
Special attention? but yep agree, really it's Vista/Win7 era hardware but that excess in power makes it great for XP.
Now is the time to be grabbing bargain for this era hardware. Alot is been disposed of thanks to Windows 7 going end of life.

b) I did a P-III 98se/ 2k / xp multi boot (1gb ram limit bc of win 98, but more than enough)
Build this as a pure Win98 build, P3 is what I'd call the sweet spot for that era. It'll run XP sure but the performance hit is not worth it IMHO

c) my P166MMX with 98 works like a charm
d) same P166 with dos + w3.11, on a different hd, works great
Sounds like your all set, on both fronts. no need to change anything

486 are a bit pointless from a gaming point of view (too slow for newer games too fast for older) and that's coming from someone who owns 2 of them.
They are fun to play with and benefit of laptop is doesn't take up much space. The lack of upgrade options doesn't really matter as you have the 166 anyway.

Win2k can make a good alternative to Win98 on something like the P3. It'll play 95% of your games and crash a lot less. What limits it's usefulness is that other 5%
My main Win9x rig is a dual P3 so "need" Win2k and actually do most my gaming here as well. I still can drop back to Win98 for those few games. Just need to ask yourself if you want that extra level of complexity

The fact is that I have all systems from 286 up to i7 and I just don't know what's best for each retro OS.
Hardware availability is not the issue as I collect cpus and mobos.
Installing an os isn't a problem either with all the xx to ide adapters and sata cards. I can test and decide.

I read a lot of stuff today and there's really a lot catching up to do on the "retro" side of things.

I have tried Win98SE but I have too many problems with compatibility with old games. No sound, reboot, crash, freeze, BSODs and ensuing profanities.

I also tried Phil's Ms-dos starter pack and it worked great but not with everything (but still a great tool and now in my toolbox). At this point I'm going to make a pure Ms-dos machine to avoid problems.
The only thing I'd like to see solved in a near future is the usb to serial adapter (as a finished product with mass production).

I had a triple boot machine with 98(Fat32)+2K(ntfs)+Xp(ntfs) and again I had many problems with these as from time to time I'd experience some random errors like registry was restored or needs a reboot to solve a problem, explorer.exe issues in all 3 or even no boot but works great again after a couple of reboots... All hardware is ok, tested and fully functional.
Mystery.

My pure ms-dos AT rig:

6.22
SB32 ISA (cheap version of the awe32)
S7 + P233 MMX
mouse + keyb (usb legacy actually works in dos straight away)
Phil's dos kit + my things

And the infinite loop of reboots to make "one" thing work... 😀 🤣

If you have problems with DOS game compatibility and Win98 SE, you're doing it wrong. Like, not running them in pure DOS mode (which is evident from you mentioning BSOD).

Phil's DOS starter pack is something I don't really like, because of the completely unnecessary multiple boot options. However, his choice of drivers (CTMOUSE/VIDE-CDD) is great.

The MS-DOS Mode Super Easy for Windows assumes that you want to be inside Windows most of the time, and reboot to DOS every once in a while. I prefer the other way - set up Win98 to always boot to pure DOS, and if I want to run Windows, I just enter WIN. This does impose some limitations on the drivers I can use in DOS mode, otherwise I'd need a boot menu.

Overall, it allows me to have a single system that dos pure DOS and Win98 SE. However, if you already have a rig good for pure DOS (which is what you do), might as well set it up with 6.22.

dr_st wrote on 2020-05-16, 08:40:

If you have problems with DOS game compatibility and Win98 SE, you're doing it wrong. Like, not running them in pure DOS mode (w […]
Show full quote

If you have problems with DOS game compatibility and Win98 SE, you're doing it wrong. Like, not running them in pure DOS mode (which is evident from you mentioning BSOD).

Phil's DOS starter pack is something I don't really like, because of the completely unnecessary multiple boot options. However, his choice of drivers (CTMOUSE/VIDE-CDD) is great.

The MS-DOS Mode Super Easy for Windows assumes that you want to be inside Windows most of the time, and reboot to DOS every once in a while. I prefer the other way - set up Win98 to always boot to pure DOS, and if I want to run Windows, I just enter WIN. This does impose some limitations on the drivers I can use in DOS mode, otherwise I'd need a boot menu.

Overall, it allows me to have a single system that dos pure DOS and Win98 SE. However, if you already have a rig good for pure DOS (which is what you do), might as well set it up with 6.22.

I get BSODs inside W98, not in dos. That was a faulty hardware in win98, now solved.

I have issues understanding how drivers for windows and dos interact, if at all, and work in general. Stuff I knew back in the period...

I have a W98 machine and experimenting with it. What I believe is that I had to gulp down so much I made some mistakes but don't understand where.
Cramming isn't a friend of mine. I need to give it time.
Plus I really really need a gotek floppy emulator to get rid of all the floppies and the issues associated...

Yes, at the moment I'm a little lost.

I'm going to ask for good guides to read because I threw away the manuals I had a few years ago (in 2007 we had a big storm and my basement had water issues like 3 feet/1 meter of water).

Just remember that DOS in w98 means VDMs, and drivers need to be VDM compatible, i.e. VXDs. Windows drivers are called through the win32 or directx apis - vxds are presented as familiar port addressable devices with irqs, dma etc.

kolderman wrote on 2020-05-16, 19:38:

Just remember that DOS in w98 means VDMs, and drivers need to be VDM compatible, i.e. VXDs. Windows drivers are called through the win32 or directx apis - vxds are presented as familiar port addressable devices with irqs, dma etc.

Ok, I'm listing my parts on ebay... 😀 😀

Going to have a look into that.

I remember big volumes/guides, thick as my hand, with lots of infos but I can't recall any name.
One for dos was Norton's edition.

These are my books