I think you're right. I feel like an AMD K6 for your existing machine would approximate it pretty well too though. It's interesting the time period you mention is also right around the time the Celeron came out. I feel like other than gamers/custom builders, people running Windows 95 toward the very end would be more likely to have a Celeron (and isn't AMD K6/K6-II the big reason for Celerons anyway?), and the Pentium IIs (at that early time) would more likely end up in a machine running NT 4.

Voodoo2 with matrox was considered a pretty ultimate configuration at the time. Maybe AWE32 for sound and a k6 processor. No-one was running 486s in 1997.

Keep in mind Windows 95 panics after 350mhz out of the box. Yes there's patches about it but they're quite difficult to apply in the day.

kolderman wrote on 2020-05-23, 03:49:

No-one was running 486s in 1997.

Sure there were! Many 1996 hit games worked fine on DX4s and even some 1997 adventures work. Some Vogoners here even stuck with them until 2000. Many "Pentium 60-90 req'd" games don't really require Pentiums but run just okay on a decent DX4 rig - just that Pentium's a pretty big brand and easier to write than "486 DX4-100 or Pentium"

Yeah, my best friend in high school ran a 486/50Mhz until Christmas 1998.

If you search for PC Magazine May 1995, you'll see ads for Pentium II 400s and 350s from OEMs with Windows 95 installed. I have both a 400 and a 350.

I have a K6-200, but I prefer the P233MMX the K6-200 for Socket 7. I think my MoBo can run early K6-2s. If so, that's definitely a choice.

viper32cm wrote on 2020-05-23, 04:07:

If you search for PC Magazine May 1995, you'll see ads for Pentium II 400s and 350s from OEMs with Windows 95 installed.

No you won't because those CPUs didn't exist 😀 Most likely you'll see P133s at best and Win95 wasn't out yet.

🤣

kolderman wrote on 2020-05-23, 03:49:

Voodoo2 with matrox was considered a pretty ultimate configuration at the time. Maybe AWE32 for sound and a k6 processor. No-one was running 486s in 1997.

Many people were not. However my family could not afford to replace our DX4 until we were gifted a hand me down Pentium2 ~ 2001.

I cant have been the only one either! 😀

Personally, I wouldn't use Win95 on the best hardware that was available in May 1998. Even on a fast Pentium 1, Win98 gives a better experience. The last version of Win95 was more or less already very close to Win98. And people with a P2 400 MHz or better probably all migrated from 95 to 98 very fast instead of sticking with 95, so they could use USB and all the new tech that became available.

OP, looks like you have done your research and should be fine.

I was a college student at the time and couldn’t afford cutting edge but I ran my DX4-100 thru the 1st half of 97’ then upgraded to a Cyrix P-200 in the early fall.

leileilol wrote on 2020-05-23, 03:54:

Keep in mind Windows 95 panics after 350mhz out of the box. Yes there's patches about it but they're quite difficult to apply in the day.

i always thought the 350 mhz issue was specific to AMD K6. this however suggests there was a similar issue with 333 mhz pentium iis that was fixed (?) in some way. apparently the k6 fix was only made freely available in 2002, as well...

according to wikipedia, pre-OSR2 lacks UDMA and AGP support, and has bugs with P6 processors and MMX usage, which is interesting when considering that the original 1995 release was the only version ever sold as standalone software. also, all pentium ii and 430TX pentium systems that shipped with windows 95 back in the day must have had .inf updates preinstalled by the vendor, as not even OSR2.5 will detect those chipsets out of the box (according to intel documentation, though it seems odd given the nov 1997 release date of OSR2.5).

auron wrote on 2020-05-23, 11:29:

apparently the k6 fix was only made freely available in 2002, as well...

Cnet's old article dates are bugged. The fix was freely available in late 1998 on AMD's site.

Same here - I was still running a 66MHz 486SLC2 until mid 97 when I bought one of those swap meet upgrade packages with 6x86-200, 32MB ram and a motherboard. I ran 95 on this and continued to run 95 when I upgraded to a k6/2 450. I remember having to put the old 6x86 back in to apply a patch as 95 would not boot with the k6/2 450.

wouldn't a Dual Socket 7 system be the ultimate Win95 machine?

486DX4/100 w/12MB of ram from 1996 to Feb 1999 and 98SE,NT4 at the end with the 95 shell when I built my K63-400 with a TNT1.
Wasn't able to run HL on the 486 so had to upgrade and it was time anyway.

Did have 98 and 2000 dual-boot on the K63 but always hated 9x (see my username) so only used it when I had to for games with issues on 2000.

Example I've been working on updating my compatibility list for Windows 2000 this week using my C2Q and 2000 is as stable as ever and highly compatible. Doing the same testing on 9x is frustrating to say the least.

aaronkatrini wrote on 2020-05-23, 22:56:

wouldn't a Dual Socket 7 system be the ultimate Win95 machine?

No multiprocessor support in Windows 95

aaronkatrini wrote on 2020-05-23, 22:56:

wouldn't a Dual Socket 7 system be the ultimate Win95 machine?

Dual socket 7 would be great for windows NT 3.5 or NT4. Windows 95,98,ME are single processor only.

leileilol wrote on 2020-05-23, 05:36:

viper32cm wrote on 2020-05-23, 04:07:

If you search for PC Magazine May 1995, you'll see ads for Pentium II 400s and 350s from OEMs with Windows 95 installed.

No you won't because those CPUs didn't exist 😀 Most likely you'll see P133s at best and Win95 wasn't out yet.

Crap. Yes, May 1998.

However, the May 1995 issue of PC Magazine is great nostalgia. I think I might have had a copy back then too . . . .

Ran DX2/66 up til Feb 98. When we got the P2/400 with NT4
I was sure at first I was dual booted with OSR 2.5 without having to patch anything but maybe that's my memory playing tricks?
It wasn't along term setup as 98 would find its way into my hands