I have a stack of Western Digital 1mb VLB cards, I always thought they had better dos performance than the typical cirrus cards but what would I know

In my experience, there is something to win.

I have got a Trident 9420 VLB with 2MB and it performs well enough in dos and Windows.
The Cirrus 5424 VLB I have is about 10% faster in benchmarks. These cards are not hard to find and still affordable.
The Diamond Viper I had, was slow as *** in VGA modes, but with the TSR installed, vesa modes were accelerated by the Weitek chip and the snail became a cheetah instantly. If this one supports ddraw I think it'll be ok, if you can find one.

I sold my Viper due to its below avarage VGA performance...

The Cirrus 542x cards are good, the 5428 is a very good card if you can find one in VLB ( i happen to have a 2MB CL 5428 VLB, came with the complete Unisys ELI 4666 486 VLB computer as the stock card, got lucky !) . The Hercules S3 Tri64 is another great VLB card. Have two Diamond Viper VLB Weitek P9000 but do not think they are as overall compatible as the Cirrus or Tri64. Just my opinion...
Added: I have a Trident 9440 based VLB and it does not have appear to have any filter caps right behind the DB15 like the others, without those it could be soft at higher resolutions, never checked.
For using a LCD/LED monitor: it must fully support 720x400 @70Hz mode and should be a 4:3 or 5:4 monitor, very few widescreen LCD/LED support it properly..

I've used an older 4:3 LCD with this card in the past and it's just awful, the output is "blocky" in a way if that makes sense. At anything above 800x600 you can barely tell the font in use it's so soft, but I'd just as soon say you're not really supposed to do that on a 486 anyway -- what I'm looking for here, specifically, is another option to the S3 Vision series, or the Trio32/64, or the ATi Mach32/64, that will do okay enough in DOS while still actually accelerating DirectDraw applications (like Diablo, or RoadRash95). Ideally that you'd actually be able to find, and for a reasonable sum of money. Not interested in paying eBay collectors' prices.

If video quality is your big concern. I wouldn't bother with any VLB card frankly. Get yourself a PCI motherboard and throw a S3Virge/Cirrus in there.

VLB cards allways tended to look a bit "noisy" on the output quality IMO, but iv only used modern monitors with them. PCI cards onward produce a much cleaner look.

As for VLB recommendations in general, well good luck trying to get a TSENG or Trio VLB at a good price these days 🙁
Those are the cream of the crop from what iv gathered.

So honestly probably your best bet would be a something Cirrus 5428 (and onwards) based. Fast enough and can be found frequently. Good compatability with EGA/CGA too. Grab one with 2mb and your set.

Generic as hell but get the job done!

Sedrosken wrote on 2020-08-19, 02:03:

.. that will do okay enough in DOS while still actually accelerating DirectDraw applications (like Diablo, or RoadRash95).
..and for a reasonable sum of money

edit: fixed an error..
Ok. So...you want to use a 486 and try to get games like Diablo (out in 1997 designed for Win95+ and a Pentium 60+) or RoadRash95 (which designed for Win95+ and Pentium 75+) to use DD on 486 with VLB card ? WOW good luck you could ever run those well at 800x600 or above on a 486 with any video card "for a reasonable sum of money".

Horun wrote on 2020-08-19, 02:40:

Sedrosken wrote on 2020-08-19, 02:03:

that will do okay enough in DOS while still actually accelerating DirectDraw applications (like Diablo, or RoadRash95).

Ok. So...you want to use a 486 and try to get games like Diablo (out in 1997 designed for Win95+ and a Pentium 60+) or RoadRash95 (which designed for Win95+ and Pentium 75+) to use DD on 486 with VLB card ? WOW good luck you could ever run those well at 800x600 or above on a 486 with any video card.

No, just their native 640x480 (for Diablo, it's very nearly playable now even in software) and 320x240 (RoadRash, again, very nearly playable now, just needs that last push). 800x600 for running the GUI only. And yeah, as for image quality, like I said I'd settle for just not wanting to gouge my eyes out when I look at it on an LCD. I said in the very first post I wasn't expecting anything Matrox-tier.

I'd like to stress that I'm already very near to my goal -- I just need that last little push to make things really smooth enough to justify keeping those games installed.

Ok. the problem is "for a reasonable sum of money". You probably won't find a really good vlb vid card for what you may consider reasonable. You do not say what country you are in (classic error here) as some areas have better deals that others. Suggest you still check ebay and keep an eye on the Euro sellers, some Polish, Russian and Ukrainian sellers have very good deals !

I live in the US, but the big problem with Euro sellers is shipping, especially right now with COVID. A few months back I bought a nice slotket from a German seller and they immediately cancelled the order and refunded my money because they couldn't ship it in a reasonable timeframe with the pandemic and all, which ironically is mostly why I even bought the thing -- having nowhere to go and nothing to do I was working on another project.

I guess I should just be happy with what I've already got, then.

I often wonder how Diablo would have performed if it ran under DOS... even at 640x480 it'd probably be much better than under Win95 on slower machines. I think of it kind of like Warcraft II, the original DOS version vs. the BNE. Now that there's a source code available I wonder just how hard it'd be to produce something that runs under DOS considering there's a Linux and Nintendo Switch port now.

In last few months from Europe: a 286 mobo, a ISA IDE controller, some I/0 shields, some ram and some special cables. All were reasonable shipping and price but they each took about a month to get here. Also every part worked as they described and would do it again if they had the same stuff a second time 😀
BTW: The stamps on packaging from most countries in Europe are beautiful !

ADDED:

Sedrosken wrote on 2020-08-19, 02:58:

I often wonder how Diablo would have performed if it ran under DOS... even at 640x480 it'd probably be much better than under Win95 on slower machines.

If they wrote it for DirectX/Direct Draw it would not perform under DOS any better than a non DX/DD card. There is no true DX/DD support under DOS that actually works AFAIK.

Horun wrote on 2020-08-19, 03:09:

If they wrote it for DirectX/Direct Draw it would not perform under DOS any better than a non DX/DD card. There is no true DX/DD support under DOS that actually works AFAIK.

Well, no, but I'm talking about changing out the graphics library for something that addresses the video hardware directly. Cut out the middleman of Windows 95 on a 486 and you'd be surprised what you accomplish. I see it as no different from how they have to swap out DDraw for SDL2 or whatever on more modern platforms. Remember, it's already pretty close to playable on the DX4-100 just running in software DDraw, I imagine it'd actually be fine under DOS on the same machine.

I don't know if your board would allow for it. But at this point, considering how well it's running for you with a DX4. You might as well get a am5x86-133 and OC it to 150/160mhz too 😀

Make the ultimate middlechild "486-but not a Pentium" system 😁. With VLB, now that's unique.

Well, I tried an Am5x86 and it just would not work. I spent too much on this DX4 OverDrive for it to sit on a shelf, anyway. The Am5x86 was my initial idea, actually.