LunarG wrote on 2021-03-11, 16:04:

Hope this isn't going to offend anyone, but if the one and only purpose of a retro system is as a tool to run old software, then […]
Show full quote

Hope this isn't going to offend anyone, but if the one and only purpose of a retro system is as a tool to run old software, then it truly is pointless, as you can do it just fine with PCEm, DosBox or other virtualization software. So if the only goal you are aiming for is to be able to run the software, then go that route. Much cheaper, fewer frustrations etc.
For me, a large part of building and tweaking old systems, is because I enjoy the hardware side of things. Today's hardware is a bit samey. If you buy a motherboard, your choice of CPU is pretty much set. And there's only one really meaningful choice when it comes to brand of graphics card... "Is it a GeForce or a Radeon?" Asus, MSI, EVGA, etc... It doesn't REALLY matter. They're all pretty much the same.
Back in the 90's, you could buy a motherboard, and you might have half a dozen brands of CPUs to choose from... Intel, AMD, Cyrix, UMC, IDT, Rise etc. That's not even mentioning the Cyrix derivatives from Thomson ST, IBM, Texas Instruments. And for graphics card? Yikes... Matrox, Tseng, S3, Nvidia, ATI, 3Dfx, Cirrus Logic, ARK Logic, Avance Logic, Paradise/WD, Number Nine, and the list goes on. And I've not even mentioned sound cards.
Does it make "practical sense" to use a retro system compared to using DosBox if I only wanted to play games? No, obviously not. Could I do the same things on a SBC? Mostly, yes.
But it's the fun of trying out different hardware that I never had the opportunity to do back in the day, and the fun of testing different weird configurations, and benchmarking... In short, retro systems are a hobby, not a tool.

So what usefulness does the PII 450 offer? It's great if you want to build a '98 build and see what the best of the best back then could do. This is something you can't do with a Pentium III 800, as that didn't come out until December '99. So sure, the Pentium III can run all the same stuff, but that doesn't matter, because if you're interested to see what could be done in '98, then anything released after 1998 is irrelevant.

IMHO, the primary point of having any computer, old or new, is using it to run software .
Emulation is not perfect, though getting closer all the time . FPGA re-implementation is another approach that will help bring us even closer.
If there ever comes a time when objectively perfect (indistinguishable from the real thing) re-creations of software/hardware environments can be experienced in a "Matrix"-like virtual reality environment, I believe that owning actual retro hardware will lose a lot of its appeal, except to die-hard collectors .

In the mean time, we have real physical old hardware to enjoy when possible and emulation/FPGA to augment/complement and sometimes replace it, depending on one's tolerance to emulation's current limits .
I also agree that playing with old hardware is a lot of the fun, but it still does not need to be period correct .

At the end of the day, if I play Doom 1 on my "period incorrect" Pentium 3 1400 and a real Sound Canvas or Gravis Ultrasound and/or Orpheus and/or AWE64 off of an SSD , is my retro experience any more or less valid than that of someone who scrupulously builds a setup where all parts are 1993 vintage because he wants to experience a "moment in time" ?

TLDR, IMHO :
- Period correctness is as important as you want it to be, if you even care at all. It can also be as loose or restrictive as you want to be , timeframe wise . It is an entirely subjective choice from a usage/enjoyment point of view .
- Real hardware can be used for period incorrect (hot-rodded) builds without resorting to emulation and still be part of the retro experience . The only limit is compatibility (part of the fun is stretching that) between older/newer software and hardware
- Emulation can be part of the retro experience and is a valid personal choice
- Period correctness to any degree, for any reason in a personal build, is a subjective personal choice, but the concept does matter for historical preservation and museum exhibits (depending on scope, purpose and practical constraints) which should strive to be as historically accurate as possible .

Also, maybe I missed this being mentioned, but a p2 with a 440bx based board can usually accept slot 1 p3's up to a point. So you can conceivably make a double headed monster, though you will be stuck at 100 mhz fsb, for the most part.

In general, 440BX will understand Katmai Pentium III, since it's not any different from PII electrically.

An unlocked P2 400 is nice for 1997 and earlier games. In 1998 games like Unreal and Half Life, it offers playable performance in the 30fps range, as long as you don't use A3D.
Enable A3D in Half Life, and you're solidly in the 20s, with frequent dips below 20.
But then again, even a 1.1GHz P3 on a 440bx could not maintain steady 60fps in Half Life with A3D. So for high performance Win98 and late DOS gaming, I'm looking to try out a mobile Athlon on a board with ISA slot. And if that doesn't cut it, might as well ditch ISA and go for a fast Athlon XP, or even A64.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2021-03-11, 12:27:

Nowadays I would go for the PII 450 as it used to be a kind of "end of an era" cpu.

PII 450 doesn't fit even into that category. That would be Slot 1 PIII 600.

But weren't many 450 Katmais (those with SL35D s-spec) essentially factory downclocked 600Bs?

Some had identical L2 cache, which is not the same thing as stable working core at 600 Mhz and at stock voltage. But 133 Mhz is officially not supported by 440BX anyway.
Although I had similar experience with Pentium II Klamath. One of mine PIIs 233 have L2 cache from PII 300 and can overclock slightly better.

There was also SL2W8 Deschutes 300/66 that had cache from 450. That was my 450 of choice in late 1998. Then got an SL35D when those came around.

But yeah if you are looking for 60 fps in many 1998 and newer games, this isn't the hardware you want.

swaaye wrote on 2021-03-12, 15:25:

There was also SL2W8 Deschutes 300/66 that had cache from 450. That was my 450 of choice in late 1998. Then got an SL35D when those came around.

But yeah if you are looking for 60 fps in many 1998 and newer games, this isn't the hardware you want.

The quote that says about playing 1998 and later is best answer I was wondering about. I

have many computer that are 486 and pentium for tricky game that to work.
Other games that are DOS, and many windows games that works well with PII 450? Or is there too many windows games that needs powerful CPU just to work?

Cheers,

pentiumspeed wrote on 2021-03-12, 19:30:

The quote that says about playing 1998 and later is best answer I was wondering about. I […]
Show full quote

swaaye wrote on 2021-03-12, 15:25:

There was also SL2W8 Deschutes 300/66 that had cache from 450. That was my 450 of choice in late 1998. Then got an SL35D when those came around.

But yeah if you are looking for 60 fps in many 1998 and newer games, this isn't the hardware you want.

The quote that says about playing 1998 and later is best answer I was wondering about. I

have many computer that are 486 and pentium for tricky game that to work.
Other games that are DOS, and many windows games that works well with PII 450? Or is there too many windows games that needs powerful CPU just to work?

Cheers,

I have a p2 400mhz system with a geforce2 gts agp, i'll set it up and give you some benchmarks when I have a chance

pentiumspeed wrote on 2021-03-12, 19:30:

The quote that says about playing 1998 and later is best answer I was wondering about. I […]
Show full quote

swaaye wrote on 2021-03-12, 15:25:

There was also SL2W8 Deschutes 300/66 that had cache from 450. That was my 450 of choice in late 1998. Then got an SL35D when those came around.

But yeah if you are looking for 60 fps in many 1998 and newer games, this isn't the hardware you want.

The quote that says about playing 1998 and later is best answer I was wondering about. I

have many computer that are 486 and pentium for tricky game that to work.
Other games that are DOS, and many windows games that works well with PII 450? Or is there too many windows games that needs powerful CPU just to work?

Cheers,

There are countless PC games for Windows out there. Many of those games should work fine with a P2 450MHz. Obviously a faster CPU will be compatible with more demanding Windows games.

It will depend a lot on which games you intend to play on it.

If there is any practical spciality regarding the Deschutes 450MHz, it may be it having a compatibility which the Katmai 450MHz lacks in the obscure case of a motherboard which (for whatever reason) does not have any compatibility with some particular obscure motherboard for which no (BIOS) updates are available.

The Pentium 2 450MHz is possibly the least remarkable top-of-the-line CPU and this is (in my opinion) partially due to marketing from Intel. The Katmai is basically a Pentium 2+ with the Coppermine perhaps being the real Pentium 3. It (the Katmai) didn't get a new CPU socket, the Katmai is basically what should have been the top Pentium 2 models. But it's just the name that is different. Well, basically, that is 😜

Debate on period correctness is all futile. One either swears by it or never pay a shit on it.

For Windows games, I would always go for the best CPU regardless. There are only very few Windows games that really puke at fast CPUs. And for those, there are always ways to slow them down. But isn't this complete disregard of period correctness experience? Yeah, but period correctness experience would also include playing games at 640x480 16bpp (even though the games support something better) between 20 and 30 FPS perhaps with frame skipping, dealing with slow spindle and noisy HDDs and so on. So, no thanks.

The spark of GPU race after year 2000 had spawned games that were unplayable with period correct hardware, or just barely playable at default settings with extreme high-end setup of the time. (SLI, extreme edition CPUs, anyone?) Coupled with dropping Win9x support to force inevitable upgrade cycles, games which weren't made to be compatible with Win2K/XP were simply out of luck. Imagine if 3DMark2001SE only worked on Win9x, what could be the absolute best scores for being period correct?

If period correctness doesnt matter, and OP is truly concerned about problems with older DOS games, and wants to run on authentic hardware, then i'd consider investing in an original pentium as well as a p3 system w/ 133 mhz bus for newer opengl games, and skip the p2.

kjliew wrote on 2021-03-12, 22:37:

Debate on period correctness is all futile. One either swears by it or never pay a shit on it.

For Windows games, I would always go for the best CPU regardless. There are only very few Windows games that really puke at fast CPUs. And for those, there are always ways to slow them down. But isn't this complete disregard of period correctness experience? Yeah, but period correctness experience would also include playing games at 640x480 16bpp (even though the games support something better) between 20 and 30 FPS perhaps with frame skipping, dealing with slow spindle and noisy HDDs and so on. So, no thanks.

The spark of GPU race after year 2000 had spawned games that were unplayable with period correct hardware, or just barely playable at default settings with extreme high-end setup of the time. (SLI, extreme edition CPUs, anyone?) Coupled with dropping Win9x support to force inevitable upgrade cycles, games which weren't made to be compatible with Win2K/XP were simply out of luck. Imagine if 3DMark2001SE only worked on Win9x, what could be the absolute best scores for being period correct?

I have rarely agreed more . +1

Last post from Darry is what I wanted to hear about.

Cheers,