HanSolo wrote on 2023-07-03, 21:18:

And performance-wise the 166 MMX is comparable to the 200 NonMMX due to its larger cache. So the speed difference is smaller than it seems at first glance.
(Btw. that is one subject in an interesting video from Necroware)

That's good to know But in general I am not craving for the most processing power. After all I have my p3 800 mhz for the more advanced stuff.

If the 166mmx makes things easier to play speed senstive games than that's the way to go without any doubt

@dormcat Thx for your advice as well. Have to agree that for later DOS games a p3 might be very useful. I am also curious to use my p3 for later Dos games.

But for earlier ones intel tx 430 system with a mmx cpu should be the better choice .

@joe22 Thx for your opinion as well.

Like I said for later DOS games I already have my p3 system. So going for another p3 for earlier Dos games is thing I am not going to do probably. I am planning to upgrade my socket 370 p3 coppermine to a p3 1000 mhz coppermine eventually but that upgrade would not do any good for earlier DOS games I think.

Going for pentium 2 instead of a pentium mmx would be in the realm of realm of possibility of course but I do not think it would matter.

Would the extra power of a P2 compared to the MMX do any good for earlier 90s DOS games?

I do not think so but feel free to correct me if i am wrong.

retep_110 wrote on 2023-07-04, 06:23:

Would the extra power of a P2 compared to the MMX do any good for earlier 90s DOS games?

On the contrary, you'd only get more problems. While some early P2s are unlocked and their frequency can be lowered, this doesn't give you nearly as much slowdown range as the MMX + SetMul combo.

Also, many earlier DOS games are subject to the dreaded "Runtime Error 200" bug. You can read up on that here and find a fix. While it's possible to patch most games which suffer from this, sometimes the game's installer executable on the CD is affected too, and you can't patch that without burning a new copy. It's also very inconvenient to randomly run into this bug while checking out new games for the first time and needing to patch them right away.

I did this with a Pentium 3 system and a Voodoo 4500. This Voodoo card has great picture under DOS, and I read that the Voodoo 4500 has issues with the earliest 3DFX games, but I had no issues with them at all. I ran Need for Speed 2, Quake, POD fine. I also had no issues with DOS games from the late era (1992-1995). Some older games will require you to slow down your processor, and I am not sure if you can make a Pentium 3 slow enough for those games. Dig dug for example is way too fast even on the lowest clock with all CPU features turned off. If you are not going to play these games, and you have a Pentium 3 system lying around, give it a go.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2023-07-04, 07:08:

retep_110 wrote on 2023-07-04, 06:23:

Would the extra power of a P2 compared to the MMX do any good for earlier 90s DOS games?

On the contrary, you'd only get more problems. While some early P2s are unlocked and their frequency can be lowered, this doesn't give you nearly as much slowdown range as the MMX + SetMul combo.

Also, many earlier DOS games are subject to the dreaded "Runtime Error 200" bug. You can read up on that here and find a fix. While it's possible to patch most games which suffer from this, sometimes the game's installer executable on the CD is affected too, and you can't patch that without burning a new copy. It's also very inconvenient to randomly run into this bug while checking out new games for the first time and needing to patch them right away.

Thanks for your reply. It just as I thought. Having P2 system might be nice for some type of software but Dos games are not among tha type of software.

A MMX system is the way to go avoid the compability issues I guess.

Pertinax wrote on 2023-07-04, 07:26:

I did this with a Pentium 3 system and a Voodoo 4500. This Voodoo card has great picture under DOS, and I read that the Voodoo 4500 has issues with the earliest 3DFX games, but I had no issues with them at all. I ran Need for Speed 2, Quake, POD fine. I also had no issues with DOS games from the late era (1992-1995). Some older games will require you to slow down your processor, and I am not sure if you can make a Pentium 3 slow enough for those games. Dig dug for example is way too fast even on the lowest clock with all CPU features turned off. If you are not going to play these games, and you have a Pentium 3 system lying around, give it a go.

My hp socket 370 p3 800 mhz with a Riva TNT 2 is my main and only retro rig at the moment and it is working quite well I will give some DOS games a try for sure.

It will take some time anyway before I get my second more DOS focused system.

Like I said in my original post this thead is mainly informal to get a idea in which direction I need to research to get a good more Dos focused rig.

The results are very promising. There are just 3 main options.

Using my finished p3 system

go with mmx system

or the athlon solution that bloodem suggest.

Jo22 wrote on 2023-07-04, 02:27:

Edit: In the 90s, a 486DX2-66 with VLB graphics was usually being considered the sweet spot.
That's what I remember, at least. But maybe the demands have changed since, not sure.

In 1993 a 486 DX2-66 would have been a good gaming rig. But in hindsight, it's in a performance no man's land. In most cases it's either too slow for games that play better on a Pentium or too fast for early 90s speed sensitive games.

retep_110 wrote on 2023-07-03, 18:05:

Thx for your reply. The MMX cpu are not that expensive. 166 MHZ and 233 MHZ are quite cheap at the moment.

Would be better to get the slower or the faster version?

This depends. If you're mainly playing DOS games from the mid-90s, it probably won't make much different either way.

You do mention possibly getting a Voodoo 1 card. On that note, a lot of early Voodoo/Glide games did require Windows 95. So if you wanted to take full advantage of that card, you'd probably want to dual-boot Windows 95 at some point, in which case the faster processor would be more ideal.

I only mention this as I have a Pentium MMX 200 system with a Voodoo 1 and use two OS installs (DOS and Windows 95) for full coverage of Voodoo 1 games.

That's very valid point. I want to run the games as good with possible. Without any sound bugs and they should look as nice as possible.

In that regard the system that bloodem suggest should be the savest bet.

But having a MMX system sounds like a great solution as well.

The nice thing is there are options. Whether you go the Pentium MMX or VIA C3 or even go with multiple DOS computers, there are many of ways of accomplishing the same goal.

The only thing I'd strongly suggest is going for motherboards with multiple ISA slots (ideally at least 3). This will give you more flexibility especially if you end up going with multiple sound cards.

Shponglefan wrote on 2023-07-04, 12:18:

This depends. If you're mainly playing DOS games from the mid-90s, it probably won't make much different either way. […]
Show full quote

retep_110 wrote on 2023-07-03, 18:05:

Thx for your reply. The MMX cpu are not that expensive. 166 MHZ and 233 MHZ are quite cheap at the moment.

Would be better to get the slower or the faster version?

This depends. If you're mainly playing DOS games from the mid-90s, it probably won't make much different either way.

You do mention possibly getting a Voodoo 1 card. On that note, a lot of early Voodoo/Glide games did require Windows 95. So if you wanted to take full advantage of that card, you'd probably want to dual-boot Windows 95 at some point, in which case the faster processor would be more ideal.

I only mention this as I have a Pentium MMX 200 system with a Voodoo 1 and use two OS installs (DOS and Windows 95) for full coverage of Voodoo 1 games.

That's very valid point. I want to run the games as good with possible. Without any sound bugs and they should look as nice as possible.

In that regard the system that bloodem suggest should be the savest bet.

But having a MMX system sounds like a great solution as well.

The nice thing is there are options. Whether you go the Pentium MMX or VIA C3 or even go with multiple DOS computers, there are many of ways of accomplishing the same goal.

The only thing I'd strongly suggest is going for motherboards with multiple ISA slots (ideally at least 3). This will give you more flexibility especially if you end up going with multiple sound cards.

Thanks a lot for the hint to consider windows 95 as well to make out the most of the Voodoo 1 card.

Also thx for the info to for motherboard with mulitiple ISA slots.

Would you recommend a certain brand/type of motherboards?

retep_110 wrote on 2023-07-04, 17:29:

Would you recommend a certain brand/type of motherboards?

Check out those pages:
https://www.vogonswiki.com/index.php/Socket_5 … -7_Motherboards
https://www.vogonswiki.com/index.php/Socket_7 … therboard_Lists

IMHO there are four tiers of motherboard companies in retro computing:

Tier 1: The company is alive, producing consumer motherboards, and has BIOS and drivers of archived products ready for downloading
Tier 2: The company is alive, producing consumer motherboards, but only has support files of recent products
Tier 3: The company is alive but has withdrawn from consumer motherboards, focusing on industrial computers or other fields of technology
Tier 4: The company is defunct and liquidated

Web pages of specific products of Tiers 2-4 might be available from Internet Archive but you have to be lucky.

I've made a list nine months ago but it was written in traditional Chinese. In short, their tiers are:

Tier 1: ASRock, Asus, Biostar*, Dell**, ECS / Elitegroup, Gigabyte, MSI
Tier 2: Chaintech, Soyo, Tyan
Tier 3: AOpen, BCM, DFI, FIC, Jetway, Powercolor, QDI, Shuttle
Tier 4: Abit, Acorp, EPoX, Matsonic, PCChips***, Soltek, Zida

* Pages of archived Biostar products cannot be accessed from main site and require search engines to search specific domains.
** Dell has one of the best driver database but its OEM motherboards are notorious for proprietary hardware standards.
*** PCChips bought ECS and retired the old brand (which had a very ugly history) so "PCChips" is gone but the company is succeeded by ECS.

Shponglefan wrote on 2023-07-04, 12:09:

Jo22 wrote on 2023-07-04, 02:27:

Edit: In the 90s, a 486DX2-66 with VLB graphics was usually being considered the sweet spot.
That's what I remember, at least. But maybe the demands have changed since, not sure.

In 1993 a 486 DX2-66 would have been a good gaming rig. But in hindsight, it's in a performance no man's land. In most cases it's either too slow for games that play better on a Pentium or too fast for early 90s speed sensitive games.

But, but.. It was often being referred to as "the 486" PC. The very essence of DOS gaming goodness. 😿

Most minimum requirements were being covered by the DX2, without breaking old games yet (XT class games don't count, they're always being finicky).
Also, there was a turbo button for 286 era games.

It was MPC Level 1 and 2 complying and good enough as a MIDI / musician's computer.
It made the whole multimedia stuff affordable. Video CD playback (in software), video conferencing, TV tuner cards..

The fast 486es were used in local servers, too. The 486DX2-66 was a good alternative to the fastest original 486, the 486DX-50.
It also was 5v tolerant, if memory serves. It worked in classic 486 motherboards.

In other hobbies, like hobby astronomy or ham radio, the DX2 had about enough "oomph" to make things possible first time.
The 486DX2 was so relevant, because it was "among us" for about the whole 90s.

If I was asked by a beginner/layman what a DOS computer was, and could only give one precise answer, it wouldn't have been a Pentium 133, an IBM PC AT Model 5170 or an IBM PC/XT Model 5160 (yikes!).
My first thought would have been a 486DX2-66 PC with VGA and Sound Blaster.
And that's me, who's more of an 286/386 person.

Edit: Windows 98SE mentioned a 486 @66 MHz in the minimum requirements, too!
So it even served as a Windows 98 PC for the poor.

retep_110 wrote on 2023-07-04, 17:29:

Would you recommend a certain brand/type of motherboards?

I'm partial to AT form factor builds. On my Pentium builds I've used motherboards with Intel 430HX and/or 430VX chipsets. I find them stable and reasonably performant for 90's DOS gaming.

If you prefer an ATX build, you can look for super socket 7 boards. The Gigabyte GA-5AX has a good reputation as being a solid SS7 board.

Jo22 wrote on 2023-07-04, 21:54:

But, but.. It was often being referred to as "the 486" PC. The very essence of DOS gaming goodness. 😿

And it was... in 1993.

With the benefit of modern hindsight, it's just not that good a gaming machine for DOS games.

I say this from experience. I found that for 3D shooters (Doom, etc.) it's generally too slow. Trying playing Doom 2 on ultra violence on a 486 DX2-66. With lots of enemies on the screen it becomes a slide show.

And when I tried using it for early 90s adventure games, I was constantly using the turbo button to throttle performance for speed sensitive games.

Since I was constantly slowing it down anyway, I downgraded to a 486 DX-33. Between the turbo button and cache disabling, I can toggle performance between a 486 DX-33, 386 DX-25, and a 386/286-16.

For late 80s and early 90s games, a 486 DX-33 is perfect. 😀

Is there someone did combinations of settings to slow down plain pentium 75, 90, 100, 133, 166 and 200 and publish 3DBENCH2 (Version 1.0c) results?

Cheers,

Shponglefan wrote on 2023-07-04, 22:44:

Jo22 wrote on 2023-07-04, 21:54:

But, but.. It was often being referred to as "the 486" PC. The very essence of DOS gaming goodness. 😿

And it was... in 1993.

How? The 486DX2-66 was just released a year before, in 1992.
1993 was way too early to make it a legend.
It took years to gain that reputation.
By the mid-late 90s, it way still in wide use. Not as a high-end system, but a fine allrounder.

1993 and a 486DX2-66. Jesus! I saw ads for games of that time that asked for 386SX-16 and similar systems.
Many non-gamers still had humble 286 PCs in the house they had bought years before.
In 1993, having any type of 486 PC was something to be proud of.
Demos ran fine on them, as well. SB Pro and GUS were still going strong.

By 1995, after Windows 95 came out, maybe not so anymore. Okay..
That's when those weird upgrade CPUs popped up everywhere, I suppose (486DX4, am5x86, AMD K6 etc).

But it was possible to stay on DOS/Windows 3.1 and 486 PCs just fine up until 1996/97 or 1999, even.
Most Windows programs in 1996 were widely 16-Bit still.
Or available as 16-Bit application in addition to a 32-Bit one (two EXEs).

I'm thinking of Catalog programs of Shareware CDs. They were built using VB3 (VBRUN300.DLL was in root directory). In 1996, still.
Or access software for online services. The latest WinCIM (2.0.1?) from 1995/1996 was 16-Bit, still.

MOD4WIN was still in development and ran fine on Windows 3.1/486 PCs.
The IDO Filter was still being improved, because a Pentium 133 would have been otherwise required for conventional resampling in real-time.
If memory serves, its readme said "but who has such a PC, anyway?").

As far as I remember, it was when Windows 98 came out that the 16-Bit era had essentially ended.
Which also marked the end for 486 PCs.

Here's a video that gives a good impression about a 486 PC, I think.

Fresh 486DX2 66 MHz takes on the world 😀 AWE32 sound, HD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoD0KNEdXnY

The MovieCD format was from 1996 onwards, and asked for a 486DX2-66 and higher.
Windows 98SE was from 1999..

Seriously, I'm not sure if you're joking or not. 🤷‍♂️
But I hope your seeing it from the rose colured perspective of a gamer only.
Or that you're from another country, reality etc. 😹
In the 90s, I think, PCs were evolving so fast that it was hard to keep up with it.
Some people simply skipped a few generations and waitet, held out.
Except gamers, which were constantly overclocking and upgrading parts. Except the system memory, of course. 😹

Jo22 wrote on 2023-07-04, 23:52:

But I hope your seeing it from the rose colured perspective of a gamer only.

I am looking at it from a gamer's perspective, since that's what I primarily used computers for.

I grew up reading Computer Gaming World and a common feature starting mid-93 were Falcon Northwest gaming PC ads. From about mid-93 to mid-94, they featured the 486 DX2-66 as their top end gaming PC. But even by early 1994 they were advertising it as "Pentium upgradeable". By mid-1994 they started advertising the Pentium as the new high-end option. By late 1994 the 486 DX2-66 wasn't even listed.

By early 1995, the 486 was starting to become minimum requirements in many 3D games with Pentiums being listed as the recommended option.

In that respect, I'd agree that from 1993 to mid-to-late 1994, a 486 DX2-66 was certainly a reputable gaming machine. But by 1995, the Pentium was surpassing the 486 era as the new gaming high end.

Mind you, all of this doesn't change the fact that it's not a great gaming machine in hind-sight. Doom was the big reason to get a 486 back in late 1993 to 1994. But this doesn't change the fact it plays better on a Pentium than a 486, along with all the Doom clones and other 3D games released from 1993 to 1995.

They are very few games where a 486 DX2-66 is the optimal system.

Shponglefan wrote on 2023-07-05, 00:55:

I am looking at it from a gamer's perspective, since that's what I primarily used computers for. […]
Show full quote

Jo22 wrote on 2023-07-04, 23:52:

But I hope your seeing it from the rose colured perspective of a gamer only.

I am looking at it from a gamer's perspective, since that's what I primarily used computers for.

[..]

By early 1995, the 486 was starting to become minimum requirements in many 3D games with Pentiums being listed as the recommended option.

Ah, I see. Ok, ok. That makes sense, that's why there are differences.
I was more of a 2D person, being into the shareware and hobbyist scene rather than commercial titles.
I avoided playing shooter games, too, due to reasons of conscience.
Couldn't bring myself to aim on people..
Games like Asteroids or Descent were okay, though.

And Commander Keen IV, of course. Loved that game.
Some PC shop I often visited in the late 90s ran it 24/7 in a weird arcade-like steel cage (sort of wire/mesh construction).
I've found this to be amusing, but also kinda cool. All the work just for Commander Keen!

To me, a PC was more like a general-purpose tool and communications device.
I remember tinkering with VB1 and building interfaces for gameport and such.
At one point I had a DCF-77 radio receiver, which I enjoyed watching doing its work.
It came with a diagnostic program that showed all the status bits of the DCF-77 time station.

I also ran moon phase prediction programs and astronomy programs like SkyMap (Win 3.1) and SkyGlobe (DOS).
And MOD players, of course. These shareware CDs were full of MOD and GIF files. And FLI/FLC animations. ^^
I've spent many nights reading all the readme files using Norton Commander!

Edit: One of the most sophisticated freeware games that I found was an arcade-like game called "Betamax" in the late 90s.
It remember it, because it required a hot-rod 486 with VLB graphics. It claimed so, at least.
It had connections to the demo scene, I believe.
- I also ran those demos, too, of course. They were on the shareware CDs, after all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZ-h3OZ_8Cc

Gaming wise, I primarily knew commercial games from using game consoles.
Among the last NES game I bought was Lion King, I vaguely remember. That was in 1996, it was sold in a store. Not second-hand, but new. Behind glass, with a security lock.

I also got Yoshi's Island for Super NES in 1997, when it was still sold as brand new (Toys are Us?).
By that time, both consoles were still in common use, despite the N64 being out. And that Playstation thing.

The Super NES was sort of a gray eminence, I guess that's how someone called it.
Gameboy titles like Pokémon Gold/Silver (1999/2000?) still supported the Super Gameboy adapter (colour palette, border).
In 1996, the Club Nintendo help line was still available via phone, I remember.

Anyway, I'm just glad that there's a rational explanation for the difference in dates.
I was already starting to question all my memories. 😅

Edit: I've also read the rest of your response.
Thanks a lot for your explanation and understanding. 😃👍

Shponglefan wrote on 2023-07-04, 22:31:

retep_110 wrote on 2023-07-04, 17:29:

Would you recommend a certain brand/type of motherboards?

I'm partial to AT form factor builds. On my Pentium builds I've used motherboards with Intel 430HX and/or 430VX chipsets. I find them stable and reasonably performant for 90's DOS gaming.

If you prefer an ATX build, you can look for super socket 7 boards. The Gigabyte GA-5AX has a good reputation as being a solid SS7 board.

Thanks for the advice. I will check out both variants.

@dormcat Thanks a lot for your detailed post as well. I will check out the links you posted asap to get more information.

ps: The discussion about the 486 is also very interesting. I cannot contribute anything to it but I really enjoyed reading about it.

Shponglefan wrote on 2023-07-04, 22:31:

I'm partial to AT form factor builds.

Interesting. I'm curious as to why, since AT power supplies in good condition are difficult to come by these days. I suppose one could use a modern ATX PSU with an adapter, but in that case, might as well go for an ATX board.

Some later 430TX based motherboards do come with an ATX power connector. My Soyo SY-5BT is one such example.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2023-07-05, 07:30:

Some later 430TX based motherboards do come with an ATX power connector. My Soyo SY-5BT is one such example.

My Asus TXP4 has both AT and ATX power connectors but is in Baby AT form factor; its "sibling" TXP4-X is completely ATX compliant.

Maybe a 486 build with a ZIF CPU socket? Then you could get a few common chips (like DX-33 and a DX2-66), maybe find a DX4 overdrive later on. Any 486 board will fit this profile, it's a very common configuration. A lot of 386-specific games will work using turbo.

This way, your main P3 build will work with late DOS games, 16-bit sound (SB16 or WSS), your 486 will cover early 90s stuff with SB Pro/AdLib and (if you care about it) MT-32.

Seems like the least overlap between two builds.

Jo22 wrote on 2023-07-04, 23:52:

In 1993, having any type of 486 PC was something to be proud of.
Demos ran fine on them, as well. SB Pro and GUS were still going strong.

The compo machine at the Assembly 1993 was a 486//33. So yes, a DX2/66 would have been incredible for demos.
The official compo machine at the Assembly 1995 was a 486 DX2/66 VLB with 4 MB (+SB Pro 2 & GUS) so I tend to say pretty much all demos ran fine on it until that point (August 1995). The Party 1995 in December then had a Pentium 90.