Fun build! its very close to the specs of my first "proper" home PC around '95-'96, a Pentium 100 which was purchased through Australia's famed Wally from Wally's Computers. I'd love to rebuild it but I couldnt for the life of you tell you what motherboard or soundcard we had. I do recall it was a 1.1Gb Disk Drive, and that it came with a big box that was absolutely overflowing with software and games 😁 good luck with the build!

ErroneousHyphen wrote on 2024-10-12, 09:34:

Australia's famed Wally from Wally's Computers

I don't know (or maybe remember) Wally, Is this them?
https://youtu.be/j8OSYx_jxNQ?si=68AsL66CJHGTsdMr

Could be we didn't get them in South Coast NSW
We did have
Computer Town Australia, Windang Road Wingdang
https://youtu.be/hnB2pBUwetg?si=PoQ0VEZ564TfesDI

That jingle at the 0:35 mark is still burned into my memory

The Gigabyte GA-586ATV motherboard I'm using for this build features a Turbo Switch, something of a rarity on Socket 7 boards.

The turbo function itself doesn't make a huge difference in performance. The case I happen to be using doesn't feature a turbo button, so I probably won't be using it anyway.

Cache disabling makes a bigger impact to performance. With L1 cache disabled, the system performs like a 486 and with both L1 and L2 cache disabled, a 386.

Benchmark specs: Pentium MMX 166, Gigabyte GA-586ATV motherboard, 24MB RAM (8 MB FPM/16MB EDO), Matrox Millennium (4MB)

chinny22 wrote on 2024-10-10, 01:55:

Third PC by '97! We only replaced the Apple IIe in '95 with a 486 which was the only PC till I got my very own (as in not the family) PII 400 in '99.
I love the secret upgrades though. I doubt my parents would have noticed either but luckily I didn't have to hide the fact, just as long as they could still use MS Office.
I still have that 486 and can't bring myself to upgrade it as that IS my memories. Instead I have faster better equipped 486's but the original is still my favourite.

I suppose we were a little lucky to have the PCs we did back then. 😀

And that's awesome you still have one of your original family PCs! Would have loved to hang onto all of our original computers, but sadly didn't have the foresight for that. I suppose recreating them is the next best thing.

ErroneousHyphen wrote on 2024-10-12, 09:34:

Fun build! its very close to the specs of my first "proper" home PC around '95-'96, a Pentium 100 which was purchased through Australia's famed Wally from Wally's Computers. I'd love to rebuild it but I couldnt for the life of you tell you what motherboard or soundcard we had. I do recall it was a 1.1Gb Disk Drive, and that it came with a big box that was absolutely overflowing with software and games 😁 good luck with the build!

Thank you! Admittedly trying to remember all the original components is tough, but getting close enough is good enough, imho. 😁

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-10-13, 23:34:

Cache disabling makes a bigger impact to performance. With L1 cache disabled, the system performs like a 486 and with both L1 and L2 cache disabled, a 386.

You can get even more slowdown range by toggling the test registers via SetMul.

Check this video by Phil of you haven't already.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-10-14, 01:53:

You can get even more slowdown range by toggling the test registers via SetMul.

Check this video by Phil of you haven't already.

Oh yes, I've seen that video. For the purpose of testing/benchmarking, I was mainly curious to see how the Turbo function would impact things, since it's not as a common means of slowing down MMX systems.

chinny22 wrote on 2024-10-13, 23:06:

I don't know (or maybe remember) Wally, Is this them? https://youtu.be/j8OSYx_jxNQ?si=68AsL66CJHGTsdMr […]
Show full quote

ErroneousHyphen wrote on 2024-10-12, 09:34:

Australia's famed Wally from Wally's Computers

I don't know (or maybe remember) Wally, Is this them?
https://youtu.be/j8OSYx_jxNQ?si=68AsL66CJHGTsdMr

Could be we didn't get them in South Coast NSW
We did have
Computer Town Australia, Windang Road Wingdang
https://youtu.be/hnB2pBUwetg?si=PoQ0VEZ564TfesDI

That jingle at the 0:35 mark is still burned into my memory

Yep fairstar computers is them, that's one of their NZ ads - here's a slightly earlier one with the legend himself

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkAhTg34jFM

I think at the time we bought from him, it was "Wally's Computer World" or something similar. He even had his own accounting software package with his face on the front, partnered with pastel (can be seen in that video attached).

He didn't have a very good reputation from memory, I have heard from some reading on some much older forums that the hardware he was selling was outdated and a bit overpriced, or perhaps the interest free $100 down deal had some kind of service fee or interest clause that caught a few people. I remember being pretty stoked with it as was Dad, who was pretty tech savvy, and with the amount of video games and software packages it came with perhaps we got a particularly good deal at the time hah.

He's still got an advertising business too - Advertising Advantage.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-10-13, 23:34:

The turbo function itself doesn't make a huge difference in performance.

But what does it do then if not disabling cache in runtime? Can it be so that your turbo works only in real mode and not in protected?

I would say. Your CPU is Fast enough. But I would add 32mb of Memory or 64mb
CF card might be to Slow and unreliable. Maybe a SSD instead.
For Win95 it was known to Crash because of the Page file being to small.
You want to increase the page file to max in virtual memory settings.
Make sure you use the Best drivers and service packs.

Bruno128 wrote on 2024-10-14, 10:31:

But what does it do then if not disabling cache in runtime? Can it be so that your turbo works only in real mode and not in protected?

I'm not entirely sure how the turbo function works on this board. The manual states that the low speed setting is "non-cache". However, turbo functionality still throttles the system with cache disabled, so it must be doing something else.

Edited:

It turns out the turbo button sets the front side bus to 50 MHz. Since the Pentium 166 runs at 66 MHz, it effectively slows it down by 24%.

Too slow the CPU down to 386 or 486 speeds you could use a program called “SetMul” ( Set Multiplier ).

I decided to test out some different 1997-era PCI video cards to see how they would perform relative to the Matrox Millennium.

I tested a Hercules Terminator 3D/DX (S3 Virge/DX), Matrox Millennium II, and Diamond Viper V330 (nVidia Riva 128).

The two Matrox cards performed identically. The S3 card was a bit slower in Doom, Quake, the 640x480 PC Player benchmark. Whereas the Riva 128 card was faster in 3D Bench, Doom, and 640x480 PC Player benchmark. Overall there wasn't a huge difference in performance, but the Riva 128 card did have a slight edge over the others.

System specs for the benchmarks: Pentium MMX 166, Gigabyte GA-586ATV motherboard, 24MB RAM (8 MB FPM/16MB EDO), L1/L2 cache enabled

Completed the main assembly of the parts and case, including replacing the green power button with a beige one.

I installed a Noctua 80mm NF-R8 redux-1200 fan for additional air circulation. It won't move a lot of air, but any extra airflow across the Voodoo card can't hurt.

Also make sure 32-bit access is Enabled.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-10-14, 15:03:

The two Matrox cards performed identically.

Interesting. I thought the Millennium II would perform a bit better due to slightly higher clocks.

On that note, the Millennium II might be preferable due to its 250 MHz RAMDAC and support for the proprietary Matrox MSI API. I didn't test that a whole lot, but I do know that Tomb Raider works with it, though it needs a newer patch.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-10-14, 16:54:

Interesting. I thought the Millennium II would perform a bit better due to slightly higher clocks.

Technically the Millennium II scored 0.1 FPS higher in Doom and Quake. I consider that within a margin error given how close the scores were.

But I agree, I would have thought there would be more difference between the two cards.

On that note, the Millennium II might be preferable due to its 250 MHz RAMDAC and support for the proprietary Matrox MSI API. I didn't test that a whole lot, but I do know that Tomb Raider works with it, though it needs a newer patch.

Interesting, so is the Millennium II basically the same as the Mystique in that regard? I wonder if it would work with the Mystique version of Mechwarrior 2?

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-10-14, 17:33:

Interesting, so is the Millennium II basically the same as the Mystique in that regard? I wonder if it would work with the Mystique version of Mechwarrior 2?

AFAIK, it has the same 3D core as the Mystique, so it's possible.

However, as mentioned before, you need the absolute latest MSI patches. I'm guessing it would be the same for the Mystique 220 compared to OG Mystique. For Tomb Raider, I used the MSI patch from this thread. And here's a video (not mine) showcasing this in action.

P.S.

I vaguely recall that some of the later BIOS versions for the Millennium II may have removed MSI functionality. Don't remember the exact details, but I think I found that info somewhere on this forum.

Intel486dx33 wrote on 2024-10-14, 16:29:

Also make sure 32-bit access is Enabled.

The OP knows about 1000X more about this stuff than you do, so stop stinking up his thread with your nonsense.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-10-13, 23:34:

The Gigabyte GA-586ATV motherboard I'm using for this build features a Turbo Switch, something of a rarity on Socket 7 boards.

I've seen Socket 7 boards with a turbo header and have wondered about them - it's strange that they bothered with such a pointless feature. It was just another thing that needed testing and which could potentially cause issues if not used correctly.

The turbo function on this board is a little odd.

I took another look at the manual to see what it says. In the list of jumpers, it states that when closed (throttled) its cache is off.

This clearly isn't the case, since disabling cache has a much bigger impact on performance. But then a couple pages later, it described the function as follows:

Reducing the FSB to 50 MHz makes sense. From 66 MHz to 50 MHz is about a 24% decrease in performance. All my benchmarks show that same decrease in performance.

It's funny they mention programs written for the XT requiring the use of a turbo function; there is no way a Pentium is slowing down that much. 😅

By itself, throttling a Pentium by 24% isn't that useful. But it's definitely more useful when combined with cache disabling or other throttling methods to get it to 486 or 386 levels.