I just spotted this ebay listing. It's for 2 x 16MB (32MB total) FPM, 72-pin 60ns. £8.99 including shipping. It isn't cheap, so maybe buy it if you can't find any cheaper alternatives?

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/2-x-16MB-FPM-Front-Page … y-/320560221468

Retro, it's a tenner cheaper than the stuff I was looking at so I'll probably end up getting it if noone has any they want to flog. The one I was looking at was a 32MB single line though which would allow me 64mb if needed. From what I read this won't be needed though.

When you say it isn't cheap, you really don't want to know how much I've been getting rinsed on my retro hardware purchases! I just want the stuff sooner rather than later so am paying well over the odds.

Hehe. BTW, for a DOS based 486 system, 32MB is extremely generous.

retro games 100 wrote:

Hehe. BTW, for a DOS based 486 system, 32MB is extremely generous.

That and some of those boards won't cache all of the 64MB if you use the writeback option 😉

Thanks for the replies guys - I'll go for the 2 16mb ones in the auction.

Thanks for the replies guys - I'll go for the 2 16mb ones in the auction.

I have at least 100 sticks of old ram. But not sure if it still works.

It's a shame that ASUS board came with only 2 SIMM slots.

Tetrium wrote:

It's a shame that ASUS board came with only 2 SIMM slots.

From a "retro perspective" it is not a problem, because 16MB SIMMs these days are relatively affordable. Another reason to stick to 32MB as opposed to 64MB, is that some old DOS games get confused if you have too much RAM. 2 sticks of 16MB will be just fine. DOOM only needed 4MB, and Dark Forces needed 8MB. If you want to use Windows 95 for instance, I'd recommend a Pentium based system.

For DOS, I wouldn't even bother to exceed 16 MB. Privateer has a nasty sound problem, when you have more than 16 MB extended/ems. Thats why I usually limit that sort of memory to 12000.

I am pretty sure to have some 72 pin ram about. If there is still need, please post.

Looking at the stason webpage for this Asus mobo, it's possible to have either 1 or 2 sticks of FPM installed. If both sticks are installed, and the O.P. comes across a game that doesn't work correctly with 32MB, then the stick in Bank 1 can be removed. So, I think it's worth getting a pair of sticks.

retro games 100 wrote:

If both sticks are installed, and the O.P. comes across a game that doesn't work correctly with 32MB, then the stick in Bank 1 can be removed. So, I think it's worth getting a pair of sticks.

The problem with this approach is, that "too much ram" is way back in the trouble solution que, if present at all. So you might waste plenty of time. With too little ram, you are usually told when you install or start the game.

So personally, I prefer to stick with enough instead of abundant. Just my 2 cents.

ux-3 wrote:

retro games 100 wrote:

If both sticks are installed, and the O.P. comes across a game that doesn't work correctly with 32MB, then the stick in Bank 1 can be removed. So, I think it's worth getting a pair of sticks.

The problem with this approach is, that "too much ram" is way back in the trouble solution que, if present at all. So you might waste plenty of time. With too little ram, you are usually told when you install or start the game.

So personally, I prefer to stick with enough instead of abundant. Just my 2 cents.

Yes I agree. That's a good approach.

ux-3 wrote:

For DOS, I wouldn't even bother to exceed 16 MB..

Ram drive baby 😉

Davros wrote:

ux-3 wrote:

For DOS, I wouldn't even bother to exceed 16 MB..

Ram drive baby 😉

Are you sure that a CF card will be much slower? At least it doesn't cut away your lower memory, and it certainly offers more capacity per unit currency 😁

ux-3 / Menkau - Thanks for the offers but I purchased the ebay RAM that Retro found.

My thinking was I could add a stick or remove a stick if certain games were giving me problems. I would like this machine to cover early to mid 90s DOS gaming (within reason - I'll build a pentium for Quake and beyond. I may build a 386 for earliest DOS as I'm pretty sure the DX4 will be too fast to run Wing Commander and Test Drive 3 at playable speeds. I like the idea of 3 machines.

hargcore wrote:

I may build a 386 for earliest DOS as I'm pretty sure the DX4 will be too fast to run Wing Commander and Test Drive 3 at playable speeds. I like the idea of 3 machines.

Test Drive and Wing Commander should be fine if you swap the DX4 for a 486 DX or SX and turn off the L1 cache.

5u3 wrote:

hargcore wrote:

Test Drive and Wing Commander should be fine if you swap the DX4 for a 486 DX or SX and turn off the L1 cache.

That's an excellent idea...

In general I find 486 machines more flexible as you can run a 25MHz cpu all the way up to a DX4-100 and AMDs 133 chip.

Often you can also change the speed simply by changing the bus speed jumper and the multiplier jumper (in case of a DX2 or DX4 cpu)...

Malik did a review with a DX2-66 MHz with L1 cache disabled and it runs Wing Commander perfectly!

Wing Commander I in 486 DX2-66 - Perfect Speed Attained!!

So in the OPs case simply changing the multiplier to 2x instead of 3x and disabling L1 cache should do the trick... Fine tweak it with the system bus (25, 33 or 40) and you should get good results.

5u3 wrote:

hargcore wrote:

I may build a 386 for earliest DOS as I'm pretty sure the DX4 will be too fast to run Wing Commander and Test Drive 3 at playable speeds. I like the idea of 3 machines.

Test Drive and Wing Commander should be fine if you swap the DX4 for a 486 DX or SX and turn off the L1 cache.

I think it's likely that these early speed sensitive games will run at approximately their correct speeds if the L1 cache is disabled, without the need to replace the DX4 CPU with a slower DX or SX chip. One reason for this thought is that a P3 system (1.4 Ghz) with its L1 cache disabled drops down in speed to roughly that of a 386. I think that one Pro for getting a 386 is that you can fine tune its speed by selecting its processor and mobo cache. One Con for getting a 386 is that it's now rather ancient hardware, and not as easy to deal with compared to old Pentium systems. It's interesting, because 486s seem to fit somewhere in between..

Edit: Also, to fine tune the 486 mobo to make it as slow as a 386, it will be worth tweaking the memory timings inside the BIOS set up area. I think that disabling L1 cache and setting the BIOS memory timings should be (hopefully) all you need to do to adjust the speed of the 486. The reason I suggest trying this idea, before putting in an SX chip for example, is because of those pesky mobo jumpers that will need rearranging!

I myself live by the following rule:

I don't play on a 486 if I don't absolutely have to. I use it to cross-check, if the game acts properly or to bypass installation errors on bigger HDDs and such. But unless I absolutely have to, I play on cheaper systems. A 486 is just too hard to replace.