Isn't a voodoo3 supposed to be on par with voodoo2 sli?

Yup it is. Just enough to get you around 60fps with Carmageddon. 😀

awgamer wrote:

Here's a list of some intensive dos games that a pentium1/mmx may not be enough to run well or at max settings:

transport tycoon, deluxe

I distinctly remember playing TTD on a 486DX4 and it ran fine, why is it in this list?

I mis-remembering or you? (me: sets dosbox to equivalent of a 486@100, runs ttd and scrolls around the map zoomed out: chug, chug, chug, set to pentium mmx 233, smoother, still some chop, set to pii 450, smooth)

Newsflash: Dosbox can barely be called close to cycle-accurate.

TTD was released in 1995, it definitely doesn't need a 450MHz P2. It was a very well written game compared to other 640x480 titles at the time.

True it's not cycle accurate, it's cycle approximate, it matches close enough, and it's not about what's needed to run a game, it's about running things at max.

awgamer wrote:

... wing commander 3, 4 nfs, settlers 2 screamer, flight sim 5.0 quake tomb raider redneck rampage ... […]
Show full quote

...
wing commander 3, 4
nfs,
settlers 2
screamer,
flight sim 5.0
quake
tomb raider
redneck rampage
...

I clearly remember playing these games in a 486 class computer (with Cyrix 5x86 100, OC'd to 120 by mistake) without a Voodoo. Yeah, they were probably being played in a fashion not very comfortable, but that was what was available so we had fun with what we had.

Puting this aside, at this age, what's the point in going thru again all the hassles caused by lack of money for better computers? Go for the fastest thing that will allow you to max out everything that these games can offer. To me, retro gaming is not "exactly replicating what I was able to do in the past", but actually "to experience what I couldn't do back in days".

I'll play most of the games in this list on nothing less than my PIII 1400 with Voodoo2 SLI and Ti4200. The best kill is overkill 🤣

Deksor wrote:

My MMX 233 runs duke3D in 800x600 res at 25-30fps.

I highly doubt that, with my Pentium 2 Overdrive @ 350mhz & Geforce FX5500 with the dos tweaks 800x600 the slowdowns were bad, had to drop back 640x480.

I use my Pentium 133 rig for many DOS games and use my Pentium 3 rig for more demanding DOS games that will have performance issues on a Pentium 1

dirkmirk wrote:

Deksor wrote:

My MMX 233 runs duke3D in 800x600 res at 25-30fps.

I highly doubt that, with my Pentium 2 Overdrive @ 350mhz & Geforce FX5500 with the dos tweaks 800x600 the slowdowns were bad, had to drop back 640x480.

I can vouch for this. My P200MMX benched in Duke3D 800x600 with various graphics cards:

TNT2 M64 32MB 30.0
ARK2000PV 1MB SDD53A 30.0
CL-GD5446 1MB SDD53A 28.0
VOODOO3 2000 16MB 28.0
S3 Virge GX 2MB S3VBE 28.0
S3 Trio64 V2/DX 2MB S3VBE 28.0
S3 Virge 325 2MB S3VBE 28.0
MILLENNIUM II 4MB 28.0
S3 Trio64V+ 1MB S3VBE 28.0
ATI Rage 128 GL 16MB 20.0
CL-GD5430 2MB SDD53A 16.0

Revolter wrote:

Magic Carpet, ... also require something like a Pentium III 700 to run smooth in 640x400/480 mode.

If you talk about this Magic Carpet, this came out 1994 and is unplayable fast on my P200. Not sure why you would need a P3 for it.

In general, one should not aim for 60fps if the original experience matters. Fast computers at the time reached more like 20 to 30fps at most in "AAA" shooters. Reading old games magazine of the time it seems they considered 15fps already as perfectly playable.

realoldguy23 wrote:

Revolter wrote:

Magic Carpet, ... also require something like a Pentium III 700 to run smooth in 640x400/480 mode.

If you talk about this Magic Carpet, this came out 1994 and is unplayable fast on my P200. Not sure why you would need a P3 for it.

Yes, this one. I dare you to hit "R" for 640x480 mode, "F4" for smooth filter and to enable reflections and shadows on the P200 😀 It will look gorgeous, but no period-correct CPU will ever be able to keep up. In default 320x200 resolution - yes, a 486 is more than enough.

😀 You made me curious. I didn't know this was possible. I thought I had already set everything to "high". I own the game from the time when it was in the "10 DM Software Pyramide" in big electronic stores, so around 1996-98. I never liked it and regretted the purchase afterwards. Maybe now, 20 years later, I give it another go.

tayyare wrote:

I clearly remember playing these games in a 486 class computer (with Cyrix 5x86 100, OC'd to 120 by mistake) without a Voodoo. Y […]
Show full quote

awgamer wrote:

... wing commander 3, 4 nfs, settlers 2 screamer, flight sim 5.0 quake tomb raider redneck rampage ... […]
Show full quote

...
wing commander 3, 4
nfs,
settlers 2
screamer,
flight sim 5.0
quake
tomb raider
redneck rampage
...

I clearly remember playing these games in a 486 class computer (with Cyrix 5x86 100, OC'd to 120 by mistake) without a Voodoo. Yeah, they were probably being played in a fashion not very comfortable, but that was what was available so we had fun with what we had.

Puting this aside, at this age, what's the point in going thru again all the hassles caused by lack of money for better computers? Go for the fastest thing that will allow you to max out everything that these games can offer. To me, retro gaming is not "exactly replicating what I was able to do in the past", but actually "to experience what I couldn't do back in days".

I'll play most of the games in this list on nothing less than my PIII 1400 with Voodoo2 SLI and Ti4200. The best kill is overkill 🤣

I like your setup, are you able to run Descent 2 and Tomb Raider without any adjusting? On my 850 PIII I have to ratchet the FSB down to 66 which in turn allows me
to slow the cpu down to 300mhz which allows both games to run fine.

The whole idea with this is to build a 3rd sysytem with what I had left in spare parts plus maybe adding a Voodoo 1 and a 300/333/350mhz cpu and trying out the DOS games my PIII setup seems to disagree with. Also have a awe SB32 pnp with new simm modules I wanted to stick in there and play around with in DOS just for the heck of it.

clueless1 wrote:

I can vouch for this. My P200MMX benched in Duke3D 800x600 with various graphics cards: […]
Show full quote

dirkmirk wrote:

Deksor wrote:

My MMX 233 runs duke3D in 800x600 res at 25-30fps.

I highly doubt that, with my Pentium 2 Overdrive @ 350mhz & Geforce FX5500 with the dos tweaks 800x600 the slowdowns were bad, had to drop back 640x480.

I can vouch for this. My P200MMX benched in Duke3D 800x600 with various graphics cards:

TNT2 M64 32MB 30.0
ARK2000PV 1MB SDD53A 30.0
CL-GD5446 1MB SDD53A 28.0
VOODOO3 2000 16MB 28.0
S3 Virge GX 2MB S3VBE 28.0
S3 Trio64 V2/DX 2MB S3VBE 28.0
S3 Virge 325 2MB S3VBE 28.0
MILLENNIUM II 4MB 28.0
S3 Trio64V+ 1MB S3VBE 28.0
ATI Rage 128 GL 16MB 20.0
CL-GD5430 2MB SDD53A 16.0

If I can clarify, I don't believe 800x600 resolution is suitable for a 200/233mmx cpu, if thats the fps at the start of the first level for benchmark purposes sure but go and play the game its a no go.

Standard Def Steve wrote:

You may want to go with DOSBox for the really demanding stuff.
DOSBox can run Duke Nukem 3D at stupid high resolutions like 1600x1200 locked at 60 fps. Not even my Celeron-1400 can manage that!

Ummm... What kind of DosBox and what hardware is that?
I've just tried and Duke3D is somewhere in the mid-twenties in 1600x1200.
Ivy Bridge Xeon 1275V2 (4C/8T, max 3.9GHz turbo) + GTX650 with the last Daum DosBox I have.
Which one got that much faster in the last few years, DosBox (then it's time to download a newer one) or the hardware (in which case I'm stuck here for now)?

jmarsh wrote:

TTD was released in 1995, it definitely doesn't need a 450MHz P2. It was a very well written game compared to other 640x480 titles at the time.

I second this. I regularly play TTD on my 486 DX4 100. It runs just fine. There are a few slowdowns during level generation and such, but nothing that affects the gaming experience.

As for Duke3D... I used to play that at 800x600 on a Pentium 120MHz back in the day. Did it run at 60 fps? Not a chance! 30 fps? Probably close to that, 20-30 probably. Back in those days, "60 fps" wasn't a thing. 30 fps was considered to be "perfectly smooth" gameplay. I doubt these game engines were designed to run much faster than 30 fps to be honest.

I remember when 'F1 Grand Prix 2' came out in 1996. People would post on Usenet about how demanding the game was in SVGA with full details. It wasn't until around 1999 on a P3-900 you could run everything on full detail and keep the processor occupancy below 100% in tracks like Monaco. Great programmed game that took advantage of faster hardware but unplayable during 1996 in SVGA.

I would keep the 850 and force 66mhz fsb for games that are too fast.

LunarG wrote:

Back in those days, "60 fps" wasn't a thing. 30 fps was considered to be "perfectly smooth" gameplay. I doubt these game engines were designed to run much faster than 30 fps to be honest.

Descent is a good example; homing missiles reorient towards their target by a fixed amount per frame (rather than by time) so the higher the frame rate, the more deadly they become. At 60fps they can practically do U-turns on the spot.

swaaye wrote:

Yup it is. Just enough to get you around 60fps with Carmageddon. 😀

I'm not sure, I have never tested it with a CPU faster than pentium II 450.

This should be benchmarked in order to see how it's really going ^^