Alone in the dark 1,2 and 3 aren't playable on fast machines. The double-tap action for running malfunctions until you slow down the machine.

Probably related to the topic too, The Terminator 2029 and Terminator Rampage simply refuse to run on anything but 286, 386 and 486.

wbahnassi wrote on 2024-10-02, 22:16:

Alone in the dark 1,2 and 3 aren't playable on fast machines. The double-tap action for running malfunctions until you slow down the machine.

Probably related to the topic too, The Terminator 2029 and Terminator Rampage simply refuse to run on anything but 286, 386 and 486.

This topic is about games that specifically need 486 machines (i.e.: games that run too slow on 286/486 systems and, at the same time, they run too fast or they are completely broken on a Pentium system).

Well, a 386 Dx 40 with cache is about as fast as a slow 486. And this is where the original question becomes a bit difficult to answer

https://dependency-injection.com/the-slowest- … vs-fastest-386/

dukeofurl wrote on 2024-10-02, 22:06:

I have been playing the game pyrotechnica recently, it's an early 3d space ship game kind of like descent. Anyways, it's 3d graphics make it way too demanding to play on a 386 where it plays like a slideshow... However on my pentium 75, or higher spec machines, the game appears to run well with a very smooth frame rate BUT the rate of fire of the enemies seems somehow linked to the processor speed, as the barrage of lasers being shot at the player by the enemies in level 1 makes the game basically impossible to play on a p75 or higher and it is a much more substantial barrage than I get on the 386 (like, I can't dodge the bullets or kill the enemies because they are shooting a constant stream of fire at me, but on the 386 it's not a constant stream of fire)... I don't have a 486 to test the game with, but it seems to be too demanding for a 386, and has a game breaking issue on pentiums, so I'd be very interested to see how it works on a 486. Incidentally the game came out around the time 486 PCs were popular so it wouldn't be far fetched to consider that the developer was using or targeting 486 machines for the game.

LGR reviewed the game a long time ago.

https://youtu.be/9YlCw7hRNI4?si=s93qCMw1YOyVhUgU

It was seemingly too fast on whatever he was playing it on. So he struggled. Someone in the comments said they had a great experience playing it on a 486 dx2 66mhz. This looks like a good candidate for me to try on my slowed down Pentium MMX machine. To see if I can get it playable.

Aui wrote on 2024-10-03, 11:40:

Well, a 386 Dx 40 with cache is about as fast as a slow 486. And this is where the original question becomes a bit difficult to answer

https://dependency-injection.com/the-slowest- … vs-fastest-386/

Speaking of 386 PCs, I think that there were about three popular categories.
(In addition to XTs @4,77 or 8 MHz, which were the baseline systems in 80s.)

286-12
am386DX-40
486DX2-66

Popular in the sense that they were the working horses of their day.

12 MHz was a stable, usable clock rate for many 286 chipsets.
It was fast, but could be paired with medium-fast SIMM modules (70ns, 80ns).

The 386DX-40 by AMD was a static CMOS design and was the basis of many compact BabyAT motherboards (486DLCs used by enthusiasts).
It didn't have any special requirements and was a solid performer in the office under both DOS and Windows 3.
It was the final expansion to 386 chipsets (intel topped out at 33 MHz).

The 486DX2-66 was an unproblematic drop-in upgrade to existing 486DX-25 or 486DX-33 PCs. It was 5v tolerant and didn't require special BIOS support yet.
Many existing 486 PCs were upgraded to an 486DX2-66, way back to the first models from 1989.
The 33 MHz bus clock was very compatible, VESA Local Bus included.

Edit: I'm speaking about Pre-Pentium here.
In Pentium era, the Pentium 90 and the Pentium MMX 166 were notable.
Or so I think. It's more of a gut feeling here. 😅
The Pentium 133 was often seen, too, but I'm not certain.

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2024-11-02, 17:21:

LGR reviewed the game a long time ago.

https://youtu.be/9YlCw7hRNI4?si=s93qCMw1YOyVhUgU

It was seemingly too fast on whatever he was playing it on. So he struggled. Someone in the comments said they had a great experience playing it on a 486 dx2 66mhz. This looks like a good candidate for me to try on my slowed down Pentium MMX machine. To see if I can get it playable.

If you find a good setting, let me know! I have an MMX machine and it would be great to actually play this game without getting killed every time I see an enemy turret.

Ringding wrote on 2021-09-19, 21:08:

Titus the Fox worked perfectly for 99% of the time on my 12MHz 286. No way this required a 486!

Titus the Fox runs OK also on my Amstrad 1640, featuring an 8Mhz NEC V30, 640k RAM and a Trident8900 VGA card and SB16, both in the 8 bit slot.

The only game I recall I had that had a narrow speed margin causing *some* issues was the DOS version of the combat flightsim EF2000, where the minimum requirements was a 486/66 MHz, but if you went above Pentium/120 MHz, the AIM120 missiles stopped working, due to how the game periodically sampled the missile to target distance.