For the games from mid 80s to early 90s like Wing Commander, you'll need a high end 386 or low end 486, since the frame rate is locked to the speed of the processor.

dominusprog wrote on 2024-10-22, 14:22:

For the games from mid 80s to early 90s like Wing Commander, you'll need a high end 386 or low end 486, since the frame rate is locked to the speed of the processor.

Looks like OP wants to use SETMUL to slow the Pentium.

Welcome to the forum!

My first thought, is that is a lot of builds! It's definitely fun to do annual(ish) builds and experiment with different hardware.

That said, from a practical daily-usage perspective there is a lot of overlap and I suspect you'll likely gravitate towards one or two builds for main use.

My second thought is that given the stated goal is proper coverage of 1985 and onward, I'm surprised that the Pentium MMX 233 is the oldest rig on the list. For 1985-to-early-90s, I'd be looking at a dedicated Tandy machine, a 386 and/or 486, and possibly even an Amiga. Though I realize the intent is to KVM everything, which does make using pre-ATX hardware more difficult.

This is an ambitious project and good luck! 😀

douglar wrote on 2024-10-22, 14:24:

Looks like OP wants to use SETMUL to slow the Pentium.

Yes. Correct. That's my intention. 386/486 PCs are very expensive now and, seem unnecessary if you can slow down a Pentium MMX to equivilent speeds (As shown by Philscomputerlab 136 in 1 video). Also more a modern platform opens up the possibility of larger sized, and faster, storage.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-10-22, 14:28:

Welcome to the forum!

My first thought, is that is a lot of builds! It's definitely fun to do annual(ish) builds and experiment with different hardware.

That said, from a practical daily-usage perspective there is a lot of overlap and I suspect you'll likely gravitate towards one or two builds for main use.

Yes. I agree that I will likely gravitate to certain machines. I'm thinking probably the Pentium MMX machine, The GTX 4600 Machine and probably the 8800 GTS machine. The in-between ones are really just to catch games that are picky on hardware. I've been having difficulty with some games like Klingon Honor Guard, Metal Gear Solid 2, Heavy Gear, Midtown Madness, Interstate 76 etc. Also some games only really work well with 3DFX Glide.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-10-22, 14:28:

My second thought is that given the stated goal is proper coverage of 1985 and onward, I'm surprised that the Pentium MMX 233 is the oldest rig on the list. For 1985-to-early-90s, I'd be looking at a dedicated Tandy machine, a 386 and/or 486, and possibly even an Amiga. Though I realize the intent is to KVM everything, which does make using pre-ATX hardware more difficult.

I was considering something older, until I watched PhilsComputerLab video on how you can slow down a Pentium MMX.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-10-22, 14:28:

This is an ambitious project and good luck! 😀

Yes, but should be fun. I've already tried most of the combinations on my test bench. Just need to put them in cases, and install OSes.

If there are so many, you can try some different things, such as dual processors, dual Voodoo2, 286, 386, and hardware with longer intervals may be more fun

alphaaxp wrote on 2024-10-22, 14:39:

If there are so many, you can try some different things, such as dual processors, dual Voodoo2, 286, 386, and hardware with longer intervals may be more fun

Yes, trying things out is part of the fun. So I fully plan to play around with different builds in the test bench drawer. I have quite a few Ati cards to try out, as well as Slot A, Athlon XP and Athlon 64 platforms. I don't have any Matrox cards yet. One of my 7 builds does has Voodoo 2 SLI with a Riva TNT.

I am keeping an eye out for older hardware. The 286 does have a special place in my heart, as my first PC as a kid was a 286. Loved that thing! However, I'm conscious how much these things cost these days and, realistically, I think most of the games I played on it will work fine on a slowed down Pentium MMX. Duke Nukem 1 + 2, SimCity, Wolfenstein 3D, Price of Persia etc.

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2024-10-22, 14:38:

I was considering something older, until I watched PhilsComputerLab video on how you can slow down a Pentium MMX.

Pentium MMX processors are highly throttle-able. The one caveat is that to get 386 speeds in my experience required L2 cache disabling, which requires disabling it in the BIOS. Depending on which games you are wanting to play, this may or may not feel convenient to be having to change BIOS settings frequently.

I've found with throttling in practice, I prefer having something I can either do at the touch of a button (e.g. turbo switch) or strictly in software via a batch file. YMMV, of course.

douglar wrote on 2024-10-22, 14:24:

dominusprog wrote on 2024-10-22, 14:22:

For the games from mid 80s to early 90s like Wing Commander, you'll need a high end 386 or low end 486, since the frame rate is locked to the speed of the processor.

Looks like OP wants to use SETMUL to slow the Pentium.

I didn't know that SETMUL works on the Pentiums, good to know.

I think if I were limited to 7, I would not have so many PIIIs close together... unless it's what you already have right now. I would be more inclined to do fastest PII then PIII above 1Ghz. I don't think your XP rigs will feel all that distinct if it's 4600 to 9700 either. However, I should not be one to criticise as I am maybe not going to get it as low as 7 🤣

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-10-22, 17:42:

Pentium MMX processors are highly throttle-able. The one caveat is that to get 386 speeds in my experience required L2 cache disabling, which requires disabling it in the BIOS. Depending on which games you are wanting to play, this may or may not feel convenient to be having to change BIOS settings frequently.

Yes. Very true. Though in my setup I need all computers to support PS/2 mice. Not sure any 386's systems do? My intention is to try to concentrate on one game at a time. So hopefully won't be switching between speeds as a regular thing. Though I intend to do some software development on the MMX PC. So, you are right, it would be inconvenient to have to go to BIOS and switch Cache on and off.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-10-22, 17:42:

I've found with throttling in practice, I prefer having something I can either do at the touch of a button (e.g. turbo switch) or strictly in software via a batch file. YMMV, of course.

I guess I could potentially set up another Pentium MMX system that's permanently got caches disabled and slowed to 386 speed. The main issue though is that the only place I could put that would be the testbench drawer. All of my Socket 7 motherboards are full ATX, and I don't want to sacrifice any of the builds assigned to the full ATX cases. Well actually I do have a baby AT Pentium MMX motherboard. Not sure if that could be somehow mounted in a micro atx case if I sacrificed on one those builds. But I think most slots would not be usable and I would probably have to drill new mounting holes.

BitWrangler wrote on 2024-10-22, 18:22:

I think if I were limited to 7, I would not have so many PIIIs close together... unless it's what you already have right now. I would be more inclined to do fastest PII then PIII above 1Ghz. I don't think your XP rigs will feel all that distinct if it's 4600 to 9700 either. However, I should not be one to criticise as I am maybe not going to get it as low as 7 🤣

I did initially think of putting a Pentium II 400mhz with the Voodoo2 SLI/TNT build. But I thought there's no harm in making a bit faster since I had the CPU. I thought a 400Mhz PII might bottleneck the TNT slightly.

I tried to spread each Win9x build to be roughly 30% faster than the previous build. Back then I think some games were very fussy on graphics cards and CPU speeds. I tried to keep CPUs and GPUs of that era fairly close in release date. Games didn't really become more tolerant until WinXP I think.

So it's not so much about noticing a big difference between each system. Its more about having a range of hardware that can play any game. Even the fussy ones.

I was thinking that the 4600 machine would mostly be used for 98. Only would use the XP boot if I had a game that didn't work on the other XP builds. I think I prefer the Geforce 6800 over the 9700 Pro for a permanent setup. Mostly because the 9700 Pro cards are prone to dying due to poor cooling. So I want to use it sparingly.

Personally, I'm doing 7 systems and I want to keep the costs down

8088 with Hercules MGA (on an Amber screen because games on that have a very unique look)
386sx with an ISA VGA that is compatible & doesn't have muddy colors
486dx4 with VLB VGA that has some 2d acceleration and a good ramdac so the screen doesn't look hollow
Pentium MMX – 200Mhz a Socket 7 w/ S3 PCI (& Voodoo if you can find one)
Pentium III – 550Mhz slot 1 w/ AGP 2x MX400
Pentium 4 – 3.0Ghz or a Barton Athlon w/ AGP 8x ATI 9600
Core 2 Duo E8400 with PCI Express Graphics that support Windows XP

douglar wrote on 2024-10-22, 19:00:

Personally, I'm doing 7 systems and I want to keep the costs down […]
Show full quote

Personally, I'm doing 7 systems and I want to keep the costs down

8088 with Hercules MGA (on an Amber screen because games on that have a very unique look)
386sx with an ISA VGA that is compatible & doesn't have muddy colors
486dx4 with VLB VGA that has some 2d acceleration and a good ramdac so the screen doesn't look hollow
Pentium MMX – 200Mhz a Socket 7 w/ S3 PCI (& Voodoo if you can find one)
Pentium III – 550Mhz slot 1 w/ AGP 2x MX400
Pentium 4 – 3.0Ghz or a Barton Athlon w/ AGP 8x ATI 9600
Core 2 Duo E8400 with PCI Express Graphics that support Windows XP

Thats certainly a nice spread of hardware! Rather more wide-spread than I need though. Primarily I have nostalgia for games that required a 386 through until when Windows Vista started gaining acceptance. After 2009 I basically stopped PC gaming for 10 years until I bought a modern gaming PC in 2019 then got bitten by the retro gaming bug in 2020. Lol.

Another possibility is getting one of those pocket 386 PCs from Ali Express. I think they have built in OPL sound and have adapter to allow PS/2 keyboard and mouse + VGA.

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2024-10-22, 19:13:

Thats certainly a nice spread of hardware! Rather more wide-spread than I need though. Primarily I have nostalgia for games that required a 386 through until when Windows Vista started gaining acceptance. After 2009 I basically stopped PC gaming for 10 years until I bought a modern gaming PC in 2019 then got bitten by the retro gaming bug in 2020. Lol.

Follow your heart, certainly!

There is something very distinctive about gaming on a Hercules with an amber or orange screen with those lingering phosphors . Think about it. Getting emulated CGA games to work on it can be a worthwhile challenge too. Native CGA or EGA are also really distinctive, but the price/game library size ratio is rough.

You could probably save some money substituting some of those rare iconic video cards with more available options.

Replace the Super 7 & voodoo with a 430TX & PCI Banshee
Replace the TNT2 & Geforce 2 with GeforceMX variations.
Replace the Geforce 4 with a FX 5600 or 5700
Replace the Geforce 6800 with a Geforce 8600

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2024-10-22, 18:50:

Though in my setup I need all computers to support PS/2 mice.

I understand the reasoning behind this (KVM) but I just couldn't play fast paced games with a PS/2 mouse. It's fine for most DOS titles, especially adventure games and turn-based strategies or RPGs. But for real-time strategies and FPS games, I would much prefer to use a USB mouse.

Personally, I like to build my Win9x rigs using platforms which support USB 2.0, so I can use a modern gaming mouse. Since the mouse has on-board memory, I can adjust its sensitivity and program the shortcut keys on my modern PC. Then, I can save that preset, plug the mouse into my retro rig, and load the desired settings. It's just a bit of extra comfort that makes retro PC gaming more enjoyable for me.

Great set of systems!

One thing that stands out to me though is the amount of systems particularly across the Win9x era. I understand youve had issues with a few specific games - have you checked out PCgamingwiki to see if there's any patches/known fixes? I'd be surprised if you couldnt cover almost everything (save for maybe some older DOS games) between your existing Ultimate 98, Ultimate XP builds, and adding the 233 in to the mix.

That being said if its to have just different era experiences, then yeh I definitely get that - I've been keen to build some other eras myself, currently just have my Windows 98 P4 build and a Weecee, hoping to add some more in the future (once I work out what Ive done wrong with my Weecee its not working 😁 )

Good luck! keen to see the builds as you get them going!

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-10-22, 20:14:

I understand the reasoning behind this (KVM) but I just couldn't play fast paced games with a PS/2 mouse. It's fine for most DOS titles, especially adventure games and turn-based strategies or RPGs. But for real-time strategies and FPS games, I would much prefer to use a USB mouse.

Yes. I agree that a modern USB gaming mouse is better than a retro mouse. I am in fact using a USB gaming mouse for my Ultimate WinXP system that's connected to an LCD monitor.

However the mouse I am using for my retro cupboard is an optical Microsoft mouse (supports both PS/2 and USB). I haven't really noticed any lag. It does also depend on the KVM. I tried a startech brand, a chinese generic KVM and an Aten brand KVM before the Belkin. The lag on the others was unacceptable to me.

Also, games in the 90s/early 2000s weren't really designed with high FPS in mind (30FPS was considered good). So fast input wasn't as required as it is now.

ErroneousHyphen wrote on 2024-10-22, 23:17:

One thing that stands out to me though is the amount of systems particularly across the Win9x era. I understand youve had issues with a few specific games - have you checked out PCgamingwiki to see if there's any patches/known fixes? I'd be surprised if you couldnt cover almost everything (save for maybe some older DOS games) between your existing Ultimate 98, Ultimate XP builds, and adding the 233 in to the mix.

Yes. Several people have said that now. Which is certainly making me reconsider whether I could use a different mix.

I have to admit, I am a little paranoid when it comes to downloading patches. Just worried that one may have a virus in it. So the only patches I have so far tried are ones that I still have from back in the day when I downloaded them from official sites, or ones that are on magazine cover disks that I still have. Maybe I need to be a bit more open to that though.

ErroneousHyphen wrote on 2024-10-22, 23:17:

That being said if its to have just different era experiences, then yeh I definitely get that

Well, yes, it is partly to have different era experiences also. I remember how often I had to upgrade my PC back in the 90s/early 2000s. Just to keep up. Though, I of course, want to play my games with the best experience possible. There is little sense having a laggy 30FPS low texture size, low resolution experience if I can play the same game smoothly at high resolution. That's why I love my "Ultimate" builds. But, at the same time, some games just don't work on them. At least not out of the box.

Mostly this is an issue on the 98 machine. Almost all XP era games work fine on the ultimate XP build. Though some games are limited in the screen resolutions they offer. That's why I went with a 1024x768 screen. It's the most suitable compromise for sharing with Win98/WinXP games IMHO. 1600x1200 is probably next suitable, as 800x600 would scale well on it for the games that don't support 1600x1200.

For example:
- Colin McRae 1 - Graphical corruption
- Midtown Madness - Graphical Corruption
- Wing Commander Prophecy - movies too fast
- Heavy Gear - Stutters when playing sounds
- Viper Racing - Car won't move
- Mechwarrior 2 - works, but is crash-prone
- Carmageddon II - very low framerate
- Grand Prix Legends - Physics broken, crashes to desktop
- Mechwarrior 3 - Stutter

I haven't even tried DOS games on the ultimate Win98 machine. But, you are correct, that the Pentium MMX should do well on almost all of those.

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2024-10-23, 06:42:

However the mouse I am using for my retro cupboard is an optical Microsoft mouse (supports both PS/2 and USB). I haven't really noticed any lag.

A PS/2 mouse will have a lower polling rate than a USB mouse. You can tweak that a bit using programs like PS2Rate, but it still feels sluggish to me compared to even the most generic USB mouse intended for office use. And a proper USB gaming mouse is a different story entirely. To each their own though, if the PS/2 polling rate doesn't bother you, that's perfectly fine. Everybody's sensitivity to this is different.

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2024-10-23, 06:42:

Also, games in the 90s/early 2000s weren't really designed with high FPS in mind (30FPS was considered good). So fast input wasn't as required as it is now.

If you mean that most of us played games at 30-ish FPS during that time (due to not having top of the line hardware) then I do agree. But those games can certainly hit 60 FPS and will feel much more responsive that way.

As an example, you could get 60 FPS in Quake 2 with a Voodoo 2 SLI and a 300 MHz CPU even back in 1998. However, for 1999s Unreal Tournament and Quake 3, you needed more powerful hardware. Maybe I'm used to modern gaming practices, but there's no way I'd play first-person games below 60 FPS with a keyboard + mouse setup nowadays.