Is it essential to have an old PC for retro gaming? In general,

>>4039054
>Is it essential to have an old PC for retro gaming?
If that's your comfy, nothing beats an actual machine with a Gravis Ultrasound Max or MT-32.

>In general, where do you get the parts needed for such a machine?
Thrift stores, garage sales, recyclers, online sites (eBay, Craigslist, local sales sites, etc).

>>4039054
>Is it essential to have an old PC for retro gaming?
It really depends on what you wanna play? if you want to play old PC games and make sure they run i recommend getting a early to mid 2000's computer with windows XP on it as it will probably run the classics along with classic emulators (pretty much anything up to playstation).

As long as you got a 32 bit windows xp machine with a good amount of ram you are good while gaming retro.
>In general, where do you get the parts needed for such a machine?
Old computers are cheap on the internet and in flee markets or thrift stores and the old operating system software is easily pirated online (winworld is a good place for example).
>>4039067
As a bonus to his opinion do not look up windows 98 gaming machine on ebay as they will upcharge you for the most common computer for the day that you could build yourself for cheaper or get for cheaper at thrift stores,

>>4039054
>Is it essential to have an old PC for retro gaming?
I've gotten everything I've wanted to run with either dosbox, dgVoodoo2, or a VM with 32bit XP. Or it just werks.

>>4039054
There's a certain level of convenience to that when playing games like Blood, that don't mix too well with modern systems. You can get 20 year old systems for peanuts now, so it certainly doesn't hurt to own one, if you're a dedicated retro enthusiast.

>>4039054
It depends entirely on what era you're talking about. Dos emulates well.
>>4040161
You can get garbage systems for nothing. Unless you mean something from the mid 2000s. Those are dirt cheap and will be for years.

>>4039054
>Is it essential to have an old PC for retro gaming?

Essential? No. It's not quite the same experience without it, though. Emulators like DOSBox emulate only a few pieces of hardware, and imperfectly. Especially sound cards.

>In general, where do you get the parts needed for such a machine?

My attic. I kept most of my better pieces of hardware because I knew damn well interoperability is a casualty of progress.

>>4039054
It's only essential if you want to play games with out all the shit problems of dosbox.

In general you find old garbage in the garbage. Some people pick it out of the garbage and sell it at flea markets. Repair shops often have all kinds of old shit.

What's recommended for a set-up? I know a specific processor is usually suggested, by why does it really matter if you can run an old OS?

>>4040275
What era?
Do you want to be period correct?

>>4040275
Recommended setup depends on which games you want to play primarily. There isn't a single snapshot of technology that constitutes "retro"

The progress of computing tech was far faster in the past than it is today and specs vs requirements was a rapidly moving target.

>>4040290
Is there any benefit to being period correct other than comfy? Mostly late 90s Windows, for starting out.

>>4040293
Comfy is worth in itself.
Also the real hardware ecosystem was gigantic and everything had its own feel.
For instance Aureal A3D blew Creative EAX out of the water. That positional accuracy was TIGHT. Then there's 3dfx Glide which uses dithering of all things in a creative way that provides a sense of depth perception opengl and D3D weren't able to replicate.

>>4040293
>Is there any benefit to being period correct other than comfy?
None if you mean performance wise. Only exception is some sound cards.
>Mostly late 90s Windows, for starting out.
-OS 98SE. Not worth anything later imo. And anything latter is a hassle in capability.

-CPU you can't really go wrong with a single core P4 or later.

-RAM I'd get 256mb. Not much point in more. MAX is 512mb unless you want to uses patches. Don't bother with retards saying you can make it work. It's shit and you need the patch. In my experience you can make systems boot fine but stability is extremely hit and miss with 512mb+ ram with no patch.

-Mobo I'd stick with an Intell 865

-You want a mid 2000s AGP GPU. I recommend staying pre nvida 6000 series. Geforce 4 or fx is a ton of power and you can max out everything while having great to perfect compatibility with win98 games. Even like a fx5200 is fine.

The great thing with these parts is you don't need to worry about crazy 3.3v and 5v or ISA voltages. Modern power supplies should work without issue. And they're dirt fucking cheap.

And you can buy a brand new mobo
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157338

Pair with a CPU like a Celeron 450 which you can get used off ebay for like $3. Beast win98 machine that I don't think you can really beat. Maybe if you used a Xeon single core CPU but why bother?

>>4040314
Comfy is the satisfaction of it being authentic? Not being a dick I'm serious

>>4040319
Oh and you need to stay under 120gig hard drive. SSDs can work but they have some issues if you don't use patches.

If you want to run the games from a CD drive you may have issues too with CD sound. Better to mount them in a virtual drive.

>>4040325
Comfy is literally whatever feels right and makes you comfortable.

>>4040328
Stay under? How come?

>>4040335
The max the OS can handle. Has to do with the 512bit sectors. Also why SSDs have some issues since they're built around using 4k sectors, This causes more rewrites on a SSD.

A lot of modern HDDs can be partitioned and work fine on Win98 regardless of size.

why the fuck would you use SSD on a retro rig anyway or am I missing something obvious?

>>4040351
Silent, speed, size, etc. Same reason you use them now. You can use them on a "period correct" machine too with a PCI SATA controller.

>>4040335
120 is fine. The hard limit for partitions under 98SE is 127GiB/137GB because of 28bit LBA. There's also a 3rd party patch for Win98 that upgrades it to 48bit LBA and allows you to go to the maximum limit of FAT32, which is 2TB.

>>4040351
If you've ever used a Quantum Fireball before your ears will thank you.

Also these old drives are getting scarce and the ones left only have so much life in them.

There's a way to get almost any given game to work properly on a modern setup, but it should be noted that there are a handful of games that just require old hardware for one reason or another. I can think of a couple late 90s games that use now-antiquated rendering techniques and simply won't render properly without period hardware, not even in a VM.

>>4040381
Win98 games run like shit or just don't run on modern machines.

>>4040381
A3D only works properly under 98.

>>4040392
Period soundcards in general only work under win98,

>>4040392
Largely because Aureal went under before producing working XP drivers, thanks to Creative Labs' jewish tricks.

>>4040275
>specific processor is usually suggested
All kinds of stupid shit is usually suggested by kids on the internet. Unless you want to play something that needs an specific older processor you want to get something with the highest spec that will run DOS based Windows.

>>4040293
Period correct isn't comfy it's stupid. Only poorfag casuals had period correct stuff in any given period. You have the advantage of being able to have a supernaturally powerful period correct setup for hardly any price premium. Not taking advantage of that is just silly.

>>4040356
Speed and they're available in the right size. Try finding a 120GB HDD today.

>>4040394
Not true, but keep spreading misinformation. Refer to the Ensoniq AudioPCI, which works in Windows XP but sounds like crap compared to on-board audio for XP purposes.

>>4040319
He won't be able to run DOS games well on a P4 though
A Pentium 3 + an ISA sound card would be better. And won't be fucking firehouses

>>4040865
Try using an Aureal card for anything but basic stereo, or an AWE32 at all.

>>4041224
Aureal cards can get around the lack of DDMA, NMI or SBLink with their TDMA DOS driver. SB live/Audigy, not so much.

>>4040865
That's plain wrong man. So many sound cards just wont work at all.
>>4041224
I was refering to Win98. You're fucked if you want DOS compatibility. Late dos/win95 will work though.
>And won't be fucking firehouses
More modern CPUs use next to nothing in terms of watts.
>>4040857
>You have the advantage of being able to have a supernaturally powerful period correct setup for hardly any price premium. Not taking advantage of that is just silly.
Not him but that hasn't been true for awhile. Still way under $1000 and way under $500 in most cases but it's jumping up. Pair of Voodoo2 cards is going to cost you $120 to $200ish alone.

>>4040167
>Dos emulates well.

Except for the soundcards which sound like crap. SoundBlaster PCM is okay, iirc, but even just the OPL2 emulation can be wildly off on both emulators I tried (dosbox, pcemu). Anything more advanced is worse. Does GUS emulation even work?

>>4041669
I'm not an expert but they sound alright to me. The Roland stuff especially.

another option is virtualbox or vmware, i've built vm's to use old rom flashing software and played some games in the vm as well without issues.

of course it varies, but I haven't had too much trouble.

>>4041224
DOS games will run just fine on a P4. You're confusing the CPU with other parts of the system like ISA slots.

>>4041642
A setup with a pair of voodoo 2 cards is going to cost you roughly 1 voodoo 2 card and an SLI cable more than a voodoo 1 setup. Not a big difference for someone who paid $200 for a "retro pc" on ebay.

File: 11-12r_real1b.gif (34KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 640x480px

I run an socket a athlon t-bird 1.2ghz as a "retro" machine which works good for windows 98 games and dos games that are not speed sensitive. If I disable l1+l2 cache I get 386 dx40 speed. In my opinion its only essential to run real hardware if you like fucking around with old hardware/software. If you are simply in it for the games, emulation.

>>4041954
PCs with the good voodoo cards are a bit more than $200 on average. Unless you're talking about some gutted PC that has a Voodoo left in it.

>>4041974
I'm talking about someone who buys a "retro pc" on ebay and then buys the voodoo on ebay and all the other parts on ebay. Then compare it to doing the same but with two voodoo 2s Not a big difference in price.

>>4042802
Where are you finding cheap retro PCs with a voodoo 2? It's more than $200. It's been more than $200 since ebay had the free bin lol.

Especially now where the choice parts demand a premium more often than not. The mid range to just under top end are dirt cheap though usually.

>>4039054
>Is it essential to have an old PC for retro gaming?
Not exactly, but it's pretty comfy and nice to do retro pc gaming the way god intended
>In general, where do you get the parts needed for such a machine?
Just get an old laptop with Windows 95 or 98SE on it with a Pentium of some kind (The higher number the Pentium, the better, a Pentium should be able to run just about any dos title you throw at it, Pentium II and III should be able to do quite a bit of Windows 9x games), it should do just fine, and it won't take up as much space as a desktop machine. I heard librettos are pretty much perfect as they're smole as fuck (Like literally as big as a video cassette tape) and can run just about any dos game.

File: Interstate_'76_Coverart.png (133KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 256x256px

>>4039054
>Is it essential to have an old PC for retro gaming?
Only if you're a fan of very temperamental games like pic related. It just doesn't run well in a VM or directly on modern hardware I own.

I accidently my OS to W10.

wut do?

File: IMG_9529.jpg (2MB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2448x3264px

>>4039054
For me, the biggest problem with emulation / virtual machines is the resolution problem. some older games will NOT get bigger than 640x480 and will be windowed or fucked up on a 1080p lcd.

for games like that a dedicated machine is better for me

>>4042815
Sorry. Forgot it's summer and the place is infested with kids who can't read.

>>4043027
can't you just set monitor or gpu to not stretch the image then?

>>4043027
The solution I found was to change the screen size on your host computer first, and then run your VM in fullscreen mode.

>>4043027
wut, DOSBOX does fullscreen

I bet you faggots don't even know how to trigger it

What the fuck faggots, you actually buy overpriced Voodoo 2 cards? They are literally 20 bucks on my local sales site

File: 1496380940529.jpg (17KB, 600x295px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 600x295px

Shit, there's a lot of retardation in this thread.

Anyways, my build:
>PIII Coppermine 1GHz
>2x256 133MHz SD-DDR
>16GB CF card + 120GB 7200RPM HDD
>DVD-RW, 3.5" and 5.25" floppy drives
>GeForce 7800 GS AGP 256MB
>Voodoo 2 12MB SLI
>Creative Audigy 2 ZS
>Sound Blaster 16 CT2910 + Dreamblaster S2
>Intel GbE
>USB 2.0 x5

That's my DOS/Win9x gaming shitbox, dare you to do better.

>>4041669
>>4041692

Yeah, "sounding like crap" is pretty much normal for PC MIDI.

>>4043242
>"sounding like crap" is pretty much normal for PC MIDI
you never had a proper MIDI card then

>>4043228
i'm not talking about dosbox i'm talking about windows 95/98 games that cant be run through dosbox

>>4043249
Run them through PCem?

>>4040062
>namefag giving poor advice
not unexpected

File: 1368043423093.jpg (8KB, 180x159px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 180x159px

>>4043238
somewhat similar
>PIII Tualatin 1.4GHz
>3x512MB 133MHZ SDRAM (in Win98 limited to 512 via .ini)
>60GB 7200RPM HDD + whatever other HDD swapped in
>DVD+/-RW ODD
>3.5" FDD
>GeForce FX5200 128MB
>2x Voodoo2 12MB in SLI
>integrated AC'97 with legacy SoundBlaster mode (works and sounds bretty good)
>Intel Dual Gigabit NIC
>4-port USB 2.0 card, VIA chipset

runs MS-DOS, Win98SE, Win2k, WinXP and Win7. switched/selected via XOSL

and ofc a horizontal desktop case and CRT monitor

>>4039054
>Is it essential to have an old PC for retro gaming?
For accurate DOS gaming and Windows 98 gaming, yes.
DOSBox is very nice, but it's also VERY inaccurate, and Windows XP cannot always get Win98 stuff running properly, especially with modern equipment (multicore CPUs can really fuck things up).

Ideally, you want 2 "classic" gaming PCs:

1) DOS/Win3.11 machine
Pentium 100 (high end) or AMD DX4 120mhz (mid end)
Yamaha Audician 32 plus ISA (you can still buy these new)
Dreamblaster S2 daughter board
32+ MB RAM
Flash based storage (IDE to CF, or Disk on Module. Some motherboards will have limits of 7.9GB or less)
Either S3 PCI video card (Trio64, ViRGE), Matrox Mystique PCI (best options), or a tseng et4000 vlb (highest compatibility, optional 2MB interleaving DRAM) / Diamond Stealth 1+MB VLB video card (don't bother with ISA)

You can disable caches to get 386 level speeds with very old games.

2) Windows 98/XP Machine
AMD Athlon, Socket A (aim for 1Ghz or so)
256MB RAM
AGP Video Card (3DFX Voodoo 3+, or any flavor of AMD/Nvidia if you don't care about Glide)
any A3D/EAX capable sound card (SBLive and Audigy 1/2, Aureal Vortex 2)
Here I'd recommend a real PATA SSD (M2) or magnetic drive. Motherboards have a 127GB limit.
Install ME or 98SE and Windows XP.
If you have a decent motherboard, you can underclock your CPU to match the games you want to play.

>>4043238
>using shitblaster on dos/9x
>not superior Aureal

>>4043375
Aureal has shit DOS compatibility.
If you're going to use a Dreamblaster anyways then it might aswell be a Sound Blaster 16 that has better support, both do have wavetable headers though.

I recently tried using a "retro" PC using Windows XP SP1.

I couldn't do anything. Virtually no sites would load under IE6, not even Windows Update. I also couldn't install any other browsers, not Firefox, not Palemoon, not Chrome, not Opera, not even Netscape Windows, fucking nothing.

It also had 256MB of ram and 64MB VRAM. Never again.

>>4039054
Virtual machine or DOSBox is infinitely better to an actual antique PC in every way.

>>4043930
Retards like you that claim VMs work at most just launch a game and if it launches you claim 100% compatibility. Modern hardware is a shitshow with Win98.
>>4043180
I can read find dumbass.
>>4043229
If you're truly finding them that cheap you're the moron for not flipping them.
>>4043238
Why would you use a 7800?
>>4043284
Also makes little sense.
>>4043918
>I couldn't use a retro PC for modern tasks so it's shit

>>4043786
>Aureal can do DOS sound even without distributed DMA, non-maskable interrupts or SBLink support on the motherboard
>bad compatibility

Riiight...

>>4043941
>Also makes little sense.
how so?

DOS works, games work, sound works, even TCP/IP works
Win98SE and Win9x stuff on it works
Win2k, WinXP and Win7 all work and each have their own use. It's convenient to have access to modern protocols on an older computer

The FX5200 is sufficient enough for Win7's Aero while still being compatible win Win9x. It can also drive my monitor at 100-120Hz, some of the shittier cards I've got can't.

>>4043967
>DOS
dosbox

>Win95/98/2K/XP
WINE

>>4043242
PC midi doesn't sound like anything.
That's like saying sheet music sounds like shit because more kids practiced on shitastic casio than in an orchestra.

>>4043967
You have a a set up that more suited for XP. Why the NIC, all that ram, USB, etc...

>>4043918
How exactly is using modern websites anything to do with retro gaming? Not surprising someone so retarded didn't manage to install updates and modern software. I have XP machines with recent versions of Firefox and Chrome and IE8

>>4043989
>advice
fail

File: 1494029163400.jpg (110KB, 577x459px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 577x459px

>>4044015
>RAM
To run a newer Windows and a newish web browser. Almost impossible to browse the 'net nowadays on an outdated browser, or with little RAM to spare.
>NIC
Faster to move/copy files between computers via network share over a gigabit connection than via sneakernet.
>USB
If for some reason I have to copy something via USB, I rather do it 20x faster via USB 2.0. Also booting from USB (via Plop, launched off a floppy disk)

And I got it all for dirt cheap

You can use virtual machines to run old game.

>>4044050
to be fair, initial installing Windows Updates is a pain in the ass if you don't have SP2/SP3 and the updated Windows Update Agent packages already downloaded and copied over

>>4044069
>Faster to move/copy files between computers via network share over a gigabit connection than via sneakernet.
That's true I forget about that.

Still not really optimized for win98se.

>>4043946
How about the fact that it can't do 16-bit sound under DOS? Only 8-bit.

Stop shilling, it's a good card for Windows 9x, but that's about it.

>>4043946
Also the compatibility is for GAMES not hardware, which is far from perfect.

>>4043941
>If you're truly finding them that cheap you're the moron for not flipping them.
Dude, even on eBay you can get two Voodoo 2's for 70 bucks TOTAL.
Also I do, I have several, I just don't find dealing with eBay shipping worth it to overprice them and sell them to hipsters.

>Why would you use a 7800?
Why not? Games like Serious Sam and Turok 4 really shine with a card like that, several time the performance of something like a FX 5200, can't even drive those games at 1600x1200 75FPS.

>>4044116
>Dude, even on eBay you can get two Voodoo 2's for 70 bucks TOTAL.
Are you retarded? Why would you make such an easily debunked statement?
>Why not?
8bit palletized textures for one?

>>4040062
>windows xp machine with a good amount of ram
Fucking retard.
Do they have good pager reception where you are?

>>4043918
go away

>>4043918
>XP
>Using "retro" pc to do shit you could have done on your primary pc
You might as well just use Dosbox or a virtual machine

>>4044073
I'd go so far as to say it's probably impossible. I don't think windows update prior to SP3 even works any more. Can't be sure because the first thing I've done with any XP installation is install SP3. For nearly 10 years now.

>>4039054

>windows

>good for gaming

just choose one faggot , worst OS playing dos game ever

in fact windows kill CRPG (Dos game industry)

>>4043020
Download an old OS, remove 10 and install it.

>>4044409
>Tep lel windblows echs dee

File: Stradiwackius.jpg (34KB, 336x355px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 336x355px

>>4044409
>implying anything other than Windows 95-98 can play this

>>4044126
>everything I don't like is somehow 8-bit so I can call it bad

>>4044480
>everything I don't like is somehow 8-bit so I can call it bad
What are you talking about dumbass?

>>4039054
I have a late 1999 Compaq laptop with sound blaster compatibility on the chip. Not sure when that quit being a thing but most late 90s PCs have integrated audio with a sound blaster compatibility mode. I actually only got it to work by installing the 2000/XP drivers under 98. The drivers intended for 98 were VxD based and would not work properly. Windows 98 supports USB controllers and nearly all DOS games run from inside Windows. Some games like the original Jazz Jackrabbit will not run on any computer faster than 200 mhz. That's because of a bug in the Turbo Pascal language. Daggerfall had issues on my 550 MHz Athlon machine. My character couldn't swim.

>>4044575
>Some games like the original Jazz Jackrabbit will not run on any computer faster than 200 mhz. That's because of a bug in the Turbo Pascal language.

There's a universal patch for TP Error 200.

>>4044585
I forgot about that. Never tried it. IDK if there's a patch for the Daggerfall CPU speed bug or not.

>>4044585
>>4044594
My experience with these patches is hit and miss.

>>4044484
>feigning ignorance and resorting to ad-hom

>>4044608
I have no idea what you're talking about kid. You made some claim that I hated 8bit for some reason.

>>4044612
>poisoning the well ad-hom

You should stop embarrassing yourself.

>>4044623
Hit me with some more greentext and assuming I hate 8bit for no reason at all. Dumb child.

>>4044126
>Are you retarded? Why would you make such an easily debunked statement?
Oh, you probably only browse the US eBay? So the cheap card sold in Europe show up more expensive to you because postage.

>8bit palletized textures for one?
Yes, what about it? It's a GeForce card and still compatible with legacy shit.
Also can do 1600x1200 under DOS that Radeon cards and FX 5200 can't.

Also, that's not me: >>4044480 >>4044608 >>4044623

>>4044409
>worst OS playing dos game ever
how is a DOS shell bad for launching a DOS game?

>>4044956
I don't know about the EU market other than you guys got shit for sound cards. GPUs like Voodoo 2 cards may be cheaper there.
>Yes, what about it? It's a GeForce card and still compatible with legacy shit.
After the Geforce 4 and FX generations you're loosing support.

>>4044959
>After the Geforce 4 and FX generations you're losing* support.
Nope, just runs in a 16-bit buffer. Games that use it like Final Fantasy VIII and Quake 2 will work and look the same with it enabled.

>>4044961
I disagree. It's a mess with the Nvidia GPUs that late. Maybe you found a driver that works but no one should recommend that late of Nvidia GPU for a Win98SE.

>>4044964
It works perfectly for me. Not a single issue with dozens of Windows 98 games.
So yes, I can recommend it, because it's nowhere less compatible than a FX 5200 (that's so popular for those builds) while being several times faster. (Also still not a unified shader cards, if you're too autistic about what cards should you put in your retro shit.)

Also what do you disagree with? You where talking about 8-bit palletized textures, they work, lots of legacy shit works fine, together with well rounded DOS support.

>>4044971
The FX5200 isn't the end all FX series card... A TI4400 is probably the fastest you'd ever need. The reason people go to the FX series is to also include early 2000s games.

>Also what do you disagree with? You where talking about 8-bit palletized textures, they work, lots of legacy shit works fine, together with well rounded DOS support.
From what I've seen and my experience with this card I'd pass. And it's odd to me since the AGP version is gimped. This is when PCI took over. I'm not saying the FX coolers are particularly great but the 6000s and later coolers are trash. These cards ran hot.

>>4044978
I was thinking the 6000 series here. I re read and forgot you're talking about a 7800. The cooler point is still there. AGP is a huge issue with these. I wouldn't even bother. Seriously gimping. Also you're one card generation from the last great GPU nvidia has made.

>>4044978
>>4044982
>The FX5200 isn't the end all FX series card... A TI4400 is probably the fastest you'd ever need.
I'd like to play taking full advantage of the professional CRT's refresh rate and resolution.

>The reason people go to the FX series is to also include early 2000s games.
Exactly my point, this machine is early 90's DOS to early 00's Windows games after all. For anything older I already have another machine.

>And it's odd to me since the AGP version is gimped.
Expain? Source?
It's only slower because of the old ass AGP bus. It's still faster then any FX or 6000 series card. I'm not trying to compete it with it's PCI-E based counterpart, I only want those FPS for the games that already play, else I'd go for a Pentium 4 build with PCI-E anyways, destroying all Windows 98 compatibility in the process though.

>This is when PCI took over
Bitch please, most people where already full PCI-E by then.

>These cards ran hot.
Usually runs in the 44C mark, barely reaches 50C when on load. It's being held back by the CPU, it doesn't run hot at all.
Actually far less hot than the FX cards.

>The cooler point is still there. AGP is a huge issue with these. I wouldn't even bother. Seriously gimping. Also you're one card generation from the last great GPU nvidia has made.
The cooler point debunked, AGPU is not a issue because it's still faster than any other AGP card (except Radeons), there is no gimping (AGP does it for them, they didn't need to forcefully gimp the card), I have no idea what generation you are talking about but all I wanted was a fast AGP card that still had compability and the card I'm using is one.

>>4044985
>AGPU
kek, AGP*

>>4044985
You're the first person I've ever seen call a 7800 a cool running card. That thing is a room heater. And see benchamrks. AGP is gimped hard.

It's my opinion that going past the FX series is a terrible idea for Win98.

>>4044991
>You're the first person I've ever seen call a 7800 a cool running card. That thing is a room heater.
But it's literary running at 40-50C for me. You do know I can monitor the temperature?
My guess is it's not running at it's full potential, either because of the AGP slot or CPU.
It's a far more efficient card still then something like a FX card.

>And see benchmarks. AGP is gimped hard.
What do I see there? I see that the AGP 7800 does worse than the PCI-E 7800, I won't even think it's gimped, because if you know anything about PCI-E and AGP slots you'd know that AGP is far slower in the first place.
Another thing I see is that the AGP 7800 still does better than any previous Nvidia AGP card.

It would be a bad card for 2006, because PCI-E was a thing already, it's not a bad card for a PC that mainly runs late 90's early 00's games.
It's like you literally read a forum post "is the 7800 AGP a bad card".

You try to talk to be like I don't have had any other cards, I have boxes full of AGP cards, several 4 MX, 5 FX and 6000 series cards.
>It's my opinion that going past the FX series is a terrible idea for Win98.
That's probably your option because you don't have the experience, from my experience I can say there are no problems and compatibility is brilliant, the performance increase is worth it if you play anything made past 1998 that isn't Glide.

>>4044991
>gimped
not him, but keep using that word, I think you don't know what it means

>>4044997
He thinks it's deliberately slower than the PCI-E counterpart, but it's just the AGP bus.
Nobody in Nvidia made a AGP card in 2006 to make it deliberately slower. PCI-E was a thing for years already and the whole point of the card was to cash in from the still left AGP market.

>>4044995
Maybe the AGP ones run cooler. I do admit my experience is with the PCI ones.
>That's probably your option because you don't have the experience,
I've been into PC gaming for a long long time.
>>4044997
>>4045000
No I'm confident the AGP cards are gimped when it comes to that late of nvidia GPUs.

>>4045002
>Maybe the AGP ones run cooler. I do admit my experience is with the PCI ones.
That's probably it, as I said.

>I've been into PC gaming for a long long time.
I'm not bashing on you that you don't have any experience, I'm saying you probably don't have any with the 7800 AGP.
It's true that it's not an official Win98 card, but it runs and runs well with the latest Forceware drives on Win98 fine, same for games.

>No I'm confident the AGP cards are gimped when it comes to that late of nvidia GPUs.
Maybe, but that card was already far inside the PCI-E era, when you compare the PCI-E card to the AGP card, you might think one is gimped, when you consider AGP limitations against PCI-E, it's looks reasonable though.
Point is, gimped or not, it's still faster then any 6000, FX, MX, etc card.

>>4045002
>>4045007
Another thing that might make you think that it's gimped is that those GPUs are made for PCI-E, they need to use a High Speed Interconnect, a bridge that does AGP into PCI-E.

>>4045009
7800 GS AGP has 16 pixel shader units instead of the 20 that the 7800 GT has, but still benefits from the optimizations of the other 7-series GPUs enjoy. Clock speeds are 375 MHz for the GPU and 1200 MHz for the (GDDR3) memory. According to all benchmark tests, the performance of this card is faster than the GeForce 6800 GT and GeForce 6800 Ultra. Different vendors may deviate from the stated specification. There was a special "Golden Sample" release from Gainward that was called "7800 GS+" or officially "Bliss 7800 GS 512 MB GS+" that had default clock speeds of 450 MHz core and 1250 MHz memory. Unlike a standard 7800 GS, the 7800 GS+ actually used a 7900 GT GPU that had the full 24 pixel shaders instead of the regular 16 pixel shaders that are normally found on a 7800 GS video card.

Gainward had previously released a "Bliss 7800 GS 512MB GS" card that was based on a 7800 GT but utilized the AGP bus. Its external appearance and name make it nearly indistinguishable from the 7900 GT-based Bliss 7800 GS 512MB GS+. Leadtek produced a similar card with 256MB memory.

In late 2006 Gainward released a third '7800 GS' card with 20 pixel shaders running at 500 MHz core and 1400 MHz memory called the "BLISS GS-GLH". This card is also based on the 7900 GS core.

>>4045007
>>4045009
My experience is bad with the 6000s series. I haven't done much with the 7000s and Win98.

And another point I'm remembered from >>4045013 is the 512mb GPUs and not working well with Win98.

>>4045013
Yup, mine is also based on the 7900 core, you can easily tell from the BIOS/ROM version it has.

>>4045018
There's a community driver for the 7800 for Win98SE, maybe they fixed some shit?

>>4045023
I wouldn't know. I stop at the FX series.

File: Yes_486_powered.jpg (525KB, 2592x1944px) Image search: [Google]

525KB, 2592x1944px

Bumping this thread as it has information I want available this weekend when I hope to work on my 486 this weekend. I keep saying I will work on it every weekend but I will try again this weekend.

>>4047056
>Windows 98 on a 486
HARAM!

>>4044107
Not that guy but name 1 title with 16-bit samples under DOS.

>>4047056
>Windows 9x on 486
Why? You should have used Windows 3.11 or something.

Guys I wanna build myself a nice Win98se box too, for games like Half-Life/Unreal/Sin/Dune2000/C&C/etc

And I still have an old Radeon9700Pro laying around, would it be worth using or should I get an Nvidia card?

>>4047168
Some people love the AMD cards. Since you have it you may as well test it out.

>>4047178
ATI rather.

These are the three builds you will need to cover EVERYTHING
1. DOS
>Pentium 233 MMX
>Sound Blaster with high quality OPL
>Voodoo 1
2. Windows 98
>Pentium 3 1.4 GHz
>Voodoo 5 AGP
>Aureal Vortex 2
3. Windows XP
>Geforce 7900 GTX
>Athlon 64 FX-57
>X-Fi Titanium

>>4047168
Windows XP tier card.
Geforce 2 Ultra is the ultimate Windows 98 GPU.
Not that using XP cards in 98 is bad.

>>4047232
Your dos build leaves a lot to be desired. I mean I guess it'll provide the most compatibility but would you want to play on it?

The Win98 build isn't much faster if at all than a 440bx unless you're talking about the later via chipsets. Bit pointless if you ask me and possibly detrimental.

The XP build is under powered.

>>4047067
>>4047081
>t. I never lived in the 90's

>>4047072
Several, how about mid 90's Bethesda games? If you don't know shit like that you don't belong in here.
Not to mention, it's 8-bit output all around, not a problem if you use a wavetable board, but kind of moot point if you could do the same with a better sounding and better supported card already.

Also, 8-Bit samples on a 8-bit card sound worse then on a 16-bit one. Just go listen to YouTube comparisons, even with heavy compression in the videos, the difference is noticeable, I have several cards myself and can confirm.

Even then, I don't understand what the guys are fanboying about, it's not a card that has good support under DOS, it's known that it's not compatible with all SoundBlaster compatible DOS games. I guess it's like 10 bucks cheaper then a 30 buck SoundBlaster, maybe it's a poorfag card, idk?

>>4047232
>1. DOS
No, you want a 386DX-40 for pure DOS, a machine that is still fully compatible with the 80's games, Pentium-233 MMX is not, even a 486 is stretching for games like Wing Commander, unless you have a proper Turbo button, but it's made useless by the fact that newer games that will play like shit anyways will play fine on the DOS/Win build.

>2. Windows 98
Change the Voodoo 5 AGP for some high end AGP card and add two Voodoo 2's in SLI instead, no Glide game needs a Voodoo 5 that two Voodoo 2's can't already handle more than perfectly, while most other games will be bottlenecked hard by the Voodoo 5. Sound card is fucking pleb tier, you want something with proper EAX support for a machine that age, like a Audigy card. Another card for DOS that is natively supported, Gravis Ultrasound Max or Sound Blaster AWE64 with a MT-32 or Sound Blaster 16 with a Dreamblaster.
Also it should be a proper dual boot with actual DOS, because instead of the first DOS machine, this is the perfect platform for all those early 90's to late 90's DOS games. Together with Windows 9x and early 00's games.

>3. Windows XP
No need for a machine like that.
Literally every game onward from that can be played on modern machines.
Even if you have some weird autistic fetish for such machines, this is out of /vr/'s allowed range of discussion.

>>4047318
>voodoo2
>dos dual boot
Why in the fuck would you do that?

>Sound card is fucking pleb tier
>more shit opinions on the sound cards
>followed by more shit opinions on the sound cards

>>4047323
>Why in the fuck would you do that?
>voodoo2
Two Voodoo 2's are the best you can get, better than a single Voodoo 3, but still have a proper AGP card.
A Voodoo 5 won't give you nearly enough power for proper gaming, like even something common like Quake 3 with AF/AA at 1600x1200 75MHz v-sync, smooth.

>dos dual boot
Compatibility? Have a different configuration set for DOS gaming? You're not going to play DOS games with a EAX sound card and you probably want a EAX card if you plan on playing any Win9x games.
The implied Pentium box for "DOS gaming" would only fit for early 90's onward, something that a P3 with proper compatible DOS hardware will do fine also and way better.

>Sound card is fucking pleb tier
>more shit opinions on the sound cards
>followed by more shit opinions on the sound cards
What are your opinions then?
The absolutely best you can get for DOS gaming is either a GUS Max, SB AWE64 plus and actual MT-32 or a cheaper SB16 card with a Dreamblaster (actually sounds better than a real MT-32 imo). That's as good as it gets.
Next you want a proper card with a DSP and support for 3D sound and EAX for Windows games, many games like Half-Life support it and it's day and night.

>>4047323
>>Sound card is fucking pleb tier
>>more shit opinions on the sound cards
>>followed by more shit opinions on the sound cards
this isn't a CRT thread where you can play off taking any CRT card from Goodwill and it will work while calling others "elitist" for just wanting a good picture, there's huge differences in PC sound card world of the time

>>4047347
>Two Voodoo 2's are the best you can get, better than a single Voodoo 3, but still have a proper AGP card.
>voodoo2
>agp
Hot outside.
>Compatibility
With voodoo2s in DOS? Really hot outside.

>What are your opinions then?
I'd focus on the win98 games for the sound card.
>>4047356
I agree and Vortex 2s are amazing. Live is another great period option.

>>4047370
ALso I should point out I'm not that anon that suggested the 5500

>>4047347
You don't get a Voodoo 5 to play games at ultra high resolutions and with AA, you get it to be able to play every game at 32 BPP, including compatibility with Glide.

The Pentium MMX was released in the later half of the 90's, after games were transitioning to Windows.
The fastest Pentium 3 machines lack flexibility for DOS builds. You could go slower, but then there's no room for that ultra high-end FPS arena gaming you were talking about

Also, A3D is superior to EAX. A case could be made that it isn't as common, but if I were stuck with one sound card, it would be Aureal.

>>4047370
Live is not that good. Has audio quality issues under certain circumstances. Audigy is not time correct, but what Live does, Audigy does better.

>>4047390
I agree. I'd still go for the Vortex cards though.

>>4047370
>>Two Voodoo 2's are the best you can get, better than a single Voodoo 3, but still have a proper AGP card.
>>voodoo2
>>agp
>Hot outside.
English is not your first language? Voodoo 2's are PCI, that's the point, you don't take up a AGP port for Glide compatibility, you can still have a proper AGP card together with Voodoo 2's.

>With voodoo2s in DOS? Really hot outside.
Glide is fully supported in DOS. You didn't know that?

>I'd focus on the win98 games for the sound card.
You're not replacing any Win9x card for Windows games, just an additional card for DOS, the DOS card won't even be loaded in Win9x and the Win9x card won't be used in DOS. Hence dual boot.

>I agree and Vortex 2s are amazing. Live is another great period option.
For Win9x? Why? Care to explain?
I'd like to have proper EAX with my Win9x games, thanks.

>>4047390
Time is no "time correct" in these builds but compatibility and speed.
Those aren't consoles. You want proper compatibility while still having good quality, like you said, Audigy does everything Live does, but better.

>>4047419
>Glide is fully supported in DOS. You didn't know that?
I think his point is that DOS compatibility suffers with Voodoo 2.

>>4047379
>You don't get a Voodoo 5 to play games at ultra high resolutions and with AA, you get it to be able to play every game at 32 BPP, including compatibility with Glide.
A proper AGP card will still let you play all OpenGL and Direct3D games at 32BBP, while true, you only get 16BBP in Glide games with Voodoo 2, but for most of the games that won't be as huge of a problem. Yet if you like Win9x gaming, most of the games will still be OpenGL/Direct3D, something the Voodoo 5 won't be that good at.

>The fastest Pentium 3 machines lack flexibility for DOS builds. You could go slower, but then there's no room for that ultra high-end FPS arena gaming you were talking about
There are no problems whatsoever for Pentium3 and DOS games from the early 90's onward.
You don't have to go slower. This is literary DOS + high-end FPS area gaming as I said, you get your pie and eat it, it's as simple as that.

>Also, A3D is superior to EAX. A case could be made that it isn't as common, but if I were stuck with one sound card, it would be Aureal.
It's not as common, as you said.
Cards like Audigy 2 support A3D together with EAX.
There's a huge difference in compatibility and quality in favor for Audigy.

There is literally no reason to go with Aureal. I have no idea why you guys like cheap PCI sound cards so much.

>>4047419
>English is not your first language? Voodoo 2's are PCI, that's the point, you don't take up a AGP port for Glide compatibility, you can still have a proper AGP card together with Voodoo 2's.
These voodoo cards are 3d accelerators. A "proper agp card" would be some 2d card like from Matrox. In modern times we use their capabilities to enhance glide games while having a 2d/3d GPU handle the rest. Not so much back then.
>Glide is fully supported in DOS. You didn't know that?
For the original voodoo. Voodoo2 will need patches for dos games and you run into a lot bugs. Most games run fine despite the bugs though.
>You're not replacing any Win9x card for Windows games, just an additional card for DOS, the DOS card won't even be loaded in Win9x and the Win9x card won't be used in DOS. Hence dual boot.
And that limits you to ISA mobos. No single soundcard is going to be great for all dos games.
>For Win9x? Why? Care to explain?
>I'd like to have proper EAX with my Win9x games, thanks.
Even if you think Aureal's support for eax is poor, many games were made for A3d.
>>4047426
A period correct build can be fun. I enjoy them.

File: v23dfx.png (56KB, 954x685px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 954x685px

>>4047427
https://www.vogons.org/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=35721&sid=f1173958d2f04a9700568c63dc149557

>>4047427
>I think his point is that DOS compatibility suffers with Voodoo 2.
Out of the handful of games that support Glide under DOS, 90% do support Voodoo 2 without problems, the rest (4-5 games) have patches.

>>4047419
Half-life is much better with A3D than EAX.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAOcdfCN-RU

>>4047446
>These voodoo cards are 3d accelerators. A "proper agp card" would be some 2d card like from Matrox. In modern times we use their capabilities to enhance glide games while having a 2d/3d GPU handle the rest. Not so much back then.
Your point? We are not building a machine in 1998.

If you really though I meant a 2D card to go together with your Voodoo multimedia 3D accelerator when I said "proper AGP card" then I don't know what you are smoking, AGP wasn't common, you'd pair it with a PCI 2D card and if you even read the dissucion, under proper AGP card we already obiously where talking about a OpenGL/Direct3D card.

You literally just said what I posted several times.

>For the original voodoo. Voodoo2 will need patches for dos games and you run into a lot bugs. Most games run fine despite the bugs though.
See >>4047448

>And that limits you to ISA mobos. No single soundcard is going to be great for all dos games.
You do know they made mobos with ISA slots up to (including) the Pentium 4 era? Some of the best Socket 370 mobos have at least one ISA slot. Perfect for that DOS sound card.
Also yes, there is no perfect card, but something like a Sound Blaster with a OPL together with a Dreamblaster, you get proper quality FM synthesis, OPL MIDI and MPU-401 (Dreamblasters sound great btw), not to mention best compatibility you can wish for.

>Even if you think Aureal's support for eax is poor, many games were made for A3d.
That's why I'm saying a proper sounding sound card like Audigy can do both. Why limit yourself to a Aureal?

>A period correct build can be fun. I enjoy them.
Then you obviously need several machines, not like the post I even first replied to that said "YOU ONLY NEED THESE MACHINES!!!1". I'm commenting on that, what are the best builds with the widest compadiblity you can make.

>>4047453
No worries, my Audigy 2 ZS supports A3D in Half-Life too.

>>4047464
Audigy only poorly emulates A3D 1.0. Which isn't doing anything for you since all the nice features like wave tracing are only in A3D 2.0

>>4047441
>Cards like Audigy 2 support A3D
Yes
>There is literally no reason to go with Aureal. I have no idea why you guys like cheap PCI sound cards so much.
No

You are right that Audigy supports A3d. It's only 1.0 from what I know. I could be wrong though since I admit I'm an Aureal fanboy becouse they're American among other reasons. To get 2.0 you need a Vortex 2 card. Also the lesser important 3.0.

Also the Aureal Vortex cards were over $100 back in the late 90s. Ya they were dirt cheap after they went under but I wouldn't call them cheap while Aureal was in business.
>>4047448
>>4047464
Just becouse the game run doesn't mean it's bug free. Tomb Raider has issue with Voodoo2s. No way around it. But you can make the game run fine despite it.
>>4047464
>Your point?
Your wording and then defensiveness about how it came off as ignorant and possibly from an underage person.
>you do know they made mobos with ISA slots up to (including) the Pentium 4 era?
That are for most part garbage.
>SOCKET 370
>BEST AT ANYTHING
HOHOH AAHAHAH AH AHH
>Then you obviously need several machines
Which is why I prefer emulation for dos.

>>4047467
>Audigy only poorly emulates A3D 1.0.
Except unofficial drivers that also have a wrapper for A3D 2.0 with support hardware.

>>4047472
There is no A3D 2.0 wrapper.

>>4047453
>>4047467
half-life is not optimized for a3d 2.0
if you actually played those games instead of criclejerking here you would know that

>>4047469
>You are right that Audigy supports A3d. It's only 1.0 from what I know. I could be wrong though since I admit I'm an Aureal fanboy becouse they're American among other reasons. To get 2.0 you need a Vortex 2 card. Also the lesser important 3.0.
See
>>4047472

>Just becouse the game run doesn't mean it's bug free. Tomb Raider has issue with Voodoo2s. No way around it. But you can make the game run fine despite it.
Source? Played Tomb Raider on both card for hundreds of hours. No issues.

>Your wording and then defensiveness about how it came off as ignorant and possibly from an underage person.
I'm tired of dumb fucks. Specially if you're going to move goalposts.
I have no idea how you can imagine someone being defensive if they try to explain something to someone who really can't understand something (you).

>That are for most part garbage.
Pentium 4? Yes.

>HOHOH AAHAHAH AH AHH
Best P3 chips are Socket 370, best Intel and Via chipsets for those CPUs also.
Care to explain the problems?

>Which is why I prefer emulation for dos.
Well, you talk about compatibility and bugs, sure weird to have a fetish for emulation then.
Even a machine with the specs we have been discussing will be better than emulation in every sense.

>>4047474
Well, the drivers I got for my Audigy 2 ZS over a decade ago do support A3D 1.0/2.0, something that wasn't supported officially in the original old drivers.

Really what's up with the Aureal fanbois? It was never a great card, it was mediocre at best.
The only thing it had going for itself was A3D and even back then you'd prefer it emulated because the rest of the card was crap.

But if we are talking about _perfect_ builds, why not include a Vortex 2 together with a Audigy 2 ZS?

you guys watch way too much phils computer lab, I understand you are all kids interested in the topic, but don't take everything he says as true, hes pretty dumb at times

>>4047489
>Really what's up with the Aureal fanbois?
poorfags finding excuses
same with faggots who prefer quake in software rendering

>>4047494
>same with faggots who prefer quake in software rendering
Kek.

>>4047487
I never once said optimized though. I have no idea what you're trying to say, I wouldn't be able to jerk off about the game unless I played it since its one of the best examples of A3D 2.0. After that is the unreal 1 engine games like ut and deus ex since they all support A3d 2.0.

>>4047489
>Source? Played Tomb Raider on both card for hundreds of hours. No issues.
Shadows
>Best P3 chips are Socket 370, best Intel and Via chipsets for those CPUs also.
You're talking about 2002... Well into Pentium 4 shitfest.
>Well, you talk about compatibility and bugs, sure weird to have a fetish for emulation then.
It beats having 5+ comps just to run all the eras of dos at their best performance.


As for the Aureal stuff. It was the hot shit in the late 90s. Every magazine praised it. I like it.
>why not include a Vortex 2 together with a Audigy 2 ZS
2 PCI slots just for sound is a no go.

>I'm tired of dumb fucks. Specially if you're going to move goalposts.
NO goals posts and don't word shit like
>Two Voodoo 2's are the best you can get, better than a single Voodoo 3, but still have a proper AGP card.

>>4047491
Phil doesn't even use the high end Vortex cards. Don't assume all the Aureal fanboys are because of that retard.
>>4047494
>>4047497
>faggots
>kek
Weather sure is hot.

>>4047491
It's simply one of the best recorded video of it in action. and hes not any dummer than this idiot here that thinks his audigy actually supports A3D 2.0 .

>>4047489
The best P3 chips lack ISA slots.

File: 1495905752506.gif (70KB, 296x335px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 296x335px

>>4047168
everything you listed still works or should work on W7 though

>>4047541
But 440bx has isa?

>>4047552
The Tualatin boards are 815

>>4047491
Examples of unintelligent behaviour?

>>4047556
>815
That's not 440bx.

>>4047562
But Tualatins are the best P3s

>>4047563
I'm not aware of native slot 1 Tualatins

>>4047567
Exactly. Tualatins are faster, but they are not compatible with these older boards, hence why you need a 815 for them.

>>4047573
Joking aside the 815 and non slot 1 PIIIs are trash. Got beat by Athlons.

>>4047582
Does anyone really want Athlon for retro gaming, though? I just know that the early ones were prone to overheating.

>>4047591
>Does anyone really want Athlon for retro gaming, though?
Most are intel fanboys or just parroting off forums and the few youtubers there are. Doesn't change the fact that Athlon beat those PIIIs. Early 2000s in general are a shitshow and should be avoided if you ask me.
I don't think AMD cpus had thermal shutdown for a long time.

>>4047072
any BUILD engine game

how underage are you?

>>4047591
I mostly go for Socket 370 Tualatin or Coppermine, most compatible CPUs, you really don't need better than that. Aka Athlon.
Athlons are great though. It's just that if you go with Athlon, why not already go with a Pentium 4? compatibility is dropping with every generation.

>>4047541
No? Almost every good chipset has a board with at least one ISA slot.
Every chipset also natively supported ISA, even if it was not used, most Pentium 4 chipsets even do.

>>4047304
Wait, I was always told that the SB Pro was one of the best sounding cards for DOS gaming, despite being 8-bit. So is this a lie?

>>4047501
>You're talking about 2002... Well into Pentium 4 shitfest.
Problem? You talk about emulation but you care about period correct hardware?
You only use Pentium 3's for compatibility, I don't care from what year the board and chip are from.

>It beats having 5+ comps just to run all the eras of dos at their best performance.
That's why you make one proper box for it, but you seem to find excuses like "2 PCI slots just for sound is a no go.", why? There are plenty of boards with 7-8 PCI sockets.

>Two Voodoo 2's are the best you can get, better than a single Voodoo 3, but still have a proper AGP card.
Two Voodoo 2's are the best you can get for 3dfx compatibility while still having a AGP slot free.
Much english problems?

>>4047615
Anything after a 600-800mhz PIII and you may as well go for Pentium 4.

>>4047615
I have seen various high-tier Tualatin boards without ISA slots. Show me a good one that does.

>>4047623
>Problem? You talk about emulation but you care about period correct hardware?
My point was you had Pentium 4s to choose from.
>You only use Pentium 3's for compatibility
Slot 1 PIIIs to be specific.
>That's why you make one proper box for it,
You can't make 1 box and run all DOS games at the highest quality.
>but you seem to find excuses like "2 PCI slots just for sound is a no go.", why? There are plenty of boards with 7-8 PCI sockets.
A lot of the best boards for dos or win98 are limited to 5 slots. That's a no go to use two up for sound.
>Much english problems?
Yes, you seem to have many.

>>4047618
That's for MIDI. It's true though.
But SB 16 has the advantage of sounding better for FM synthesis and together with a Dreamblaster it's MIDI capabilities rival the MT-32 easily.

>>4047625
Why? Windows 98 has shit support for Pentium 4 motherboards and chipsets.
You want performance while still being compatible, go for a high end Pentium 3.

It's really like people here have no clue about machines/games and software of that area.

>>4047632
4 slots*

>>4047632
>My point was you had Pentium 4s to choose from.
See
>>4047634

>Slot 1 PIIIs to be specific.
No need, all P3 boards and chipsets have good Win9x driver support and compatibility.

>You can't make 1 box and run all DOS games at the highest quality.
You can get pretty darn close. You are too lazy to take it on though.
But as said, this is a machine for early 90's DOS to late 90's Win9x and some early 2000's Windows games.

>A lot of the best boards for dos or win98 are limited to 5 slots. That's a no go to use two up for sound.
Define "best board" because it's the chipset that matters, good chipsets almost always had someone making a board with ridiculous amount of expansion, like several PCI and even ISA slots.
When talking about boards we are mostly talking about the chipsets they had.

>>4047634
>Why? Windows 98 has shit support for Pentium 4 motherboards and chipsets.
No? What?

>>4047640
>You are too lazy to take it on though.
Right kiddo. Hold on let me go find a magical CPU that's going to work with ALL dos games and then somehow cram all sound hardware needed. Ya no.
>Define "best board" because it's the chipset that matters, good chipsets almost always had someone making a board with ridiculous amount of expansion, like several PCI and even ISA slots.
The manufacturer is pretty important. Intel 440bx mobos like the se440bx only have 4 pci slots. Asus P2b only has 4 slots too usually.

>>4044418
the beatnik worm was the most annoying cunt

>>4047506
It would be easy to tell the difference if he actually knew what he was doing, but i bet he doesn't have an actual aureal card to compare with. For instance if you try putting "s_refgain" in half-life's console, you'll notice it controls the volume of the reflections from the wavetracing with A3D 2.0. But of course with this you wont notice any difference on audigy since an A3D 2.0 wrapper doesn't exist.

So what exactly is wrong with 815, and why is 440 desired?

>>4047675

Jest meh performance. With the rock solid options of 440bx mobos and slot 1 PIIIs being great for win98 there's little point. Irrelevant for Win98 but 815 also has a ram limit of 512mb.
440bx is period correct also. 815 mobos are getting into ME and XP era. They are one of Intel's most legendary chipsets and lasted as long as they did for a reason.

>>4047682
>Meh performance
But how fast is a slot 1 CPU? 1GHz at most?
You can get 1.4 on a 815.

>>4039054
While preffered its not essential. I have VM with Win98 and XP images. Works fine for me.

>>4047698
And you can get an Athlon and be faster while still being the same time period. A P4 even if you want a 2000-02 build.

It's not like those socket 370 PIIIs run Win98 games that much better. Talking like 40% increase around there about. Athlon and the later P4s being a 220%+ from the Slot 1s.

>>4047625
EPOX EP-D3VA

Soltek SL-65KV2-CT

>>4047641
It does.
I agree though, it's wrong to say Windows 98 has shit support for Pentium 4 boards and chipsets, it's more correct to say that Pentium 4 boards and chipsets have shit support for Windows 98.

>>4047645
>Right kiddo. Hold on let me go find a magical CPU that's going to work with ALL dos games and then somehow cram all sound hardware needed. Ya no.
Who said ALL? Unless you are playing early/mid 80's or some late 80's games, the CPU won't matter. I already told you, for games that old you get a 386 or 486 with proper turbo in the first place.

Do you even read posts?
>this is a machine for early 90's DOS >>4047640

>No, you want a 386DX-40 for pure DOS, a machine that is still fully compatible with the 80's games, Pentium-233 MMX is not, even a 486 is stretching for games like Wing Commander,
>unless you have a proper Turbo button, but it's made useless by the fact that newer games that will play like shit anyways will play fine on the DOS/Win build. >>4047318

>The manufacturer is pretty important.
Except back then any OEM could use any chipset they could get a deal with.
There are shitloads of Intel chipset boards not made by Intel.

>>4047804
You're just randomly linking shit from google now. Why?
>>4047824
But there are mobos and chipsets with excellent support for win98. All the way up to lga775.
>>4047834
Evan late 80s to late dos isn't possible. Stop.

>OEM
WHO THE FUCK BROUGHT UP OEM?

>>4047713
But the point of Pentium 3s is to have that same architecture used throughout the late 90's, just with higher speed.

>>4047804
>VIA
Trash

>>4047874
The chipsets are garbage though?

>>4047804
meant to link to >>4047628

>>4047881
what's wrong with VIA?

>>4047873
>Evan late 80s to late dos isn't possible. Stop.
What the fuck are you talking about? Are you the same anon with reading problems?

>Unless you are playing early/mid 80's or some late 80's games, the CPU won't matter.
I literally said there that most 80's games are CPU dependant, if you don't want to play those however, CPU won't matter.

>>4047645
>>4047834
>>4047873
for 1990s dos games it doesn't matter what CPU you use

>>4047873
>>OEM
>WHO THE FUCK BROUGHT UP OEM?

>t. I have no clue what I'm talking about

>>4048225
Obviously, that anon has been spewing out bullshit the whole thread. He has no idea about Wintel hardware of the time or how things worked.

>>4048232
you are on /vr/
what the fuck did you expect? most people here are hipsters or literal tech illiterates

>>4047541
>best CPUs lack ISA slots
!?!?

you mean chipsets? no, all those chipsets had native ISA support

>>4048235
>are hipsters or literal tech illiterates
You mean and/or

>>4043238
Damn anon, that's pretty much as perfect as it goes for DOS and Windows gaming from the turn of the millennium
I'd love to make something similar but buying parts for a build like yours would cost loads nowadays

>>4048260
Much appreciated. I still want to modify and tweak it a little.
The parts aren't that expensive if you just wait and keep your eyes open. Ture my machine is mostly from parts I gathered over the years.

>>4048268
If I ever get the parts I will do a build like yours though

>>4048273
Good luck!

>>4043238
I feel the 7800 is overkill but otherwise is a solid build.

File: 1489854343494.jpg (46KB, 671x665px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 671x665px

>>4048291
Thanks.
It's overkill alright, but it works great and I don't mind the additional horsepower it gives over older AGP cards.

>>4047541
All P3 chips lack ISA slots. The slots are on the mobo not the CPU.

>>4048224
Wing Commander called. It said forminguponyourwinglookoutbogeysimhitweareheretocimemmorateanongameover

>>4048371
Wing Commander is borderline 90's, it literally came out in 1990.
You want a 386DX for that.

File: Remember_the_excitement_perusing_store_shelves.jpg (2MB, 2304x1728px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2304x1728px

>>4047056
>>4047081
It's a 486DX4 100mHz and I primarily want to use it to play DOS games. Win98 is just for a newer DOS, also make use of some of my old anime screensavers, desktop wigets, Tenshindo, Minesweeper, and that Win95 Puyo Puyo 2. I do remember using Win 3.0, but all I ever used it for was Reversi and Solitare.

>>4047467
>>4047498
>Which isn't doing anything for you since all the nice features like wave tracing are only in A3D 2.0
>After that is the unreal 1 engine games like ut and deus ex since they all support A3d 2.0.
the only difference between a3d and a3d 2 is the amount of sounds they can reflect at once, none of those games even play 60 sounds at the same time, not to mention 3d sounds, the crappy creative a3d support is going to sound exactly the same like a a3d 2 card

t. I have had and still have shitloads of aureal cards

File: ease.jpg (736KB, 2592x1944px) Image search: [Google]

736KB, 2592x1944px

Whoops, intended >>4048379 to be directed at >>4047067 and not myself.

I will admit that I made a mistake and should have installed J-Win98 instead. Maybe even experiment with DOS/V.

>>4048376
WC II does the same thing tho
Also basically everything made with Turbo Pascal is fukt

>>4048376
>>4048386

To add to this I know early-mid 90s Sierra adventure games don't really like clock speeds too far out of their contemporary range. I remember I had a hell of a time replaying Quest for Glory games on an Athlon XP years back. You could adjust the game speed to something comfortable for world movement but it still did silly shit like run minigames (or worse, combat) at hyperspeed depending on the situation. I also ran into a lot more random "Oops! You did something unexpected" crashes on faster machines doing completely routine things that never crashed these games on older hardware.

>>4048217
>What the fuck are you talking about?
>Who said ALL? Unless you are playing early/mid 80's or some late 80's games
Like I said, champ. I can read.
>>4048224
Wrong
>>4048225
>>4048232
>>4048235
>>4048251
>t
Nice 2016 meme. Shows your age.

>>4048549
It's an old ass meme from ylilauta by way of krautchan.

>>4048573
Thanks for the source of this dank meme. I'm sure you know all about it.

>>4048549
Did you ever stop to think that if you have to keep telling a bunch of different people that you know how to read that maybe the problem isn't all those people? lel

>>4048593
Sometimes but then they end their sentence with shit like "lel" and I'm confident I'm not the problem.

>>4048596
>Sometimes but then they end their sentence with shit like "lel" and I'm confident I'm not the problem.
Sucks nobody here did, must be you then.

>>4048696
Might want to look at the post you just made prior, champ.

>>4048549
>Nice 2016 meme. Shows your age.
>only one post has (You) after it
>quoting my post as "t"
Sorry?

File: Clipboard02.jpg (114KB, 1138x416px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 1138x416px

>>4048705
>Oh no! There is no way several people dislike me because of my shitty opinions and knowledge
>No no no! It must be the same person!
Well, I never said "lel" while talking to you and you failed to read several of my posts properly even though as other agree, they where perfectly understandable.

>>4048708
Called a post chain. We use it here on 4chan.

>>4048712
But it has nothing to do with my post.
You must be new to this.

>>4048705
You are talking to who?

>>4048710
>it wasn't me!
Cool

>>4048717
Nice shitpost.
Thanks for the laugh, it's nice to see some actual retardation and autism once in awhile between all that bait.

>>4048715
Might want to look up what a post chain is.
>>4048716
See post chain. 4chan isn't that hard, summer children.

>>4048717
it wasn't him though

>>4048719
Must be hard trying to fit in.

>>4048718
It's not a shit post. That's the shit you're pulling right now. Point to the post you're talking about. That's how a post chain works.

>>4048719
Nice! I bet you feel real proud for shitposting on /vr/.
First you even tried to be normal, but after you made an idiot of yourself you have to ruin the thread with shitposts.

>>4048721
>>4048725
Do tell me more about oem mobos.

>>4048729
Try not throwing a term like "oem" around when you clearly don't know what it means. Because following it up with a dank meme and accusing me of not being able to read wont help.

>>4048726
Genuine retardation is funny as fuck.
Sorry if I come off edgy, but you have no fucking idea what you are doing here, do you?

>>4048734
I never said you can't read...
Also do YOU even know what OEM means? Do you really think chipsets where tied to companies who made the boards?

>>4048734
You can't read.
Several times you pointed out my post with a comment that confirmed it.

File: bbc01f8078b4450f42975c7e0dffb856.jpg (318KB, 900x1000px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 900x1000px

>>4048736
No unlike you kids my knowledge comes from the actual time period.
If you need me to further explain my post here >>4047873 then it's clear you're ignorant of the topic. Maybe not underage but not knowledgeable.
>>4048738
>I never said you can't read...
Someone did in a reply to me...
>Also do YOU even know what OEM means?
Yes. You seem not to.
>Do you really think chipsets where tied to companies who made the boards?
In some cases they were.

A company like Aopen making a 440bx mobo is an oem for intel... They're making a retail board.

To help you out. An OEM makes someones else's hardware design for them. ie. Nvidia contracting visiontek to fulfill orders to IBM.

An oem is not a company like my other example with Aopen making a 440bx chipset from intel. They are licensing the chipset.

Just wow.
>>4048739
Neat

>>4048749
isn't* an oem for intel... fuck captcha.

>>4048749
>A company like Aopen making a 440bx mobo is an oem for intel... They're making a retail board.
>To help you out. An OEM makes someones else's hardware design for them. ie. Nvidia contracting visiontek to fulfill orders to IBM.
>An oem is not a company like my other example with Aopen making a 440bx chipset from intel. They are licensing the chipset.
Thank God you finally understand it, took you hours in Wikipedia and Google, didn't it?
So now if you go back to the discussion we had, you can understand what that post meant.

>>4048749
>No unlike you kids my knowledge comes from the actual time period.
This seems rather unlikely. My bet as someone who actually lived in the 90's without shitting their pants at the time, you seem pretty confused about all this.

Here, you also seem to be confused about OEMs and licensing and where the difference really comes from.
http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/O/OEM.html

>>4048749
>Nvidia contracting visiontek to fulfill orders to IBM.
false, it's not always like that, OEMs can license and rebrand

>>4048761
>>4048764

>So now if you go back to the discussion we had, you can understand what that post meant.

No I don't because the post makes no sense. Back to your post >>4047834
>Except back then any OEM could use any chipset they could get a deal with.
>There are shitloads of Intel chipset boards not made by Intel.
You say manufacturer doesn't matter because you seem to think just throwing the title "OEM" on a mobo means it's good. Not all 440bx mobos are good. Many are garbage.
>>4048767
>OEMs can license and rebrand
Which we aren't talking about. Visiontek had retail cards too. You can be an OEM and a retail manufacturer. Not a difficult concept here.

>>4048764
don't be so harsh on the guy, hes really trying and not just baiting

File: 1496784660202.jpg (5KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 200x200px

>>4048749
>animu post
>reddit spacing
>ignorant remarks
>problems with shitposting and understanding basic concepts
If you were really an adult at the actual time period we are discussing about, you must be a sad as fuck, fuck.

>>4048771
>Not a difficult concept here.
don't know why it seems so difficult for you then, as I said, it not always like that and it's not always like I explained it too, but it's still OEM

>>4048771
>You say manufacturer doesn't matter because you seem to think just throwing the title "OEM" on a mobo means it's good. Not all 440bx mobos are good. Many are garbage.
I never mentioned 440bx.
I explained fair and well that OEMs existed as an example, the board itself isn't as important as the chipset on it. You don't need an Intel board to get an Intel chipset. Is that concept too hard for you? I think everybody else understood it fine.

You were the one saying the actual boards manufacture was as essential as the chipset, but not really.

>>4048781
>manufacture
manufacturer*

>>4048773
>>4048779
>>4048781
Holy shit faggots, just stop replying to the retard, this was a nice thread until you guys ruined it.

>>4048791
nice butthurt bro

>>4048791
I'm pretty tired of this shit anyways, have fun in your thread, the tech illiterates just make me cringe though. Wintel threads always attract them like magnets.

>>4048773
That's pretty standard bbs format for a post, champ. Also
>touhou
>anime
It's a retro game.

Thanks you showing your age.

Have another spacebar sentence.

Neat.
>>4048779
If it's a retail card then by definition it's not an oem card. Are you retarded?
>>4048781
>I never mentioned 440bx.
I did. Keep up.
>I explained fair and well that OEMs existed as an example, the board itself isn't as important as the chipset on it. You don't need an Intel board to get an Intel chipset. Is that concept too hard for you? I think everybody else understood it fine.
No you replied to this part of my post
>The manufacturer is pretty important.
You went on your ignorant oem rant which you still are.
>You were the one saying the actual boards manufacture was as essential as the chipset, but not really.
Hey you figured out you fucked up. Too bad you're a fucking idiot and think all mobos with the same chipset are the same.

>>4048801
>That's pretty standard bbs format for a post, champ. Also
>>touhou
>>anime
>It's a retro game.
>Thanks you showing your age.
>Have another spacebar sentence.
>Neat.
you sad fuck, I pitty you

>>4048801
>If it's a retail card then by definition it's not an oem card. Are you retarded?
you are confused here, aren't you?

>>4048804
Just stop you dumb child. You clearly have no idea what an OEM is. Please show me an example of manufacturer selling a retail OEM card under their name. It doesn't exist because that isn't an OEM.

>>4048801
>No you replied to this part of my post
Yes, you fail to understand that different board manufacturers could make different board with different characteristics but still use the same chipset.

>You went on your ignorant oem rant which you still are.
I never mentioned OEM again, only once as the example for different board, you started a rant about it because you failed to understand the point, probably because you have difficulties with english as you have showed several times.

>Hey you figured out you fucked up. Too bad you're a fucking idiot and think all mobos with the same chipset are the same.
Well, I haven't changed any statement, so if you think I figured out the "I" fucked up, means you finally understood something you didn't before.
Also no, nobody said all mobos with the same chipset are the same, that's literally the point I made in the first post.

You seem pretty thick for someone who was at least an adult in the 90's, pretty much the usual shit you see in /vr/ daily, except then it's kids in their mid 20's.
Not to mention all that goalpost moving, it's hilarious, you have no idea yourself what you are trying to accomplish with your posts, pretty much no better then shitposts.

>>4048816
you still seem confused, nobody has ever mentioned something like you are talking about

>>4048816
>Just stop you dumb child.
>I'M AN ADULT! PLS JUST STOP!

>>4048818
>think I figured out the "I" fucked up
that*

As I said, I'm pretty tired, have fun arguing guys.

>>4048818
>Yes, you fail to understand that different board manufacturers could make different board with different characteristics but still use the same chipset.
No dumbass that was my point in why manufactures are important.
>Well, I haven't changed any statement
You're trying.
>Also no, nobody said all mobos with the same chipset are the same
>Except back then any OEM could use any chipset they could get a deal with.
Explain then retard. In what way does an OEM mobo beat a retail one.
>>4048823
You just did

>>4048828
>In what way does an OEM mobo beat a retail one
not him, but in the same way a OEM card can beat a retail one, features

>>4048836
>but in the same way a OEM card can beat a retail one, features
>oem
>features
Name one win98 period OEM mobo that beat the best retail options. NAME ONE.

>>4048838
>Name one win98 period OEM mobo that beat the best retail options. NAME ONE.
don't really care enough about this discussion to start copy pasting model names, but I can tell you that there are OEM boards with same chipsets as retail boards but with more ISA/PCI slots or RAM slots or more USB ports, etc

>>4048845
There are none. Thanks for trying retard.

>>4048596
>I'm confident I'm not the problem
I'm pretty sure this is the official millennial motto. lel
Only a summerfag would think someone on /vr/ unironically lels

You know what they say; the more insistently they posture about age on the internet the younger they usually are.

>>4048872
>>4048879
Topkek. Welcome to /vr/.

>>4048847
>call names because you don't like someone answer
sorry for disappoint you, but yes there are, I'm really not going to bother looking them up, but I have owned several that didn't have as good retail counterparts (same chipset boards that is) specially for the time period we are talking about, but you should know that if you where such a smartass back then already

>inb4 hurr I win because I'm too dumb to find information myself and you didn't give me any

>>4048872
This guy is pretty kek, he poses like a oldfag on 4chan while unironically shitposting. You don't see that level of autism everyday, not even on /vr/.

>>4048883
List them retard.

>>4048383
Then I don't know how you can be so wrong. Sound in A3D 1.0 games sounds completely different to A3D 2.0 games.
A3D 1.0 only offers HRTF on 8 audio sources and these are rendered in software. No reverb support at all.
A3D 2.0 gives a whole slew of new features like Occlusions, Hardware HRTF, WaveTraced reflections and some other neat 3D audio features.

>>4049074
To know why A3D was developed you need to know a bit of history. When Microsoft released DS3D with DirectX3, the summer 96, they didn't offer any hardware acceleration and hinted that even if they later would offer that, they wanted everyone to use their algorithms. Aureal didn't want to use Microsoft's 3D algorithms and they wanted the possibility to accelerate the 3D streams but still use the same 3D sound commands (API), the result of their work was A3D. Aureal also released some tools to make life easier for developers to include 3D sound in their titles. That together with soundcards released using Aureal's 3D sound algorithms without taxing the CPU too much, was enough to make some developers start to include 3D sound in their titles (something no one did using MS DirectX3 3D sound engine).

So A3D 1.X doesn't offer THAT much capability than more than DS3D except 3 things. The most important is a voice manager (Aureal's name for it is resource manager) that helps the developers to manage the 3D streams and take better advantage of the number of 3D streams that the card can handle, that is, choose the most important sound sources to be using Aureal's 3D sound algorithms. The rest of the sound sources are either not played at all or played using the stereo mixer, usually the latter. This doesn't completely remove the problems I mentioned above in Unreal but should at least reduce them. By how much depends on the developers and how many sound sources they use in the game. The other improvement A3D 1.X has is a more advanced distance model where they have a high frequency distance factor the developer can manipulate to simulate different atmospheric environments, such as thick fog or underwater. Finally the developer can find out more details about the A3D hardware that it uses including what drivers are used.

>>4049205

There is now a voice manager for DS3D that QSound made as an extension to DS3D and gave to MS. MS later made some changes to that extension after feedback from companies like Creative and published it as an official voice manager extension that all soundcard companies could support if they wanted to. The Live and all soundcards using QSound's and Sensauras 3d technology support this voice manager.

However, it's not enough to just support a resource manager in your drivers. You also need to get developers to take advantage of it which is why Creative Labs, QSound and Sensaura all are strongly promoting and recommending the usage of MS Voice Management to game developers, as a complement to DS3D platform, to take full advantage of 3d audio hardware acceleration and to optimize resource consumption. The current plans (unless they changed since last summer) is that MS will include a new more advanced and more integrated voice manager when they ship DirectX7.

There are also several SDKs(software development kit) like QSound's QMDX and QMixer that include voice manager capabilities that will work on all 3D soundcards regardless of what voice manager they use.

1.0 was much simpler and easy to implement. A3D 2.0 on the other hand requires more effort on the dev's part to implement its advanced features. For example. heres an old interview with slave zero developers where they confess not implementing A3D's 2.0 wavetracing feature out of lazyness, hence there being much less games with A3D 2.0 support than A3D 1.0.

http://web.archive.org/web/20010906211453/http://www.3dsoundsurge.com:80/interviews/SlaveZero/SlaveZerop3.html

>>4049205
>>4049206
Slave Zero isn't exactly the best game.

Unreal and Thief are some big names for a3d2.0.

>>4049225
It was just an example of the typical lazy dev attitude at the time which made aureal suffer. It doesn't stop the few A3D 2.0 supporting games from being any less awesome though.

For unreal make sure you use the latest official patch for the game since its what adds the A3D 2.0 support.

>>4039067
>>4040062
Where do you people live that you can find old computers at thrift stores? All the ones where I live either don't accept or destroy/recycle computers as a matter of policy. I haven't seen computer hardware in a thrift store for 10 years.

>>4047502
>Phil doesn't even use the high end Vortex cards. Don't assume all the Aureal fanboys are because of that retard.
Why do you hate PhilsComputerLab so much?

>>4049401
Because he's a autistic fuck, only know Wintel and has shitty opinions, mostly just "muh time period correct", which is ridicclilous for such new builds.

He acts like a 50 year old building 70's mainframes, but they are actually 90's shitboxes and hes a fucking kid. That's about it.

>>4049312
stop being a lazy fuck
this isn't 2007 anymore, you want old hardware, move your butt

>>4049074
>>4049205
>>4049206
That's cool!
But why did EAX win?
Also why do people say EAX is better, like EAX 3.0 being better than A3D 2.0?

>>4049402
pretty sure he's 40 years old, his original nick was maulwurf1977. He also uses modern hardware like CF cards, floppy emulator all the time

>>4049401
I don't hate him but the guy has some terrible videos. To claim he's the reason anyone likes Vortex cards is silly.
>>4049409
$$$

>>4049412
>pretty sure he's 40 years old
Indeed, if you know that you know how bad it is

>He also uses modern hardware like CF cards, floppy emulator all the time
That's the most autistic part, not only a GOTEK shill but then again he mentions things being time period correct, in the same fucking build

>>4049475
There's nothing wrong with using a floppy emulator. Come on man.

>>4049409
Creative files frivolous lawsuits and drags Aureal through court, court repeatedly finds in favor of Aureal but by then the damage is already done. They do not recover.
https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/fido7.su.hardw.pc.sound/szRoEl_XbgY
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/creative-vs-aureal/1100-2446686/
https://www.doomworld.com/vb/everything-else/70645-why-did-aureal-die-and-get-bought-by-creative/

tl;dr: Jewish tricks

>>4049402
Sticking to period correct solid state components is one thing but the need to compromise on aging mechanical storage will only become greater as time goes on.

>>4049225
Thief on A3D hardware is pretty magical. Would recommend.

My machine
Compaq Armada M700

Pentium II @ 366 MHz
ATI Rage Mobility P with RCA-out
192 MB RAM
6.0 GB hard drive
Windows 98 SE (also have ran NT 4, 2000, XP on it)
ESS Maestro2E sound chip (works on DOS with WDM drivers, but the A3D support only works with the 95/98 drivers I think)

Is EAX an extension to DS3D while A3D is its own thing?

>>4049476
>There's nothing wrong with using a floppy emulator. Come on man.
Wut?

There are hard drives for that.
If you really need a floppy drive once every full moon, just use a standard floppy. Not a emulator with a SoC probably way more powerful then the computer you're using the drive on.

>>4049312
I rarely see old computers in thrift stores here but there are lots of second hand computer shops and repair shops that sell them.

>>4050093
Sounds like you might not just be terminally autistic but have other mental issues as well. And the gotek uses an ARM running at 8mhz. So yeah, slightly more powerful than an early 286. lel

>>4050331
>Sounds like you might not just be terminally autistic but have other mental issues as well.
>Defending FLOPPY drive emulators
>FLOPPY
Am I still in /vr/?

>And the gotek uses an ARM running at 8mhz. So yeah, slightly more powerful than an early 286. lel
Are you literally pulling that shit out of your ass?

>Gotek drives use a powerful Cortex ARM based STM32 MCU working at 72Mhz

Even IF it was 8MHz, GOTEK is mostly used on 8-bit and 16-bit machines anyways, point still stands.
So yeah, lel to you too kind sir.

File: 2014_win_98.jpg (258KB, 1920x1440px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 1920x1440px

Why is there no working copy of Nippon Windows 98 on the internet?

>>4050441
>meme thinkpad laptop
>meme microsoft mouse
>muh nippon
hot shit, ring the autist bells

File: Microsoft_Wheel_Mouse_Optical.jpg (183KB, 1920x992px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1920x992px

>>4050469
They are memes for a reason

>>4050486
Exactly, they are _memes_

>>4050348
>GOTEK is mostly used on 8-bit and 16-bit machines anyways

So in other words mostly machines that don't have hard drives, are a pain in the dick to get a working drive for, or require an adapter for a more modern storage solution kind of like a floppy emulator

>>4050469
yeah for real those mouses are great. I'm a mac fag and even I use one I saved and cleaned up from the junk pile at work. it's just solid.

>>4050486
>>4050582
really shitty sensors though, even for the machines of the time with their low polling rates

>>4050579
>machines that don't have hard drives
You are on /vr/, unless you're a normie hipster, even your Apple II and C64 will have hard drives.

>are a pain in the dick to get a working drive for
How mediocre are you?

>or require an adapter for a more modern storage solution
>kind of like a floppy emulator
No, adapters for storage are one thing, they are FIXED DRIVES, floppy drives are removable media.

Gotek floppy drive emulators are one of the most retarded things ever made. I have no idea if it's laziness, autism or both.

>>4050608
Sensors are a meme, just like 60 fps gaming and PVM/BVM monitors

>>4050486
I didn't know my mouse was a meme

>>4050635
i guess you've never been to /g/?

File: 20170609_220022.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

>>4049753
HERE'S JOHNNY!

File: eshop.jpg (53KB, 586x494px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 586x494px

Say, would these SD card to IDE adapters make good HDD replacements for a retro system?

>>4050348
>kids react to floppy emulators
>Am I still in /vr/?
Yes. You've been here since the start of summer.

>Are you literally pulling that shit out of your ass?
I'm literally pulling numbers off the parts. It has an 8Mhz crystal. It would be difficult to tell if it's running a different frequency internally. Even running at maximum speed it would do 90 MIPS. That's less than a high end 486 any everything that came later.
Enjoy your summer kiddo.

>>4050675
I'm not sure but I think Compact Flash is better.

CF is natively IDE so in theory it'd be more compatible, but they actually vary wildly in their function and protocol support. Windows in particular doesn't really like CF cards as boot drives if they ID as removable, and the ability to toggle a CF card between fixed or removable is missing from virtually all modern cards. Then many cards don't respond safely to low-level IDE fuckery or legacy partitioning. Case in point: Tried installing Wn98SE to a Kingston 32GB card, card became. RMA and repeat three times, same result each time. Turned out Win98's partitioning/bootsector somehow corrupted the card's firmware and bricked it because the knobs at Kingston couldn't compartmentalize it properly.

Also CF is substantially more expensive than SD. At least a decent SD adapter will consistently present itself as a fixed IDE disk with proper UDMA support to the host computer.

>>4050609
>your Apple II and C64 will have hard drives
You're really showing off your age and ignorance there sport. Sounds like it's time to up your meds.

>>4050806
Seriously? You don't know that Apple II's and C64's have hard drive?

>>4050679
>Yes. You've been here since the start of summer.
Pathetic comeback. Haven't seen that one before. But whatever.

>I'm literally pulling numbers off the parts. It has an 8Mhz crystal. It would be difficult to tell if it's running a different frequency internally. Even running at maximum speed it would do 90 MIPS. That's less than a high end 486 any everything that came later.
Well, how about getting into the documentation next time and not make up shit because you think you are a EE and that internal 8MHz crystal is literary 1:1 with the CPU clock.

>Enjoy your summer kiddo.
I enjoy proving autistic fuck wrong all year long.
Every time you call someone kiddo, it becomes more obvious that you are just projecting your own age.

>>4050675
Compact Flash is better.
It's native PATA.

>CF is natively IDE so in theory it'd be more compatible, but they actually vary wildly in their function and protocol support.
They are all 100% ATA though.

>Windows in particular doesn't really like CF cards as boot drives if they ID as removable, and the ability to toggle a CF card between fixed or removable is missing from virtually all modern cards.
Some adapters let you toggle it.
Also no, Windows does not care if it's installed on a removable drive, as long as you don't try to force eject it.

>Then many cards don't respond safely to low-level IDE fuckery or legacy partitioning. Case in point: Tried installing Wn98SE to a Kingston 32GB card, card became. RMA and repeat three times, same result each time. Turned out Win98's partitioning/bootsector somehow corrupted the card's firmware and bricked it because the knobs at Kingston couldn't compartmentalize it properly.
You fucked up, user problem not the card or software.
Was it one with the red/yellow/green labels? I have several of those in use with Windows 98SE, never had a problem.

Also those cards don't have the firmware accessible over the standard connection, the firmware is on the controller and not the storage flash.

I see so much bullshit about CF cards, usually because people are tech illiterates and would fuck up the same way with a normal hard drive, sometimes they try some useless hacks that aren't really needed to use those adapters/cards or they are "purist" and love to shit on it because it's not their cup of tea.

>>4050737
I don't think I have ever seen someone defend SD card to IDE adapter over CF card before, you must be selling them?
anyways enjoy your shit speeds and compatibility problems, unless it's SCSI, that's the only time SD card adapters are acceptable over CF

>>4050836
Same, used them for years without ever getting into a problem

File: Old_burn.png (163KB, 1514x818px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 1514x818px

>>4050441
Will I need some Japanese serial key?

>>4050814
>hurrimmadurr

Nobody had shit like CMD/Lt hardware and good fucking luck finding one in working order now.

>>4050823
The crystal is literally 1:1 with the CPU clock unless you tell it not to be. Nice diverting though. Fact still is that your claim that it's "way more powerful then the computer" is proven to be total bullshit.