| Author |
Message |
cheers_rules
Newbie
Joined: 31 May 2004
Posts: 8
Location: Virginia
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2004 2:28 am
Post subject: Two Performance Q's |
 |
|
I recently acquired two mobos: the first is a late-gen 486 model w/VLB and the second is an older ISA mobo with an on-board AMD 386DX/40 chip. I'm trying to build these into two working computers, and I'm thinking about putting an Intel 486DX4-100 cpu in the 486. My 1st question is: how is performance with the DX4 chip? Is it worth going for instead of a DX2-66? This will likely be a Win 9x/NT system. Secondly, I was wondering whether performance will be adequate AT ALL under win 9x/nt on the 386 with adequate RAM or whether I should just go with DOS/3.x. (The 386 will have 64 megs of RAM). Thanks for the help! I look forward to hearing your responses.
Thanks! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Unknown_K
Way too much free time
Joined: 01 Oct 2002
Posts: 560
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 08, 2004 2:34 am
Post subject: Re: Two Performance Q's |
|
|
| cheers_rules wrote: | I recently acquired two mobos: the first is a late-gen 486 model w/VLB and the second is an older ISA mobo with an on-board AMD 386DX/40 chip. I'm trying to build these into two working computers, and I'm thinking about putting an Intel 486DX4-100 cpu in the 486. My 1st question is: how is performance with the DX4 chip? Is it worth going for instead of a DX2-66? This will likely be a Win 9x/NT system. Secondly, I was wondering whether performance will be adequate AT ALL under win 9x/nt on the 386 with adequate RAM or whether I should just go with DOS/3.x. (The 386 will have 64 megs of RAM). Thanks for the help! I look forward to hearing your responses.
Thanks! |
I never seen a 386 MB that takes 64mb of ram, 4mb simms are about the most they can take.
Win9x runs best on a Pentium or faster motherboard, I have run it on a 486/133 oc to 160 before.
386/40 runs Win 3.1 just fine stick with that.
Make sure your 486 motherboard can run the 100 chip. Anything faster then 66 is usually a 3.45V chip compared to the earlier 5V chips (there is a rare Intel 486/100 that is 5V along with a 486 overdrive).
My 486/66 system runs Win 3.11 (same as my 386/40) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sasami
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2004 9:00 am
Post subject: |
|
|
| The 386 Dx-40 will run Win95 fine. I ran it years ago with 5MB RAM, 120MB HDD with a 512K SVGA graphics card and it performed very well under Windows95 and 3.1 (it actually ran faster on 95 as the DX is a 32 bit chip). The only issues I had were with RAM but I really ran it with the minimum - 5MB! I ran Winword 6.0, Excel, Norton Desktop and Generic Cad without any problems - except for lots of hdd activity (swapping). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Unknown_K
Way too much free time
Joined: 01 Oct 2002
Posts: 560
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2004 11:29 am
Post subject: |
|
|
| Sasami wrote: | | The 386 Dx-40 will run Win95 fine. I ran it years ago with 5MB RAM, 120MB HDD with a 512K SVGA graphics card and it performed very well under Windows95 and 3.1 (it actually ran faster on 95 as the DX is a 32 bit chip). The only issues I had were with RAM but I really ran it with the minimum - 5MB! I ran Winword 6.0, Excel, Norton Desktop and Generic Cad without any problems - except for lots of hdd activity (swapping). |
Running windows 95 with 5mb of memory would make me loose my mind, but if you could deal with it then thats all that matters to you. I would not recommend anybody try serious work in 5mb of memory. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frenkel
Way too much free time
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 521
Location: Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2004 12:08 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
| I had W95 on a 386 with 6 MB of memory and I got on the internet with a 33k6 modem. It's possible, but slow. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sasami
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2004 1:40 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
| Unknown_K wrote: |
Running windows 95 with 5mb of memory would make me loose my mind, but if you could deal with it then thats all that matters to you. I would not recommend anybody try serious work in 5mb of memory. |
Well that was long ago (1994) before routine internet access in South Africa, and I could do serious work what was serious for me at that time - run Turbo Pascal 7 (DOS) for high school computer science classes and write resumes/letters and print them out on Word for Windows 6. These things ran slugglishly
but I could do what most basic computer users do - ie word processing and Winword looks way better than MS Word for DOS. 
I only upgraded to a Pentium II 64MB system + GeForce 256 only in 1998 hehe which only led me to play 3d games like Unreal - most counter-productive  . |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Unknown_K
Way too much free time
Joined: 01 Oct 2002
Posts: 560
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2004 1:49 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
| Maybe you are refering to windows 3.1 and not windows 95 (since I dont think it was out in 1994) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Interon
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2004 6:10 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
| The 486DX4/100 is a pretty peppy chip and is only about 50% slower than the Pentium. Caveat: some 486 motherboards do not support the DX4 and therefore I recommend the 486DX2/66 for safety and compatiblity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Unknown_K
Way too much free time
Joined: 01 Oct 2002
Posts: 560
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2004 6:59 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
| JMS wrote: | | The 486DX4/100 is a pretty peppy chip and is only about 50% slower than the Pentium. Caveat: some 486 motherboards do not support the DX4 and therefore I recommend the 486DX2/66 for safety and compatiblity. |
There was a cutoff at DX/2 66 that were 5V and newer chips thats were 3.45V (dx/2 80 and higher). Some boards that did allow for the lower voltage also needed a seperate board plugable module which is next to impossible to find these days if its no already installed.
The nice DX/4-133 boards tend to be PCI only, so you cant use your good old VLB cards. The Dual PCI and VLB boards had speed problems because of the design compromise.
I overlocked a dx/4-133 to 160 and it was faster then the slower pentiums and very stable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jmmijo
Lord of Gaming
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 225
Location: PDX
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 12, 2004 7:39 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
I remember having a couple of Amptron 486 boards, they would both take DX2/DX4 CPU's and even the Cyrix and AMD CPU's. I really liked the AMD DX4/120 which would overlock to 160 with good cooling 
The nice thing on a VLB board was running the CPU and the VLB bus at 40MHz instead of the standard PCI bus speed at 33MHz... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dr_st
Lord of Gaming
Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 309
Location: Absorbed into Clayface
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 6:04 am
Post subject: |
|
|
| You will forgive me, but: running Windows 95 on anything less than a Pentium is sheer idiocy. Yes, it will work, but why? Not that I understand the point of assembling anything less than a Pentium anyway. Maaaaybe a 486 DX4-100 for the oldies, but even then a Pentium will do the job better 99% of the time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jmmijo
Lord of Gaming
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 225
Location: PDX
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 10:54 am
Post subject: |
|
|
| dr_st wrote: | | You will forgive me, but: running Windows 95 on anything less than a Pentium is sheer idiocy. Yes, it will work, but why? Not that I understand the point of assembling anything less than a Pentium anyway. Maaaaybe a 486 DX4-100 for the oldies, but even then a Pentium will do the job better 99% of the time. |
Ah but my young padawan, you're forgetting that some of us like to try things now that we may not have been willing to do back in the day, just to see if it will run, just like the minimum specs state on the package |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dr_st
Lord of Gaming
Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 309
Location: Absorbed into Clayface
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 1:34 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
| jmmijo wrote: | | Ah but my young padawan, you're forgetting that some of us like to try things now that we may not have been willing to do back in the day, just to see if it will run, just like the minimum specs state on the package |
Is that the point of the DOSGames community as you see it? I thought the point was trying to preserve the good old games in playable state. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Interon
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:21 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
| Do you expect everyone to throw all their 8088, 286, 386, and 486 computers in the garbage, even if they are in decent condition? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dr_st
Lord of Gaming
Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 309
Location: Absorbed into Clayface
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2004 12:25 am
Post subject: |
|
|
| Interon wrote: | | Do you expect everyone to throw all their 8088, 286, 386, and 486 computers in the garbage, even if they are in decent condition? |
No, I'd expect them to have done it some 5 years ago. 8088? Jesus.
But I'm being unfair. I bought my first computer in 1996 and it was a Pentium, so it's natural I don't accept anything less than a Pentium as a legitimate PC. Now that Pentium of mine (was a 100MHz) died on me a few years back (mobo), and since it was long due upgrade anyway, I bought a new PC. I daresay that I would have kept it if it didn't die, because later I went and bought a Pentium 200MHz system for my oldies and I have intention to keep it until it dies (hopefully will be a very long time).
A 8088, 8086, 80286? I'm sorry, that IS garbage. Even if it's still in mint condition. It's needed absolutely for nothing, except taking space in your room/basement, being slow beyond your wildest dreams, accepting only 360K diskettes and running old games that you can still run perfectly on a Pentium/486 using a slowdown utility or a XT/AT/whatever simulator.
But who am I to tell anyone to throw their comp into the trash? Like I said, I never thrown anything of mine, unless it died. OK, I suppose there are reasons to keep them, but why would you try to abuse them by trying to make them do things they will barely be able to deal with and by attempting to do so will drive you in-fucking-sane with their slowness? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
