Best computer for old DOS games [Archive]

phreakindee

10-25-2009, 11:08 AM

I want a Windows 3.1/DOS computer. What would be the best one to get that can play old DOS games the way they were meant to be played? I'm sure many different kinds would suffice, but there must be a brand that is better than others, plus what sort of specs and hardware would be ideal to get the most out of every game...

This is kind of a broad question. Almost like asking what Nintendo is the best to play old Nintendo games. "Old" could mean 80s or it could me 90s or anywhere in between. There are tons of versions of processors and this will largely decide what you can play. For instance, many games made before say 1991 could be CPU dependant, meaning they will too fast or too slow if you have the wrong processor for the game.

Since you mentioned Windows 3.1 I will assume you want to play games circa 1993. For that I recommend a 486 CPU with 8MB of RAM and DOS 5.x or perhaps 6.22. Go with 16MB if you want to play bigger CD games.

Brand doesn't matter so much, because by that time most machines were just as good as the IBMs they were cloning. Still, I am partial to Compaq, IBM and Packard-Bell computers of the time.
If you want a real "all-around" machine, I would say get something with a 100+Mhz Pentium and 32MB of RAM and a powerful 2D graphics card and even a Voodoo card. This will get you compatibility and speed needed for the last DOS games (Quake, Duke 3D, Doom II, Carmageddon, Mechwarrior 2 etc) as well as be more than quick enough for older 90s games. It will be way too fast for many really old games though, most anything after 1991 or so should be fine.

Also check out the "Post your DOS machine" thread here on DP for lots of great examples.

Poofta!

10-25-2009, 03:50 PM

i say use your current computer and run dosbox. spec the emulator accordingly.

virtualization is a good way to go about it too. if a certain game wont work you can just respec the virtual pc and load it up with whatever you want.

only thing about PC games being played the 'way they were meant to be' is make sure you have a keyboard and (sometimes) a mouse ;)

blue lander

10-25-2009, 05:12 PM

phreakindee

10-25-2009, 11:32 PM

I'm a big proponent of playing games on the original platform rather than emulating, but I've got to agree with poofta when it comes to PC gaming. The only difference between playing a game on a "vintage" pc and dosbox is all the hassles of setting IRQs and loading TSRs and whatnot. I can see the value of playing an early 80's pc game on a real CGA monitor with an old fashioned clicky keyboard, but if it's a Windows 3.1 VGA game from 1991, who cares?

While I may agree, and in fact I do play all games I can on DosBox, I still prefer to play them on the real thing with a real CRT monitor and all of that. I have an IBM 5150 with a CGA monitor for the really old stuff, so that works for those DosBox screws up on. Me, I just like messing with memory managers and disk drives and failures and all of that.. Ha

Poofta!

10-25-2009, 11:41 PM

While I may agree, and in fact I do play all games I can on DosBox, I still prefer to play them on the real thing with a real CRT monitor and all of that. I have an IBM 5150 with a CGA monitor for the really old stuff, so that works for those DosBox screws up on. Me, I just like messing with memory managers and disk drives and failures and all of that.. Ha

you know, dosbox DOES output to crt monitors, right ? =D

its a pc, there is absolutely no difference what hardware the program runs on as long as you can get it to run. video output aside, the control scheme and the position of your body has stayed the same since when the programmer intended it.

NayusDante

10-26-2009, 12:13 AM

I've been noticing some vertical sync/tearing issues with DOSBox, which I don't get on real hardware. Just something to take into account...

ebenezer

10-26-2009, 04:03 AM

cool..yeah that was the main reason i wrote this post was because i remember some of my really old games going way to fast on newer computers, CPU dependent was the term I was looking for I see. Dosbox is convenient, but its not just the games I want...i want the whole experience of starting up the machine, the grinding of the disk drives, typing in CD\..., waiting forever, glitches, all that jazz. I don't know much about installing hardware on old machines though...I was hoping for a sort of "set" where the monitor and drives are all in one--or at least something with some character rather than the normal monitor, computer, keyboard and mouse...saw some cool pics in other posts. I'll check around. Thanks.

blue lander

10-26-2009, 10:31 AM

you know, dosbox DOES output to crt monitors, right ? =D

its a pc, there is absolutely no difference what hardware the program runs on as long as you can get it to run. video output aside, the control scheme and the position of your body has stayed the same since when the programmer intended it.

People tend to use Dosbox on PCs that use 31khz VGA monitors, which looks different (to me at least...) than an old 15khz CGA or EGA monitor.

phreakindee

10-26-2009, 12:54 PM

Vsync issues, hertz issues, color issues, native resolution issues... all sorts of reasons to play on a real machine with an old CRT. And why would I have a newer Windows XP/Vista computer with a CRT for DosBox? If I'm going to go through the trouble to get a computer with DosBox and a CRT running, may as well make it a real DOS machine! I use DosBox because it's convenient, but if I really want to play, I'll whip out my 486 or Pentium with my old Compaq 14" and it's off to the games.

OMF2097

10-26-2009, 02:18 PM

A 486 DX2 66 MHz(preferably with a turbo button to downgrade to 33MHz), 16mb of Ram, and a Soundblaster 16 should be more than sufficient to run older DOS games. Run Dos 6.22 as specified above and you shouldn't have any issues. If you're planning on running the original disks from Sierra, make sure you have the patch disks/files.

Don't forget an older IDE HD.

Jorpho

10-26-2009, 02:42 PM

Vsync issues, hertz issues, color issues, native resolution issues... all sorts of reasons to play on a real machine with an old CRT.The "real" machine with an old CRT will have even more issues, even if it solves those other ones, which it might not.
A 486 DX2 66 MHz(preferably with a turbo button to downgrade to 33MHz)Turbo buttons are extremely handy, but there are much faster processors that still support a turbo button.

JustRob

10-26-2009, 02:46 PM

Seriously now, how many posts and no one has mentioned the one place where discussing exactly this topic is the most bonerific thing possible?

http://vogons.zetafleet.com/

Vigilante

10-26-2009, 03:02 PM

I got my hands on an old IBM thinkpad laptop. I can't remember the model, but it is a P2, like 512meg ram, 8 gig hdd. Took forever to tweak but it is a dos 6.22 and win 3.11 system. Spent forever digging thru my archive of everything, then thru the underdogs and abandonware websites. I broke it up into 4 partitions, the first has dos and win 3.11 games, the second has more dos games, the third has mame, and the fourth has other console emu's. When I need a fix it is easy to pull a laptop out of the drawer for a few hours, then put it away.

Ze_ro

10-26-2009, 06:32 PM

i remember some of my really old games going way to fast on newer computers, CPU dependent was the term I was looking for I see.
You can usually compensate for this by running programs specifically designed to slow down your computer. Mo'Slo (http://moslo.info/) used to be pretty much the only choice here, but there are other options these days. I haven't tried many of them, so I can't really comment on which ones work best. I do remember having a very difficult time trying to slow down my Pentium 133 enough to play Montezuma's Revenge, which I think was meant to be played on an 4 MHz 8088, as even at 1% speed, it was still too fast.

There are also all kinds of other errors that can crop up on newer computers. Sometimes the errors are also caused by the speed difference, but give you misleading messages that confuse the actual problem. Home of the Underdogs has a FAQ that lists some of them (http://www.homeoftheunderdogs.net/faq2.php).

I don't know much about installing hardware on old machines though...I was hoping for a sort of "set" where the monitor and drives are all in one--or at least something with some character rather than the normal monitor, computer, keyboard and mouse.
A laptop might be your best bet then... but you still have to know IRQ's and IO addresses and stuff, even with a laptop... so it might not help as much as you think it will. Laptops of the time were generally bad for playing games on though... but with a newer machine, you might have trouble getting features to work with DOS (sound and CD-ROM might give you a hard time)... so you might have some trouble finding just the right balance here.

I'd recommend either a 486 or Pentium, somewhere in the 66 MHz to 133 MHz range. Look for something with ISA ports on the motherboard, that way you can be confident of finding DOS and Win 3.1 drivers for pretty much all of the hardware you'd ever put in it. Finding graphics cards, hard drives, CD-ROM drives, and floppy drives should be very easy... but finding just the right sound card might prove tricky. I'd recommend a SoundBlaster-16 to get the best compatibility. It's not the best *sounding* card, but you'll have to jump through a lot less hoops than you would with something like a Roland MT-32, Gravis Ultrasound, or even newer SB cards like the AWE-32.

--Zero

Soviet Conscript

10-26-2009, 06:50 PM

i think i know what your getting at with just a pre put together old PC. maybe something from the IBM line?

i'm picking up one of these tommarow
http://john.ccac.rwth-aachen.de:8000/alf/ps2_70121/

hope it meets some of my old gameing needs. only problem though is it doesn't use ISA, think they used there own thing for this model.

I'm not a fan of useing laptops for gameing. just feels wierd to me.

Jorpho

10-26-2009, 09:08 PM

i think i know what your getting at with just a pre put together old PC. maybe something from the IBM line?

i'm picking up one of these tommarow
http://john.ccac.rwth-aachen.de:8000/alf/ps2_70121/

hope it meets some of my old gameing needs. only problem though is it doesn't use ISA, think they used there own thing for this model.Good heavens, no! If you're going to bother with this at all (and I still think it's a lousy idea), at least get something halfway standardized! You might as well go for a Packard Bell for all the good this will do you!

phreakindee

10-26-2009, 09:12 PM

I have to agree! As much as I have a soft spot for PS/2s, the hardware overall pretty much sucks! Second only to the PCjr... incompatibility, awkward hard configs, memory issues from what I've read. It can be a pain. A PB, NEC, Compaq... something else from the time would be MUCH more doable! You'll still have all the lovely "problems" with real DOS, but it's better than the hardware issues.

Soviet Conscript

10-26-2009, 09:15 PM

Ze_ro

10-26-2009, 11:54 PM

I think you're better off putting together the hardware yourself. In order to make good use of DOS, you really need to know things like what IRQ's are free, and how to arrange your conventional memory and such. If you're going to go the hardcore route, then you might as well go all the way and learn how to do it properly.

Installing hardware really isn't all that hard. It's usually just a matter of stuffing the card into the computer and loading the appropriate driver. Most drivers are still readily available on the internet, even though they're 20+ years old. The main hard part is sound cards, where you need to know IRQ, DMA, I/O addresses, etc. With some cards, this kind of stuff can be set with jumpers (you might need to find a scan of the manual on the internet to find out what jumpers are what)... otherwise, sometimes the easiest way is to just guess at values until a game works, then write down those numbers on a sticky note that you keep on the computer itself so you don't forget 'em.

--Zero

Jorpho

10-27-2009, 12:31 AM

really? well mine is comeing with a mouse/keyboard and a color monitor for $20 so i may still pick it up for the novelty of itIf it's a Model M keyboard, that's definitely a keeper, or at least good for eBay. But the computer might as well be a doorstop.

A PB, NEC, Compaq... something else from the time would be MUCH more doable!No, no, definitely not a Packard Bell.

Installing hardware really isn't all that hard.Oh, it's not that simple either... If you've got a random assortment of parts, there's all kinds of wacky little obscure compatibility issues that might pop up - and that's assuming all your parts are completely functional to begin with, and they might very not be.

The first example that comes to mind is RAM - you can't just toss any old SIMMs into your available slots willy-nilly; some of the motherboards were mighty particular about exactly what went where.

blue lander

10-27-2009, 09:32 AM

I expect a lot of people will disagree with me, but if you want an "Out of the box" early 90's computer that you don't need to fuss with much, you might want to consider an IBM PS/1. They're small, compact, and DOS is on ROM so it boots in an instant. All the hardware is proprietary, though, so don't expect to ever upgrade it.

Soviet Conscript

10-29-2009, 12:31 AM

well, after a few days of playing around with the PS/2 i don't find it that horrible...but then i havn't tried playing alot on it

it acually is a decent condition M model keyboard. i also like the monitor that came with it, its wierd but i like how easy it swivels. i've always been a sucker for desktop style pc's over towers

i have hit a wall with its expansion bus system though. none ISA is a pain. i want to put a sound card in it but apperently they didn't make many for it

phreakindee

10-29-2009, 09:08 AM

Yeah, the lack of expansions became the biggest reason I never got one. Somewhat ironic that some of its other aspects became "standard" like the PS/2 mouse and keyboard ports.

leicamaster

01-26-2010, 07:25 PM

Ya, im looking for good pc for early and mid 90's to play the classic Lucasarts games and stuff like that. I would like it to have a 5.25 inch drive also are those easy to find or harder? Goodwill maybe?

Jorpho

01-26-2010, 07:35 PM

Ya, im looking for good pc for early and mid 90's to play the classic Lucasarts games and stuff like that.You've heard of ScummVM (http://www.scummvm.org), right?

I would like it to have a 5.25 inch drive also are those easy to find or harder? Goodwill maybe?The only way you'll find out is to go visit your local Goodwill and see for yourself, isn't it?

Do you have a lot of 5.25" disks you want to use with this drive? It's not like blanks are easy to find anymore, and they were never particularly reliable.

leicamaster

01-26-2010, 08:25 PM

I have scumm vm but i still want n original machine. I have to go to goodwill again and check

Soviet Conscript

01-26-2010, 10:00 PM

I have scumm vm but i still want n original machine. I have to go to goodwill again and check

I hope your goodwill doesn't do like mine do and ship all thier computer related items to a central store. all the goodwills in my area ship all things computer related to a "goodwill computer center" in downtown Pittsburgh. up side is all the pc stuff is centralized, bad part is you have to drive into the god forsaken city that never understood the concept of street planning.

its ok if you don't use your 5.25 drive. its like haveing a really fast car. your never going to legally be able to drive on the street at those speeds but it just makes you feel warm inside knowing you could.

leicamaster

01-29-2010, 02:11 PM

I hope your goodwill doesn't do like mine do and ship all thier computer related items to a central store. all the goodwills in my area ship all things computer related to a "goodwill computer center" in downtown Pittsburgh. up side is all the pc stuff is centralized, bad part is you have to drive into the god forsaken city that never understood the concept of street planning.

its ok if you don't use your 5.25 drive. its like haveing a really fast car. your never going to legally be able to drive on the street at those speeds but it just makes you feel warm inside knowing you could.

My goodwill does the same thing but I know the people who work their and they call me when they get 80s computers

PC-ENGINE HELL

01-30-2010, 09:17 PM

You can always hit up ebay for Socket 7 hardware. I keep a ton of it around. My current Dos/Windows98/ME gaming system I have thrown together is a Socket 7 AMD K6-3 400 mhz system. I paired it with a lan card, Geforce 256, and a AWE 32. So far it hasnt given me any problems. I use it to run stuff like Megarace, Screamers,Quake, Wolfenstien, Duke Nukem, Mortal Kombat, ect. Pretty much has me covered for DOS and Direct X gaming up to Direct X 6. Alot of Socket 7 hardware is just ATX and Micro ATX based, so you could easily use a newer style case and power supply if you need to. You can also go the Pentium 2/3 slot-1 way. 440BX was pretty reliable for its time. I have a friend who uses that platform specifically for his DOS box. Stuffs dirt cheap.

Jorpho

01-30-2010, 09:31 PM

What's the motherboard you're using? If it's a K6-3, I reckon it must be a Super Socket 7 with AGP. (400 MHz is a little fast for older games, isn't it?)

Also, does it have USB? If not, how do you transfer files over to it?

PC-ENGINE HELL

01-30-2010, 11:40 PM

http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/Motherboard/Products_Spec.aspx?ProductID=1578

Thats the board Im using. Yea it supports USB, but I mean, I can transfer stuff over to it via cd also. I have two cd-r burners in the system. Yea some would consider 400 mhz a bit much, but it comes in handy for Quake and alot of the other more 3d'ish Dos based games, along with Direct X based stuff. I like to use it for a large range of games.

Ze_ro

01-31-2010, 01:58 AM

Do you have a lot of 5.25" disks you want to use with this drive? It's not like blanks are easy to find anymore, and they were never particularly reliable.
Actually, my experience has been that 5.25" disks are more reliable in the long run... though most of that experience is with double density disks.

Anyways, if you collect retail games, quite a few of them are on 5.25" disks. I have a real copy of Pools of Darkness, and it includes the game on 2 high-density 5.25" disks AND 3 double-density 3.5" disks... so in at least that case, the 5.25" disks are actually a tiny bit easier.

I have scumm vm but i still want n original machine.
In many respects, ScummVM actually does a better job than an original machine does... same with Exult vs. actual Ultima VII. But whatever, we're certainly not here building DOS machines because it's the practical solution.

Yea some would consider 400 mhz a bit much
Certainly no more unnecessary than 2 CD burners... what's the point of that?

--Zero

PC-ENGINE HELL

01-31-2010, 02:13 AM

Burners are in there because I have more burners laying around then normal drives these days, and they tend to read short strategy disc alot better.

Jorpho

02-01-2010, 08:40 AM

I can transfer stuff over to it via cd also.I suppose that's an option if you have huge quantities of CD-Rs that you don't mind treating as a disposable commodity.

Ze_ro

02-01-2010, 02:53 PM

I've always had trouble with that myself. I can't bring myself to waste a CD when it's only 5MB worth of data. I know they're cheap, but it still bothers me at some level. CD-RW's would seem like a great idea, but I have a bad history with RW's somehow becoming unrecoverable coasters, and I no longer trust them enough to buy them.

At one point, I tried getting a Zip drive setup going... I had found some drives at the local thrift store, and some disks, and it seemed like the perfect solution. However, I had a ton of trouble getting any of it working (possibly due to the infamous click of death (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Click_of_death), though I'm still not entirely sure). I've since found a few different mechanisms that might make things a bit easier, but past experience has really soured me on the idea.

At another point, I put a USB add-in card into the computer, but getting USB working under DOS is a nightmare in itself. Most of the tools available are geared towards using USB hard drives, and generally don't do anything other than USB mass storage. At the time, I had no USB flash drives, but was trying to get things working with an SD card reader. It's USB mass storage, right? Shouldn't be much different from a hard drive, right? Well all I managed to accomplish was corrupting the file system on the SD card, and wasting tons of conventional memory on USB drivers.

What I usually do is use the "split" command in Unix to break large files up into 1.4MB pieces, which I then take to the other computer on floppy disks. Once I have all the pieces, the DOS copy command can be used to recombine them. Not a particularly fun way of doing things, but at least it feels less wasteful.

If none of those options appeal to you (which I would certainly understand!), you could always connect the DOS machine to your modern PC via the network. Set up an FTP server on your PC and use an FTP client on the DOS machine to copy the files over. Internet software for DOS can be a little dicey (and lord help you if you try it in Win 3.1), but you'd be surprised at how many ethernet card manufacturers still offer DOS drivers for their cards. I keep planning to do this some day, but my DOS machine is in the basement while the rest of my network is on the main floor, which causes some problems.

--Zero

Jorpho

02-01-2010, 04:06 PM

CD-RW's would seem like a great idea, but I have a bad history with RW's somehow becoming unrecoverable coasters, and I no longer trust them enoug to buy them.Aye, likewise.
Most of the tools available are geared towards using USB hard drives, and generally don't do anything other than USB mass storage.In the limited experience I've had with them, they're not so bad. Those USB expansion cards are still $20 a pop, though. The last one I tried had some weird power consumption issues.
At the time, I had no USB flash drives, but was trying to get things working with an SD card reader. It's USB mass storage, right? Shouldn't be much different from a hard drive, right? Well all I managed to accomplish was corrupting the file system on the SD card, and wasting tons of conventional memory on USB drivers.Apparently there are Compact Flash-to-IDE adapters that will work even on very, very old computers, but I've never tried them myself. Plus I reckon they might not be plug-and-play.
Internet software for DOS can be a little dicey (and lord help you if you try it in Win 3.1)If you have Windows 3.11 for Workgroups, apparently it's not bad at all. But dealing with DOS drivers is just icky. You might as well try a null modem cable if you go that way - not that I had much success with that either.

Ze_ro

02-01-2010, 09:14 PM

Apparently there are Compact Flash-to-IDE adapters that will work even on very, very old computers, but I've never tried them myself. Plus I reckon they might not be plug-and-play.
I've actually wanted to do this with my DOS computer for a while... take out the hard drives, and just have a CF slot on the front of the computer hooked straight into the main IDE channel. Then I could just have a CF card with an MS-DOS install, another with Win 98, and another with OS/2 for whatever reason. These days it's hard to find good deals on compact flash though, as the format is largely obsolete.

If you have Windows 3.11 for Workgroups, apparently it's not bad at all. But dealing with DOS drivers is just icky. You might as well try a null modem cable if you go that way - not that I had much success with that either.
Well, I lived through the early days of the internet on Win 3.1, and it was NOT fun... screwing around with Trumpet Winsock and such. I gladly would have lived entirely from the DOS command line, except Netscape only worked in Windows :(

--Zero

PC-ENGINE HELL

02-02-2010, 12:50 PM

I suppose that's an option if you have huge quantities of CD-Rs that you don't mind treating as a disposable commodity.

I've always had trouble with that myself. I can't bring myself to waste a CD when it's only 5MB worth of data. I know they're cheap, but it still bothers me at some level. CD-RW's would seem like a great idea, but I have a bad history with RW's somehow becoming unrecoverable coasters, and I no longer trust them enough to buy them.

I think you guys got me all wrong here. I do have large quantities of cd-rs, but I don't treat them as disposable if I can help it. Ill only toss a disc out if its gone bad due to the ink rotting or its a bad burn, and I dont just leave the stuff laying around. The reason I use burners is because older normal cd drives tend to have a harder time reading anything burned on newer short strategy (Ritek Co. ect) disc.

As with that, I wont burn anything on a disc unless its required, ISO, ect, or its enough data to fill up the majority of the disc. Burning off just one or two Dos games per disc would be a huge waste. Just not something Id be willing to do. On the CD-RW thing, yea I've ha d a bad history with them too. They tend to go bad early. Also, they have a knack for killing some burners quicker, so I stopped using them around 4 years ago.