I'm not sure if i'm intruding here on your BBS. I'm from Canada, and my first home computer we
played on local BBS's and the community was awesome! I was looking for a version of a TW game and
that's how I came across this.
Hope you are all doing well, the nostalgia here is awesome :)
Hey Everyone,
I'm not sure if i'm intruding here on your BBS. I'm from Canada, and m first home computer we played on local BBS's and the community was awesome! was looking for a version of a TW game and that's how I came across this.
Hope you are all doing well, the nostalgia here is awesome :)
Thanks for being here
John
Bulifyf wrote to All <=-
I'm not sure if i'm intruding here on your BBS. I'm from Canada,
and my first home computer we played on local BBS's and the community
was awesome! I was looking for a version of a TW game and that's how I came across this.
I live in Nova Scotia, and work as a Paramedic, currently do rotation outside Yellowknife in the NWT. When i'm up here I have some downtime, an aptop isn't the strongest for gaming. I had downloaded some older games i to play like Di
When I was 12 or 13, our computer was a 486 and we used to connect to 's in our town. I know my older brother in Halifax had a huge list he cou ose from. The games I remember us playing was LORD, TW and a MUD which was y fun, tons of
locate a BBS. So here I am, and yes this is the first one i've been on i
20 years ....
Anyway, thanks for being here, this is quite awesome! I've never bee amloops, but I had worked in Fort Nelson on an LNG site previously, and in McMurray also .... which I know is nowhere near Kamloops. But closer than
Sounds very familiar. My parents upgraded my 8086 to 386SX and then to a 386DX2 and I thought that it just couldn't get any better than that. I
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: unc0nnected to Bulifyf on Thu Oct 26 2023 08:32 pm
Sounds very familiar. My parents upgraded my 8086 to 386SX and then t > un> 386DX2 and I thought that it just couldn't get any better than that. I >As far as I remember, there was never such a thing as a 386DX2.. The fastes > 386 I remember was AMD's 386DX-40. The 'DX2' designation started with the
486DX2-66 (clock-doubled from 33mhz), from what I remember.
Nightfox
Sounds very familiar. My parents upgraded my 8086 to 386SX and then to a 386DX2 and I thought that it just couldn't get any better than that. I
As far as I remember, there was never such a thing as a 386DX2.. The fastest 386 I remember was AMD's 386DX-40. The 'DX2' designation started with the 486DX2-66 (clock-doubled from 33mhz), from what I remember.
Re: Re: Hey folksI don't remember a 386DX2 either, but I had one of those AMD 386DX-40's. Was a decent little chip and would give the popular at that time 486SX-25 a run for its money. The chip I really liked was the 486DX4-100. Now THAT was fun chip to run and it began my decades-long preference for AMD chips....
By: unc0nnected to Bulifyf on Thu Oct 26 2023 08:32 pm
Sounds very familiar. My parents upgraded my 8086 to 386SX and then to a 386DX2 and I thought that it just couldn't get any better than that. I
As far as I remember, there was never such a thing as a 386DX2.. The fastest 386 I remember was AMD's 386DX-40. The 'DX2' designation started with the 486DX2-66 (clock-doubled from 33mhz), from what I remember.
Nightfox
---
I don't remember a 386DX2 either, but I had one of those AMD 386DX-40's. Was a decent little chip and would give the popular at that time 486SX-25 a run for its money. The chip I really liked was the 486DX4-100. Now THAT was fun chip to run and it began my decades-long preference for AMD chips....
I don't remember a 386DX2 either, but I had one of those AMD
386DX-40's. Was a decent little chip and would give the popular at that time 486SX-25 a run for its money. The chip I really liked was the 486DX4-100. Now THAT was fun chip to run and it began my decades-long preference for AMD chips....
fusion wrote to Weatherman <=-
On 27 Oct 2023, Weatherman said the following...
I don't remember a 386DX2 either, but I had one of those AMD
386DX-40's. Was a decent little chip and would give the popular at that time 486SX-25 a run for its money. The chip I really liked was the 486DX4-100. Now THAT was fun chip to run and it began my decades-long preference for AMD chips....
i feel like this was also when you started seeing overclocking pictures and video with the russian guys with their computer crammed into a
freezer
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: unc0nnected to Bulifyf on Thu Oct 26 2023 20:32:00
I do recall there were two variants of intel's 386. There was the SX variant and the DX variant. The DX variant was manufactured in the Philipines. The D variant also accepted a math co-processor add-on. I owned a 386DX with a mat co-processor to boost system performance when using AutoCAD in 1991.
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: unc0nnected to Bulifyf on Thu Oct 26 2023 08:32 pm
Sounds very familiar. My parents upgraded my 8086 to 386SX and the to a 386DX2 and I thought that it just couldn't get any better than that. I
As far as I remember, there was never such a thing as a 386DX2.. The fastest 386 I remember was AMD's 386DX-40. The 'DX2' designation started with the 486DX2-66 (clock-doubled from 33mhz), from what I remember.
Nightfox
---I don't remember a 386DX2 either, but I had one of those AMD 386DX-40's. W a decent little chip and would give the popular at that time 486SX-25 a run its money. The chip I really liked was the 486DX4-100. Now THAT was fun c to run and it began my decades-long preference for AMD chips....
Regards,
-==*>Weatherman<*==-
I don't remember a DX2 either, I seem to remember a 386DX just had a math co-p
cessor? I supposed a quick google would set the record straight haha. I just r
ember we had something called a 386DX for high school draft class.
I don't remember a DX2 either, I seem to remember a 386DX just had a mat co-processor? I supposed a quick google would set the record straight haha. I
Nightfox wrote to unc0nnected <=-
As far as I remember, there was never such a thing as a 386DX2.. The fastest 386 I remember was AMD's 386DX-40. The 'DX2' designation
started with the 486DX2-66 (clock-doubled from 33mhz), from what I remember.
I don't remember a DX2 either, I seem to remember a 386DX just had a mat co-processor? I supposed a quick google would set the record straight haha. I
I never understood why a math co-processor was a big deal? All computers do is processes math. huh?
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: Terry to unc0nnected on Fri Oct 27 2023 10:59 am
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: unc0nnected to Bulifyf on Thu Oct 26 2023 20:32:00
I do recall there were two variants of intel's 386. There was the SX variant and the DX variant. The DX variant was manufactured in the Philipines. The D variant also accepted a math co-processor add-on. I owned a 386DX with a mat co-processor to boost system performance when using AutoCAD in 1991.
The DX variant didn't have a math co-processor. It was the 486 where the coprocessor was introduced. The main difference between the 386 SX and DX was the SX had a smaller 16 bit data bus (?)_ to make for budget PCs
As far as I remember, there was never such a thing as a 386DX2.. The
fastest 386 I remember was AMD's 386DX-40. The 'DX2' designation started
with the 486DX2-66 (clock-doubled from 33mhz), from what I remember.
I know they made a SX version without a coprocessor, and AMD made a compatible chip that ran at 40 mhz.
Oh, clock doubled 486es, that was a rabbit hole of a debate back then - was a 486/50 faster at certain processor-intensive apps than a DX2/66?
I was in the 486/50 camp. :)
The DX variant didn't have a math co-processor. It was the 486 where the
coprocessor was introduced. The main difference between the 386 SX and DX
was the SX had a smaller 16 bit data bus (?)_ to make for budget PCs
i had a 386dx with a math coprocessor.
i had a 386dx with a math coprocessor.
So you had an 80387?
I never understood why a math co-processor was a big deal? All computers do
is processes math. huh?
There's a big difference between "integer" (whole number) math and "floating point" (fractional) math. A math co-processor (e.g. the 8087, 80287, 80387 in the earliest intel x86 days) only dealt with floating point math problems while the CPU (8086, 8088, 80286, 80386) dealt with integer math. If you
Dumas Walker wrote to THE LIZARD MASTER <=-
DX in the 386 world meant that the system was fully 32-bit. SX meant, IIRC, that the processor was 32 but everything else was 16 -- that may
not be exactly right, but it did mean a mix of 16 and 32-bit.
HusTler wrote to Dumas Walker <=-
I never understood why a math co-processor was a big deal? All
computers do is processes math. huh?
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: MRO to Boraxman on Sat Oct 28 2023 05:50 pm
The DX variant didn't have a math co-processor. It was the 486 where the
coprocessor was introduced. The main difference between the 386 SX and DX
was the SX had a smaller 16 bit data bus (?)_ to make for budget PCs
i had a 386dx with a math coprocessor.
Was it a separate chip? I had a 386DX-40 for a little while in the 90s, and I thought the motherboard had a separate socket for a math co-processor.
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: MRO to Boraxman on Sat Oct 28 2023 05:50 pm
i had a 386dx with a math coprocessor.
So you had an 80387?
HusTler wrote to Dumas Walker <=-
I never understood why a math co-processor was a big deal? All
computers do is processes math. huh?
The insides were 32-bit, but with a 16-bit data bus. Sort of like the original 8086 (16 bits inside, 8-bit data bus).
When I was building and selling PCs and networks in the late 80s, I got a special build request to add an 80387 (this before there were SX or DX variants) to a 386 desktop order. I figured the 387's pins were keyed (could only be inserted in the socket in the correct orientation) and didn't notice the marked corner on the chip and corresponding inidcator on the socket. Turning on the PSU resulted in a loud pop and the smoke in the 387 was released. You never forget that smell... the smell of $300 going up in smoke. :-(
As far as I remember, there was never such a thing as a 386DX2.. The fast 6 I remember was AMD's 386DX-40. The 'DX2' designation started with the 4 66 (clock-doubled from 33mhz), from what I remember.
I do recall there were two variants of intel's 386. There was the SX varia
the DX variant. The DX variant was manufactured in the Philipines. The DX nt also accepted a math co-processor add-on. I owned a 386DX with a math c essor to boost
Sounds very familiar. My parents upgraded my 8086 to 386SX and then to a 386DX2 and I
thought that it just couldn't get any better than that. I
As far as I remember, there was never such a thing as a 386DX2.. The fastest 386 I remember was
AMD's 386DX-40. The 'DX2' designation started with the 486DX2-66 (clock-doubled from 33mhz), from
what I remember.
I don't remember a 386DX2 either, but I had one of those AMD 386DX-40's. Was a decent little chip
and would give the popular at that time 486SX-25 a run for its money. The chip I really liked was
the 486DX4-100. Now THAT was fun chip to run and it began my decades-long preference for AMD
chips....
I don't remember a 386DX2 either, but I had one of those AMD 386DX-40's. Was a decent little chip
and would give the popular at that time 486SX-25 a run for its money. The chip I really liked
was the 486DX4-100. Now THAT was fun chip to run and it began my decades-long preference for
AMD chips....
Yeah, I also had an AMD 386DX-40 for a little while. It was a nice processor and quite capable of
running the software of the day for a while.
I had been using AMD processors for a long time, from 1993 to 2011 when I built an Intel desktop (I
was working for Intel at the time, and Intel employees could buy Intel CPUs for half of retail
price). My current desktop is one I built in 2019, also with an Intel processor. I'd heard AMD's
processors from around 2019 and newer have been giving Intel a run for their money (again), and I've
thought about using AMD again for my next desktop.
Yeah, I never got into the overclocking fad. Seems to me a lot of those people were just trying to
see how far they could push the chip to get the best benchmark numbers and didn't give a crap about
stability. I figure if a chip is designed to run at a certain speed then that's fine for me.
When I was building and selling PCs and networks in the late 80s, I got a special build request to add an 80387 (this before there were SX or DX variants) to a 386 desktop order. I figured the 387's pins were keyed (could only be inserted in the socket in the correct orientation) and didn't notice the marked corner on the chip and corresponding inidcator on the socket. Turning on the PSU resulted in a loud pop and the smoke in the 387 was released. You never forget that smell... the smell of $300 going up in smoke
Unc0nnected wrote to Weatherman <=-
I completely forgot the 486's had a DX4 variant, I think I went from
the 386DX-40 to a Pentium2 so I missed out on all of those fancy
upgrades.
friends Pentium-75. I can even remember the smell of those old
machines like it was yesterday.
owned a 386DX with a mat co-processor to boost system performance when using AutoCAD in 1991.
The DX variant didn't have a math co-processor. It was the 486 where the coprocessor was introduced. The main difference between the 386 SX and DX was the SX had a smaller 16 bit data bus (?)_ to make for budget PCs
i had a 386dx with a math coprocessor.
Was it a separate chip? I had a 386DX-40 for a little while in the 90s, and I thought the motherboard had a separate socket for a math co-processor.
I do recall there were two variants of intel's 386. There was the SX varia
the DX variant. The DX variant was manufactured in the Philipines. The DX nt also accepted a math co-processor add-on. I owned a 386DX with a math c essor to boost
Maybe that led some folks to think of it as a DX2 as the co-processor was the second processing unit in there. Bringing back all sorts of memories now, I didn't now their origin though, thanks for sharing
As a convert I can tell you that you won't look back after switching to team red.
I haven't gotten a chance to play with much of the Ryzen line yet, but over the years (since the 90s) I've tried several times to switch over to AMD. Each time, the computer seemed very laggy to me. Just running 'ls' in Linux, you can see how the whole thing hesitates before showing you the output. With an Intel CPU of the same generation, eveything always seems snappier/faster. The same goes when it comes to stability. I hear so may good things from people about AMDs, but I just never lucked out enough to experience them.
DX in the 386 world meant that the system was fully 32-bit. SX meant, IIRC, that the processor was 32 but everything else was 16 -- that may not be exactly right, but it did mean a mix of 16 and 32-bit.
The insides were 32-bit, but with a 16-bit data bus. Sort of like the origina
8086 (16 bits inside, 8-bit data bus).
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: Phigan to Unc0nnected on Mon Oct 30 2023 07:51:14
I haven't gotten a chance to play with much of the Ryzen line yet, but over the years (since the 90s) I've tried several times to switch over to AMD. Each time, the computer seemed very laggy to me. Just running 'ls' in Linux, you can see how the whole thing hesitates before showing you the output. With an Intel CPU of the same generation, eveything always seems snappier/faster. The same goes when it comes to stability. I hear so may good things from people about AMDs, but I just never lucked out enough to experience them.
I've run AMDs as long as I can remember and never had any problems running linux. Even my 486 DX4-100 AMD chip ran Linux in its 4mb of memory booting off 2 floppy disks without issue :)
These days I have a Ryzen 5 3600 and it's quite nippy. No lag, no delay.
I'd maybe put it down to user error or skills issue ;)
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: Digital Man to All on Sat Oct 28 2023 07:08 pm
When I was building and selling PCs and networks in the late 80s, I got a special build request to add an 80387 (this before there were SX or DX variants) to a 386 desktop order. I figured the 387's pins were keyed (could only be inserted in the socket in the correct orientation) and didn't notice the marked corner on the chip and corresponding inidcator on the socket. Turning on the PSU resulted in a loud pop and the smoke in the 387 was released. You never forget that smell... the smell of $300 going up in smoke
Woofah... how much trouble did you get into afterward? I get that was a life lesson on its own, though.
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: Jagossel to Digital Man on Mon Oct 30 2023 07:56 am
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: Digital Man to All on Sat Oct 28 2023 07:08 pm
When I was building and selling PCs and networks in the late 80s, I got a special build request to add an 80387 (this before there were SX or DX variants) to a 386 desktop order. I figured the 387's pins were keyed (could only be inserted in the socket in the correct orientation) and didn't notice the marked corner on the chip and corresponding inidcator on the socket. Turning on the PSU resulted in a loud pop and the smoke in the 387 was released. You never forget that smell... the smell of $300 going up in smoke
Woofah... how much trouble did you get into afterward? I get that was a life lesson on its own, though.
It was my own company, so I didn't get any trouble, I just had to delay the delivery of the system to the customer while I waited for a replacement 80387. That $300 (or whatever it was) was basically my total profit on that particular computer build, just up in smoke. So yeah, lesson learned: not all expensive ICs are keyed; check your orientation markers carefully.
I remember how hot the first Pentiums seemed. I don't recall any of my
486es having CPU fans, only heat sinks?
Maybe that led some folks to think of it as a DX2 as the co-processor w the second processing unit in there. Bringing back all sorts of memori now, I didn't now their origin though, thanks for sharing
Speaking of memories, I was able to run AutoCAD on a 386SX and it wasn't t . There was a math coprocessor emulator that I would run to get past the " h coprocessor" check in the beginning.
I haven't gotten a chance to play with much of the Ryzen line yet, but ove years (since the 90s) I've tried several times to switch over to AMD. Each time, the computer seemed very laggy to me. Just running 'ls' in Linux, yo see how the whole thing hesitates before showing you the output. With an I CPU of the same generation, eveything always seems snappier/faster. The sa goes when it comes to stability. I hear so may good things from people abo AMDs, but I just never lucked out enough to experience them.
really care that much. I have the lingering impression that Intel is better (than AMD) at quality control, but it's probably not a rational impression anymore.
I've run AMDs as long as I can remember and never had any problems running linux. Even my 486
DX4-100 AMD chip ran Linux in its 4mb of memory booting off 2 floppy disks without issue :)
I've gone back and forth between Intel and AMD based motherboards/CPUs over 30 years. The only
systems that have had CPU stability issues (e.g. over-heating, tricky DRAM compatibility) were
non-Intel systems (AMD, Cyrix). When I was working at Broadcom (16+ years), Intel was our biggest
add an 80387 (this before there were SX or DX variants) to a 386 desktop order. I figured the
387's pins were keyed (could only be inserted in the socket in the correct orientation) and didn't
notice the marked corner on the chip and corresponding inidcator on the socket. Turning on the PSU
resulted in a loud pop and the smoke in the 387 was released. You never forget that smell... the
to the customer while I waited for a replacement 80387. That $300 (or whatever it was) was basically
my total profit on that particular computer build, just up in smoke. So yeah, lesson learned: not
all expensive ICs are keyed; check your orientation markers carefully.
I've gone back and forth between Intel and AMD based motherboards/CPUs over 30 years. The only systems that have had CPU stability issues (e.g. over-heating, tricky DRAM compatibility) were non-Intel systems (AMD, Cyrix). When I was working at Broadcom (16+ years), Intel was our biggest competitor (for network controllers), so I actively boycotted Intel when spending my own money on computers. The computers I buy these days usually have Intel processors (especially the workstations), but I honestly don't really care that much. I have the lingering impression that Intel is better (than AMD) at quality control, but it's probably not a rational impression anymore.
These days I have a Ryzen 5 3600 and it's quite nippy. No lag, no delay.
I'd maybe put it down to user error or skills issue ;)
I've gone back and forth between Intel and AMD based motherboards/CPUs over 30 years. The only systems that have had CPU stability issues (e.g. over-heating, tricky DRAM compatibility) were non-Intel systems (AMD, Cyrix). When I was working at Broadcom (16+ years), Intel was our biggest competitor (for network controllers), so I actively boycotted Intel when spending my own money on computers. The computers I buy these days usually have Intel processors (especially the workstations), but I honestly don't really care that much. I have the lingering impression that Intel is better (than AMD) at quality control, but it's probably not a rational impression anymore.
I'm not sure abuot the Pentium 1's but I don't think the P2's had fans did they? Those chips that were housed in that giant cassette tape looking thing?
Speaking of memories, I was able to run AutoCAD on a 386SX and it wasn't t . There was a math coprocessor emulator that I would run to get past the " h coprocessor" check in the beginning.
Likewise, I remember 3D Studio Max 1 on my DX and getting one of those terrible Learn to model 3D books when I was 13, spending 20 minutes trying to figure it out and going back to BBS'ing.
These days though my issues almost always relate to the manufacturers of the motherboards first, then the PSU's second and ram third. So I'd be much more sensitive to a choice between say ASUS over MSI over ASROCK than I would AMD over Intel if I was worried about stability.
I remember how hot the first Pentiums seemed. I don't recall any of my 486es having CPU fans, only heat sinks?
Likewise, I remember 3D Studio Max 1 on my DX and getting one of those
i've had both as well. for me, Intel processors just seem to have a slight speed advantage. I'm real good at noticing patterns and maybe some people are not and just don't notice. I've also had games that ran better on intel than an amd computer with more muscle. I always chalked it up to the developers catering to intel specs.
I'm not sure abuot the Pentium 1's but I don't think the P2's had fans did
they? Those chips that were housed in that giant cassette tape looking
thing?
what?
I remember how hot the first Pentiums seemed. I don't recall any of my
486es having CPU fans, only heat sinks?
I've run AMDs as long as I can remember and never had any problems running lin
. Even my 486 DX4-100 AMD chip ran Linux in its 4mb of memory booting off 2 fl
py disks without issue :)
These days I have a Ryzen 5 3600 and it's quite nippy. No lag, no delay.
I'd maybe put it down to user error or skills issue ;)
don't really care much either. I stuck with AMD for a long time because it seemed there was better bang for the buck. And a few times, I had heard AMD was measurably faster than Intel for a few generations of processors they made (I remember hearing that about their Athlon XP, one of their server processors (Opteron?), and the most recent with their Ryzen 3000 series from 2019.
I've gone back and forth between Intel and AMD based motherboards/CPUs over 16+ years)
the socket. Turning on the PSU resulted in a loud pop and the smoke in 387 was released. You never forget that smell... the smell of $300 goin up in smoke. :-(
Ouch.. :(
Nightfox
are you saying asus sucks? because i've had bad luck with asus.
i've had a lot of laptops, etc die just after warranty and issues with mobos
I remember the faster 486s having fans. I had an AMD 5x86-133, which was really a 486DX4-133 and I had a heat sink with a fan on it. I thought Intel's 486DX4-100 CPUs might have had fans too, though I don't remember for sure.
I remember trying to use 3D Studio Max around 1998 or 1999 and then thinking it was more complicated than I expected, and I gave it up.. though I always thought it would be cool to know how to do 3D modeling
and animation on a computer.
Likewise, I remember 3D Studio Max 1 on my DX and getting one of thos
I remember trying to use 3D Studio Max around 1998 or 1999 and then thinki was more complicated than I expected, and I gave it up.. though I always t it would be cool to know how to do 3D modeling and animation on a comput
I'm not sure abuot the Pentium 1's but I don't think the P2's had fans they? Those chips that were housed in that giant cassette tape looking thing?
what?
motherboards first, then the PSU's second and ram third. So I'd be muc more sensitive to a choice between say ASUS over MSI over ASROCK than I would AMD over Intel if I was worried about stability.
are you saying asus sucks? because i've had bad luck with asus.
i've had a lot of laptops, etc die just after warranty and issues with
i've had both as well. for me, Intel processors just seem to have a slight speed advantage. I'm real good at noticing patterns and maybe people are not and just don't notice. I've also had games that ran b on intel than an amd computer with more muscle. I always chalked it u the developers catering to intel specs.
I used just AMD for so long that I couldn't really compare. I But I alway ght the games I played ran fairly well with the AMD processors I used. Ev they may have been slightly faster on Intel, I thought they were plenty fa the AMDs.
These days I have a Ryzen 5 3600 and it's quite nippy. No lag, no delay.Could have been an issue with a particulary distro, too. Several years ago, I was testing out different distros and was pretty shocked at how man (with graphical installs) would get the graphics card settings right durin the "graphics test screen" but then I'd wind up with a desktop that was very much set wrong.
yeah right now the price/performance/power consumption trio is insane..
if you g ame at all the X3D chips in particular just stomp on the intel stuff..
unfortunately the gen change from AM4->AM5 is still keeping the prices floating above what the 5000 series stuff was.. still a steal compared
to the intel stuff though.
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: MRO to Digital Man on Tue Oct 31 2023 01:11 am
i've had both as well. for me, Intel processors just seem to have a slight speed advantage. I'm real good at noticing patterns and maybe some people are not and just don't notice. I've also had games that ran better on intel than an amd computer with more muscle. I always chalked it up to the developers catering to intel specs.
I used just AMD for so long that I couldn't really compare. I But I always thought the games I played ran fairly well with the AMD processors I used. Even if they may have been slightly faster on Intel, I thought they were plenty fast on the AMDs.
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: MRO to Unc0nnected on Tue Oct 31 2023 01:15 am
are you saying asus sucks? because i've had bad luck with asus.
i've had a lot of laptops, etc die just after warranty and issues with mobos
I had the same issue with Asus laptops. Luckily these were just before the warranty. One had free 3 year accidental damage protection and my son spilled water on it JUST before the warranty ended. Could be they played alot of games on them that kept them running high temps for hours and fail before warranty =).
I'm not sure abuot the Pentium 1's but I don't think the P2's had fans they? Those chips that were housed in that giant cassette tape looking thing?
what?
These things: https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/h1oAAOSw63FZ8mmd/s-l1600.jpg
Intel typically would beat AMD on the gaming side, less about catering and more about the nature game engines being very very poorly multi-threaded(if you could even call them that). Unreal and
The Lizard Master wrote to unc0nnected <=-
Speaking of memories, I was able to run AutoCAD on a 386SX and it
wasn't too bad. There was a math coprocessor emulator that I would run
to get past the "no math coprocessor" check in the beginning.
I completely forgot the 486's had a DX4 variant, I think I went from the 386DX-40 to a Pentium2 so I missed out on all of those fancy upgrades. I remember looking on with envy as I played some game on my friends Pentium-75. I can even remember the smell of those old machines like it was yesterday.
I haven't gotten a chance to play with much of the Ryzen line yet, but over the years (since the 90s) I've tried several times to switch over to AMD. Each time, the computer seemed very laggy to me. Just running 'ls' in Linux, you can see how the whole thing hesitates before showing you the output. With an Intel CPU of the same generation, eveything always seems snappier/faster. The same goes when it comes to stability. I hear so may good things from people about AMDs, but I just never lucked out enough to experience them.
I'm not sure abuot the Pentium 1's but I don't think the P2's had fans did they? Those chips that were housed in that giant cassette tape looking thing?
Interesting, I can't say for certain one way or the other but I have noticed that, particularly in server situations with 128GB+ Ram the Intel's we run have given us the biggest headaches. I run all of our office machines at stock frequencies for the most part and the AMD machines have all held together, have some 6 year old machines still
To quote Morpheus, "There are some things in this world that never change" because I can tell you that I had the same thing happened with a $300 Asus TUF motherboard, but for different reasons. Turned the PSU on, saw flames shoot out of one of the capacitors and then that same smell and smoke filled the room. Live and learn that while the cables might look identical, PSU cables from one model PSU, even if it's the same brand, should never be used in another
i just always remember AMD being stuff that was cheaper but not as good.
i think for a while there they surpassed Intel, but Intel didn't allow that to happen for long. Aside from work computers I have not touched an AMD box with muscle for quit a long time.
Unc0nnected wrote to Weatherman <=-
I completely forgot the 486's had a DX4 variant, I think I went from
the 386DX-40 to a Pentium2 so I missed out on all of those fancy
upgrades. I remember looking on with envy as I played some game on my friends Pentium-75. I can even remember the smell of those old
machines like it was yesterday. ---
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: unc0nnected to poindexter FORTRAN on Mon Oct 30 2023 22:14:00
I'm not sure abuot the Pentium 1's but I don't think the P2's had fans did they? Those chips that were housed in that giant cassette tape looking thing?
P2's definitely had fans and heatsyncs in the design... and it still wasn't very good at appropriate cooling iirc. I remember the server variants were just nasty hot.
Tracker1 wrote to Unc0nnected <=-
I always go a little overkill on ram, even today running 128gb, though
I have used over 70gb a couple times for project work. Part of me
would like to get one of the new Macbook Pro M3 Max systems, but just can't bring myself to pay that much (2.5-3x what my desktop cost).
Waiting for next gen desktop parts before doing anything new at this point.
I think those were all AMD (DX4), along with the 5x86 series... I had a 5x86@1
w/ 64mb ram, and the cache addon, it was very fast for general use, not so mu
for a couple of the latest games that really needed a Pentium. I think I wen
from that to an OC'd AMD Duron @1ghz a couple years later.
Speaking of memories, I was able to run AutoCAD on a 386SX and it wasn't too bad. There was a math coprocessor emulator that I would run to get past the "no math coprocessor" check in the beginning.
So you run software to emulate hardware running software? How
delightfully META!
I always go a little overkill on ram, even today running 128gb, though I have used over 70gb a couple times for project work. Part of me would
Heh, now that's funny. I never ran a Pentium lower than a P-II myself. Back in the days of the original Pentium chips when I was running my DX4 I used to tease the early adopters of the Pentium by telling them that MY chip could actually do simple addition.
Couldn't be any more META lol, none more meta.
box. Don't get a new GPU at launch if you run linux is all I'll say. The
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: Tracker1 to Unc0nnected on Thu Nov 02 2023 11:10 pm
I always go a little overkill on ram, even today running 128gb, though I have used over 70gb a couple times for project work. Part of me would
I started using 32GB of RAM in 2012, when I think it was a bit overkill. These days, I think 32GB is more common, though 16GB is probably a common minimum. Currently I still have 32GB in my main desktop PC at home, though I currently have 64GB in my BBS computer - I also have a Plex media server running on that, and I wanted it to be able to handle my BBS as well as
fans they? Those chips that were housed in that giant cassette looking thing?
what?
These things: https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/h1oAAOSw63FZ8mmd/s-l1600.j
oh god i never saw one of those things. funny how manufacturers were always changing and making some occasionaly stupid changes. I just had
a regular p2 chip. i had a pent1, 2, and 3 that ran my bbs.
fans they? Those chips that were housed in that giant cassette looking thing?
what?
These things: https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/h1oAAOSw63FZ8mmd/s-l1600.j
oh god i never saw one of those things. funny how manufacturers were always changing and making some occasionaly stupid changes. I just had a regular p2 chip. i had a pent1, 2, and 3 that ran my bbs.
And this whole time I thought those were the 'regular' Pentium 2's :)
Nightfox wrote to The Lizard Master <=-
I like the Spinal Tap reference. :)
MRO wrote to unc0nnected <=-
well like i said, i got that big haul of old computers from my uncle in the late 90s. they couldnt work out a single way to do things. rj11 jacks for keyboards and other stuff. parallel port adapters for serial ports for mouse, huge fans. weird plastic enclosures inside the cases.
engineers were out of control.
well like i said, i got that big haul of old computers from my uncle in the late 90s. they couldnt work out a single way to do things. rj11 jacks for keyboard s and other stuff. parallel port adapters for serial ports for mouse, huge fans . weird plasti
I like the Spinal Tap reference. :)
come to think of it, I'm surprised Teslas don't have a guage that goes to 11.
AND THE CASES!
Compaq desktops with flying butresses! HPs with hidden optical drives. CD-ROM holders built-in to the cases! The Packard Bell "Corner PC"! Monitors with built-in speakers. Matching weird mice and keyboards!
well like i said, i got that big haul of old computers from my uncle in
the late 90s. they couldnt work out a single way to do things. rj11
Well said, it's so easy to take for granted how standardized everything is today and that it wasn't that long ago when everyone was going off in their own directions with what they thought was the best way. I mean hell, wasn't it only in the last 2-3 years that Apple finally got on USB-C?
MRO wrote to unc0nnected <=-
well like i said, i got that big haul of old computers from my uncle in the late 90s. they couldnt work out a single way to do things. rj11 jacks for keyboards and other stuff. parallel port adapters for serial ports for mouse, huge fans. weird plastic enclosures inside the cases.
engineers were out of control.
AND THE CASES!
Compaq desktops with flying butresses! HPs with hidden optical drives. CD-ROM holders built-in to the cases! The Packard Bell "Corner PC"!
Monitors with built-in speakers. Matching weird mice and keyboards!
today and that it wasn't that long ago when everyone was going off in their own directions with what they thought was the best way. I mean hell, wasn't it only in the last 2-3 years that Apple finally got on USB-C?
I can't even imagine how excited you must have been with that haul? I can almost smell it if I close my eyes and that smell alone would be enough to give me goosebumps.
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: Nightfox to Tracker1 on Sat Nov 04 2023 05:53 pm
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: Tracker1 to Unc0nnected on Thu Nov 02 2023 11:10 pm
I always go a little overkill on ram, even today running 128gb, thou I have used over 70gb a couple times for project work. Part of me would
I started using 32GB of RAM in 2012, when I think it was a bit overkill. These days, I think 32GB is more common, though 16GB is probably a common minimum. Currently I still have 32GB in my main desktop PC at home, thoug currently have 64GB in my BBS computer - I also have a Plex media server running on that, and I wanted it to be able to handle my BBS as well as
i still hae 16 gigs in my main computer. i run a plex server and stream to other computers on the network. i can play newer games.
i havent really hit a wall yet. just the other day i re-encoded a movie
and replaced the audio and it didn't take long.
i'm not a big gamer though. if i needed more i would buy it.
MRO wrote to unc0nnected <=-
i tore through it and kept the good stuff. i was a moron though. i
tossed a lot of model m keyboards. i kept the best ones for myself.
Boraxman wrote to MRO <=-
I'm still on 8GB on my main computer, which was built back in 2009.
Been thinking of upgrading the RAM but I rarely use the full 8GB.
Needless to say I don't run memory hungry games and apps...
AND THE CASES!
Compaq desktops with flying butresses! HPs with hidden optical drives.
CD-ROM holders built-in to the cases! The Packard Bell "Corner PC"!
Monitors with built-in speakers. Matching weird mice and keyboards!
i tore through it and kept the good stuff. i was a moron though. i tossed a >lot of model m keyboards. i kept the best ones for myself.
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: MRO to unc0nnected on Mon Nov 06 2023 11:24 pm
i tore through it and kept the good stuff. i was a moron though. i tossed a >lot of model m keyboards. i kept the best ones for myself.
One of my favorite keyboards!
I just got a replacement cable for my Model M13. You can get alot of money for these. What did you say you were again?
I don't have any of those keyboards. i don't keep stuff i'm not using around i'm anti hoarder.
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: MRO to Nopants on Wed Nov 08 2023 03:07 am
I don't have any of those keyboards. i don't keep stuff i'm not using around i'm anti hoarder.
I hope your turned them into some loot and not be a moron is all
The IBM Model M13 has the thinkpad trackpoint mouse built in great for a server
https://i.imgur.com/rRQeVSi.jpeg
I overthink memory some times. I have an old Thinkpad T410 that only
supports 8 GB of RAM. It's not a daily driver, I use it when I go to
coffee shops and such. Running a web browser with a couple of tabs
open, winamp, and an office app or two does just about does it in - but
that's OK.
I just upgraded a desktop with 16GB of RAM, thinking of future
upgrades, and feel bad - 16GB felt like just enough memory. It's
sitting in my closet gathering dust now.
Nightfox wrote to Weatherman <=-
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: Weatherman to Unc0nnected on Sat Nov 04 2023 01:53 am
Heh, now that's funny. I never ran a Pentium lower than a P-II myself. Back in the days of the original Pentium chips when I was running my DX4 I used to tease the early adopters of the Pentium by telling them that MY chip could actually do simple addition.
I think Intel fixed that Pentium floating point flaw fairly quickly
after it was discovered (and I'd heard it only happened in a rare
corner case anyway).
At that time I was only using AMD processors. I went from an AMD
386DX-40 to an AMD 5x86-133, then AMD K6 200mhz, K6-2 300mhz, and K6-3 450mhz (I think), then the Athlons..
= Synchronet = Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
When I think of how much memory computers have, and how much programs use, I'm impressed by how things have progressed, and saddened at the same time by how wasteful we are. The dismay of bloat ends up being the dominant feeling.
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Boraxman on Tue Nov 07 2023 06:53 am
I just upgraded a desktop with 16GB of RAM, thinking of future
upgrades, and feel bad - 16GB felt like just enough memory. It's
sitting in my closet gathering dust now.
When I think of how much memory computers have, and how much programs
use, I'm impressed by how things have progressed, and saddened at the
same time by how wasteful we are. The dismay of bloat ends up being the dominant feeling.
apparently this is what SDXL thinks DM looks like with some new Sync merch: http://kirin.dcclost.com/~alex/00007-3501872545.png
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: fusion to Boraxman on Mon Nov 13 2023 07:56 pm
apparently this is what SDXL thinks DM looks like with some new Sync merch: http://kirin.dcclost.com/~alex/00007-3501872545.png
EWWW
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: fusion to Boraxman on Mon Nov 13 2023 07:56 pm
apparently this is what SDXL thinks DM looks like with some new Sync merch: http://kirin.dcclost.com/~alex/00007-3501872545.png
EWWW
apparently this is what SDXL thinks DM looks like with some new Sync merch: http://kirin.dcclost.com/~alex/00007-3501872545.png
EWWW
Doesn't look anything like me!?! (or does it?)
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: Boraxman to poindexter FORTRAN on Mon Nov 13 2023 05:48 pm
When I think of how much memory computers have, and how much programs use I'm impressed by how things have progressed, and saddened at the same tim by how wasteful we are. The dismay of bloat ends up being the dominant feeling.
yeah there's some programs that i'm running that use wAAAAAY too much memory especially my browsers. i have opera and chrome open and they're using 1.5g of memory.
for most people 16gb is currently fine, and up until a few years ago that wa 8gb.. gaming, browsing, whatever really. time marches on..Oh,I don't run that stuff. Maybe a VM every now and then, but ONLY to buil software for a diferent architecture, or perhaps occasionally test something. It's quite rare.
but if you start to use your machine like a workstation all bets are off :) running multiple VMs, running AI locally, probably video editing, and also video game streaming is eking it's way into this category.
using Stable Diffusion here i'll sometimes see 27GB or so conventional ram, it chews up 16GB of VRAM like it's nothing.
apparently this is what SDXL thinks DM looks like with some new Sync merch:
You remember that episode of The Simpsons where Homer meets his long lost half-brother Herb, who owns a car company? Herb gets Homer to design a car and Homer ends up designing a monstrosity that sends Herb bust. The web is that car.
Most of the time I'm running Mutt, or some CLI program, Brave would be the most 'heavy' program I run, occasionally Spotify which is bloated. So for me 8G is enough.
Well, browsers are at another level. The web is now a dismail failure, utterly broken. Browsers are horrendous because web-devs have made the web horrendous.
You remember that episode of The Simpsons where Homer meets his long lost half-brother Herb, who owns a car company? Herb gets Homer to design a car and Homer ends up designing a monstrosity that sends Herb bust. The web is that car.
good thing about brave is it blocks youtube ads. now it's difficult on reguI have found Clipious (through Invidious instances) to be quite ok. It is sanerthan using a browser when it works. I think Google is removing them from searchresults :-)
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: Boraxman to fusion on Wed Nov 15 2023 11:09 pm
Most of the time I'm running Mutt, or some CLI program, Brave would be most 'heavy' program I run, occasionally Spotify which is bloated. So me 8G is enough.
good thing about brave is it blocks youtube ads. now it's difficult on regular browsers to defeat their ads.
good thing about brave is it blocks youtube ads. now it's difficult on regular browsers to defeat their ads.
it's actually incredibly simple. firefox+ublock origin
over this whole ordeal i've seen their anti-ad-blocker message like 3 times. then i go into ublock's settings and update the filters and it's gone. about 10 seconds of effort total over the whole "ordeal"
You remember that episode of The Simpsons where Homer meets his long lost half-brother Herb, who owns a car company? Herb gets Homer to design a car an
Homer ends up designing a monstrosity that sends Herb bust. The web is that car.
Well, browsers are at another level. The web is now a dismail failure, utterly broken. Browsers are horrendous because web-devs have made the web horrendous.
Re: Hey folks
By: Bulifyf to All on Tue Oct 24 2023 08:35 pm
Welcome back to the past.
I too am from Canada, in the Vancouver area!
I'm intrigued by Gemini and Gopher protocols, but I like plain old HTML. I'dYou can serve HTML pages over Gopher. You could build a gophersite on HTML only. People just prefers not to do it because gophr has better ways of arranging content-
The web is used by millions of people around the world every day (via a web browser or apps making REST calls & such via web erquests), so I'm not sure say it's such a failure.
Nightfox
I'm intrigued by Gemini and Gopher protocols, but I like plain old HTML. I'd like to see a simple browser that works with basic HTML get some traction, myself. I think back to the blogs I hand-hacked back before blogger.
Kmeleon loads my tilde blog (https://tilde.club/~poindexter) in around 100 megabytes of RAM just fine, and to me, HTML is easier to hand-code than Gemi or Gopher.
...Have you ever asked a question you weren't supposed to ask?
Boraxman wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
The key is to
eschew bloat and show people the web can be fast, simple, friendly and
fun again.
Boraxman wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
The key is to
eschew bloat and show people the web can be fast, simple, friendly and fun again.
I'm rediscovering simple blogging. I'm running Blosxom on http://tilde.club/~poindexter and found there are a bunch of tools to
take plain text and make it into a somewhat pretty blog - even one
written completely in BASH!
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Boraxman on Sun Nov 26 2023 09:05 pm
Boraxman wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
The key is to
eschew bloat and show people the web can be fast, simple, friendly and fun again.
I'm rediscovering simple blogging. I'm running Blosxom on http://tilde.club/~poindexter and found there are a bunch of tools to
I'm rediscovering simple blogging. I'm running Blosxom on http://tilde.club/~poindexter and found there are a bunch of tools to
take plain text and make it into a somewhat pretty blog - even one
written completely in BASH!
I've created a website, but decided against blogging. Blogging is fine when > is personal, but I've seen people who post articles as blog posts, which
doesn't make sense. Articles and writing which aren't a log would be better > served categorised, tagged and sorted.
it reminds me about when everyone was trying to do podcasts. most people just arent interesting enough.
Re: Re: Hey folks
By: MRO to poindexter FORTRAN on Tue Nov 28 2023 05:01 am
it reminds me about when everyone was trying to do podcasts. most people just arent interesting enough.
Hey now, I resemble that remark!
i never liked blogs. most people were boring.
now most blogs are just advertisements thinly diguised as blogs.
it reminds me about when everyone was trying to do podcasts. most people just arent interesting enough.
| Sysop: | Tandy |
|---|---|
| Location: | New York, USA |
| Users: | 15 |
| Nodes: | 13 (0 / 13) |
| Uptime: | 15:51:06 |
| Calls: | 335 |
| Messages: | 112,962 |
