wait, do you mean that guy got fastdoom running on a 286?
It's impossible to run FastDoom on 16-bit x86 machines. It uses instructions the 286 nor 8088/8086 have, and requires 32-bit protected mode.
BitWrangler wrote on 2024-09-13, 14:48:Blue Lightning BL3, got one in a system, I'll get round to it over winter maybe. It's got some 486 instructions and a 16kb cache too, so does about 1.5x 386 IPC or 2/3 to 3/4 486 IPC, so at 100Mhz is about equivalent to 486DX2/66
edit: for integer only that is. Has to rely on best 387s you can pair with it at FSB speed of 33 Mhz
I would be really interested in hearing more about this CPU, what boards it can run on and how it really compares to a 486/66 in real world use..
appiah4 wrote on 2024-10-01, 09:07:BitWrangler wrote on 2024-09-13, 14:48:Blue Lightning BL3, got one in a system, I'll get round to it over winter maybe. It's got some 486 instructions and a 16kb cache too, so does about 1.5x 386 IPC or 2/3 to 3/4 486 IPC, so at 100Mhz is about equivalent to 486DX2/66
edit: for integer only that is. Has to rely on best 387s you can pair with it at FSB speed of 33 Mhz
I would be really interested in hearing more about this CPU, what boards it can run on and how it really compares to a 486/66 in real world use..
Well that's a real rabbithole, it's the Cyrix 5x86-120 of 386 class, in rarity and expense, may even be double the $$$. Information is sparse and scattered, overview of the range here... https://ardent-tool.com/CPU/386_upgrade.html# … SLC2/SLC3%20and
A lot of work done on finding boards that run it here, 3 (+3 more) retro battle stations in the 386 section of in thread links. There are other threads with some info too, maybe SLC3 threads relevant.
So in the early 90s, IBM almost frankensteined this together from Cyrix and possibly TI designs and used some Intel IP too that they had. Now their agreement with Intel at the time was they could manufacture intel CPU under license and license all their x86 IP, with the condition that they did not sell any CPUs on their own, all to be on IBM boards or in systems.... So Blue Lightning SL/BL class never available as a CPU. Most famous board package for homebrew and systems integrators was the Alaris Cougar "Cobalt AT", with either a BL2 or BL3 on it. Notice that they specified that platform as the AT version, because other boards in other formfactors were also called cobalt, but most references only take you to the Alaris. Now, the boards all seem to have been done by IBM Microelectronics division, who sold boards to integrators like Patriot systems and also internally to IBM divisions that made Ambra, Aptiva, PS/1 and Valuepoint systems. The system models were often containing 466 for the BL2 and 4100 for the BL3, the Patriot system which I have is the SL4100. Also there were upgrade modules for other IBM systems. Also super rare and super expensive.
Now, the reason I think these are super rare now, is twofold... i) support info never made it to the web officially, by the time IBM went fully onboard with web support sometime in 1998, these had hit the 5 year from introduction cutoff that they had at the time (Many IBM supported systems like Olivetti also affected, Olivetti may also have been a cobalt board customer just by being involved in the right timeframe but no definite confirm) So people with these systems in 1998 forward could find nothing about them to help keep them running, ppl didn't want to buy them used for same reason... then.. ii) Millennium bug... the surepath BIOS code that IBM Microlectronics favored has a rollover bug. Since some Millennium Bug testing programs were a bit overdramatic like "Aaargh this machine has Millenium Cancer" kind of statements in big red flashing letters, ppl may have scrapped them before millennium, then more would have been scrapped in 2000 when the date didn't roll. So high amount of attrition likely.
My experience is limited to getting my Patriot SL4100 back from the dead to first POST this time last year and then I ran out of time on it, and had a few niggles that were frustrating the hell out of testing, was hoping to scour up some more info by the time I got back to it, but I think I have to do some of that tedious elimination kind of testing. Saw a few benchmarks line up with approx DX2/66, should say SX2/66 due to FPU being more like DX33. Anyway, when the weather closes in I will be back to fiddling with that and seeing what it can do
Unicorn herding operations are proceeding, but all the totes of hens teeth and barrels of rocking horse poop give them plenty of hiding spots.
Thanks for all the info I really appreciate it and look forward to your tinkering with it. It's one of those rare times when I learn about something new (old?) that I never heard of before and get excited about. Out of curiosity, which IBM computers do I need to look out for in order to come across one of these unicorns? Aptiva, Valuepoint and PS/1s?
appiah4 wrote on 2024-10-02, 08:59:Thanks for all the info I really appreciate it and look forward to your tinkering with it. It's one of those rare times when I learn about something new (old?) that I never heard of before and get excited about. Out of curiosity, which IBM computers do I need to look out for in order to come across one of these unicorns? Aptiva, Valuepoint and PS/1s?
Yes or Ambra if you ever happen to see any, which was more of an arms length IBM division, kinda like Saturn was to General Motors. However, they all also later sold IBM made Cyrix DX2 regular 486 as Blue Lightning in the same lines. Some people also seemed to think they got a DX4-100 when it was running at 100, and maybe seemed fast enough in 1994 that the difference wasn't obvious. So they can also fly under the radar as "DX4" systems or get hidden in crowd of 486 DX2s. But usually if you see a Blue Lightning 100 mhz, or 75Mhz that's always going to be the actual real deal BL3, but a 66 could be BL2 or DX2
Unicorn herding operations are proceeding, but all the totes of hens teeth and barrels of rocking horse poop give them plenty of hiding spots.
What was the last version that had EGA 640x200x16 mode? I liked the visual dithering.
I am aroused about any X86 motherboard that has full functional ISA slot. I think i have problem. Not really into that original (Turbo) XT,286,386 and CGA/EGA stuff. So just a DOS nut.
PS. If I upload RAR, it is a 16-bit DOS RAR Version 2.50.
The last version with native EGA 640x200x16 mode was 0.9.4. I also liked the visual dithering, but the performance was far from good. To be fair, the actual EGA 320x200 mode runs at the native 640x200 resolution 😅.
Thanx. I'll put it in my personal retroarchive.
PS. It runs buttersmooth with a Pentium and a PCI videocard. Love the retro/matrix look. Nerdly pleasures, as one of our friend said and did.
And by the way, dark corners are more scarier and darker. It is like silent 8bit sounds.
ViTi95 wrote on 2024-10-03, 13:16:The last version with native EGA 640x200x16 mode was 0.9.4. I also liked the visual dithering, but the performance was far from good. To be fair, the actual EGA 320x200 mode runs at the native 640x200 resolution 😅.
I am aroused about any X86 motherboard that has full functional ISA slot. I think i have problem. Not really into that original (Turbo) XT,286,386 and CGA/EGA stuff. So just a DOS nut.
PS. If I upload RAR, it is a 16-bit DOS RAR Version 2.50.
@Cyberdyne I've spent some time trying to bring back the EGA 640x200 dithered mode, I think I've managed to get better colors. Here's a small demo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwoI0mlR2_M
What do you think?
ViTi95 wrote on 2024-10-09, 21:58:What do you think?
Beautiful.
Just every time i see anything like that from your project, i always have to search for my jaw that fell under my table.
It's amazing what you have done throughout the whole project.
"640K ought to be enough for anybody." - And i intend to get every last bit out of it even after loading every damn driver!
ViTi95 wrote on 2024-10-09, 21:58:@Cyberdyne I've spent some time trying to bring back the EGA 640x200 dithered mode, I think I've managed to get better colors. Here's a small demo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwoI0mlR2_M
What do you think?
Noice 👌
But download please ☺️
I am aroused about any X86 motherboard that has full functional ISA slot. I think i have problem. Not really into that original (Turbo) XT,286,386 and CGA/EGA stuff. So just a DOS nut.
PS. If I upload RAR, it is a 16-bit DOS RAR Version 2.50.
Cyberdyne wrote on 2024-10-10, 06:37:But download please ☺️
I need to optimize it first before considering releasing it again. Right now, the conversion from 256 colors to EGA planar is done in C, and OpenWatcom is not smart at all. Here's a small benchmark I did comparing different modes on my 486 laptop (Intel DX4-75):
Ultimate Doom, DEMO3, high detail, screensize 10:
- fdoom.exe: 30.596 fps (VGA mode Y)
- fdoom13h.exe: 37.185 fps (VGA mode 13h, backbuffered)
- fdoomega.exe: 30.396 fps (320x200 without dithering, backbuffered)
- fdoomehr.exe: 12.253 fps (640x200 with dithering 2x1, backbuffered) ~ 3 times slower
ViTi95 wrote on 2024-10-10, 13:51:I need to optimize it first before considering releasing it again. Right now, the conversion from 256 colors to EGA planar is do […]
I need to optimize it first before considering releasing it again. Right now, the conversion from 256 colors to EGA planar is done in C, and OpenWatcom is not smart at all. Here's a small benchmark I did comparing different modes on my 486 laptop (Intel DX4-75):
Ultimate Doom, DEMO3, high detail, screensize 10:
- fdoom.exe: 30.596 fps (VGA mode Y)
- fdoom13h.exe: 37.185 fps (VGA mode 13h, backbuffered)
- fdoomega.exe: 30.396 fps (320x200 without dithering, backbuffered)
- fdoomehr.exe: 12.253 fps (640x200 with dithering 2x1, backbuffered) ~ 3 times slower
i would like to know 160*100 internal rendering vga and 160*100*16 cga performance.
ViTi95 wrote on 2024-10-09, 21:58:@Cyberdyne I've spent some time trying to bring back the EGA 640x200 dithered mode, I think I've managed to get better colors. Here's a small demo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwoI0mlR2_M
What do you think?
Damn. That's beautiful. I would love to run through Doom in dithered mode.
My only potential complaint is that it is a bit dark/murky. For example, when you first encounter the Imp at the top of the room, you can't really barely see it. It might just be a result of the more limited color palette meaning that the colors of certain enemies match those of the backgrounds more closely, but I'm not sure if that is surmountable or what.
I'd still play the hell out of it, but that's my initial reaction. Also, I pretty much have every enemy's location in the first game memorized anyway, so I don't need to be able to see them all.
7F20 wrote on 2024-10-10, 15:46:Damn. That's beautiful. I would love to run through Doom in dithered mode. […]
ViTi95 wrote on 2024-10-09, 21:58:@Cyberdyne I've spent some time trying to bring back the EGA 640x200 dithered mode, I think I've managed to get better colors. Here's a small demo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwoI0mlR2_M
What do you think?
Damn. That's beautiful. I would love to run through Doom in dithered mode.
My only potential complaint is that it is a bit dark/murky. For example, when you first encounter the Imp at the top of the room, you can't really barely see it. It might just be a result of the more limited color palette meaning that the colors of certain enemies match those of the backgrounds more closely, but I'm not sure if that is surmountable or what.
I'd still play the hell out of it, but that's my initial reaction. Also, I pretty much have every enemy's location in the first game memorized anyway, so I don't need to be able to see them all.
I love even the original 0.9.4 version and played it thru.
I am aroused about any X86 motherboard that has full functional ISA slot. I think i have problem. Not really into that original (Turbo) XT,286,386 and CGA/EGA stuff. So just a DOS nut.
PS. If I upload RAR, it is a 16-bit DOS RAR Version 2.50.
ViTi95 wrote on 2024-10-10, 13:51:I need to optimize it first before considering releasing it again. Right now, the conversion from 256 colors to EGA planar is done in C, and OpenWatcom is not smart at all. Here's a small benchmark I did comparing different modes on my 486 laptop (Intel DX4-75):
I have an EGA card in a 2.8GHz Pentium 4 so no problem 😜
https://doomwiki.org/wiki/TNT.WAD
TNT.WAD file size requirement is wrong. It expects the older version filesize and nags about it.
Same problem with PLUTONIA.WAD.
Add both filesizes or disable nag, because those both came out as 1.9 and all versions works just fine.
I am aroused about any X86 motherboard that has full functional ISA slot. I think i have problem. Not really into that original (Turbo) XT,286,386 and CGA/EGA stuff. So just a DOS nut.
PS. If I upload RAR, it is a 16-bit DOS RAR Version 2.50.
I'm using the file size of the released DOS version for TNT and Plutonia (1996-06-10), which is the version I've tested with. Thanks for pointing this out; it's a good idea to add support for the id Anthology release (both versions will be supported in the next bugfix release).
ViTi95 wrote on 2024-10-29, 11:05:I'm using the file size of the released DOS version for TNT and Plutonia (1996-06-10), which is the version I've tested with. Thanks for pointing this out; it's a good idea to add support for the id Anthology release (both versions will be supported in the next bugfix release).
Thank you. Those anthology WADs fix minor bugs too. And thank god, they still have red crosses on health packs. Those newer green crosses are like rape of DooM.
I am aroused about any X86 motherboard that has full functional ISA slot. I think i have problem. Not really into that original (Turbo) XT,286,386 and CGA/EGA stuff. So just a DOS nut.
PS. If I upload RAR, it is a 16-bit DOS RAR Version 2.50.
