I can run Quake 2 on my Amiga (060@50 MHz) relatively playable, also port for Nintendo DS was very smooth. This 386 is impressive in a sense too, but I'd say most of performance is eaten by Windows :).
More RAM would've probably helped a fair bit. This is probably swapping a _lot_. Also a 3D accelerator would probably help too. I imagine the DS too while primitive, was probably a bit more optimized for the sort of math needed for this too, and the port might've even been using the DS's 3D hardware.
This 1000x. Feel lucky to have lived through this period and seen how games advanced from EGA even CGA graphics up til today. The evolution of games in the last 10 years feels like a snails pace by comparison and the "jump" from GTA 4 to 5 to 6 graphics so small compared to what was experienced year to year in the 90s.
@@gazman9468, it's just the law of diminishing gains, really. 1080p to 4k is a nice jump, but 240p to 480p was crazy. 60fps to 120 again nice, but 15fps to 30 was just incredible. Twice the power gets you graphics which look at tops 25% better. Ray-tracing epitomises this. Love seeing the screenshots, but think of the power it takes and then - especially with a fast-paced game - how you have to consciously look for it. Admittedly screenspace reflections can be quite noticeable in their behaviour once you are used to RT.
well, at least its ran at 1FPS ;) A 386 machine was slow for games as Doom1, Doom2, Herect, Hexxen. But ran well with games like The Lost Vikings, Prehistoric, Tiryan, Pinball
Quake is explicitly tailored to the Pentium architecture. The transformation of the space relies on a powerful FPU. For i386, this would have to be done completely differently, and a much better result would come from using integer arithmetic.
He maxed-out the 1989 motherboard, 20mb was very high-end at the time. I got my first PC in December 1996 and it came with 64mb ram, but it could handle 512mb ram (a 64mb stick for each of the 8 slots). But it would have cost like $4,000 dollars to max out the boards when those PCs were new. The slots were there so when ram got cheap, your computer had longevity and not go obsolete too quickly.
Watching this video reminds of the pain of playing through Doom 2 at "OK" framerates but in VGA on my 386 SX 16mhz - twice as slow as this system. Then going to my friends house where he'd just bought a 486 DX2-66 and being blown away at the game running smoothly in SVGA.
@@plasmaastronaut that SVGA sticking to 800x600 is a bit misleading because in reality 640x480 256 colors was SVGA too as VGA could do 640x480 in 16 colors only.
The Tseng Labs ET4000ax graphics card has no hardware acceleration. The ET4000/w32i does have hardware acceleration and can have a maximum 4mb ram. Upgrading the graphics card would have made a difference. An ATI Mach 32 or a 64 ISA would have ran this better.
The whole thing runs thanks to Open GL software emulation using Scitech GLDirect on CPU. But you are right, the AX card is not top of the line. The Mach 64 ISA is kinda rare and very expensive. I have VLB ET4000 W32i, ARK, S3 Trio64 and a number of other cards. It would be interesting to put together a VLB 386 and redo the test one day.
@@command_line_channel did the 386 boards even support VLB graphics? I would like to see how the likes of Matrox, Mach64 or Diamond Stealth would've paired with a 386DX. My old DX- 40 was paired with a ISA bus Trident SVGA w/ 512k vram
I’m going to start posting different cpus Using PCEM with this game. I tested it on an emulate Pentium 90 and 133 and it’s indistinguishable from the real thing. BTW, a 486 DX2 40 runs the exact same in 1024x767
Not necessarily an invalid question but a 3D accelerator might've helped. there were some PCI 486 motherboards that could maybe take a 3DFX card or some earlier nvidia/ati, though I think they're fairly hamstrung by bus speed/width so it certainly wouldn't be ideal, but nothing about this is.
386 predates VLB and PCI. I don’t think there are any motherboards with VLB and 386. ISA bus speed only became a problem with 486. Maybe there are any motherboard with VLB and 386. There are some motherboards that supported both cpus. Iam not sure if they have VLB.
@@fenixlolnope361 from my research there are 386/486 hybrid motherboards that support vlb. But VLB on 386 doesn’t allways work from what i read. There are a DOS port of quake2. Maybe have better performance on 386 even without the VLB card.
@SleepyKitteh Yes indeed. But the difference is that, back in the 90s, old PCs could not run new software because of hardware limitations... and now is just greed.
wth you're talking about? realtime raytracing wasn't even dreamed off in 1997 when the Quake II was released and it wasn't meant to run on CPU from 1985
well id have to say the problem is that youre running in software mode and not in hardware for the gfx .. try putting in a voodo card that would fix it ..
If this game came out when 386 was on market, by the time you finish the game, the Pentium 2 had been already on market.
I really love the part how much effort you put into filming the hw components.
Seems like the algorithm has chosen you, also nice shots and video quality
This is how you played TOTAL ECLIPSE on Commodore 64
I can run Quake 2 on my Amiga (060@50 MHz) relatively playable, also port for Nintendo DS was very smooth. This 386 is impressive in a sense too, but I'd say most of performance is eaten by Windows :).
There is a dos source port of quake 2 that can be tried out
A 68060 is not a fair comparison with a 386. It's almost 10 years newer and made to compete with the Pentium
More RAM would've probably helped a fair bit. This is probably swapping a _lot_. Also a 3D accelerator would probably help too. I imagine the DS too while primitive, was probably a bit more optimized for the sort of math needed for this too, and the port might've even been using the DS's 3D hardware.
1 thing you didnt mention was how the ds port uses hardware acceleration and cannot. Just software rendering, and has massively reduced texture sizes
Shows how fast technology was moving back then. You'd fully expect to run a new game on 7 or 8 year old hardware now, admittedly with concessions
This 1000x. Feel lucky to have lived through this period and seen how games advanced from EGA even CGA graphics up til today. The evolution of games in the last 10 years feels like a snails pace by comparison and the "jump" from GTA 4 to 5 to 6 graphics so small compared to what was experienced year to year in the 90s.
@@gazman9468, it's just the law of diminishing gains, really. 1080p to 4k is a nice jump, but 240p to 480p was crazy. 60fps to 120 again nice, but 15fps to 30 was just incredible. Twice the power gets you graphics which look at tops 25% better. Ray-tracing epitomises this. Love seeing the screenshots, but think of the power it takes and then - especially with a fast-paced game - how you have to consciously look for it. Admittedly screenspace reflections can be quite noticeable in their behaviour once you are used to RT.
Exactly. Now when you think, what we had 7 years ago? 1st gen Ryzen and Kaby Lake, perfectly usable hardware in every way.
@@RuruFIN 2gen intel core (2011) is perfectly useable in 2024, especially these 4c/8t i7
@@RuruFIN same case with GTX 1060
well, at least its ran at 1FPS ;) A 386 machine was slow for games as Doom1, Doom2, Herect, Hexxen. But ran well with games like The Lost Vikings, Prehistoric, Tiryan, Pinball
What kind of chip you got in there? A Dorito? It's all about the Pentiums baby.
I'm nearly suprised it runs "that fast". Great.
This is how it feels playing Quake II RTX on my 1080 Ti.
It's running, but at about 1fps... Can't you go further down with details and resolution?
This reminds me of trying to run Quake 1 on a 486sx/25 with dx4/75 overdrive clocked to 100mhz ⏱👀🤡🌎
'Trying to'?.. With the DX4-100 it should be fairly playable @ 320x200. Then again, it was less than perfect on my P90, so..
@@RetroPeKar I would guess it would be pretty miserable in fast action.
Fantastic video! Try Quake 2 DOS port as well :)
I'm calling this the undisputed best ever in terms of filming retro hardware. And the result in Q2 is impressive, too! But.. 20MB of RAM?..
I had 7MB on my 386 SX setup 😆
Quake is explicitly tailored to the Pentium architecture. The transformation of the space relies on a powerful FPU. For i386, this would have to be done completely differently, and a much better result would come from using integer arithmetic.
And now we are having not frames per second, but seconds per frame.
there is undeniable beauty in the old hardware
I laughed when you made the screen smaller and you could actually tell it was performing like..... 0.001% better lol. Cool idea with these videos btw.
Hm, it needs a 3DFX Voodoo card but I don't think any PCI boards exist for 386 processors. PCI was a Pentium-era technology.
Pci existed since 486 era. You can play glquake with a 486. Cpu galaxy did a video about it
386DX: "Kill Me, Now!"
20MB ram in 1989? My first computer in 2003 had only 256MB.
He maxed-out the 1989 motherboard, 20mb was very high-end at the time. I got my first PC in December 1996 and it came with 64mb ram, but it could handle 512mb ram (a 64mb stick for each of the 8 slots). But it would have cost like $4,000 dollars to max out the boards when those PCs were new. The slots were there so when ram got cheap, your computer had longevity and not go obsolete too quickly.
I really like your style of video editing, very nice
This is like 05.fps/s amazing 386 can run. Nice video edit
Watching this video reminds of the pain of playing through Doom 2 at "OK" framerates but in VGA on my 386 SX 16mhz - twice as slow as this system. Then going to my friends house where he'd just bought a 486 DX2-66 and being blown away at the game running smoothly in SVGA.
SVGA is at least 800x600
doom2 ran at 320x200 in 1994
Doom didn't support SVGA but on dx2/66 with VLB garphics card Doom2 ran perfectly
@@plasmaastronaut that SVGA sticking to 800x600 is a bit misleading because in reality 640x480 256 colors was SVGA too as VGA could do 640x480 in 16 colors only.
Now you need to work out how to install a 3dfx on a 386 system :)
Easy. Take a pen and write 3dfx on the case! 🤣
So... Quake II RPG edition. Nice.
this would be way better with a minimal 3d acceleration. Quake II was not intended to be run using the software renderer, as Quake I
it wouldn't work better even with full RTX acceleration, because this CPU only has 275000 transistors for god's sake XD
Its like 3D Freescape engine on ZX Spectrum 👍
But can it run Crysis?
Ahahahaha.
Literally a showslide. This is how my pc in 2021 runs cyberfk 2077.
Imagine if you could run it on a 386!
@@thecount25 Gold times..
I’ll never complain about getting 25 fps in quake II on my pc again
so funny even when shrunk down its barely 1fps, the frames match the video time almost exactly
The Tseng Labs ET4000ax graphics card has no hardware acceleration. The ET4000/w32i does have hardware acceleration and can have a maximum 4mb ram. Upgrading the graphics card would have made a difference. An ATI Mach 32 or a 64 ISA would have ran this better.
The whole thing runs thanks to Open GL software emulation using Scitech GLDirect on CPU. But you are right, the AX card is not top of the line. The Mach 64 ISA is kinda rare and very expensive. I have VLB ET4000 W32i, ARK, S3 Trio64 and a number of other cards. It would be interesting to put together a VLB 386 and redo the test one day.
@@command_line_channel did the 386 boards even support VLB graphics? I would like to see how the likes of Matrox, Mach64 or Diamond Stealth would've paired with a 386DX. My old DX- 40 was paired with a ISA bus Trident SVGA w/ 512k vram
@@nng1979 There are some boards that support VLB on a 386. But they are very uncommon.
about 0,6 - 0,7 fps ? still palyable and amazing
My p5 100 plays this at about 10fps. 16mb ram, s3 verge. Plays winquake at 20frames an is playable.
I’m going to start posting different cpus Using PCEM with this game. I tested it on an emulate Pentium 90 and 133 and it’s indistinguishable from the real thing. BTW, a 486 DX2 40 runs the exact same in 1024x767
Excellent video I would like to see doom 1 and 2 quake 1 running
WONDERFUL SLICK PRESENTATION!!! ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Pain! But I kept watching it.
Well I guess you could Matrix your way through the game and have a good amount of time to plan your attacks if it wasn´t for that input lag 😅
While recording a demo, then you could see it played back kinda like a TAS run of the game. :p
@@Aeduo Indeed lol
Quake 2: Rogue Edition
Possible to run, but not possible to play... Still, it's impressive that it can run it at all!
Did you speed up the section where Windows 95 loads? If not, then that's mildly impressive.
It's a speed-up, just like DOS tests as well.
Quake 2 as a turn based game
I was surprised you could run Windows95.
win95 will run on any 386 with 4 MB RAM provided
At least have 2MBx8 RAM for dual interleave.
Put soundcard off
they never said could it run quake ii *well*
those wait states are high..
still faster than on school pc
What if you paired the 386dx40 with a GTX 4090 - would it run Quake 2 any better? :D
Not necessarily an invalid question but a 3D accelerator might've helped. there were some PCI 486 motherboards that could maybe take a 3DFX card or some earlier nvidia/ati, though I think they're fairly hamstrung by bus speed/width so it certainly wouldn't be ideal, but nothing about this is.
I put the playback speed at 0.25x, it reminds me of my Atari 2600.
My old 386 played doom like a slide show.
What about with a 3D accelerator though? I’m assuming you don’t have VLB or PCI
386 predates VLB and PCI. I don’t think there are any motherboards with VLB and 386. ISA bus speed only became a problem with 486.
Maybe there are any motherboard with VLB and 386. There are some motherboards that supported both cpus. Iam not sure if they have VLB.
@@sjogosPT that’s what I figured. Really asking it to do OpenGL calls would probably not be helping matters any anyways with that tiny bus
@@fenixlolnope361 from my research there are 386/486 hybrid motherboards that support vlb. But VLB on 386 doesn’t allways work from what i read.
There are a DOS port of quake2. Maybe have better performance on 386 even without the VLB card.
Yo please do a timelaps video as you did with Q3 so it would seem as if it's running in 30 fps over hours of actual rendering ))))
You gotta 486 DLC that thing. XD
i've run diablo I on 386dx40
NO is the answer. next question please
Wow 😍 43 subs? 4 real?
Soon to be 50k
so this is not the original software renderer?
Try on 486 DX2.
This can't be real.
performance same as Doom on C64
Technology advanced fast in the 90s, 4-5 year old pcs couldn't even run modern Windows, now imagine if a pc from 2016 couldn't run Win10....
@SleepyKitteh Yes indeed. But the difference is that, back in the 90s, old PCs could not run new software because of hardware limitations... and now is just greed.
@@CypherCod greed on whose part?
But it does not has raytracing
wth you're talking about? realtime raytracing wasn't even dreamed off in 1997 when the Quake II was released and it wasn't meant to run on CPU from 1985
0.5fps :) ..but your 386 is a beast ;) 20mb of ram..20x more than i had on 286(1mb, or 1024kb heh)..also it had 4mhz(turbo mode turned it to 8mhz)
Not bad SPF though, eh.
Looks like the answer was and still is: fok no.
Try rendering it at sub-50p.
1x1px could get 30 fps , i guess
a whopping 2 -fps- spf
Actually not that bad.. :P
Great! Now try to skip to final boss battle, and defeat Macron. )))
well id have to say the problem is that youre running in software mode and not in hardware for the gfx .. try putting in a voodo card that would fix it ..
Can you get an ISA voodoo card?
0.5fps is not playable. why did this need to be almost 20 mins long?
you know nothing about playability
Coool! But can it run Crysis? 😜
yes, it can run when you use black magic spells xD
too speed
999fps
Последние 14 минут ни о чём. Можно было уложиться и в 3 минуты.
Quake III на 386. Всего 2:38 :) ua-cam.com/video/DlxlOtupnUc/v-deo.html
lagggggggggg
Did it even have FPU copro installed? xD