When Windows 98 can't identify a critical hardware device, such as video or hard drive controller, it uses a Safe Mode driver instead. The Safe Mode drivers are slower than molasses and I bet that that is a factor here. Install VMware Tools and ensure that your Device Manager is using all the correct drivers.
It will have to get passed some timeouts that have to pass to reach fail point and default to safe mode. The biggie is where VM ware is installed. Install the VM software on the RAM drive and test that...
100% this. Windows will run with its default drivers from a new boot, but it will not be able to tap into specialized and accelerated hardware without proper driver support. Installing drivers would most likely help, especially since you're getting the same exact result across three different "disks" with wildly varied speeds. If I had to assume (I honestly have zero idea if this is the case or not) Win98 is falling back to a very standard protocol for writing/reading data across "IDE" in the VM. It's not taking advantage of the faster standard because it's not specifically written for it. So, you could still have a blazingly fast drive, but if Windows will only pull data so fast, then it won't matter. No idea if that's true or not, but eh, it's a theory.
6 років тому+3
Came here to say this. It would be interesting to redo it after VMware Tools is installed.
Hello Druaga1! You might be interested to know that ReactOS 0.4.9 version will be released soon. This version will be the first version that has almost no problems with files of huge size or amount. It means you will be able at least to install really large games and even to try them.. We fixed a lot of bugs related to filesystems and Cache controller :D. Maybe you will be in the mood to try new version...
The main reason why it is so slow when you set it up in Windows 98 mode in VMWare, is because VMWare makes the machine think that you are using an IDE adapter, therefore throttling your speeds. When you added it to the Windows 10 machine, it saw SATA and took advantage of that. It could also have something to do with VMWare showing a different chipset between the two machines, but I think it's mainly due to the SATA vs IDE modes.
I think it would run faster if you'd enable DMA transfer under 98, otherwise it runs at slower Programmed I/O speeds. But you need chipset drivers installed for that.
Back on the old OS's, notably DOS based, devices had to be probed directly off the bus by the driver. This is in contrast to the new hardware model that NT (XP) brought about. In this time, drivers have to do tests to make sure the end device is working. That involves lots of purposeful waits for responses. They add up, and it's in constant time. Additionally, before the 9x kernels were fully booted, they ran in the config.sys mode of driver loading which was a single-driver-at-a-time mastering by virtue of the limitations for compatibility. It's why 9x drivers generally don't work with NT.
Well, you need to try installing VMware Tools in Windows 98 because it may have IDE controller drivers, so disk speed should be increased. On my Pentium machine I left the DOS driver for CD-ROM and was shocked to see that videos from Windows 95 CD are playing poorly. But after digging through Internet I found Intel drivers for my chipset and video playback was fine after that!
If you're still running a 2600k, Druaga1, little fun fact: Virtualization has almost no effect on overclock stability until you get up to 5ghz (if your chip can even hit that, not many can) and actually helps the CPU out in VirtualBox in my experience when enabled.
Try using qemu or disabling virtualization. I remember mi windows95 vm booting in like 5 seconds on a pentium4 with just a sata drive. You barelly could see the windows 95 logo. its not windows, its the drivers or the emulation. I asure you windows doesnt have a defined limit to the boot speed. Its all about hardware and drivers loading in any case.
Hal yeah the asrock boards have a pretty fast power on self test routine. This sometimes makes it really hard to access the bios or boot menu on my two asrock machines
Dude my Win10 boots in ~5 seconds off a ~500Mbps SSD, just a budget (ADATA) model on SATA3. It installed in less than 5 minutes from a USB3 stick. I was really surprised, I thought it'd at least take 15 minutes. I don't know what I did differently from anyone else.
Lucas Burrell yup. Watching druaga1 vids is the best use of time ever. I _should_ be cleaning my room or trying to get a shiny Pokémon, but, nah, those can wait.
Oooh I made a ram disk of Windows 7 once.. Surprisingly I didn't get very fast RW's on it.. I felt like the virtual box's SATA and SAS controllers weren't letting it get up to the full speed it could have :/ It did feel snappy though.
Read throughput was never the limiting factor for a fast boot of Win98, access times were however. You should check if TCP/IP is set to DHCP on some interfaces, Windows 98 will wait for like 5 secs for an IP or something as crazy. Also enable DMA and install all the drivers but in the end it won't boot that fast anyway after you've set up your software and games. And Windows 10 isn't that fast either when it doesn't cheat by relabelling a hibernate/resume cycle "fast shutdown" which makes these 4 secs boots possible. It's not really a boot.
It is no faster as VMWare is emulating an IDE hard disk so it will only be as fast as the IDE bus supports. Look in the machines settings at your disk controller.
Chronic's Tech Stuff tl;dr: a ram disk is still faster than an HDD over that interface. Long version:Even if that is the case, a ram disk should always be faster than a hard disk not because of the interface speed which in both cases is limited to 166 MB/s at best. It is faster because of access latency. A harddrive head needs some time to find the sector-track-combination it is looking for. A ram disk is pointed to a destination and at the same times gives the information from that destination to the processor. So that is why it is faster and the interface should not be the limit here. Although of course a SCSI interface would be better for this case because of its DMA capabilities and higher speed limits. But of course the difference between a SCSI HDD and a ram disk emulating a SCSI interface would still remain roughly the same. And I think what Druaga1 is looking for here is not the fastest speed but especially that difference in speed between HDD and ram disk.
I vaguely recall that there is indeed an IDE transfer rate cap in vmware. It is for Windows 2000 though, since its installer bugs out if the HDD is too fast. I have no idea why Windows 98 is throttled as well.
Are you k, Druaga1? that intro seems like a call for help, we all hope you will pull through and will be putting ssds in everything and everything in a ramdsisks in no time. Vote for sanity
I have a pair of Evo 850 m.2 drives in RAID0, running Gentoo. Boot times are less than 10 seconds to login prompt. Another few seconds for Firefox. Steam is the only other GUI program that I have auto start, which takes a solid 10 or 15 seconds...sometimes more, if it gets stuck trying to check for updates. Steam has always felt kinda sluggish to me on any machine I've used it on, though.
statikreg can you tell me if installing gentoo is really as hard to install as the old meme suggests? I want change from Ubuntu because it is still too bloated for me even though it already uses less space than windows. Is gentoo really that bad? And if it is, what do you want me to select? Any Debian based distro or fedora? I have only had experience with Ubuntu and Debian 8 so far
On my PC, after the Gigabyte logo disappears, I am at the logon screen in 5 seconds. I use a 32gb Adata SSD for booting, and 2 1TB Western Digital Blue drives in RAID1 (which means they are copies of each other) for storage.
I know this is an old video (been binge watching Druaga1 videos with tears of laughter running down my face). Probably use a slightly newer OS (windows 7?) that can use virtio drivers.
Installing an OS on random media ideas : sim card, magnetic tape, accessing from an ftp, daisy-chained floppy drives, laserdisk, using a smartphone as a boot device, zipdisk, ... okay I'm out of ideas.
its windows 98 that keeps hanging on the boot searching or waiting for something. so its not the hardware, its 98 itself that keeps it from loading faster. I have windows 10 on a ssd and it boots within 5 seconds.
JKP73 a clean install of 98 that does have all the important and correct drivers for your devices installed will fly even on a fast mechanical HDD. At least on my machine it does not even show the boot screen, just a short time of Black screen and then the login prompt. But maybe your hardware is faulty or has drivers that prevent windows from loading faster.
I think you're right. I just can't get it to boot very fast. I've checked the device manager and there are some items I can't find the drivers for, probably that is the cause of my slow boot times with win 98. Anyway, nice to see Druaga1 getting into these things. I find it fascinating. On a side note: I keep an eye out for ReactOS as well, seems very very fast as well, although it is still alpha.
You have an M.2 SSD? They work far faster than standard SSDs. You are looking at up to 3400MB/s read compared to 540MB/s. Windows 10 installed to one of those beasts could possibly boot in a few seconds.
22:30 I don't believe you can get it to start in 4-5 seconds. I mean you can, just suspend it and wake it up, it should only take 3 seconds on a decent system. But of course we are talking about a cold boot. Even with windows 10 fast startup (which essentially just hibernates and resumes instead of doing a normal shutdown/restart) I don't think you can get 4-5 seconds. Maybe, but even then I haven't seen it that quick. In any case, they are definitely not talking about cold boot times. They probably are just waking up from sleep or hibernation and don't realize it.
Yeah you're probably right. It would be useful since the older 15.2 version doesnt work well with newer computers like have two versions kept aside, the 15.2 for older computers and the rebuilt HBCD for newer PC's.
install times would have been far quicker if you had used a virtual disk drive to mount the iso. Is their a chance it is an issue with the way the vm is configured?
Could be a lack of instruction level parallellism perhaps? Like, if it's designed to be compiled for processors that can't do more then a single instruction at any one time, back when the main bottlenecks where different ones like how long the core had to wait on data from cache between instructions etc. With instruction level parallellism I mean something like this: If you got four numbers that you want to add together. A + B + C + D. You *can* do "A + B and store the result in B" then "B + C and store the result in C" and "C + D and store the result in D". And since each of those steps have a dependency on the result from the previous step they *have* to happen one at a time. Alternativly you could run them a bit out of order. Because A + B + C + D could *also* be done as "A + B and store the result in B" and "C + D and store the result in D" *at the same time* and then "B + D and store the result in D". Doing it the later way would shave of a whole clock cycle as the first two instructions could both happen in the first clock cycle and the third instruction in the second clock cycle instead of using three clockcyles for it all. Of course, if you have a processor that *can't* do more then a single instruction pr clock cycle then non of that matters as both codes will run the same speed on both. In both cases your CPU will show 100% utilization as there is *something* running on it 100% of the clock cycles, even if a processor with the ability to do multiple instructions each clock cycle would only do a single one each clock cycle on one of those two codes. A modern Coffee Lake (Skylake arcitecture) CPU can do 4 instructions each clock cycle, and those can be broken down inside the CPU to smaller instructions in the decoder for a total of 8 micro-instructions. Ryzen on the other hand can do up to 5 or even (in corner cases for a single clock cycle) 6 instructions pr clock cycle but only does 6 micro-instructions on the inside. A (modern) x86 thread with slightly above average optimizations feeds the core 1-3 instructions pr clock cycle (well, with "1" I actually mean from slightly less then 1 to 3, as there will be clock cycles where the core is waiting on data doing nothing), two x86 threads will therefore feed a core 1-6 instructions pr clock cycle. Still, both of those numbers are way, way higher then a single core doing a single instruction pr clock cycle that was normal way back in the day.
When Windows 98 can't identify a critical hardware device, such as video or hard drive controller, it uses a Safe Mode driver instead. The Safe Mode drivers are slower than molasses and I bet that that is a factor here. Install VMware Tools and ensure that your Device Manager is using all the correct drivers.
It will have to get passed some timeouts that have to pass to reach fail point and default to safe mode. The biggie is where VM ware is installed. Install the VM software on the RAM drive and test that...
dbozan99 I think the problem are the hard Disk drivers.
Like when I install Win98 with AHCI hard drives, it takes 10x longer than with IDE mode.
100% this. Windows will run with its default drivers from a new boot, but it will not be able to tap into specialized and accelerated hardware without proper driver support. Installing drivers would most likely help, especially since you're getting the same exact result across three different "disks" with wildly varied speeds.
If I had to assume (I honestly have zero idea if this is the case or not) Win98 is falling back to a very standard protocol for writing/reading data across "IDE" in the VM. It's not taking advantage of the faster standard because it's not specifically written for it. So, you could still have a blazingly fast drive, but if Windows will only pull data so fast, then it won't matter. No idea if that's true or not, but eh, it's a theory.
Came here to say this. It would be interesting to redo it after VMware Tools is installed.
How about the boot time at 26:34, when he used a Windows 10 VM but with the 98 disk image?
Next: Installing Windows Vista on a Power supply
Thunderblaze16 lol!
it is posseble if you have a singleboard pc with a real psu
Druaga channel has lore now
Hello Druaga1! You might be interested to know that ReactOS 0.4.9 version will be released soon. This version will be the first version that has almost no problems with files of huge size or amount. It means you will be able at least to install really large games and even to try them..
We fixed a lot of bugs related to filesystems and Cache controller :D.
Maybe you will be in the mood to try new version...
@Bike Vids go ride a tricycle
I actually used ReactOS but whenever I took out a USB Drive it crashed.
I like these little skits. They’re fun.
Epiozyto same!
*C L I C K D I R E C T L Y O N T H E B O D Y*
Sweet dreams are made of this.
who am i to c l i c k d i r e c t l y o n t h e b o d y
Needs more cowbell
all our times have come
C L E K D E R I C T L A Y U N D O B A D O Y
Hey smokers, Druaga1 here and today we’re installing windows 10 on a 386
Don't give him any ideas...
Someone already tried windows 10 on a og pentium 2
I did Windows 95 on a 386 with 12 MB of RAM and it was cancer, even with the copro. windows 3.1 isnt even much better
Now you're talkin....😈😈😈😈
Benjamin Brady hey smokers Druaga1 here and today we are gonna install Windows 1.0 on a Core i7 8700K
hey smokers druaga1 here and today we will install an os on a somewhat interesting storage medium
this NEVER gets old
He's got to install DOS on a CD lmao
@@markm0000 people have probably already done that
I wonder what next? A ZIP disk? A floppy disk? A USB?
The main reason why it is so slow when you set it up in Windows 98 mode in VMWare, is because VMWare makes the machine think that you are using an IDE adapter, therefore throttling your speeds. When you added it to the Windows 10 machine, it saw SATA and took advantage of that. It could also have something to do with VMWare showing a different chipset between the two machines, but I think it's mainly due to the SATA vs IDE modes.
I think VMWare is capping out at what ever PIO mode Windows 98 is running at.
hey smokers, never gets old xD
420 blaze it
I'm so fucking high this is always perfect
I think it would run faster if you'd enable DMA transfer under 98, otherwise it runs at slower Programmed I/O speeds. But you need chipset drivers installed for that.
This, also VMware could be limiting read speeds under a Win98 guest OS for compatibility.
You aren't fooling anyone with that profile picture ;) everyone knows ants don't teleport!
Back on the old OS's, notably DOS based, devices had to be probed directly off the bus by the driver. This is in contrast to the new hardware model that NT (XP) brought about. In this time, drivers have to do tests to make sure the end device is working. That involves lots of purposeful waits for responses. They add up, and it's in constant time. Additionally, before the 9x kernels were fully booted, they ran in the config.sys mode of driver loading which was a single-driver-at-a-time mastering by virtue of the limitations for compatibility. It's why 9x drivers generally don't work with NT.
I am loving these cold opens you are doing. Of course, the content that follows is enjoyable as well!
I wish we could hang out and mess with old computers all day.
how come is that
*Real Jeffy Paul*
Because potatoes have life and the gentle ostrich AI demands it.
We all do hh
Well, you need to try installing VMware Tools in Windows 98 because it may have IDE controller drivers, so disk speed should be increased. On my Pentium machine I left the DOS driver for CD-ROM and was shocked to see that videos from Windows 95 CD are playing poorly. But after digging through Internet I found Intel drivers for my chipset and video playback was fine after that!
1.8 inch drives? i thing toshiba made some back in the olden days.
If you're still running a 2600k, Druaga1, little fun fact: Virtualization has almost no effect on overclock stability until you get up to 5ghz (if your chip can even hit that, not many can) and actually helps the CPU out in VirtualBox in my experience when enabled.
Try using qemu or disabling virtualization. I remember mi windows95 vm booting in like 5 seconds on a pentium4 with just a sata drive. You barelly could see the windows 95 logo. its not windows, its the drivers or the emulation. I asure you windows doesnt have a defined limit to the boot speed. Its all about hardware and drivers loading in any case.
ian i love your skits so much please god keep making these
*how do you know his name*
Is that a Hatsune Miku statue in the background at 1:14
ChrisTheFox I think it is. It most definitely is.
I see a Luka to the left of it :P
I spent way too long and found the figure. It's the Racing Miku 2014 EV Mirai version in case you're still curious lol
@@daKaosjr what a legend!
It is and I like it!
"Salutations" - Channelling Penny?
From my understanding, DOS based OSes try to use 100% CPU at all times, so they need to be throttled in modern VMs to reduce CPU usage.
I think it' s the Windows networking initializing. Go into the network settings and remove everything and try it.
Fastest booting computer I've seen was a h81 40 euro asrock board that got to win8 desktop in 3 seconds. The thing posted in under half a second.
Hal yeah the asrock boards have a pretty fast power on self test routine. This sometimes makes it really hard to access the bios or boot menu on my two asrock machines
I found if you hold down the BIOS key before power on it will work better.
BOOT ERROR 9C
Dude my Win10 boots in ~5 seconds off a ~500Mbps SSD, just a budget (ADATA) model on SATA3. It installed in less than 5 minutes from a USB3 stick. I was really surprised, I thought it'd at least take 15 minutes. I don't know what I did differently from anyone else.
hey druaga1 I have been a fan since you had 1,000 subs and I still watch your channel
Dark Druaga!
Darkaga
one of the best intro's on UA-cam, even on the entire internet!
Watching this instead of ea's press conference,better use of my time
Lucas Burrell yup. Watching druaga1 vids is the best use of time ever. I _should_ be cleaning my room or trying to get a shiny Pokémon, but, nah, those can wait.
Fuck yeah
I think you should check virtual machine config for win98 ...
Oooh I made a ram disk of Windows 7 once.. Surprisingly I didn't get very fast RW's on it.. I felt like the virtual box's SATA and SAS controllers weren't letting it get up to the full speed it could have :/
It did feel snappy though.
Read throughput was never the limiting factor for a fast boot of Win98, access times were however. You should check if TCP/IP is set to DHCP on some interfaces, Windows 98 will wait for like 5 secs for an IP or something as crazy. Also enable DMA and install all the drivers but in the end it won't boot that fast anyway after you've set up your software and games. And Windows 10 isn't that fast either when it doesn't cheat by relabelling a hibernate/resume cycle "fast shutdown" which makes these 4 secs boots possible. It's not really a boot.
I love the skit at the beginning with the editing and stuff.
You should do more!
How about a Windows Xp build on an ssd. GT 420?
Technically he did that in the recording DV on Windows XP videi
Brendan Siwik I was looking for more of an over kill xp system. Plus druaga gave that machine to his dad.
I like this, the catharsis of seeing you _not_ wanting to do something and the plight of the algorithm.
What happened? Latest video right now!
It is no faster as VMWare is emulating an IDE hard disk so it will only be as fast as the IDE bus supports. Look in the machines settings at your disk controller.
Chronic's Tech Stuff tl;dr: a ram disk is still faster than an HDD over that interface. Long version:Even if that is the case, a ram disk should always be faster than a hard disk not because of the interface speed which in both cases is limited to 166 MB/s at best. It is faster because of access latency. A harddrive head needs some time to find the sector-track-combination it is looking for. A ram disk is pointed to a destination and at the same times gives the information from that destination to the processor. So that is why it is faster and the interface should not be the limit here. Although of course a SCSI interface would be better for this case because of its DMA capabilities and higher speed limits. But of course the difference between a SCSI HDD and a ram disk emulating a SCSI interface would still remain roughly the same. And I think what Druaga1 is looking for here is not the fastest speed but especially that difference in speed between HDD and ram disk.
i think it may be limited by the cpu, unless u added a fix so u can enable VT-x it will not be using anywhere near the full cpu speed
30 seconds isn't so bad for 98. I remember it started for me, on a fresh install on a Pentium MMX 166, 32mb ram in about 5-10 minutes.
I vaguely recall that there is indeed an IDE transfer rate cap in vmware. It is for Windows 2000 though, since its installer bugs out if the HDD is too fast. I have no idea why Windows 98 is throttled as well.
What would you think of covering one of those old IBM operating systems, like OS/2 or something
Are you k, Druaga1? that intro seems like a call for help, we all hope you will pull through and will be putting ssds in everything and everything in a ramdsisks in no time. Vote for sanity
it was a skit
It is something like you have a little universe into your ram.
Druaga please do another video about the windows 95 ssd machine
Druaga I have a problem my IMac g3 is running Windows me and now I threw up all over my computer.....
Pug01 Retro and more commentary Yo maybe it's a hackintosh? (I know it's a joke comment, lol.)
kaity kline at this time I’m commenting it’s still installing because the Mac fell asleep XD
ITS BEEN 3 WEEKS MAKE A NEW VIDEO DUDEEEEE
lmao what happened to the access time meme?
*Why did I just look up the heart attack video out of pure curiosity, I feel sick*
I have a pair of Evo 850 m.2 drives in RAID0, running Gentoo. Boot times are less than 10 seconds to login prompt. Another few seconds for Firefox. Steam is the only other GUI program that I have auto start, which takes a solid 10 or 15 seconds...sometimes more, if it gets stuck trying to check for updates. Steam has always felt kinda sluggish to me on any machine I've used it on, though.
statikreg can you tell me if installing gentoo is really as hard to install as the old meme suggests? I want change from Ubuntu because it is still too bloated for me even though it already uses less space than windows. Is gentoo really that bad? And if it is, what do you want me to select? Any Debian based distro or fedora? I have only had experience with Ubuntu and Debian 8 so far
DJ Slinus I have used Debian, Suse, and arch. For most use cases I see no reason to run anything besides a Debian based distro
A fresh installation of Ubuntu and a new Druaga1 video? The perfect combination.
*Would you like a free upgrade to Windows 10?*
HAPPY 20 YEAR ANNIVERSARY, WINDOWS 98!!!
u also need to consider response time, operations per seconds, etc
There is a config parameter on the vmx that makes the virtual mqchine ram be pages on the disk, try disabling it.
On my PC, after the Gigabyte logo disappears, I am at the logon screen in 5 seconds. I use a 32gb Adata SSD for booting, and 2 1TB Western Digital Blue drives in RAID1 (which means they are copies of each other) for storage.
I know this is an old video (been binge watching Druaga1 videos with tears of laughter running down my face). Probably use a slightly newer OS (windows 7?) that can use virtio drivers.
Installing an OS on random media ideas : sim card, magnetic tape, accessing from an ftp, daisy-chained floppy drives, laserdisk, using a smartphone as a boot device, zipdisk, ... okay I'm out of ideas.
maybe because the bottleneck is the IDE adaptor. vmware comes with ide scsi and sata. i think if its older OS then it auto sets it to ide
What is this Windows logo wallpaper?
I've only watched the intro so far, i already love it and have liked already
That intro skit was brilliant!
Imagine how fast it'd be if you weren't limited by the fake ATA bus
Is this not technically a commercial use of the VMware Player?
You can’t really expect it to perform virtualized and without drivers to be honest. You can probably get it down to less than half of the time.
our lord has uploaded! REJOICE!
its windows 98 that keeps hanging on the boot searching or waiting for something. so its not the hardware, its 98 itself that keeps it from loading faster. I have windows 10 on a ssd and it boots within 5 seconds.
on real hardware at least.
JKP73 a clean install of 98 that does have all the important and correct drivers for your devices installed will fly even on a fast mechanical HDD. At least on my machine it does not even show the boot screen, just a short time of Black screen and then the login prompt. But maybe your hardware is faulty or has drivers that prevent windows from loading faster.
I think you're right. I just can't get it to boot very fast. I've checked the device manager and there are some items I can't find the drivers for, probably that is the cause of my slow boot times with win 98. Anyway, nice to see Druaga1 getting into these things. I find it fascinating.
On a side note: I keep an eye out for ReactOS as well, seems very very fast as well, although it is still alpha.
That intro was brilliant
What's the name of the fps in the skit, I can't remember the name?
Linus will probably install Windows 10 on RAM disk
Enderman already did that.
@@MrMasterKeyboard My comment is literally 3 years ago he hasn’t done it by then. But yes Enderman has grown to be more intriguing than Linus.
@@stanleychen3298 I thought he did I might be thinking of a different Windows. Enderman is really interesting! Linus was but now is meh.
@@stanleychen3298Pretty much anything is more intriguing than Linus
That intro was absolute gold
How do you insert yourself alongside yourself?
E D I T I N G and you are late
i can boot into Linux in literally less than a second, most of the boot time is the bios
druaga if youre reading this, windows is boring, trick out a linux to boot super fast instead.
You have an M.2 SSD? They work far faster than standard SSDs. You are looking at up to 3400MB/s read compared to 540MB/s. Windows 10 installed to one of those beasts could possibly boot in a few seconds.
I'm gonna try windows 10 in a ram disk like this i think.
Intro was awesome, holy shit!
Kek, thanks for the product key Druaga
I want dark druaga in every video.
also what is that game
edit: wow I'm good at read more
8:10 my computer with ssd
8:26 my computer with old hard drive
22:30 I don't believe you can get it to start in 4-5 seconds.
I mean you can, just suspend it and wake it up, it should only take 3 seconds on a decent system.
But of course we are talking about a cold boot.
Even with windows 10 fast startup (which essentially just hibernates and resumes instead of doing a normal shutdown/restart) I don't think you can get 4-5 seconds.
Maybe, but even then I haven't seen it that quick.
In any case, they are definitely not talking about cold boot times.
They probably are just waking up from sleep or hibernation and don't realize it.
What was that body game in the intro bit?
SGNRyan
Oh wow I used to watch your videos!
The game is called 3D Body adventure
2020: installing and running windows 1.0 on the biggest potatoe ever existed
Druaga1, you need to set the Virtual Disk controller to SATA on the Virtual Machine. By default VMWare sets the Virtual Hard Disks to SCSI mode.
You should take a look at the rebuilt hirens boots cd Druaga, they revamped it quite a bit
Yeah you're probably right. It would be useful since the older 15.2 version doesnt work well with newer computers like have two versions kept aside, the 15.2 for older computers and the rebuilt HBCD for newer PC's.
link, dude?
Fives of Arch www.hirensbootcd.org
What did you use to make the ram drive? I know there are some programs out there but what did you use?
Where can I get that wallpaper your using
Consider the emulator mini Vmac, which allows you to emulate the early macOS using the entire host computer processor.
Tombstoner he knows about it, check out the windows OS ception video to see him use that program
where tf is the next mac video
Hey Druaga1,
i have a suggestion, try putting an exisiting machine into a VM
Just to make sure: Did you enable DMA for the hard disk in the device manager?
it still amuses me how inefficient the old windows installers were. imagine having to do nothing but install windows all day.
You should have put the VMWare additions CD on the VM
install times would have been far quicker if you had used a virtual disk drive to mount the iso.
Is their a chance it is an issue with the way the vm is configured?
Yo Druaga, what is that game you were playing in the beginning?
What version of VMware Player is this that you are able to have the resolution stretch out to the full size of the window?
Did you forgot to install VMware Tools?
Also, does disabling Large Disk Support changes anything about speed?
Druaga?
An interesting experiment could be to use NVME emulation in VMware and a guest OS that supports it (e.g. Windows 10)
Then what would happen if you turn it off
It... deletes system 32! (Lol...) (I know 98 doesn't have 32, just memeing.)
kaity kline it has a system32 folder. Even 3.1 has one if you have a 32 bit emulation software installed(don't remember how it's called right now)
Gone.
Could be a lack of instruction level parallellism perhaps?
Like, if it's designed to be compiled for processors that can't do more then a single instruction at any one time, back when the main bottlenecks where different ones like how long the core had to wait on data from cache between instructions etc.
With instruction level parallellism I mean something like this:
If you got four numbers that you want to add together.
A + B + C + D.
You *can* do "A + B and store the result in B" then "B + C and store the result in C" and "C + D and store the result in D".
And since each of those steps have a dependency on the result from the previous step they *have* to happen one at a time.
Alternativly you could run them a bit out of order.
Because A + B + C + D could *also* be done as "A + B and store the result in B" and "C + D and store the result in D" *at the same time* and then "B + D and store the result in D".
Doing it the later way would shave of a whole clock cycle as the first two instructions could both happen in the first clock cycle and the third instruction in the second clock cycle instead of using three clockcyles for it all.
Of course, if you have a processor that *can't* do more then a single instruction pr clock cycle then non of that matters as both codes will run the same speed on both.
In both cases your CPU will show 100% utilization as there is *something* running on it 100% of the clock cycles, even if a processor with the ability to do multiple instructions each clock cycle would only do a single one each clock cycle on one of those two codes.
A modern Coffee Lake (Skylake arcitecture) CPU can do 4 instructions each clock cycle, and those can be broken down inside the CPU to smaller instructions in the decoder for a total of 8 micro-instructions.
Ryzen on the other hand can do up to 5 or even (in corner cases for a single clock cycle) 6 instructions pr clock cycle but only does 6 micro-instructions on the inside.
A (modern) x86 thread with slightly above average optimizations feeds the core 1-3 instructions pr clock cycle (well, with "1" I actually mean from slightly less then 1 to 3, as there will be clock cycles where the core is waiting on data doing nothing), two x86 threads will therefore feed a core 1-6 instructions pr clock cycle.
Still, both of those numbers are way, way higher then a single core doing a single instruction pr clock cycle that was normal way back in the day.
Did you put the cd image on the ram disk aswell? If not, big oversight.
What is that game at the start of the video?