If someone had 233 mmx, that was called king of having fastest computer. I had one in 1997. But in 1995 had only 486 dx 13 mhz+turbo=33 final speed. Was a vintage time and miss it. Miss you Prince of Persia for DOS. I don't believe i passed 25 years.😭
It was 1998, i had my first PC. There were 200MMX from polish manufacture named Optimus. At first it was 200MMX with 2MB GPU, 32MB Ram and 2GB HDD. 2 Years later bought VooDoo2 3dfx and i was King of PC, but my friend year after bought AMD Athlon 1000, and i stop to be King
Impressed with mmx differance. Its Huge! I had 200mmx on 12.1997. Its been overclocked to 225mhz. It was a beast. Add Voodoo 1 - ultimate gamer machine. Mmx power! But my computer cost without Voodoo 1 was 1000 euro + in 97year. In Poland that was quite huge amount of money, so it was long payment.
Only 1000 euro? I guess it was that cheap because it was 1997. My parents bought a Pentium overdrive 200mhz machine in 1996 and it was around 3000$ usd. I'm unsure of the ram it had, but I think it was a 1gb hard drive.
Tumas. Of clurse, 3000 was insane. Dont remamber now, but i know it was about 1100 euro. And in that time was considering Playstation, almost bought it. Fact was for 1200 e could buy 5 new Playstations. That PC wasnt economical. Also considering that Poland from 97 to 2021 changed minimal paymand about 4x times +. Nowdays every average Joe can buy PS5 without thinking, cause it costs one month of average bad, almost minimal monthly payment work in Poland. Anyway Mmx was awesome, but it Aged too fast for me. Technology in 98 was speeding up each month, and each month requirements for games ware higher and higher. For example, Unreal.
@@pauls4522 That's because your parents were incompetent dumbasses who bought a prebuilt that was marked up to high hell. A custom built Pentium 120 PC, for example, could be had for about 1.2k USD if not less. And there were no 200 MHz Pentium overdrives, WTF you smoking?
Great video ... have the exact same case as yours. Came with a 200mhz mmx and spent the day today setting it up, debugging issues (crashes) and playing some games.
From a performance standpoint, the mmx’s biggest advantage is that it has twice the L1 cache. There were very few games or applications that use the mmx instructions, so the mmx technology rarely made any difference. The general rule of thumb back in the day was that MMX cpus would perform about 1 step up in clock speed vs the original Pentium. So a 166mhz mmx would perform closely to a 200mhz Pentium. I had a few magazines with benchmarks to support this claim at the time.
That's not entirely true. MMX was used in nearly all MP3 and video players. There were also DOS games with 16bpp graphics using it for faster drawing - like Extreme Assault as the best example. However, I agree that games mostly benefited from the doubled L1 cache.
The MMX technology is just a marketing thing, there's (almost) no realworld apps or games that can take advantage of it. P55C has twice the L1 cache over the regular Pentium and that makes the only difference in performance between them. Clock per click, the Pentium Pro would easily outperform these two, as well as the Klamath Pentium II. It's all about the cache.
Yeah, I remember it was EVERYWHERE for about a year, given the honor of being added to the pentium logo, but then seemed to just vanish. My Compaq P200 MMX came with the awful Rebel Moon Rising game to show off the MMX technology, which didn't really help convince people that MMX was something special.
I know it doesn't matter any more, but FRAPS that you used here actually has a benchmark "tool" you can activate in game. Well...in theory anyway as I never tried to do so for these specific games and we all know how things can change depending on the game. Good video. I never had these two specific CPUs back then so I don't have experience with them (I had slower and faster, but not these two CPUs). MMX was indeed mostly about using some extra code in games that supported them, which gave you better performance and better looks in games that were coded for MMX (originally or through patches). So yes especially for older non MMX games, the difference would be minimal, but still there for Windows only games..
Yeah, from about the original IBM PC to the 486dx2 cpus ran with 5v. being able to run the cpus at lower voltages is one of the advancements over time that allowed us to run CPUs faster without them getting way too hot, also the smaller transistors got, the less voltage they could handle before they fry themselves.
It's not really that Windows benefits more than DOS. If you wanted to use specific acceleration features in DOS you had to code for each specific piece of hardware you wanted to support. MMX became a thing right as DirectX/OpenGL became a thing, making it far easier to take advantage of various hardware acceleration schemes by just coding to an API that would handle hardware acceleration on the back end. Games that were already coded for DOS just never got acceleration or developers maybe released a patch later for any hardware they managed to support.
MMX is a set of instructions ... only a few software at that time had them implemented. also cache is used by the cpu, software is not aware of it. (but you could disable it if you want)
As I understand, it used vectorized hardware implementation of the processor, something that was essentially what the Cray computer had going back in the day. But it was harder to adapt general purpose code to it to use a vector mode.
Between mmx MultiMedia Extensions and SSE streaming simd extensions, fps and performance really wasn't too insane. Mmx was more about alleviating the bottleneck that multimedia suffered from. Turn redundant instructions that is all that video really was .. Into a more.. RISC (reduced instruction set) type affair. Reduce the instructions that need to be processed, and you don't thrash the processor as much. Further offload onto a graphics acceleration platform and everything should work perfectly. But not. Games had to be written specifically to utilize those features, really. The cpu will utilize it in a generic way, sure. But to truly reduce the processing needed, a good codec would've sufficed. Better motion compensation, lower bitrate, but... I mean.. at this time the fill rate was abysmal. The cpu was basically the only boss at the job. It had to coordinate the whole thing. If you added more RAM, there were times when you noticed the system actually lose performance because the CPU had to manage that much more. Reads and writes to disk ate up cpu time. Hell, it wasn't that long before... That IRQ's didn't exist. Things were first come, first serve. You couldn't skip (Interupt ReQuest) the line to process the sound or screen or whatever before something else.
I've played quite a bit of RCT on my Pentium 166MMX machine. Fairly choppy, but I still have fun playing it on there tbh. 800x600 is the highest resolution you can go before it becomes a bit too intolerable, though. Would be curious to know how much difference there is between non-MMX and MMX of the same speed for Atlantis the Lost Tales.
Yeah I tried to experience roller coaster tycoon on a pentium again a few years back and it was. Choppy experience. This was 133mhz pentium. Oddly I remember the pentium over drive my parents used ran it fine.
I'm looking for a tiny DOS CPU benchmark (or demo) called Drift. The assessment was not given as points, but descriptively. The only description I know is: "nice machine, is a killer" (and for the processor it was something like 486SX 66MHz, so I suspect that the demo comes from the times of 386 or maybe even 286). The image presented during performance testing... I think it was also relatively interesting.
2:46 those programs can use MMX instructions unlike those U used before (DOS benchmarks); for DOS use MDK benchmark (perf_dos.exe with probably only dos4gw.exe)
It can run Windows XP because it has the CMPXCHG8B instruction but cannot Vista and the following for other necessary instructions and platform technologies.
If someone had 233 mmx, that was called king of having fastest computer. I had one in 1997. But in 1995 had only 486 dx 13 mhz+turbo=33 final speed. Was a vintage time and miss it. Miss you Prince of Persia for DOS. I don't believe i passed 25 years.😭
There is nothing called turbo. That button just makes the CPU half speed to be compatible with older software. Your CPU was 33 mhz, not more or less.
I got one now >:)
It was 1998, i had my first PC. There were 200MMX from polish manufacture named Optimus. At first it was 200MMX with 2MB GPU, 32MB Ram and 2GB HDD. 2 Years later bought VooDoo2 3dfx and i was King of PC, but my friend year after bought AMD Athlon 1000, and i stop to be King
Pentium 200 MMX + 64MB ram + 3dfX DIAMOND Monster 3D 😍
Impressed with mmx differance. Its Huge!
I had 200mmx on 12.1997. Its been overclocked to 225mhz. It was a beast. Add Voodoo 1 - ultimate gamer machine.
Mmx power!
But my computer cost without Voodoo 1 was 1000 euro + in 97year. In Poland that was quite huge amount of money, so it was long payment.
I had 166 mmx + matrox 4mb + Voodoo 2, great setup for that time (98) ....
Only 1000 euro?
I guess it was that cheap because it was 1997. My parents bought a Pentium overdrive 200mhz machine in 1996 and it was around 3000$ usd.
I'm unsure of the ram it had, but I think it was a 1gb hard drive.
Tumas. Of clurse, 3000 was insane.
Dont remamber now, but i know it was about 1100 euro. And in that time was considering Playstation, almost bought it. Fact was for 1200 e could buy 5 new Playstations. That PC wasnt economical.
Also considering that Poland from 97 to 2021 changed minimal paymand about 4x times +.
Nowdays every average Joe can buy PS5 without thinking, cause it costs one month of average bad, almost minimal monthly payment work in Poland.
Anyway Mmx was awesome, but it Aged too fast for me. Technology in 98 was speeding up each month, and each month requirements for games ware higher and higher. For example, Unreal.
@@pauls4522 That's because your parents were incompetent dumbasses who bought a prebuilt that was marked up to high hell. A custom built Pentium 120 PC, for example, could be had for about 1.2k USD if not less. And there were no 200 MHz Pentium overdrives, WTF you smoking?
It's funny how we already had 100+ hertz CRT monitors, but pretty much nothing could actually run at that FPS at the time.
Great video ... have the exact same case as yours. Came with a 200mhz mmx and spent the day today setting it up, debugging issues (crashes) and playing some games.
From a performance standpoint, the mmx’s biggest advantage is that it has twice the L1 cache. There were very few games or applications that use the mmx instructions, so the mmx technology rarely made any difference. The general rule of thumb back in the day was that MMX cpus would perform about 1 step up in clock speed vs the original Pentium. So a 166mhz mmx would perform closely to a 200mhz Pentium. I had a few magazines with benchmarks to support this claim at the time.
That's not entirely true. MMX was used in nearly all MP3 and video players. There were also DOS games with 16bpp graphics using it for faster drawing - like Extreme Assault as the best example.
However, I agree that games mostly benefited from the doubled L1 cache.
The MMX technology is just a marketing thing, there's (almost) no realworld apps or games that can take advantage of it. P55C has twice the L1 cache over the regular Pentium and that makes the only difference in performance between them. Clock per click, the Pentium Pro would easily outperform these two, as well as the Klamath Pentium II. It's all about the cache.
Yeah, I remember it was EVERYWHERE for about a year, given the honor of being added to the pentium logo, but then seemed to just vanish. My Compaq P200 MMX came with the awful Rebel Moon Rising game to show off the MMX technology, which didn't really help convince people that MMX was something special.
I know it doesn't matter any more, but FRAPS that you used here actually has a benchmark "tool" you can activate in game. Well...in theory anyway as I never tried to do so for these specific games and we all know how things can change depending on the game.
Good video. I never had these two specific CPUs back then so I don't have experience with them (I had slower and faster, but not these two CPUs). MMX was indeed mostly about using some extra code in games that supported them, which gave you better performance and better looks in games that were coded for MMX (originally or through patches). So yes especially for older non MMX games, the difference would be minimal, but still there for Windows only games..
great video. straight to the point and no BS.
Im really impress by how fluent the games were on only 200Mhz PC.
But always keeping on mind how fluent they were on 33Mhz PS1.
The PS1 had a dedicated GPU and even geometry co-processor, but it also ran games at potato graphics quality, usually 320x240.
thumbs up for the plini background! :)
Heck yeah, he makes great music
Wow. 3.4V for a cpu??? My Ryzen 5 4500U laptop only uses around 0.68V when Idle!
Yeah, from about the original IBM PC to the 486dx2 cpus ran with 5v. being able to run the cpus at lower voltages is one of the advancements over time that allowed us to run CPUs faster without them getting way too hot, also the smaller transistors got, the less voltage they could handle before they fry themselves.
It's not really that Windows benefits more than DOS. If you wanted to use specific acceleration features in DOS you had to code for each specific piece of hardware you wanted to support. MMX became a thing right as DirectX/OpenGL became a thing, making it far easier to take advantage of various hardware acceleration schemes by just coding to an API that would handle hardware acceleration on the back end.
Games that were already coded for DOS just never got acceleration or developers maybe released a patch later for any hardware they managed to support.
the only reason the mmx is faster in games is because of double cache amounts on the cpu , mmx cant do fp instructions .
Yeah, I know. The test here was if the cache made a difference since that was the only real difference with the CPUs.
Oh wow, didn’t know the MMX bit helped performance lol. I had a pentium 150mhz MMX as my first pc
any applications (including but to a lesser extent, games) that dont have a MMX specific code path youll likely not see much if any difference.
MMX is a set of instructions ... only a few software at that time had them implemented. also cache is used by the cpu, software is not aware of it. (but you could disable it if you want)
As I understand, it used vectorized hardware implementation of the processor, something that was essentially what the Cray computer had going back in the day. But it was harder to adapt general purpose code to it to use a vector mode.
The best of MMX is the high overclock over regular pentium.
nice video :) I never knew that MMX instructions really meters
Most gaming software probably did not make use of them, it was the double cache (32K) size on MMX Pentiums that upped the performance
Between mmx MultiMedia Extensions and SSE streaming simd extensions, fps and performance really wasn't too insane.
Mmx was more about alleviating the bottleneck that multimedia suffered from. Turn redundant instructions that is all that video really was .. Into a more.. RISC (reduced instruction set) type affair. Reduce the instructions that need to be processed, and you don't thrash the processor as much.
Further offload onto a graphics acceleration platform and everything should work perfectly. But not.
Games had to be written specifically to utilize those features, really. The cpu will utilize it in a generic way, sure.
But to truly reduce the processing needed, a good codec would've sufficed. Better motion compensation, lower bitrate, but... I mean.. at this time the fill rate was abysmal. The cpu was basically the only boss at the job.
It had to coordinate the whole thing. If you added more RAM, there were times when you noticed the system actually lose performance because the CPU had to manage that much more.
Reads and writes to disk ate up cpu time.
Hell, it wasn't that long before... That IRQ's didn't exist. Things were first come, first serve. You couldn't skip (Interupt ReQuest) the line to process the sound or screen or whatever before something else.
Nice stuff man! I played the shit outta moto racer all the time as a kid.
same here, it was a go to game on my old dell laptop
I've played quite a bit of RCT on my Pentium 166MMX machine. Fairly choppy, but I still have fun playing it on there tbh. 800x600 is the highest resolution you can go before it becomes a bit too intolerable, though. Would be curious to know how much difference there is between non-MMX and MMX of the same speed for Atlantis the Lost Tales.
Yeah I tried to experience roller coaster tycoon on a pentium again a few years back and it was. Choppy experience. This was 133mhz pentium. Oddly I remember the pentium over drive my parents used ran it fine.
I'm looking for a tiny DOS CPU benchmark (or demo) called Drift. The assessment was not given as points, but descriptively. The only description I know is: "nice machine, is a killer" (and for the processor it was something like 486SX 66MHz, so I suspect that the demo comes from the times of 386 or maybe even 286). The image presented during performance testing... I think it was also relatively interesting.
i wouldnt call it a stable fps (descent) but a higher cieling (and floor in this case)
Was the 3d games using software renderer? If thats the case it looked/ran amazing.
Naw, they were run with a voodoo 1
What program did you use to get the FPS on screen? Thx
fraps
@@Tr3vor42532 Thx i will try that
Is that music from Hotwheels micro racers?
Yep, the office track.
Plini, nice
2:46 those programs can use MMX instructions unlike those U used before (DOS benchmarks); for DOS use MDK benchmark (perf_dos.exe with probably only dos4gw.exe)
But can it run Windows 10?
WellBeSerious12 no
But can run windows 7 and older
@@concreetbloc Maybe win xp but not vista and 7
It can run Windows XP because it has the CMPXCHG8B instruction but cannot Vista and the following for other necessary instructions and platform technologies.
Its awesome
You are good
DOS Quake!
DOS is king
If you do the video in 90's, you were be rich in today.
Bruh no UA-cam in 90’s UA-cam came around 2005 and became popular in around 2010
@@oldzkr omg you are very fucking smart saved my life!
@@synthy.0 😑I’ll take that as a compliment btw where do you live you don’t look like an American
@@oldzkr yup i am turkish xd sorry for my grammar
@@oldzkr and i was joking
maybe fraps could get you framerate (maybe try dgvoodoo* to pipe to dx9/10/11)
*dont let the name fool you.