Can Windows 3.1 Run on a New Modern PC 2024?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 лют 2023
- Here is my PC specs:
🖥️Monitor: LG UltraGear 27GL850-B amzn.to/3YKp4hu
🖥️CPU: Intel Core i9-9900K amzn.to/43ZHdu3
🖥️Motherboard: MSI Z390 Gaming EDGE AC amzn.to/41MKjjD
🖥️GPU: NVIDIA GTX 1080 8Gb amzn.to/3LnUiWA
🖥️RAM: 32 GB(2x16GB) Kingston HyperX 3466Mhz amzn.to/3N7ditD
🖥️Storage: Samsung EVO 970 Plus 1Tb amzn.to/3H7gRMB
📀Download XMGR drive.google.com/file/d/1OUGk...
📀Download FreeDOS (or just use RUFUS) www.freedos.org/
📀Download RUFUSrufus.ie/ru/
#windows365 #Windows #modernpc #z390 #i9-9900k #msiz390gamingedgeac #newpc #Microsoft #ramtecheng #ramtech #cyberadvisor #Windows
Can Windows 3.1 Run on a New Modern PC 2023? Today in this video I’ll try to find out is it possible to install Windows 3.1 on a modern hardware in 2023. Enjoy
🎵Background music from «CO.AG Music» / @co.agmusic
🎥Main channel / ramtecheng
🎥Game channel / @ramtechgaming
🎥Can MS-DOS Run on a New Modern PC 2023? • Can MS-DOS Run on a Ne...
🎥Can Windows 98 Run on a New Modern PC 2023? • Can Windows 98 Run on ...
🎥Can Windows XP Run on a New Modern PC 2023? • Can Windows XP Run on ...
🎥Can Windows 11 run on Pentium II Old PC 1998? • Can Windows 11 run on ...
🎥What's The Oldest PC That Can Run Windows 11? • What's The Oldest CPU ...
🎥Removing RAM While Computer is Running! • I Removed RAM While Co... - Наука та технологія
Did you ever install Windows 3.1?
You already pinning your own comment?
Stop
Yepp
nope
Abort, Retry, Fail?
Nope.
The artifacts aren't a driver issue. It's actually modern graphic cards that don't implement well the base VGA standard and have bugs in their implementation.
Graphic cards are backward compatible to standard VGA to allow booting, showing POST messages and such, but they expect to switch to proprietary run mode once OS and proprietary drivers are loaded. So no efforts is made to properly support base VGA and once you start doing things a little more intensive, like Windows 3.1 drawing windows, things starts to get glitchy and bugs show up.
You need a better VGA card :P
It almost seems that, since the artifacts seem to be a consistent width, that reading back or masking in pixels isn't working correctly, so various drawing operations are just clobbering a row of a few pixels each time. But yeah if that is the case, it'd be a similar cause. An incomplete or broken implementation of the old standard.
Maybe a Geforce GT 730 card works. That card has a VGA output at the back and HDMI, DVI ports. Modern graphic cards have HDMI and display port only.
@@isharadhanushan2002
My comment had nothing to do with the D-SUB connector.
I highly doubt any card made in the last 20 years will be glitch free in standard VGA operation.
another W for AMD
It kind of is and isn't. VGA standard is old and doesn't cover even hardware bitblitter which was added over time (along with many other additions like new screenmodes etc). Those things were covered only through windows drivers (hence the name of graphic cards with those improved vga chips was often "windows accelerators"). So obviously if there WERE win3.1 drivers for modern GPUs such glitches would not appear. Conversely if modern GPUs did cover proper VGA standard those wouldn't be a problem as well with generic vga default driver.
"so, is this the end? of course not."
The reason for the graphical artifacts is because Windows 3.1 (more specifically, the entire Windows 3.x family) used the default VGA driver when it couldn't detect and / or utilize the exact driver for the video card. What does that have to do with anything, you might ask? Well - VGA was not only a specific type of graphics output - it was also an industry standard graphics output. Very similar to CGA and EGA that came before it. The majority of modern graphics cards don't natively support the old analog VGA output. Instead, the cards emulate it, for backwards compatibility. The artifacts you're seeing here are demonstrating that the specific graphics card you are using doesn't do a very good job of emulating the old VGA output.
Man, people used to get excited in anticipation of a new Windows release and line up outside the stores.
Facts
Now it's like "Go to hell, Microsoft! The one I have will suit me fine forever!"
Microsoft is a victim of their own success.
@@poseidon3032 it’s because they expect people to drop hardware for new hardware every 3 years now lol
@@poseidon3032 Like me with Win7. No updates pls, I like Win7 (and linux)
@Bob McBob I agree, I still use windows 7, I also like Linux.
I remember i had Win 3.1 on my pc in the early 90's, but i never used it.. Pretty cool to have used old stuff like this and seeing it again. 🙂 Brings back memories!
I honestly never had much use for Windows in those days. I had it, but didn't really liked it. I didn't even get on the internet. I just played DOS games. Doom, Hexen, Wolfenstein, Panzer General, X-Wing, Hardball 5. I only started using Windows with the release of Windows 95. Windows 1.0 - 3.11 For Workgroups, the desktop was unwieldy. The Program Manager. I'm like WTF is this! 95 desktop was what I was looking for. A proper desktop with program icons you can create, organize, and launch. Maybe I could have made the previous Windows work, but I didn't have programs for it nor bought any. I bought DOS games. Bare metal baby!
Back in Junior High I installed Windows 3.11 with about 10-12 1.44MB floppy disks. Video artifact were present until you installed the right video drivers. We installed it on top of MS-DOS 6.22. In High School (1997-2001) if the teachers had broken computers with windows 95/98 on them, I would install Mandrake Linux on them as it ran applications faster- especially DOS based apps. During this time, schools didn't have IT departments and very few computers had access to internet.
I don't know if installing drivers help- as Ati Rage II without drivers didn't have any glitches under Win3.11. After installing drivers it was possible to adjust colour depth and resolution. I tried it with Celeron333 with 32mb memory- it was seriously fast with that.
@@Tegelane5Ati rage II was probably better at actually conforming to base VGA standards than a modern graphics card
finally a video where its not just emulating the operating system in a virtual machine.
*This is Russian man, lol*
@@Unrealmassacre he makes english content because not everyone is russian
The accent makes this video gold 😂. 2 accents i absolutely love....russian and Australian
Russian is native. Australian? Looks like I was listening Australian accent while checking pronunciation :D
Object Packager actually was used to embed objects from one application into another. So, you could embed an excel chart within word. Back in the 1990s Excel and Word were separate applications and you could not copy paste from one to the other like you can today.
Yeah. Back before the Internet made people want to exchange files rather than just printed copies, Microsoft OLE and Apple's OpenDoc were the new hotness for being able to mix and match things from your installed programs in a single document. OLE still forms the basis for a lot of modern Windows tech including drag-and-drop.
I do be feeling like that command line emoji sometimes: alone, in the middle of darkness, smiling hysterically.
You do be.
Thank you for the deep plunge back in time. It transported me 30 years earlier, and made me so calm, incredible.
Would so like to play at minesweeper again, it was entertaining my off time when I was a student, at university, at a time almost nobody had a computer at home
I know it's not the same, but there are plenty of Minesweeper apps for phones
The original winmine.exe is floating around somewhere, I'm fairly sure
Try NT older (NewTechnology) than Windows XP, such as NT3.5, NT4.0 and 2000
It works fine Windows 2000 with all drivers are compatible on GTX 980 (unofficial driver), Z87 board and i5-4690k
I feel like, even though it's even older than Win98, 3.1 is probably also simpler since it's designed as a DOS shell instead of a full operating system.
Win98 is actually also a DOS shell. Windows didn't completely stop being a DOS shell until Windows XP.
yes to expect running EGA or CGA?
@@thunderlina3237 erm ackshually windows nt was released before
From what I understand DosBox provides a good environment for classic Windows. Installing 95 on DosBox should provide full compatibility for video, sound, and game controllers. I haven't tried it yet.
They are trying to have it run natively dosbox is using emulation
@@superJK92 Right. I get it. Just seeing if you could. Unfortunately, it's unusable, since there are no good drivers or patching for sound and game ports. Setting up DosBox is still a pain in the ass,, but you will have something usable in the end after all the effort. It's either period correct hardware or good modern emulation.
you can actually get sound on windows 3.1 because for some reason someone wrote a HD audio driver for windows 3.1 it also somewhat works on 98 which I was using it for
i love your contents
Nice video man, I love Windows 3.1, it brings back so many memories to me. Can you try to fix the drivers issue? I'm curious if its an easy task to accomplish!
It works, because the computer has a universal low-level application programming interface known as BIOS. MS-DOS and the 16-bit versions of Windows use BIOS for all I/O if they don't have device drivers. It is the BIOS that makes it possible that a software is compatible with so many different computers without any device drivers. Sadly UEFI does not make that possible - with UEFI the operating system has to support every piece of hardware separately to be even able to boot, and that's just not possible without continuous updates and maintaining the driver support. Small independent operating system developers don't have resources for that.
Hello Ramtech, the Invalid Opcode error that shows at 7:40 means an invalid CPU instruction was executed, although in this case this means that Windows 3.1 can't recognize the CPU instruction used by the newer processor by executing the game. For example, Windows 3.1 is probably not aware of SSE, SSE2, etc, so it deems those instructions as invalid.
I still have my original Packard Bell 486 with Windows 3.1. I believe there was a 3.1 and then a more stable 3.1.1 for Workgroups that fixed a lot of the issues. Spend so many hours daily tinkering with that machine from editing the config.sys and autoexec.bat to upgrading the ram and modem.
Great vídeo
Dude, about artefacts try VGA monochrome driver, VGA 320x240 social driver, EGA or CGA. If the motherboard have PCI slot you can even try with S3 video card, they have drivers for 3.1x and can display 32 bit colors.
Windows 3.1 was my introduction to Windows and trying to fix the things I messed up by mistake.
This brings back so many memories
There is a generic patched SVGA driver for Windows 3.1 on newer graphics cards that ^might^ fix the glitchy graphics . You can also try loading the SBEMU(If you have a modern soundcard such as Intel HD Audio) TSR before running Windows and then installing SB16 sound drivers to get sound working.
Thanks for files 😉🤗👍🏻
This channel is underated
I guess You can change the resolution in 'Windows Setup' >> 'Options' ... and maybe select different kind of support in the same driver.
nice video
There is an upgraded driver you can install that should work fine and modern hardware it's an SVGA lib, it's pretty trivial to get and install for Windows 3.1.
any hope in getting EGA and CGA to display correctly even if someone were to try to push a driver? games like quest for glory (ega mode) stay on the prompt and don't display the game, although i can hear the game's music playing. already have dosbox, but the hobby of getting it all to run on metal is just satisfying.
7:30 that when you used upscaling back in the day fsr or dlss they weren't available but that is an example
This is good to know. My copy of Leisure Suit Larry refuses to run. Doesn't work on Win XP, 7, 8, or 10. It works on 3.1 though.
I installed Windows 3.1 in 1993 on a 486DX66 with a whopping 8MB of RAM. Shortly afterwards I replaced Windows 3.1 by Windows for Workgroups 3.11.
In Jan 2011 I installed WfW 3.11 in a Virtualbox Virtual Machine and I still have a look at it say once a month.
I don't have to imagine how painful it was. I lived it! My first OS was DOS 2.1 which I ran on an IBM 8088 with 512k of RAM, no HDD, two 5.25" Floppy Drives and a 4 color (CGA) monitor.
CGA was NOT 4 COLORS! I know this is an overreaction, but SERIOUSLY!
In *TEXT MODE, NOT GRAPHICS* CGA could do 16 colors.
@DanTDMJace I believe you're referring to EGA. Enhanced Graphics Adapter. I know for certain I had a CGA graphics card and when I played games, or anything else it only produced 4 colors.
CGA = 4
EGA = 16
Although, I'm rediscovering my knowledge has been limited all this time. It seems to depend on the resolution at which one operated and from what I can tell, the full pallete of 16 colors was only available at 160x100 or 80x25. At 320x200, only 4 colors however.
The 32bit extention give internet access with a browser and makes 3.11 shown with ver /r
I think some settlers game have program which determines what GPU you have. Sometimes it crashed but I think..... It would help.
1:45 squadala,we're off!
Time Travel is REAL & FREE. If you don't believe it watch this video. Thank you for that. Windows 3.11 was the most stable OS at that time.
niceeee
7:46 invalid opcode stands for invalid assembly operation code. Possibly some sort of assembly instruction failed to execute to be parsed and understood by the CPU.
3:36 What are we surprised on? Windows kernel of course changed throughout the years. Most basic fundementals are still there though. Intel's assembly set was not modified that much, but extended. The only thing the coders had to be sure of to write good kernel drivers, and handle failures to prevent system shutdown, which was proper enough back in the time. The OS is so small compared to what we have now, It resides on the very basic fundementals we mostly build on top of nowadays. This is though a very short and smallified fact of the bigger picture.
Great video! Someone online in the vintage computer forum made modern drivers that work with modern sound cards! Goes by the name walters_world if I remember correctly.
The ToastyTech man Nate would be proud son!
windows NT 3.5 thN? Or you prefer MS-DOS based version?....
"Hey there! Just wanted to let you know that the invalid opcode you're getting (FFFF 2603 0286) when trying to run Aladdin on your modern hardware might be due to compatibility issues. Some older software like Aladdin were designed to work on specific processor speeds, and if the speed is too fast or too slow, they may not work properly or may encounter errors like this one. It's also possible that the software is not compatible with the version of Windows being used. Hope that helps!"
Solid Copy bro
@@mrgps4393 that’s why there are quotations
They need to bring back the turbo button 😔
It's running in Standard mode rather than 386 enhanced. Unless you have a 286 you can normally only get Standard mode if you force it. I wonder if this is to do with the RAM you have fitted. The rumour mill for years is that WIndows 3.1 won't run with more than 512MB RAM fitted. I wonder if that prevented you from running 386 enhanced mode and so it's fallen back to Standard which then limits you to 16MB. With drivers, there is a generic SVGA 800x600 with 16 colours driver bundled which will often work with most graphics cards. This may clear up the glitches and give you a little more screen real estate. With the sound, back in the day even if you had a compatible sound card Windows would still be silent after install as the setup program does not install drivers for the sound card; this was a post-install task you had to do from Control Panel.
What about Windows NT 3.51 or 4.0? could be fun to see that..
nt4 was so good.
NT 4 is 2000 or XP iirc
@@joevaghn457 2000 is 2000. It's I believe it's nt5 (xp) without direct x and some other multimedia stuff.
@@joevaghn457 No, very far from. Win2000 was the successor of NT4. Win2000 is a very different OS. XP came much later and not relevant here.
Can u plz try if old windows versions like windows 98 can handle 2 monitors?
Windows 3.1 has never looked so good.
Use a PCIe to PCI adapter and use a period-correct graphics card (some work, some don't)
3:39 yes, Windows 3.1 is Super Stable u even can just make a CD-RW and use is as [Live CD] install dosbox on it and create a folder with some programs and ur windows 3.1 and just use it on any pc u wanna have it. and any other windows then after it was very unstable and just sucked. (yes even windows 95). I wish to to continue the development of windows 3.1 bc it was so simple and it runned very well.
i might also do that.
Нужна видеокарта Ati X300 или ей подобная, одна из первых на PCI-E. Драйвер для видеокарты универсальный VGA для виртуальных машин. Тогда глюк с отображением картинки можно будет побороть.
to enable sound you have to load the sound card drivers in ms dos
amazing as a retro-tech feat, but way easier to use a VM, hehehe
Ofc it was easier to use a VM, but the real question was is it possible to install on a real hardware
The highest I could do with legitimate driver support do was a Pentium 2.
intersting!
Can't believe how fast it loads
From the past to the present "Windows" NEVER CHANGE! believe me...🤣 Start - Setting - Explorer
Opcode means Operational Code, or machine code instructions.
Ohhhh Windows 3.1. Now I'll run Visual Basic 6 and make cool apps.
Supposedly Windows 3.1 is incompatible with freedos. The only release which works is the latest from Jeremy David but It doesn't work well
Could I install the LOTUS IMPROV spreadsheet in these Win 3.1?
try to installing Windows NT 3.51 you might have a better luck with all things hardware driver.. no promise though..
also Windows NT might failed to even boot, given it was a full blown OS unlike Windows 3.1
I don't understand the technology that is plugged into the driver via USB that allows Windows 3.1 to function on the modern computer, but it is fascinating to witness.
It can be possible because of modern BIOS
I presume the reason windows 3.1 worked better then windows 98 is due to windows 98 being 32 bit and 3.1 being 16 bit, aka it doesnt need to load a bootloader.
Size of windows 3.1 equal to my favorites video clip😅
Can you install all versions of Windows in one device?
Well this is retro operation systems for sure.
Like the video
Fix the graphics and install full compatible drivers
Time to upgrade to Windows for Workgroups 3.11
Teason why it works well: uses standards more
bruh, conventional memory is never higher than 640K.
the rest is the upper memory area with extended memory, MSDOS can address 64MB in total, which you can see there.
Do it bro just go do it.
Win 1 and Win 2
I’m planning to build a gaming PC next year and of course it’s going to run Windows 11, although I do plan to also make it Windows 12 ready, but I would also like some means of playing old games on it meant for Windows 95 and Windows XP. I’d particularly like to play Virtual Springfield again, being a Simpsons fan, but I’d also like to check out Lego Island, a title I missed out on as a kid, and one title that’s been on my mind for years is Supreme Snowboarding because a Dreamcast version of it was planned but abandoned! There is the issue of older titles not accepting USB gamepads, how can I get around that? Thanks.
I think the best way is to use DOSBOX for old dos games or any emulator for another
This is end? Of course not :D
It's going to be the fasted computer on earth.
can you give a link to the 3.1 file? i cannot access any .img files, becasue it says its corrupted, also does this install to the USb stick, or the hard drive?
You can flash .img file using a program Win32diskimager. It can flash your image and you can boot from usb
@@RamtechENG and will this install to the hard drive? because when i used freedos to install windows 98, it installed to the USB
Well, if DOS can run, Windows 3.1 can run.
It is only running in standard mode though. Enhanced mode would function a bit better.
which in term means doom will run
Очень хорошо
Try running Windows predecessor even before DOS, CPM, on a modern PC then I will be impressed.
Oh,no! Remote memories!
Ahhh.. Windows... Windows 3.1 etc.... I loved Windows so much... that I bought a Mac back in 2005 and have never looked back......
Those graphics glitches tho... GDI+?
GPU wise you'll probably have better luck with an old ATI PCIe grahpics card or possibly even just some recent AMD one. Nvidia's vga compatibility has never been great
I find the Intel HD graphics of the Core i3 380m chip displays Windows 3.1 just fine. No artifacts of any sort.
Ok, well this is like riding a Penny Farthing in the Tour de France. Or a pedal-car in an F1 race. Can be done...but WHY!!?
woa woa woa... there was a DOS 7.1??
Make Windows 95
you need svgaptch for 256 colors
Молодец красава
Ураааааааааааааааа 1 русский
can you do a video on windows 95
Wait, does this work that there is Soo much ram, that it sees not much, but if there is a massive amount of ram, it sees the perfect amount?
Is this the end?
The most painful windows install is 98, on 39 floppy disks.
I'm assuming you switched your BIOS from UEFI to CSM?
Yes, but it was enabled by default. You can just use boot menu and choose USB in legacy mode or UEFI
@@RamtechENG You know what would be neat, is an UEFI boot loader that will let you load the legacy and modern operating systems. This way you can boot to DOS or Windows 11.
Also, have you tried loading Windows 3.1 with MS-DOS 6.22? Any difference than Windows 3.1 on MS-DOS 7.10 CDU version?
If you pay attention the Windows 98 launcher is actually Windows 3.1... I've actually extracted it before!
О, рамтеч здорово
It's actual x manager not xm-gr
I wouldn't be surprised with DOS - it was a very basic operating system. 3.1 I wouldn't be surprised either because it was a JOKE when it was released and it wasn't much more complicated or functional than DOS.