How to build a dinosaur.

January 7, 2008 1:40 AM

I'm considering getting a cheap PC that I can slap Windows 98 and/or 3.1 one solely for the purposes of playing older games. Would this satisfy my needs, or is there a better option?

This is similar to a question I asked a few months back, but it's not quite the same, so here's a new one! I've recently rediscovered some older PC games that I loved playing when I was younger, and I'd like to pick up a cheap PC that I could use only for playing said older games. I know that I could use VMware or DOSbox or something similar and emulate them, but that's been a bit hit-or-miss in my experience, and I think that having the games installed on the system they were meant for would be an all-around better experience.

The problem that I've run into is that I don't know if even a low-end PC I could buy today would be too advanced for the likes of Windows 3.1/98. When we got our first computer back in 1994, a 1 GB hard drive was pretty massive; the 160 and 250 GB hard drives that are so cheap today dwarf that. Similarly, CPU speed and memory capacity have also increased so much. As a result, I'm not entirely sure if even something with fairly minimal specs (for example, the one I linked) would be too much an older version of Windows. I know that Windows 98 does have some issues with anything over 512 MB of RAM, so I imagine there would be similar issues with 3.1.

So, here's my question, in two parts:

1. What's the optimal configuration for a PC meant to run Windows 98 and Windows 3.1 if games are my focus?
2. What are the maximum system requirements for those older versions of Windows? I don't mind paying for a PC that has as much CPU speed, memory capacity, and hard drive space as 98/3.1 can handle; I'd just like to know what the ceiling is for those operating systems.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

posted by phaded to computers & internet (15 comments total)

Maybe buy another hard drive and dual boot ? Seems the easist. I'd go with 98 and you should be "fine" with just about any modern hardware, although you won't get dual core support and all that.
posted by iamabot at 2:03 AM on January 7, 2008

Specs are higher than you need.
Price is higher than it should be.

CPU power might be more than you need (in some cases I've found older games to not work well with the really fast processors because they're not expecting the fast clock speed.)

Maybe an older, used compaq desktop from ebay?
posted by sharkfu at 2:04 AM on January 7, 2008

I think a lot of the speed issues with old games are game-specific. A common solution is to download a "slowdown program" (google results: 491,000). Windows 98 can handle extremely fast computers with no problems (up to 2.1GHz/512MB of memory, and above 2.2GHz with no problems if it's Win98 Second Edition). Also, a lot of games that were made for Windows 98 can be played on (for example) Windows XP -- you just have to right click on the game executable, click properties, and select the Compatibility tab. There you can select to run the game in Windows 98 compatibility mode, etc. That will work with the majority of games designed for Windows 98.

Anyway, looking at the new computer you linked, I think one of your biggest problems will be finding hardware drivers for those operating systems -- Windows 98 might be possible, Windows 3.1 could be a real stretch to get working with new hardware. You might be better off trolling ebay, craigslist and yard sales for old 386 or 486 systems. But the drivers, man. The drivers. I'd make sure I got the original drivers disks with anything I bought, because a lot of them might not be available anymore.
posted by empyrean at 2:11 AM on January 7, 2008

Man, you want a dinosaur, why buy something new? Get a fossil for like 20 bucks, dont spend 400!

There are tons of old computers that can be had for about 20 bucks, give or take, from tech companies that don't need them, or academic institutions. Ex: UCSF surplus store:
http://www.campuslifeservices.ucsf.edu/distribution/surplus_goods/surplus_flyer/
also, tech surplus:
http://www.goldensurplus.com/used-computer-hardware.htm

Also, almost every large academic institution has some way of surplusing out old equipment. for example, at mrs wuzandfuzz and I's alma mater, we had the bargain barn, where anyone could pick up old, working stuff.
http://bargainbarn.ucdavis.edu

in your case, I just realized you are in new york, so here's an example of a relatively close academic institution's surplus store and their un-fuckin-beatable prices. Just google the university name, surplus, and equipment, and im sure you'll get one on the first page.
http://www.material.rutgers.edu/surpluscomputers.shtml

Do you have a friend who works at a major tech company of any kind? Pay him 20 bucks to steal you one. If he's in an IT department, even better. Tell him you'll supply a hard drive, so he cant get busted for letting someone have unsanitized data, and you're golden. Like Empyrean said, tho, I'd bring a CD full of stuff to test with me, to make sure all the shit works. maybe a couple games, whatever. Good Luck!
posted by wuzandfuzz at 2:42 AM on January 7, 2008

I've had no problems with DOSBox, which I use to run Advanced Civilization and Master of Magic. It requires a fairly high-end PC, but you probably have one. VMWare with FreeDOS would also work, same caveat.
posted by aeschenkarnos at 3:53 AM on January 7, 2008

If you want an old box, get an old box, and don't pay for an XP license if you're not going to use it.
posted by pompomtom at 4:02 AM on January 7, 2008

In all honesty, the new DOSBox 0.72, with the dynamic CPU emulation, is so amazingly good that you probably don't need to do this. DOSBox used to be very slow, but starting in the 0.7X range, they included a JIT x86 recompiler, so the emulation is far, far quicker. An emulated 33Mhz 486 should be easily achievable on almost any current machine. My Core2Duo box, at 2.7Ghz, comfortably emulates a 486-100. I could probably go faster still, but none of the DOS software I have needs it.

Virtually anything that runs in DOS will work nicely in DOSBox. And most Win98 games can be run with XP's compatibility layer.

If you're really sure you want hardware, you'll want to find an older machine with a Pentium chip. You want at least a Pentium 150, and anything up to about a Pentium 3/733 would work fine. If you can find one, get a motherboard with the 440BX chipset, as it was very stable, and well supported on all operating systems of the time. Replace the CPU fan/cooler with something new, consider replacing the power supply, and buy a new drive for it. Buy the smallest you can find... there are several compatibility-problem size points in the PC's history. I don't remember all of them anymore, but I think it's very unlikely that you'll be able to use all of a drive that exceeds 128g. Many early BIOSes require a boot partition that's entirely within the first 8gb of a drive, so you probably want to make your C drive no bigger than 6g or so. Put your CD/DVD drive on D, and then put the rest of your space on E.

If you can find one, a Soundblaster 16 will give you the best possible sound compatibility with early games. If you want to get more advanced, try to find a General MIDI card, as many early DOS games use very nice MIDI scores. There were a number of General MIDI daughtercards for the SB16, and you'll probably like that approach the best, but you can also do outboard cards. The better a MIDI device you have, the better music will sound.

You're likely to find all of this to be a giant pain in the ass. DOSBox does most of this for you. It has very good sound emulation, and includes General MIDI support. If you have an Audigy or X-Fi with a really good soundfont loaded, you can get better music than anyone on those old DOS machines even dreamed of.

Basically, the DOSBox people probably liked the same games that you did; they know what's good and what has lasted. Most games work well, but the big names tend to be very close to perfect.
posted by Malor at 5:00 AM on January 7, 2008

http://longisland.craigslist.org/sys/

Otherwise, someone you know must have some ancient hardware sitting in their basement. I think you'll have better luck with something that does/did actually run 98, rather than something that you would piece together now.
posted by Ctrl_Alt_ep at 8:21 AM on January 7, 2008

Yeah, $400 seems like far too much to sink into a Win98/3.1 box--I think I spent about that on my media center.

Classifieds and Craigslist could snag you an ancient PC for free or close to it; if you have any friends who work in large businesses or colleges, they usually recycle computers every year.

I would also like to nth Dual-Booting and/or DOSBox, depending on the games you want to run. You could Partition/buy a real-frickin' cheap hard drive and putting Win95 on there--which still relied on DOS, IIRC--and be able to play any games from that era. Hell, you could partition it with drives for DOS, Win3.1, and Win98, if you're into that.

DOSBox, after a small bit of configuring, worked on basically every DOS game I could dig up, too. For DOS gaming, you really should have problems running it on any modern machine.

Keep your money!
posted by BenzeneChile at 8:44 AM on January 7, 2008

Try a 486 for Win 3.1 or a P1 or P2 for Win98.

I have gotten a few old Thinkpads on eBay, but you could probably go cheaper looking at yard sales.
You probably know someone who has an old 486 or P1 in their basement.
posted by MtDewd at 8:44 AM on January 7, 2008

Use Virtual PC. Emulation on today's hardware will play any dos game you want.

What dos game do you have that doesn't run on XP? Shortcuts can be told to run the app in compatability modes.
posted by jeffamaphone at 8:55 AM on January 7, 2008

What they said. The linked box is total overkill, and not without risk: your ancient OSes might not support the current hardware. Either get an old box on the cheap or use an emulator.
posted by Zed_Lopez at 9:33 AM on January 7, 2008

Follow-up:

Our family's old Dell Dimension V350 (Pentium 2 350 MHz, 256 MB RAM), which I'd forgotten about, is currently not in use, and I could probably have it if I ask nicely. Should I seek to upgrade that any, or would that be good enough?
posted by phaded at 11:02 AM on January 7, 2008

A Pentium 2 @ 350 MHz was precisely the machine I had at the end of '98 and that was reasonably powerful for its moment. That'll do fine.
posted by Zed_Lopez at 3:33 PM on January 7, 2008

That should be great. 256 megs is vast, vast overkill, and 350Mhz is about 200Mhz more than most DOS games expect. :)
posted by Malor at 4:06 PM on January 7, 2008