|
Post by tascodlx on Aug 8, 2010 1:46:16 GMT -5
And for the swap and D3D... Well, i guess so, but that "invalid opcode" error is a bit misleading, i would have expected it to say "segmentation fault" or something. Allow me to clear this up: it is definitely an invalid opcode. The opcode is for BSWAP, a 486+ instruction. It is used only a couple times within the BUILD engine. Maybe it's possible to modify the source to avoid it, but I can't imagine it's worth the effort. The D3D engine code was written on a 386 Nope. 486 -- at least for earlier versions. (See Ken Silverman's webpage.)
|
|
|
Post by Tom Maneiro on Aug 8, 2010 13:03:52 GMT -5
I was right! D3D is 486+ only An "invalid opcode" error has nothing to do with swap or segfaults in this case. Well, it should be fun to recompile it... not! (i have never done DOS programming since my Pascal ages )
|
|
|
Post by theelf on Aug 8, 2010 13:24:50 GMT -5
Like i say before, D3D not work in my 386DX, even if have 32mb ram, and is the "top" end ;D 386DX-40mhz...
You need to try the windows port, it works for me, but not remember witch version....
In any case, is so slow, that is only to test....
About swap, i remember old times, i have a 386 with only 4mb ram, and some extenders like DOS/4G, DOS/4GW, dpmi.. have a option to create a swap file, that you need to set by hand..
I remember i play Mortal Kombat 3, in plain MSDOS, with only 4mb, when the game ask for 8mb.... but very slow
The best thing i remember, is the 386 emulator... a resident software, only a couple of kb in conventional ram... and except games that check and need a 386CPU ... a lot of 386 "only" games, run very good in my 286-16mhz....
There was a 386to486 but i think this is only a joke.. or not? i don´t remember
Good old days...
|
|
|
Post by GiGaBiTe on Aug 8, 2010 17:28:20 GMT -5
There was a 386to486 but i think this is only a joke.. or not? i don´t remember Nope, they are very real CPUs. The Cx486SLC/DLC were basically 386s with the 486 instruction set. There is a more rare version, the Cx486DRx2 which is a clock doubled chip. D3D would probably work on them since they have a 486 instruction set.
|
|
|
Post by tascodlx on Aug 8, 2010 21:52:04 GMT -5
Well, it should be fun to recompile it... not! Looks like I can patch the EXE if you want to try. Just shoot me a PM.
|
|
|
Post by theelf on Aug 9, 2010 1:03:00 GMT -5
I was talking about a software solution. 386to486.com The 286to286.com was software, and emulate a bunch of 386 instructions in the 286 by software... Well, you can run or compile in windows/Linux, maybe works... www.eduke32.com/
|
|
|
Post by GiGaBiTe on Aug 9, 2010 5:15:19 GMT -5
Well, it should be fun to recompile it... not! Looks like I can patch the EXE if you want to try. Just shoot me a PM. It might be a cool experiment, but it would probably run like ass. The 1.3d Registered Edition wanted a 486 DX/2 66 and 8 MB of RAM, and it ran like crap even at the lowest 320x200 resolution. All hell would break loose if you wandered into a room with a mirror, or went outside into a large area (which D3D has a lot of.) It would probably run even worse with sound enabled.
|
|
|
Post by Tom Maneiro on Aug 9, 2010 12:20:30 GMT -5
Looks like I can patch the EXE if you want to try. Just shoot me a PM. It might be a cool experiment, but it would probably run like ass. The 1.3d Registered Edition wanted a 486 DX/2 66 and 8 MB of RAM, and it ran like crap even at the lowest 320x200 resolution. All hell would break loose if you wandered into a room with a mirror, or went outside into a large area (which D3D has a lot of.) It would probably run even worse with sound enabled. But, quoting Duke, it would "chew rancid bubblegum and blow ass" Make your bets - i give 1FPS here.
|
|
|
Post by TheMVRules on Aug 9, 2010 14:09:42 GMT -5
Set every option to max. ;D One frame every third second.
|
|
|
Post by GiGaBiTe on Aug 9, 2010 16:17:12 GMT -5
Make your bets - i give 1FPS here. I bet the system will lock up from being overloaded and you'll have to turn it off and back on to recover
|
|
|
Post by idisjunction on Aug 27, 2010 7:40:20 GMT -5
I was talking about a software solution. 386to486.com The 286to286.com was software, and emulate a bunch of 386 instructions in the 286 by software... A particular program that purported to do that may have been a hoax, but there are real patches to the Linux kernel to trap and emulate 486 instructions on a 386, so its not outside the realm of possibility. linux.1wt.eu/x86-emu/patch-2.4.25-wt2-emux86-0.3
|
|
|
Post by GiGaBiTe on Aug 29, 2010 4:19:06 GMT -5
Don't know why you'd want to run Linux on a 386, it would be mostly useless. Even a simple router would be bogged down by even a minute amount of traffic. And did anyone ever compile a 386 version of duke? I want to see how bad it runs
|
|
|
Post by Tom Maneiro on Aug 29, 2010 12:38:51 GMT -5
The 386 used to be a fairly common embedded processor (ARM beat it to death on that arena), and a highly stripped Linux version is common on such systems so... Think in some specialized gear beyond routers.
|
|
|
Post by idisjunction on Aug 29, 2010 12:42:25 GMT -5
Don't know why you'd want to run Linux on a 386, it would be mostly useless. Even a simple router would be bogged down by even a minute amount of traffic. Linux was originally developed and run on a 386. Then again, it was mostly useless at the time, too. I think as long as you had enough RAM, though, it could still be used for running a serial login console to a more powerful computer, or possibly as a dedicated control computer of some sort. I've run it on a 486 with only 4 MB of RAM and it did fine with a serial login. I even managed to run JOE decently. I wish I had more RAM in that thing...
|
|
|
Post by theelf on Aug 30, 2010 4:49:52 GMT -5
Hi, like i say before, i have a 386 DX40, with 32mb ram, ISA video card. I always think the 386 have only ISA 16/8bits, but i find this motherboard in google, is a 386 with VLB WOW!!! first time i see this in my life!! My question is if someone know that a 386 CPU works well with a VLB card, or maybe, only works in ISA mode.... i don´t know... ?¿??¿
|
|