Main > Main Forum

Best OS for 733MHz system?

<< < (7/9) > >>

pointdablame:

--- Quote from: MartyNg on July 14, 2006, 12:01:01 pm ---While we're discussing this, I'll throw another question in the mix.

With 2 40-gig hard drives, would it make sense to use 1 HD for roms only, and leave the other HD for the OS? This way, I think I would be able to change the OS without losing all of my roms and stuff. Would there be a performance difference with MAME not being on the same drive as the OS?

How would this play in with different OSes? What file system would I want to use on the "MAME drive"?

--- End quote ---

It'd work just fine.  There shouldn't be any performance hits at all if you ask me.

I'd stick to FAT32 if you want to use multiple OSes as NTFS would limit you.  Unless you'd plan to start with XP and only UPGRADE your OS from that point on, in which case, NTFS would be fine.

nostrebor:
Useful:


--- Quote from: Lilwolf on July 14, 2006, 08:35:40 am ---NOTE:  If a game doesn't need it... none of this matters.  So XP - Dos - Linux wont matter for 85% of the games.

Then there will be about 5%-10% of the games that will change from unplayable to playable once you optimize the crap out of everything.  Best case - decent/worse case. 

So we are really only talking about a few games here.... Make sure you care about them before spending too much time.

Pure DOS will give you a decent jump in fps.  This will give you the best performance... IF you aren't using any hardware stretching...

If you need hardware stretching... Then you will need a windows version.

98 will run the DOS and W32 versions of mame so its a great place to start.  Plus a ton of people have 5+ license laying around.  Plus you get a full range of frontends to use.  Its minuses - slowest of the boots...

XP wasn't designed for a machine that slow.   Yes you can get it to work.  No it wont be as fast... And no it wont effect most games... But again, a few more will be playable if you go DOS or 98SE.  But it will outboot 98 and give you more frontend options then DOS... and it will use hwstretching or d3d.

Now pure DOS - if you can use it, its great.  but the limits are left / right.  No USB support, No uploading of data to most keyboard encoders, No to most frontends, No to lots of things... But for the actual mame games... it should be best.   

As for using older versions of MAME... everyone should have a frontend that allows more then one version of mame.  There are 3 main versions to consider... v36, v55 and then current...  Each has a major speed decrease...  And if you want to play a game that wont run on your system on the latest build, trying it on 55, if so great... if not, try it on 36.  But you should try to use the latest version whenever possible... But don't discount older versions when necessary...  Running MKII on v55 is better then not running it at all (or at 10fps).... assuming you like MKII of course

Don't forget about windows being able to play other emulators!



--- End quote ---

Not Useful:


--- Quote from: arcadepcnut on July 14, 2006, 12:06:00 am ---That you Drew for your useless response. If I was CRAMPING I'd understand your response....but since Im passionate about the hobby your response is totally inappropriate and shows your mentality and adds absoltutely nothing to the thread.

Pointdablame:
You specifically attacked and targeted me. Not gave your opinions.
Also to address you in your last response.
There is no need in my opinion to use older copies of mame unless there are a few games in specific you are interested in and want to research what version they run best under.

you wont see me in this thread anylonger....so reply however childish you both wish.

--- End quote ---

Arcadepcnut,

Seriously? Opinions are like ---uvulas---. You have yours, PDB has his, Ray has his. Don't get soooooo bent out of shape if we don't swallow your pill outright. Just give your opinion and move along. Responding the way you have, even if justified (not saying it is), just makes you the bad guy.

nostrebor:
Huh. ***holes doesn't get the censorship?

And now for my opinion...

DOS: Fastest boot, *can be* least obtrusive visually. HARDEST to setup. Least amount of good documentation to help through the issues. Frustrating at times, especially for the layman. Free OS. Most limited hardware and software choices.

98: Slowest boot. Hardest to hide. Easy to setup. Good documentation. Cheap/free to implement.

XP: Fast boot. Pretty easy to hide. Good documentation. More horsepower needed, harder to get licenses free, so MOST expensive. Best software and hardware choices/support.

With some level of skill, dollars, and time, *any* one of these OS choices will work on your system.

Zakk:
I have an honorary A+ degree in 'observational gynecologism hygenics'.  So -I- say you should run a mook system.  Configure it for mook, and mook away!

And if you're feeling all sensitive, well it's because you're a mook.

I know this because of my certification.  Zakk (MFNC)   A+OGH

MartyNg:
I think I'm going to try Win98SE to start and see how the performance is. Thanks again to everyone that shared some useful thoughts!   :cheers:

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version