THIS INVENTION would sell (MSDOS mini machine)

>THIS INVENTION WOULD SELL...
>....for this very niche crowd of music producers who already have better setups!
You literally have your own board, fuck off with your shit

>CPU is IBM:s copy of 200MHz Intel Pentium CPU and it allows speeds from 50MHz to 200MHz.

That's just barely fast enough for Whiplash which targets a P166 but is extremely demanding even then. You could probably push into the 1GHz range to run more demanding software without losing compatibility. Lots of DOS games benefited from the high clocks at the ends of the '90s.

Attached: nemesis.webm (640x397, 2.97M)

THere's no reason to do this when PCem does emulate such a system perfectly

Yeah it emulates it perfectly if you have a fast 4GHz system which cost several hundred dollars

It cannot be properly emulated with cheap and low power PC:s

FPGAs aren't fast enough yet to do something like this

>Lots of DOS games benefited from the high clocks at the ends of the '90s.

yes, games released from 1996 onwards
but games made before this stop functioning after CPU clock goes above 200MHz

But if there was a selectable CPU speeds from 50MHz to 1000MHz, there would be no harm done and device would be even more useful

The S3 VGA card is good enough to run anything in 320x240 resolution with 256 colors

I have a question: Are you by any chance under 18 and/or new to Jow Forums?

>Yeah it emulates it perfectly if you have a fast 4GHz system
this, it's really irritating that you need a beast of a computer to run 20 year old software in an emulator. Dosbox is an absolute joke.

PCem isn't dosbox
If your PC can't run dosbox then it's ancient garbage or it's misconfigured

it's not that my PC can't run Dosbox, it's that Dosbox does not attempt to emulate a fast enough computer to run the program I want to run in the first place. It's quick enough for simple shit like Commander Keen, but I always see people recommending it for Doom, which is totally insane, you might as well play the fucking 32X port. The SVN versions of Dosbox are faster but not fast enough, and ports to other systems are outdated, slower and even more useless.

also I was speaking generally about old x86 emulators, I don't have any experience with PCem so I can't conclusively say that it is bad software, but I do know Dosbox and it is crap.

Needs a turbo button for extra nostalgia

Attached: Casebuttons.jpg (800x500, 56K)

You didn't configure dosbox properly if you can't even run fucking doom. Did you set cycles to max?

but if you leave it out, then you can sell the 8088 mini as another product!

But the turbo button is so comfy.

Everything runs great on my fucking 4ghz desktop PC you 256-kilobyte turbosperg, it's anything pre-Intel Botnet, and anything not x86 that literally cannot make use of Dosbox to play any '90s 3d game at all, just 286/386 shit.

I mean that's why there are Doom source ports for Android and such but I'm not playing Doom, it's just an example because I personally know maybe one other person who has even heard of the game I actually want to play.

Even a 15 year old pocket pc can emulate dos games using dosbox
Sounds like you're using garbage ports

I wish it came in stylish cardboard box

Attached: atari-flashback-7-retro-console.jpg (300x300, 50K)

They actually are. Not that you should.

You're actually retarded. Please go to /vr/ or at least get a trip so I don't have to see your utterly idiotic posts.

yeah I don't think so Tim. I'm using SVN versions on my PC with fully customized configs and I've tried nearly every handheld port on the machines I own, it is totally incapable of running anything I want to play at solid framerates. Just booting the game and staring at a slideshow or a DOS prompt is not my definition of "working emulation", even if technically I can "run" the games. Dosbox simply doesn't aim high enough to run the game I want to play at reasonable framerates on lower-power hardware.

stop trying to defend bad software, that is unless you have some kind of stake in it.

filters are literally autism

This won't be cheaper to buy than a regular x86 computer that can emulate the same shit and isn't useless for other tasks

Uh? For anything lower end, as in sub 100MHz Pentium, x86 emulation is utterly fine even on a shitty APU system. For anything over that, you don't even need emulation anyways for accurate results.

Stop making dumb arguments for your shit. Nobody needs OPs idea and there are plenty of ways to play old x86 games just fine.

Just fucking buy used terminal similar to these Igels or WYSEs that has sound chip compatible with a dos drivers you have an access to and you are good to go. Rest is already there. I have Igel 3/4 running freedos flawlessly for all my old soft and games needs except for sound (it has somewhat different sound chip than any fucking driver I could get my hands on so I play in silence)

Such device can be acquired for a few dozen bucks from China

There's no reason you couldn't use SD or SATA to IDE adapters. Straight CF is unnecessary.
DOS 7.1 lifted from 9x and Freedos support FAT32.
BIOS LBA limitations can be bypassed with disk overlay software or custom option firmware.
I'm not sure you've thought this through all the easy.

well, according to this thread, dosbox is shit but how about dos6.22 and qemu?

Attached: panzercat.jpg (1600x900, 140K)

dude have you looked at ebay prices on genuine retro hardware from 1998s?
hipsters pay insane sums

yeah, fuck OP! let's discourage him from ever trying anything like this while we build it ourselves and take the benefits.

fucking kikes, I swear to god

Attached: images.jpg (202x249, 5K)

why to use CF instead of actual hard drives?

because CF just werkz with dos, it writes so rarely in the card there is no performance losses unlike when you use Windows on top of CF

think this through, would you rather have a small gaming box with CF card which you can easily remove for copying stuff into another devices or do you fit inside 2.5" hdd or ssd or god forbids, put it in a 3.5" hdd

Go get a socket7 pc you dildohead

this

Can't you just fucking use freedos or dosbox or any shit like this?

Or you can just buy a raspberry pi you idiot.

Or you could use cheaper SD cards. You need an adapter either way and the host system doesn't care if the controller it's talking to is in the card or on the adapter.

All you need is an FPGA for up to 500MHz P3 levels of performance, with the benefit of OPL and Glide in hardware.

A CF card literally is just an IDE device. The pinout is direct so there is rarely if ever compatibility issues. SD2IDE has to translate everything on a microcontroller, and you just have to hope that the adapter you bought dosn't suck.

does this kind of FPGA already exists

Yes.

Risk of defective Chinese shit isn't a compelling argument for one over the other. I've got a couple CF adapters that don't work fine on retro machines because they miswire or don't export all the pins for this particular application. Contrary to popular belief the electrical is not 1:1 and the card has to be signaled to operate in the desired mode. This requires at the very least jumping certain pins to ground or VCC with appropriate pullups. Then there's the cards themselves which may not even have the desired features, particularly shit like the fixed/removable bit which usually can't be toggled on consumer grade cards.

Are you from 2012?
Everything you said can be done in less space than a Raspberry Zero size using some FPGA. I guess a Chromecast-sized device would literally suffice.

Also, Compactflash is basically dead, and you should anyway stay away from anything that doesn't have control over wearing level (microSD's, CF's, etc). You may go for some small M.2 (I'd go for mSATA, if it wasn't already obsolete). It will take anyway a lot of BIOS support to simulate "lots of 511 Mb hard disks")

CPU multiplier is a literal waste. You at most need two clock speeds: a classic 33 MHz 386 equivalent speed, and a "maximum" speed. Building out a "superfast Pentium" machine for a very few games is somewhat of a nonsense. If you need a real fast DOS machine, just start dosbox on Ubuntu.

Video output: HDMI is enough. It's cheaper than any other solution (VGA would be even cheaper, but you don't want a wobbly output because The Luser™ can't find a decent VGA cable).

Most classic DOS games are indeed 320x200. Not even the original Doom II required four megabytes RAM.

Utter garbage. The real golden era of MS/DOS was 1987-1993. Most games will seriously glitch on a fast computer because of the braindamaged IBM PC architecture around IRQ's and ports and shit.

Also, everyone forgot that all those old games are still under copyright. You may create the Most Powerful Emulator Thing and miserably fail just like Zx Vega Spectrum and Sony PS1 Classic.

MS/DOS real appeal is doing things with very little memory and resources.
People with a 128kb MS/DOS machines were able to work with Pascal language: the Borland Turbo Pascal 3.01A executable file was 39.5 kilobytes (not compressed) and included IDE, compiler, libraries.

The same 4.77 MHz 128kb machine could run WordStar wordprocessor (25 kilobytes executable plus ~40 kilobytes .OVL overlay library), enough to edit and print your entire doctorate thesis. Even if the machine only had a puny Monochrome/Hercules graphic card.

Attached: mybattlestation.jpg (1800x1350, 428K)

By default a CF card is a PCMCIA device, not IDE. Using it reliably in IDE mode is going to depend on your adapter and whether or not the card's manufacturer shit the bed on the design.

>I've got a couple CF adapters that don't work fine on retro machines
The issue would not be from the adapters but actually the CF cards themselves. The adapters litterlly is just a stright pinout for the various data pins. The controller on the CF card it self can be missing instructions if you buy from a trash brand. I've got SanDisk CF cards in a 486Dx2, P1 200Mhz P45C, P3 1.26 Ghz, and a PCI Power Mac 6400. All of them work great.

>fixed/removable bit

there is MSDOS .com program which works for several CF-cards which will write the required bit to the card. You only need to do this once, unless you somehow turn it off again by mistake. Formatting the card has no effect on this controller setting.

however if the card has been physically created to not have the required pins, its different thing then

>talks about FPGA emulating a MSDOS machine
>doesn't plan some FPGA feature emulating IDE disks out of Compactflash interface

Attached: BattleStation.jpg (3840x2160, 689K)

kek, i thought that was a grill, box doesn't help it looks like some shitty kichen product youd see as like >shown on tv

What the fuck am I looking at with that keyboard? That looks like carpal tunnel syndrome in the making.

Most major brand consumer cards hardcode the removable and atcfwchg does absolutely nothing.

It's absolutely an issue with these adapters. It doesn't matter what card you use in them, modern XP era or newer systems can access them but old hardware running something like Win98 shits itself and more often than not corrupts the card if you attempt to write to it. The factory that made these clearly didn't follow spec, T&E'd the design and signed off on it when it was "good enough"

No, it depends on the card, not the adapter. Adapters are passive. If the card can do native PATA, it will work fine.
PCMCIA, PATA and ISA are all based on the same thing.

Oh and they shipped with jumpers on their activity LED headers so I immediately knew something was up.

That's why you don't buy randomly but check beforehand online. I.e. I think Transflash cards worked well, while Kingston ones didn't.

If you're dead sure it's the adapter, then buy the ones from StarTech. Never have had a single issue with these cheep things.
$9
amazon.com/Syba-SD-CF-IDE-BR-Connects-3-5-Inch-Interface/dp/B001JTO782/

You don't need an active controller on the adapter to fuck up the wiring. I reiterate, they are NOT electrically 1:1. The CF card must be correctly configured to operate in ATA mode over IDE. This is done with passive signaling and changes what the pins do internally. If you screw this up your adapter will not work, or will work only partially.

I already sorted that out long ago but thanks anyway.

Well yes, if you buy some adapter that isn't even wired correctly, of course it's not going to work, even if the card itself supports it fine.

>This is done with passive signaling and changes what the pins do internally.
that's done inside the controller that's inside the CF card

Which is my point. Favoring CF over SD because the manufacturer might screw up the SD adapter is pointless because they're both susceptible to Chinese "engineering"

The only difference between them is the price per unit of storage you can get them at. Speed wise and compatibility wise they aren't really different.
Low end usage, a CF card is going to be a fine cheap option, less than 10 bucks for 16GB with the adapter (like a 486), while something like 64GB, the SD card option is going to be a better idea (like a Xbox or Pentium). Anything higher up, SATA SSD to PATA is even better (Xbox with more storage, Pentium 3 with no option for SATA controller).

Someone actually bought one of those memeboards!

By sending the correct signals into it.
Which is done on the adapter.
Read:
winsystems.com/wp-content/uploads/datasheets/cflash-g-xxxm-i-ds.pdf
And don't come back until you're done.

That's the SID you're talking about. Even among FM chips OPL2/3 was shit tier next to OPNA or actual synthesizers.

>some X random CF card
Please, I've done my own adapters, probably before you were even born.

If you weren't larping you'd know better.

Just because you use some uncommon CF cards, doesn't mean everyone else is wrong.
All you need is the right pinout, most cards are compatible to work in ATA mode that way and are software switchable.

X random CF card works as an example because it's following the spec

I wasn't aware that Kingston and SanDisk were uncommon.

But using the spec, you only need to know how to wire them up passively. Just because user keeps going about "1:1" doesn't mean shit, you're not using to use a ATA to CF adapter for PCMCIA, only for IDE ATA mode.
It's anons dumb excuse for buying shit chink adapters.

>uncommon CF cards
In my experience it's the uncommon generic cards that actually work best for retro machines because they tend to behave like the big brand industrial cards instead of the crippled consumer ones.

Kingston does not follow the spec at all and their CF cards are broken or half broken in ATA mode.

>Game resolutions in MSDOS times were never higher than 800x600 and common one was 320x240.
wrong, see BLOOD and ARSENAL

Attached: bigim01.jpg (660x500, 67K)

This depends what source the Chinese factory used for a particular patch. The flash chips and controllers can be different between same "brand" generic CF cards, even bought from the same place.

sauce on webm?

Maybe but not being able to set the removable bit even with a firmware tool sometimes is still better than every time.

I'm not sure you followed the thread. It started out with CF being recommended because it's IDE but then it was pointed out it doesn't really matter since you need an adapter to use any modern storage and you can end up with a crap chink adapter for any of them.

I don’t really see this appealing to anything but that upper end of casuals that think they’re too good for an emulator but still aren’t serious/knowledgeable enough to pick up real hardware or even know why they need it.

Such a weird mash-up of hardware too, sounds like you just rattled off a bunch of random shit you heard about once and left it at that. IBM never even made a Pentium clone of their own, their licensing ended with the 386. And why a Vision868 specifically? The Trio64 was so much more ubiquitous.

>puny Monochrome/Hercules graphic card
Those were fucking great though, I still pick them over color cards because of the better effective resolution.

SD cards are fucking garbage man

>fpga
install RISC-V

>IBM for no reason other than IBM's name on it
every fucking time

Attached: aaaa.png (92x69, 19K)

Given that these machines typically had hard drives with glacial seek times that could barely push 10mb/sec I doubt anyone would be terribly put off by even a trash tier class10/uhs1 sd card.

>Posts 660x500 image to refute games never being above 800x600

You sure told him.

best thread on Jow Forums right now, I always love these idea threads