• 𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚐
    link
    fedilink
    English
    9
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    40MHz is plenty for doom.

    Ew, no. Even 386DX-40 is terrible for Doom:

    Doom timedemo 386 DX 40 MHz DOS PC

    486SX-33 is certainly playable, but you really want 486DX2/66:

    Doom Timedemo - 486DX2/66MHz

    Edit: grammar

    Edit 2: These videos are accurate, btw. I upgraded from 386SX-25 to 486SX-33 just for Doom while my friend got the 486DX2/66 Packard Bell. Envy.

    Edit 3: My memory forced me to go back and properly designate the models.

    • MacN'Cheezus
      link
      fedilink
      English
      210 days ago

      Can confirm. My dad had a 386DX-40 when I got my hands on a copy of Doom, and it was a fucking slideshow at best.

    • @AbidanYre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      I had a 386sx@25MHz too and I don’t remember it being that slow. Unless that demo has the detail cranked up to high or something like that. Although, like that first commenter I had a math co-processor, so maybe that helped.

      Or maybe my memory is off and I made the window tiny.

      • 𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚐
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        10 days ago

        Are you sure you didn’t set low-detail with the viewport cranked way down? I played it on the same model with a math co-processor and it could not handle high-detail and the large viewport in the video.

        Edit: I’m fairly certain I had a math co-processor, but I’ll defer to you on this detail just in case. That would certainly make a sizeable difference.

        • @AbidanYre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          210 days ago

          I think the detail level made a pretty big difference. I definitely ran it in low and kind of forgot that high was an option, but the shotgun animation in that video is bringing up some traumatic memories.