From e471456eb049f857111e280234817993531b409b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: RichardG867 Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2022 14:12:21 -0300 Subject: [PATCH] Switch HTML links with tooltips to the standardized Markdown form --- _posts/2021-12-01-86box-v3-0.md | 2 +- _posts/2022-01-07-pcem-migration-guide.md | 2 +- _posts/2022-03-18-86box-v3-3.md | 2 +- _posts/2022-03-21-why-not-p3.md | 6 +++--- 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/_posts/2021-12-01-86box-v3-0.md b/_posts/2021-12-01-86box-v3-0.md index 08a6324..50f50ac 100644 --- a/_posts/2021-12-01-86box-v3-0.md +++ b/_posts/2021-12-01-86box-v3-0.md @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ The Cyrix III is available on all newly-added Socket 370 and Slot 1 (the latter [**nerd73**](https://github.com/nerd73) also added emulation of IBM's [386SLC, 486SLC and 486BL](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_386SLC), available on PS/2 machines; as well as SL-Enhanced models of Intel and AMD 486 CPUs, available where supported. The 486SLC and 486BL were notable for having a 386-class core derived from the 386SLC, with the 486 instruction set and a small L1 cache added on top. The SL-Enhanced 486 models support the [System Management Mode](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Management_Mode) feature, designed for "Green PC" and laptop power management applications, which resulted in litigation between Intel and AMD over its implementation and eventually became a standard feature on x86 CPUs. -[**richardg867**](https://github.com/richardg867) implemented the **STPC series** of System-on-Chip devices marketed by STMicroelectronics for embedded applications between the late 1990s and early 2000s. These chips featured a Cyrix Cx486DX CPU core running at up to 133 MHz, integrated PCI chipset, and optional integrated VGA (not emulated yet). The STPC Client, Consumer-II, Elite and Atlas are emulated, with at least one machine representing each. In keeping with the embedded theme, they have also implemented the **ALi M6117** SoC, which had a long run from Acer Labs to Nvidia (yes, that Nvidia) and DM&P; this chip has a 33 or 40 MHz 386SX CPU core and an integrated ALi M1217 chipset providing most peripherals, allowing for tiny 386SX systems. +[**richardg867**](https://github.com/richardg867) implemented the **STPC series** of System-on-Chip devices marketed by STMicroelectronics for embedded applications between the late 1990s and early 2000s. These chips featured a Cyrix Cx486DX CPU core running at up to 133 MHz, integrated PCI chipset, and optional integrated VGA (not emulated yet). The STPC Client, Consumer-II, Elite and Atlas are emulated, with at least one machine representing each. In keeping with the embedded theme, they have also implemented the **ALi M6117** SoC, which had a long run from Acer Labs to Nvidia (yes, that Nvidia) and DM&P; this chip has a 33 or 40 MHz 386SX CPU core and an integrated ALi M1217 chipset providing most peripherals, allowing for [tiny 386SX systems](https://images.google.com/images?q=Kontron+DIMM-PC%2F386-I "Disclaimer: this board did not make it to v3.0 due to technical issues and a missing BIOS"). {% include imageheading.html url="/assets/images/v3.0/chipsets.png" heading="Chipsets" %} diff --git a/_posts/2022-01-07-pcem-migration-guide.md b/_posts/2022-01-07-pcem-migration-guide.md index 25ca8e4..b2a4806 100644 --- a/_posts/2022-01-07-pcem-migration-guide.md +++ b/_posts/2022-01-07-pcem-migration-guide.md @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ PCem v15 introduced a rewritten dynamic recompiler, which was primarily aimed at PCem's emulation of some core system components, such as the Programmable Interval Timer (PIT), takes a few shortcuts to improve performance. These shortcuts are perfectly fine for games, which is what PCem targets; although, they have caused issues with the software preservation side of things, as we found out with **Microsoft Word 1.0**, the **MR BIOS** and other old pieces of software. -In addition to taking fewer shortcuts, 86Box also tries to follow the specifications of these components, rather than implement the minimum viable feature set, which is - once again - good enough for games, but not good enough for some other applications. Generally speaking, the more accurate a component's emulation is made, the more host CPU horsepower it will require. There are certain limits to what's attainable to emulate (as an example, we don't do CPU caches, as that is too complex even for other non-PC emulators), but we try to follow what's possible. +In addition to taking fewer shortcuts, 86Box also tries to follow the specifications of these components, rather than implement the minimum viable feature set, which is - once again - good enough for games, but not good enough for some other applications. Generally speaking, the more accurate a component's emulation is made, the more host CPU horsepower it will require. There are certain limits to what's attainable to emulate (as an example, we don't do CPU caches, as that is too complex [even for other non-PC emulators](https://dolphin-emu.org/blog/2017/02/01/dolphin-progress-report-january-2017/#50-2204-hack-to-protect-lower-mem1-from-malicious-game-code-by-booto "Our issues involved cache test errors on some BIOSes"), but we try to follow what's possible.
diff --git a/_posts/2022-03-18-86box-v3-3.md b/_posts/2022-03-18-86box-v3-3.md index 3aef51c..baecaf1 100644 --- a/_posts/2022-03-18-86box-v3-3.md +++ b/_posts/2022-03-18-86box-v3-3.md @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ This release also brings a **major change to the Windows version**: it now uses ### Machines * Added **Compaq Deskpro 386**, the first 386-based PC -* Added **Vendex HeadStart Turbo 888-XT** XT clone +* Added [**Vendex HeadStart Turbo 888-XT**](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhDmYhopMgA "As seen on LGR") XT clone * Added **Z-NIX PC-1600** XT clone ### Hardware diff --git a/_posts/2022-03-21-why-not-p3.md b/_posts/2022-03-21-why-not-p3.md index 3f4b0e9..5a08601 100644 --- a/_posts/2022-03-21-why-not-p3.md +++ b/_posts/2022-03-21-why-not-p3.md @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ Furthermore, our developer was becoming increasingly frustrated with Virtual PC ### Making PCem better than Virtual PC -At the time (around 2014), PCem was a promising full system emulator which had just crossed into the Pentium era. Most importantly, it was **open source**, which meant that any issues could be patched with ease. With that in mind, [**OBattler**](https://github.com/OBattler) started hacking around PCem, fixing an issue with the Japanese DOS/V, merging network emulation from another fork, and inviting other developers including your author. These fixes were released to the public under a variety of names (such as PCem-Unofficial and PCem-X) and upstreamed to PCem author Sarah Walker; but things got to a point where our changes grew beyond the scope of what Sarah was willing to upstream, so we forked PCem and created the **86Box** project. +At the time (around 2014), PCem was a promising full system emulator which had just crossed into the Pentium era. Most importantly, it was **open source**, which meant that any issues could be patched with ease. With that in mind, [**OBattler**](https://github.com/OBattler) started hacking around PCem, fixing an issue with the Japanese DOS/V, merging network emulation from another fork, and inviting other developers including your writer. These fixes were released to the public under a variety of names (such as PCem-Unofficial and PCem-X) and upstreamed to PCem author Sarah Walker; but things got to a point where our changes grew beyond the scope of what Sarah was willing to upstream, so we forked PCem and created the **86Box** project. If we had any goal early on (before taking on the 86Box name), it was to make a better emulator than Virtual PC was a virtualizer. We believed part of that goal could be achieved by developing **Pentium II** emulation, while hoping that the single-thread performance of future host CPUs would allow it to be emulated as reasonably fast as Virtual PC. Remember, Intel was a performance monopoly still happily [tick-tocking](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tick%E2%80%93tock_model) away at the time; their 10nm troubles and AMD Ryzen competition were not a thing yet. @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ A decision was therefore made to **keep** the Pentium II and Celeron CPUs, with ### Misplaced childhood -Until, of course, one of our past contributors decided they wanted to emulate their childhood AMD Athlon system, **no matter what speed** it would run at. The AMD K7 core is well known to be a more advanced design delivering more instructions per clock than the P6, and therefore, even the lowest-end 500 MHz "Argon" Athlon was way off our radar. While we don't know exactly which CPU that system had, it was quite possibly an **Athlon XP**, which would be at least twice as fast as the entry-level "Argon". +Until, of course, one of our past contributors decided they wanted to emulate their childhood AMD Athlon system, **no matter what speed** it would run at. The AMD K7 core is well known to be a more advanced design delivering more instructions per clock than the P6, and therefore, even the lowest-end [500 MHz "Argon" Athlon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_Athlon_microprocessors#Athlon_\(Model_1,K7_%22Argon%22,_250_nm\) 'Which matched or beat the 500 MHz "Katmai" Pentium III in most benchmarks') was way off our radar. While we don't know exactly which CPU that system had, it was quite possibly an **Athlon XP**, which would be at least twice as fast as the entry-level "Argon". Arguments ensued. After all, **what is the point** of emulating such a fast CPU at half speed, if not less? You can't reasonably play games at such speeds, and if you just wanted to mess around with operating systems, a slower CPU at 100% speed will do the same job as a twice-as-fast CPU at 50% speed, without mouse lag, crunchy audio and the (uncommon but not unseen) risk of emulation desyncs; at least some of us in the team have endured installing Windows 7 on CPUs slower than a 233 MHz Pentium II just fine. More on running newer versions of Windows later. @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ After numerous disagreements with that contributor, including but not limited to ### Stick to the Windows that's best -It is widely known (and even shown in the cover of our [v3.0 release post](/2021/12/01/86box-v3-0.html)\) that with a new enough Super Socket 7 or Pentium II setup, you can actually run Windows 7 on 86Box. But "running" is a **massive overstatement**: Windows versions beyond XP were originally designed for much newer hardware than 86Box can emulate at full speed on modern computers, even if you take Microsoft's official minimum requirements into account. Windows Vista and 7 were never meant to even boot on Pentium 1 systems, but Microsoft was pandering to the embedded computing industry at the time by avoiding intentionally breaking support for these old CPUs, and sometimes even fixing it in updates. This changed with Windows 8, which required a late model Pentium 4 with the SSE2 instruction set and NX bit feature at a bare minimum; Windows 7 also eventually received updates which required a Pentium III with SSE at a minimum. +It is widely known (and even shown in the cover of our [v3.0 release post](/2021/12/01/86box-v3-0.html)\) that with a new enough Super Socket 7 or Pentium II setup, you can actually run Windows 7 on 86Box. But "running" is a **massive overstatement**: Windows versions beyond XP were originally designed for much newer hardware than 86Box can emulate at full speed on modern computers, even if you take Microsoft's official minimum requirements into account. Windows Vista and 7 were never meant to even boot on Pentium 1 systems, but Microsoft was pandering to the [embedded computing industry](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Vortex86%22+%22Windows+7%22 "Vortex86 is a Pentium 1-class CPU from the Windows 7 era") at the time by avoiding intentionally breaking support for these old CPUs, and [sometimes even fixing it in updates](http://web.archive.org/web/20110814164028/http://support.microsoft.com/kb/980358 "KB980358 fixes a BSOD when booting Windows 7 RTM on a Pentium 1"). This changed with Windows 8, which required a late model Pentium 4 with the SSE2 instruction set and NX bit feature at a bare minimum; Windows 7 also eventually received updates which required a Pentium III with SSE at a minimum. As a result of this, we've been getting many requests to emulate newer CPUs so that 86Box can "run Windows 8 and 10". Even if such CPUs were to be implemented, the user experience would be **extremely painful**; as outlined earlier, there is no host system in existence which can consistently keep up with the fastest CPUs we already emulate, let alone faster ones. Running newer versions of Windows on 86Box is just as much of a questionable endeavor as it is on an equivalent real system: it's a fun experiment maybe worth making a [YouTube video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zs8-rQKvptM) about, and nothing more. Everything will be so slow you won't even want to open a web browser (if they run at all due to CPU requirements). Just stick to Windows 98, maybe 2000 or XP if your host system is capable; for newer versions, **virtualizers exist**, you know.