Quantcast

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 26

Thread: Genecyst on a 486

  1. #1
    Raging in the Streets Sik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    3,858
    Rep Power
    70

    Default Genecyst on a 486

    I was bored and browsing around and YouTube suggested me this video:



    Doesn't even show the full screen and plane B (the background) is outright missing lol (and let's not get started on sound, surprised it wasn't disabled to try to improve performance… though maybe that didn't help enough). I guess it's an early Genecyst version since I don't recall X.XX letting you disable plane B?

  2. #2
    Hedgehog-in-Training Hedgehog-in-TrainingRoad Rasher Stifu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    381
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sik View Post
    I guess it's an early Genecyst version since I don't recall X.XX letting you disable plane B?
    I believe it is version x.xx, as it has the standard white cursor. Earlier versions had the sword cursor.

  3. #3
    WCPO Agent
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    911
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    I remember running Genecyst on a few Pentiums, I can't remember the slowest system I put it on but I know at 166 MHz it was flawless. Wonder if there's any 486 that can handle it? I remember Cyrix made 5x86 CPUs that would drop into a 486 board and ran about as fast as early Pentiums.

    Back in the day I briefly had a 486 server board, I got rid of it because I couldn't find a use for it. It had four CPUs, I think all at 50 MHz. I've never seen another one like it so now I'm wondering if two of them were actually FPUs or something.

  4. #4
    WCPO Agent Tripredacus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Buffalo
    Posts
    986
    Rep Power
    34

    Default

    The first computer I ran emulators on, both Genecyst and Nesticle was a 486 Compaq LTE 440 CX. For back then, it was fine. There are better ways of playing those games now.
    Sega Genesis Master Set Collector
    https://vgcollect.com/Tripredacus/gen

  5. #5
    The Cat in the Hat Shining Hero NeoVamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    10,274
    Rep Power
    189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by axel View Post
    I remember running Genecyst on a few Pentiums, I can't remember the slowest system I put it on but I know at 166 MHz it was flawless.
    I remember running Kgen and Genecyst on our family's Pentium 100mhz and they both ran pretty smooth if i remember correctly.

  6. #6
    Hedgehog-in-Training Hedgehog-in-TrainingWildside Expert
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    203
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by axel View Post
    I remember running Genecyst on a few Pentiums, I can't remember the slowest system I put it on but I know at 166 MHz it was flawless. Wonder if there's any 486 that can handle it? I remember Cyrix made 5x86 CPUs that would drop into a 486 board and ran about as fast as early Pentiums.

    Back in the day I briefly had a 486 server board, I got rid of it because I couldn't find a use for it. It had four CPUs, I think all at 50 MHz. I've never seen another one like it so now I'm wondering if two of them were actually FPUs or something.
    486 new instructions over the 386, are actually just atomic instructions used for parallel processing. I've never seen it used in a setup before though.

  7. #7
    AKA Mister Xiado Master of Shinobi Raijin Z's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,079
    Rep Power
    43

    Default

    Nesticle on my 66MHz 486 runs like a one-legged dog, and the same for MAME running simple stuff like Jailbreak. I won't even bother to try Genecyst. I have a 160MHz Pentium system connected to the same monitor, but I haven't bothered to test it with anything.
    - Where it's always 1992 (or so).
    Youtube - Terminated
    BitChute - Fragmented, but functional

  8. #8
    Hedgehog-in-Training Hedgehog-in-TrainingNameless One retronostalgia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    91
    Rep Power
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tripredacus View Post
    There are better ways of playing those games now.
    Understatement of the century! :-)

  9. #9
    The Cat in the Hat Shining Hero NeoVamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    10,274
    Rep Power
    189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by retronostalgia View Post
    Understatement of the century! :-)
    I'm glad he said it though, wouldn't want kids scouring ebay for a 486 just to emulate.

  10. #10
    WCPO Agent
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    911
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raijin Z View Post
    Nesticle on my 66MHz 486 runs like a one-legged dog, and the same for MAME running simple stuff like Jailbreak. I won't even bother to try Genecyst. I have a 160MHz Pentium system connected to the same monitor, but I haven't bothered to test it with anything.
    MAME really required a Pentium II to run the good stuff (late 80s/early 90s games) back in the day. Today the requirements are probably much higher now that it's a more accurate emulator.

  11. #11
    AKA Mister Xiado Master of Shinobi Raijin Z's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,079
    Rep Power
    43

    Default

    The novelty comes in running stuff on low end systems to see what they could really do. I also have an AMD K6-2 300 (my first computer, no less) that I rebuilt. I was most surprised that the motherboard hadn't died, as I had left it out in the open for about 17 years. I had a Dell Latitude L400 running Win2K that ran Mame32++ perfectly, at least for any 2D games. I miss that computer, but one day my crappy laptop bag's zipper ran off the track in college, and the laptop took a header into the floor and died. Not that I would even be able to find a compatible battery for it fifteen years later.
    Another issue with running Genecyst on a 486 comes from having to use the keyboard to play, because good luck finding a controller with more than two buttons that also has DOS drivers. Now, if you install Win9X on it, you won't have that issue, but while I have run Win98 on a 486 DX2 66 for laughs, I wouldn't have tried to play games on it.
    - Where it's always 1992 (or so).
    Youtube - Terminated
    BitChute - Fragmented, but functional

  12. #12
    WCPO Agent
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    911
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raijin Z View Post
    The novelty comes in running stuff on low end systems to see what they could really do. I also have an AMD K6-2 300 (my first computer, no less) that I rebuilt. I was most surprised that the motherboard hadn't died, as I had left it out in the open for about 17 years. I had a Dell Latitude L400 running Win2K that ran Mame32++ perfectly, at least for any 2D games. I miss that computer, but one day my crappy laptop bag's zipper ran off the track in college, and the laptop took a header into the floor and died. Not that I would even be able to find a compatible battery for it fifteen years later.
    Another issue with running Genecyst on a 486 comes from having to use the keyboard to play, because good luck finding a controller with more than two buttons that also has DOS drivers. Now, if you install Win9X on it, you won't have that issue, but while I have run Win98 on a 486 DX2 66 for laughs, I wouldn't have tried to play games on it.
    It's been a very long time since I used a DOS joystick but I think the Gravis Gamepads usually came with four buttons and would plug right into the sound card, so if your sound card is supported everything should work. On a laptop you would have to find a gamepad with a PS/2 connector and configure it like an external keyboard, map the buttons to the keys you would use in the game.

  13. #13
    AKA Mister Xiado Master of Shinobi Raijin Z's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,079
    Rep Power
    43

    Default

    Without a driver to enable 4 button functionality, you had to use the switch on the pads to set them to 2 normal and 2 turbo buttons. Default support through most sound cards gave you four cardinal directions and two fire buttons, with nothing else. The Microsoft Sidewinder pads' extra buttons only function in Win9X with a driver, and there exists no DOS driver for them. All I have for Gameport connections are a small pile of Sidewinders and a couple new ProPad (2 button) controllers, so I haven't done much hunting for drivers for other controllers. Even the drivers for Capcom's 6 button controller that came with Mega Man X are a nightmare to track down.
    - Where it's always 1992 (or so).
    Youtube - Terminated
    BitChute - Fragmented, but functional

  14. #14
    Outrunner maxi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    566
    Rep Power
    23

    Default

    Kgen could run in 100% speed on a 486 66MHz with the sound a bit off, but still better than the Smash Pack for Dreamcast. Genecyst was slow like the video and I never liked that thing.
    I remember nes, sms and gb running flawless, and Zsnes also slow as hell.

  15. #15
    Raging in the Streets Sik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    3,858
    Rep Power
    70

    Default

    I was under the impression that button support under DOS boiled down to how every individual program interpreted the input.

    The PC joystick port is basically four axes and four buttons. By convention, the first pair of axes and buttons belonged to the first joystick and the other pair to the second joystick. Most four button joysticks worked by assigning the two extra buttons to the "second" joystick's, so games supporting four buttons worked that way. Six button joysticks apparently worked by using the 2P axes as two more buttons as well (at least this is how some games seem to handle them).

    I wouldn't be surprised if some joysticks came with drivers for DOS but those would need explicitly support from each game (since most games polled the joystick port directly instead of calling the BIOS to do it). Windows is a completely different matter since the OS acts as intermediary (meaning you absolutely needed a driver but also that every Windows game would "just work" with them).

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •