[Solved] Pentium only software on a (capable) 486-type CPU?

edited February 2017 in Software
Hello, greetings, etc,
I am looking into getting a 486 laptop for cheap, and getting it upgraded to an Am5x86. I was asking if there was a way to get Pentium only software to work on a fast enough 486 type computer because the Am5x86 is not anything like a Pentium Overdrive, rather just an Am486 with a 5x clock multiplier, or something like that. I am not very educated in this field, and this is why I'm asking this likely stupid question. I'm getting an Am5x86 opposed to a Pentium Overdrive because it would be cheaper, and they don't run as hot. I know that the program that I would try to run (*Office 2000) would run on a P75, or a Pentium Overdrive of similar specifications, but not an Am5x86 for reasons that I have previously stated. I would run Windows 95, and this would be the bare minimum system requirements for Word 2000, but It's just a word processor, It's not doing 3D animation or anything.
*I chose Office 2000 as it has a somewhat familiar interface to me, and [from experience from transferring documents between Word 97 to Word 13 (Compatibility Mode)] formatting seems to be messed up when transferring files to newer versions, but not to as much of a degree with Office 2000. I am just going to use it for [Windows 3.1/95] games and small assignments. Any help is accepted, I don't belong in this field.
(I am using a laptop of this age to do this because of the smaller size and that no one would steal it due to it's age.)
«1

Comments

  • Most programs I know of only warn you that you don't have a Pentium and tell you to click yes to install if you think you have a compatible processor. Never seen one that wouldn't install just because the processor is wrong. A lot of Pentium programs lag hardcore when you run them on Non-Pentiums. Seeing as it's just a word processor you want, you should be okay if it actually installs. Only way to find out is to try.

    EDIT: Don't think a computer is safe from thieves just because it's old. Some people will steal crap just to be able to say they did.
  • BigCJ wrote:
    A lot of Pentium programs lag hardcore when you run them on Non-Pentiums. Seeing as it's just a word processor you want, you should be okay if it actually installs.
    I was asking because if it did install, I wouldn't want it to behave as slowly as Word 97 on Windows 95 with 4MB of ram, although I don't know how a slower a processor would make it, I've just messed with different amounts of RAM. Virtual Machines are fun.
    Only way to find out is to try.
    QEMU should emulate a i486 or a 486 type CPU, so I'll try Office 2000 on that.
    EDIT: Don't think a computer is safe from thieves just because it's old. Some people will steal crap just to be able to say they did.
    I guess you are right, but it wouldn't be a major loss if it is stolen.
    [EDIT] I was saying Pentium Only software because I thought Office 2000's system requirements were a P75, 16MB of ram, and Windows 95.
    [EDIT 2] (Fixed typing error.)
  • Keep in mind that many older laptops don't contain socketted processors, and if they do they were typically soldered onto a removable card, so you'd be limited to whatever cpu options that manufacturer had.
  • Keep in mind that many older laptops don't contain socketted processors, and if they do they were typically soldered onto a removable card, so you'd be limited to whatever cpu options that manufacturer had.
    I'm aware of that, I know people who can do this for me. Look up noq2's blog on putting an Am5x86 in a Thinkpad 701c. I'm likely not going to use a Thinkpad 701c, but just any 486 dx/dx2/dx4 laptop and get the Am5x86 off of an Evergreen 586 upgrade module and put that in the laptop.
    [EDIT] https://blog.noq2.net/butterfly-on-spee ... z-mod.html
  • Ah cool. I have a 701c and even bought a couple 586 upgraded boards for entirely too much money from Europe but neither one would boot into windows correctly when the video driver was installed, didn't matter what version of windows, they would both fail.

    Perhaps I'll examine the boards and compare their mods to this ones, though I'm in no rush to try opening the 701c again.... so very fragile.....
  • If it supports Pentium instructions, it'll run. Performance might not be fun with a "Pentium class" CPU, however.

    My 701 is just the DX4-75.
  • ampharos wrote:
    My 701 is just the DX4-75.
    That is the best configuration it came in. A 701C with that DX4 would've been top of the line, opposed to a 701CS with a 486DX2. I'm looking forward to getting a laptop set up with an Am5x86 P75 or P75+, although the latter is kind of rare.
  • I recommend to move the topic from Software --> Hardware to discuss about hardware.
  • ibmpc5150 wrote:
    I recommend to move the topic from Software --> Hardware to discuss about hardware.
    I guess you are right, although the initial question that started this thread wAS ABOUT SOFTWARE.
    (Don't take the notch in the "caps lock" key for granted.)
  • There's no need to shout, Eli. A simple "let's get this thread back on track" would've sufficed.
    eli573 wrote:
    I was asking because if it did install, I wouldn't want it to behave as slowly as Word 97 on Windows 95 with 4MB of ram, although I don't know how a slower a processor would make it, I've just messed with different amounts of RAM.
    One last note on hardware: a slow processor is as bad or worse than low memory, depending on what you're trying to do.

    Since all you want is M$ Word, you should be okay. Simple black text on a white background isn't normally very resource-intensive.

    I wonder how Office 95 documents would do in the newer versions of Word. Newest version I have is 2k7, I'll try see if they play nicely together.
  • BigCJ wrote:
    There's no need to shout, Eli. A simple "let's get this thread back on track" would've sufficed.
    I'm sorry, every other time I press the "A" key, I press "Caps Lock."
    eli573 wrote:
    (Don't take the notch in the "caps lock" key for granted.)
    I typed that instead of fixing it for some reason. Anyway, the oldest MS Office that I got to play vaguely nice with Office 2013/2016 (We use 2013/2016 at school) was Office 97, but Office 2000 leaves the formatting intact, while I've had issues with paragraph formatting with Office 97. Office 2K is what I've been using on a P266 for school work, which was stolen. Luckily, my tactic of buying the cheapest and oldest stuff possible has paid off, and I lost only $5. Anyway, Office 2000 is the oldest Office program I'd recommend, as Office 97 has indentation / font / paragraph issues when transferring to 2013/2016, so I have no idea how Office 95/4.2/4.3 would behave. Yes, I've tried MS Office 4.2/Word 6.0, It's as useful as using edit . com, (Don't want "edit . com" to become a link) or worse than edit . com if anything, as it leaves all of the data on formatting and stuff in random unknown UTF-8 characters. Sorry again for accidentally pressing "caps lock" mid sentence. I'll be in hardware to ask questions about why my video card is bursting in to flames.

    If word processing isn't very resource intensive, why is it listed in system requirements that it needs at least a P75? New Powerpoint features?
  • eli573 wrote:
    If word processing isn't very resource intensive, why is it listed in system requirements that it needs at least a P75? New Powerpoint features?
    Not sure, I don't use Office 2k. Damn Microsoft sent WinWorld a DMCA about it a while back, so I can't get it from the Library. Aside from a few tweaks, I don't know of any real difference between 97 and 2k.

    Okay, I was wrong. After searching through my little private archive, I found that I actually have Office 2k. A disc image of Premium Edition from M$DN.

    I'll do some research now with what I have, I'll post results in a little bit.

    EDIT1: From what I've done so far, 95 and 2k7 work very well together. Windows 95 RTM is wanting to be an ass tonight, so I'm going to reinstall the C variant and continue my tests. Be back in a bit.

    EDIT2: You may want to downgrade your main word processor if possible. 2k7 works perfectly fine with 7.0 (95). I know you probably don't want to do that but it may be a necessary evil. You may be asking "why did you use 2k7 when I said I had 2k13?" You told me what you needed, I'm telling you what I found with what I have. Hope this helps.

    EDIT3: If downgrading the version of Office is not possible, you could try a format converter. Change it to .docx when coming from the old computer and back to .doc before transferring back from the new computer. This may preserve formatting, but beware that newer formatting features exclusive to newer versions of Word will not convert properly. If you only do basic word processing, (you made it sound like you are) you shouldn't run into this problem.
  • BigCJ wrote:
    eli573 wrote:
    If word processing isn't very resource intensive, why is it listed in system requirements that it needs at least a P75? New Powerpoint features?
    Not sure, I don't use Office 2k. Damn Microsoft sent WinWorld a DMCA about it a while back, so I can't get it from the Library. Aside from a few tweaks, I don't know of any real difference between 97 and 2k.

    Okay, I was wrong. After searching through my little private archive, I found that I actually have Office 2k. A disc image of Premium Edition from M$DN.

    I'll do some research now with what I have, I'll post results in a little bit.

    EDIT1: From what I've done so far, 95 and 2k7 work very well together. Windows 95 RTM is wanting to be an ass tonight, so I'm going to reinstall the C variant and continue my tests. Be back in a bit.

    EDIT2: You may want to downgrade your main word processor if possible. 2k7 works perfectly fine with 7.0 (95). I know you probably don't want to do that but it may be a necessary evil. You may be asking "why did you use 2k7 when I said I had 2k13?" You told me what you needed, I'm telling you what I found with what I have. Hope this helps.

    EDIT3: If downgrading the version of Office is not possible, you could try a format converter. Change it to .docx when coming from the old computer and back to .doc before transferring back from the new computer. This may preserve formatting, but beware that newer formatting features exclusive to newer versions of Word will not convert properly. If you only do basic word processing, (you made it sound like you are) you shouldn't run into this problem.
    Why would I want to do that [downgrade office] if Office 97's .doc files work okay with Office 2013? I mean, I think Office 97 would work on most computers that will run Office 95, and I could tolerate Office 97's messed up paragraphs. I'll install Windows 95 in 486 mode in QEMU, it depends on how this Pentium 4 handles QEMU. I'll run it in 486 mode and see if Office 2000 will run.
  • eli573 wrote:
    Why would I want to do that [downgrade office] if Office 97's .doc files work okay with Office 2013?
    Because you said formatting is broken when opening '97 documents with Office 2013. And I meant to downgrade Office 2013/2016 to 2k7, not 97 or 2k to 95.

    95 documents work perfectly with 2k7, so 97 documents should work just as well.

    I have honestly never seen major formatting problems when opening older documents, could you explain in detail what breaks when you open in compatibility mode?
  • Ok, when I view 97 .doc files in a newer version, the paragraph's indentation sometimes disappear, or in multiple paragraphs, one of the paragraphs is shifted to the side entirely by the length of one to two "tab" key presses. I said why would I downgrade to Office 2007 if the .doc files work okay, I use the word "okay" somewhat loosely, and if I use Office 2000, the .doc files work perfectly, so if I put Office 2000 on a 486 type processor, it should work, because it's just a word processor, and if the issue is clock speeds of processors, the higher end of the DX4s or a 5x86 should fix that problem.
  • eli573 wrote:
    Ok, when I view 97 .doc files in a newer version, the paragraph's indentation sometimes disappear, or in multiple paragraphs, one of the paragraphs is shifted to the side entirely by the length of one to two "tab" key presses. I said why would I downgrade to Office 2007 if the .doc files work okay, I use the word "okay" somewhat loosely
    Yeah, that doesn't work okay at all. I have no clue what could be causing that, aside from the versions are simply incompatible.
    eli573 wrote:
    it should work, because it's just a word processor, and if the issue is clock speeds of processors, the higher end of the DX4s or a 5x86 should fix that problem.
    Clock speeds are not the only thing to worry about. Pentium processors are better than 80486s. The 66Mhz Pentium is better than most 80486s due to internal changes in the chip. I'd have to look it up, I can't remember the optimizations straight off the top of my head. If memory serves, a 486DX4@100MHz performs about as well as a Pentium 66MHz.

    Borked paragraph formatting is a new one on me. The only reason I suggested downgrading Office is because 2k7 works well with 95/97 and those versions system requirements are lower.
  • An Am5x86 has roughly the same performance as a Pentium 75 when running an application that doesn't utilize the extra data pipelines, or whatever. The Am5x86 is either clocked at 133MHz and something else, I've forgotten.
  • eli573 wrote:
    An Am5x86 has roughly the same performance as a Pentium 75 when running an application that doesn't utilize the extra data pipelines, or whatever. The Am5x86 is either clocked at 133MHz and something else, I've forgotten.
    IIRC, Am5x86 was AMD's answer to the Pentium, though not nearly as good. You wrote predominantly about 486s, so that's the route I thought you were taking. It shouldn't be too much trouble to just go ahead and test Office 2k on the real hardware. Most emulators don't have Am5x86 emulation support, and 486 mode would be inaccurate.
  • BigCJ wrote:
    eli573 wrote:
    An Am5x86 has roughly the same performance as a Pentium 75 when running an application that doesn't utilize the extra data pipelines, or whatever. The Am5x86 is either clocked at 133MHz and something else, I've forgotten.
    IIRC, Am5x86 was AMD's answer to the Pentium, though not nearly as good. You wrote predominantly about 486s, so that's the route I thought you were taking. It shouldn't be too much trouble to just go ahead and test Office 2k on the real hardware. Most emulators don't have Am5x86 emulation support, and 486 mode would be inaccurate.
    486 mode on an emulator wouldn't really be that inaccurate, because the Am5x86 is just an Am486 but with a 4x clock multiplier, or something along those lines. This is why I wrote a lot about 486s. If it runs on a 486DX4 or a 486DX2, it will almost certainly run on an Am5x86. Also, it wasn't AMD's product to compete with the Pentium 1, but it rather provided an upgrade path to those who used an i486 or an Am486. AMD's product that competed with the Pentium was the K5, I believe.

    Worst case scenario, I come across a 486DX/486DX2 and I am not able to get it upgraded, in which case, the results of the test of QEMU in 486 mode will matter.
  • You don't have the computer yet?

    When you finish your tests, please post the results. I'd be curious to see how it turns out.
  • BigCJ wrote:
    When you finish your tests, please post the results. I'd be curious to see how it turns out.
    I'm working on getting drivers for the QEMU machine as we speak. I have it put to emulate a 486, but I need some CPU ID software to find out which 486 it's emulating, as the (My Computer > Properties) window just tells me "80486." I don't want to turn this into a [request] thread, but I need drivers for a:
    Realtek 8139 (Network)
    Cirrus Logic GD5446 (Video)
    (These are emulated, not on the host PC.)
    (EDIT: I don't expect anyone to look for these.)
  • Okay, so far I've found out that QEMU is emulating a 486DX clocked at 33MHz. Good fun. Still haven't found a copy of Office 2000. A 486DX, I wonder if it will still run.
  • edited February 2017
  • Thank you, I was looking for those. Just about now, I stumbled-- I apologize for any typing errors, the lack of avaiible CPU cycles from QEMU is messing up myy typing. Anyway, I just recently came across a Office 2000 iso, so this shuld accelerate the process. I'm not going to bother messing with CD romm drivers, so I'm just going to transfer my Office 2000 iso to the emullated machine, through IE, so I can use some old image mounting software for Windows 95 and install it from there. Although I might juust go to sleep and begin again in the morning, it's 10:40 and I had a somewhat big day. So unpredictable, but I'll post the results soon, but QEMU is too sluggish to do anything quickly, it's like I'm running Windows 95 on a 386SX with 4MB of ram.
  • Well, QEMU just stopped working, so I'll leave this rest until I get the laptop of question. I was able to recover my stolen P266, so I don't think I'll get a new 486 laptop for a while. Thanks for you help, everybody.
  • BigCJ wrote:
    eli573 wrote:
    An Am5x86 has roughly the same performance as a Pentium 75 when running an application that doesn't utilize the extra data pipelines, or whatever. The Am5x86 is either clocked at 133MHz and something else, I've forgotten.
    IIRC, Am5x86 was AMD's answer to the Pentium, though not nearly as good. You wrote predominantly about 486s, so that's the route I thought you were taking. It shouldn't be too much trouble to just go ahead and test Office 2k on the real hardware. Most emulators don't have Am5x86 emulation support, and 486 mode would be inaccurate.
    The AMD 5x86 is also called 486DX5, and runs at 133 MHz. That should tell you what you probably want to know.
  • buricco wrote:
    BigCJ wrote:
    eli573 wrote:
    An Am5x86 has roughly the same performance as a Pentium 75 when running an application that doesn't utilize the extra data pipelines, or whatever. The Am5x86 is either clocked at 133MHz and something else, I've forgotten.
    IIRC, Am5x86 was AMD's answer to the Pentium, though not nearly as good. You wrote predominantly about 486s, so that's the route I thought you were taking. It shouldn't be too much trouble to just go ahead and test Office 2k on the real hardware. Most emulators don't have Am5x86 emulation support, and 486 mode would be inaccurate.
    The AMD 5x86 is also called 486DX5, and runs at 133 MHz. That should tell you what you probably want to know.
    I know, it's an enhanced Am486, but with a 4x clock multiplier. That's why I put it in the same group as a 486.
  • The defining difference is that a Pentium or Pentium Overdrive is required to run Quake. It won't run on a stock 486, or (haven't actually tried this myself) an AMD 5x86.
  • SomeGuy wrote:
    The defining difference is that a Pentium or Pentium Overdrive is required to run Quake. It won't run on a stock 486, or (haven't actually tried this myself) an AMD 5x86.
    I'm aware-- well, not required, but it won't run well at all with a 486. As I've said,an Am5x86 is just an (AMD) 486 with a 4x clock multiplier.
  • SomeGuy wrote:
    The defining difference is that a Pentium or Pentium Overdrive is required to run Quake. It won't run on a stock 486, or (haven't actually tried this myself) an AMD 5x86.

    I thought Quake would run on 486s (that is, it doesn't use any i586 instructions) but it's just intolerably slow without the floating point performance of a proper Pentium class machine.
Sign In or Register to comment.