Installing Windows 95 On a 386DX???
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 25 янв 2024
- Well guys, I may be getting in way over my head.... I'm going to attempt to install Windows 95 on a 386DX-33Mhz. Let's see how this goes!
SPECS:
CPU: AMD Am386DX-33Mhz
Memory: 8mb RAM, 64K Cache
Video: Tseng Labs ET4000
Audio: ESS AudioDrive 688F (Originally: Creative Labs Vibra16, but it sucked)
LIKE, COMMENT, & SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE VIDEOS LIKE THIS!
If you have any questions regarding retro hardware, software, systems, etc... or you have a suggestion for stuff you guys would like me to discuss/review on the channel, I would love to hear from you guys! You can contact me via email! (Email address is in my channel description)
I appreciate all the support from you guys, and I hope to keep doing this channel for a long, long time! 
Наука
It wasn't the most pleasant thing to use every day, but 95 was the hot new thing and my 386SX20 was all I had.
Hey, back then we had to do what we had to do! Thanks for the comment!
Same here. I even managed somehow to install it on 3MB of RAM. It required working around the available memory check by the installer. I can't recall how I did it.
If you put /nm parameter after setup.exe command in dos,it skips checking for minimum requirements. @@piast99
I'm studying to get my CompTIA A+. I'm fascinated by older computers and the history behind it. Thank you for putting in the effort! I really liked seeing the 386 in action.
Best of luck! Thank you for the comment!
This intro was super good! So talented! Keep up the good work!
Thank you! Will do!
Thanks for this video. I did that same install, using floppies on my 386 DX 40 at the time... Good memories.
You're welcome! Thanks for commenting! If you wanna hit that subscribe button I'd really appreciate it!!!
well done, very fun te watch. one time for laughs i tried it on a late 286 16mhz with 4 simm sticks of 1mb and a more modern 500mb hard drive. it ran but i remember extracting a .rar file like a random directx installer took 17 minutes or something
Thanks! Lol, sometimes it's fun to try a crazy idea with an old computer just to see what happens! 🤣
Rubbish, a 286 can't run Windows 95, as it is 16/32 bits OS
I worked at a computer shop back in the day and we had a customer that brought his 386sx in to have us install Win95 on it. It was torture but I did it.
Thanks for the story! I love hearing these personal experiences with old operating systems and computer systems! Great stuff!
The oldest PC I ever used was a 486, so I wasn’t sure what to expect but I really thought it would perform worse, it really didn’t seem that slow all things considered.
Yeah, 386DX machines were actually fairly capable little systems! I was impressed as well!
I had a cacheless 386SX (so just 16bit bus!) at 20MHz with 8MB of ram with Windows 95. :D It's a bucket list item checked, but that's all it is. :D
I ran 95 on my 386 DX 40 just fine*
*It was 1995 and that's all I had as a kid. So many floppies.
Wow what a throw back 😢 makes me want to setup a windows 95 vm
86box is your best bet for virtualizing w95
386sx33 with 4Mb RAM. It actually worked kind of ok back in the day. Thrashed the disk like crazy though lol
It's hard to believe the phone I'm watching this on is twice as fast as that computer
Your phone is definitely much more than twice as fast.
The 386DX CPU was introduced in the mid-1980s.
The first computer I ever installed Windows 95 on was a 486DX2/66. I don't remember all of the stats, but I think I had 8MB RAM, and a 2GB hard drive. It ran pretty well, but doing benchmarks on it, I found that it had better stats running DOS than it had running Windows 95. I think that would be an interesting video, if you ran benchmark tests on it, in Windows, as well as booting up in command line DOS mode, (which I believe is an option on Windows 95). I think that's how I did my comparison, but it was obviously over 18 years ago, so I'm not sure.
Back in the day, we had a menu system in Window 95-98-ME. You have one selection for , say Wolfenstein, another for a CD based game, and another for Windows. You would never run a Dos Game without exiting Windows, or better yet, not loading it. You have to edit msdos.sys, config.sys, and autoexec.bat All of these files are text files in the Dos version that comes with windows 9x.
I was able to run Windows 3.11 on 286's and Wolfenstein and Blake Stone, and Windows 9x and Doom on 486 machines and Windows ME and Quake on Pentium 60. But I never ran the games never ran under Windows. Even the ones that would run did so slowly and without sound. Your menu choice loads the Dos version of the sound drivers or possibly the sound and cd rom drivers if you plan on playing 3d games.
You could dual boot Dos and NT with versions of NT then use the Menu system to load your drivers for DOS games.But, again, you want to avoid playing DOS games under NT.
I had a friend running win95 on an 8mbyte 386dx40 back in teh day, and it actually wasn't that bad - I've heard, anecdotally, that it's actually snappy if you can get 12meg+ in there - win95 seemed to hunger for ram far more than it hungered for computrons
Thanks for the comment! That's what I remember as well. Early versions of Windows 95 were memory hogs 🐖
Would be truly painful if it didn't have cache. is it an ET4000W32 or one without Windows acceleration
It's an ET4000AX, and given the BIOS date of 9/14/1990, I highly doubt it has Windows acceleration. It's a shame, it would definitely help out Windows alot if it did.
I think the floppy disk version of Win95 only has The Microsoft Sound, but not the rest of the sound files...
Ah, that makes sense. I was wondering why they didn't install, Thank you !
I was forced to install Win95 A on a Compaq Deskpro 5133 around 2000. After that I always made sure to have a bootable Win98 startup disk with cdrom drivers & a pc available to format hard drives & copy the setup files to them. C:\Windows\Options\Cabs\ is your friend.
Yeah, having a boot disk (or several) around is definitely a necessity! Thanks for the comment!
These days I keep bootable Cds, Dvds &USBs around@@J-Tech95
In my experience outside of booting very slow on a old 120MB hard drive, Windows 95 generally ran faster on a 386 than Windows 3.11 did. I think Windows 95 has a couple of improvements to UI optimisation.
lol, that was my first computer when i was like 10... 3.1 then 95 on a 386... i remember borrowing some ram to install it.
This doesn't seem much worse than on my 486dx33 with 8mb of ram. It wasn't great but it was all i had till i got a hand me down pentium mmx 133 in like 1998.
Windows performance on this class of hardware did force me to learn dos for gaming so that was a plus.
Thanks for sharing! Really, the 386's were pretty decent if you got the DX version. The SX's sucked... they were about on par with a 286-class CPU
I am not sure if running DOS game under Windows 95 as the only game you run to present how Windows 95 runs games makes any sense whatsoever. You could try to run Doom95 and e.g. compare it to DOS version showing how big nonsense Win95 was for 386.
The 8 mb ram and win95 combo will destroy the hdd. Win95 will make a swap file on hdd and it write like crazy on it, making bad sectors, due to the age of the hdd. I have seen it happened many times. Are those the famouse win95 installs 1.7 mb floppy disks?
:)
286?
Are you asking if it'll run on a 286?
It can't run on a 286 (unless maybe you swapped the cpu with a super rare 386 chip with adapter to go in a 286 socket)
Windows 95 needs a CPU that is capable of 32bit instructions.
The 286 is not capable of such instructions, so no Windows 95.
386DX is the minimum CPU according to Windows 95 system requirements.
Try installing Windows 95 on a 386SX (not DX) for a laugh.