NT> Well... my answer wasn't entirely wrong then, was it? Is this
NT> version of OS2 out already? How good is the support for DOS games?
NT> Is it practical to play in this fashion?
No idea about multi-processor versions of OS/2 - I've only got one.
BUT.....it was a Pentium 66MHz a few weeks back, and is now a Pentium
166MHz.....so I can comment on that aspect.
With both fast and slow processors (the rest of the system is 32MB EDO,
all PCI, 4MB S3 964 video, Adaptec 2940 SCSI-based disk drives - so
hopefully not to big a bottle-neck elsewhere) I ran GP2, ICR2 and Nascar
in both native DOS and simulated DOS from OS/2.
Using the CDBenchmarks, OS/2 was slightly slower than pure DOS, perhaps
a frame or two/second.
I practice, it was maybe a frame/second at the most (based on GP2's
estimates + occupancy rates, and ICR2's frame count. Essentially, in the
real world, either running fairly basic detail in SVGA on the P66, or
near maximal on the P166 (everything in Papyrus, no sky in GP2), I don't
notice any significant difference in play between native DOS and OS/2.
This might well be because, besides the "overheads", at the same time my
OS/2 Dos games all think they've got 640k base memory with no TSR's in
the way, busmastering on the SCSI setup instead of "Smartdrive", etc.
Whatever - in use, I don't notice the difference in play. And clicking
on the icon from the desktop, switching in and out, avoiding bootdisks
or multiple-setup config.sys's and the like.....OS/2 is a dead coninient
way to drive.....and do other things!
Certainly seems a lot better than the Win95 route.....!!!
Cheers!
---
* RM 1.3 U0414 * News Flash : Duracell bunny arrested, charged with battery.