search

win32ss / supermium

Chromium fork for Windows XP/2003 and up
https://win32subsystem.live/supermium/
BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License
2.38k stars 79 forks source link

Support for older processors #144

Closed win102018tv closed 5 months ago

win102018tv commented 10 months ago

If you are making support for Windows 2000, then I want to see support for processors without SSE, for example Pentium 2, and (if this is real) then optimization for such computers.

win32ss commented 10 months ago

I just had Supermium tested on some Pentium Ms, and those are near the limit of usability. I will try to optimize for the Pentium 4/4M/M, but I don't think I'll be able to get it to be usable on a PII. I'm not even sure if I can force a non-SSE flag on all Supermium components, like ffmpeg.

Windows 2000 easily supports hardware from the beginning of SSE2 (Pentium 4) to Nehalem/Westmere era. Maybe the SSE2-less Athlon XP is a good target, but we will see.

Gianluca18092004 commented 10 months ago

Windows 2000 easily supports hardware from the beginning of SSE2 (Pentium 4) to Nehalem/Westmere era. Maybe the SSE2-less Athlon XP is a good target, but we will see.

Windows 2000 also works for Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge

win32ss commented 10 months ago

Windows 2000 easily supports hardware from the beginning of SSE2 (Pentium 4) to Nehalem/Westmere era. Maybe the SSE2-less Athlon XP is a good target, but we will see.

Windows 2000 also works for Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge

Yes, but you need a modified usb.inf to ensure usbd.sys is copied over for the USB stack to function.

Stepman123 commented 10 months ago

I will try to optimize for the Pentium 4/4M/M

Supermium runs fine on a P4 SSE2 Socket478, but I use Thorium 109 because it is much faster on heavy sites. (1 GB RAM) Maybe you will do a Supermium 109 build?

ghost commented 10 months ago

Supermium runs fine on a P4 SSE2 Socket478, but I use Thorium 109 because it is much faster on heavy sites. (1 GB RAM) Maybe you will do a Supermium 109 build?

For such hardware, better rollback to XP and use Kafan Minibrowser (Chromium 87) and Mypal 68. They are the fastest "modern" browsers for P4 processors.

sparty411 commented 9 months ago

If you are making support for Windows 2000, then I want to see support for processors without SSE, for example Pentium 2, and (if this is real) then optimization for such computers.

It wouldn't be useable even with a top of the line 1.4GHz Tualatin or Athlon XP 3200+. It isn't even useable on my 2.13GHz Pentium M with 2GB of RAM.

mserafym commented 9 months ago

Anything below the Pentium D and all other single-core processors are, in my humble opinion, unfit to adequately run the current web in 2024. The pages themselves and the dynamic content will be processed and rendered more or less tolerably on a single-core CPU. And the biggest brakes will be introduced due to the ubiquitous https - with a rather voracious AES128 and AES256 (all encryption falls on the CPU)

mserafym commented 9 months ago

It wouldn't be useable even with a top of the line 1.4GHz Tualatin or Athlon XP 3200+. It isn't even useable on my 2.13GHz Pentium M with 2GB of RAM.

Some people believe in miracles (those who have single-core retro processors on retro PC builds), but, alas, miracles do not happen

cavejonston commented 5 months ago

Support for non-SSE2 CPUs would be great as I currently run a Pentium 3 setup and it only supports SSE. If Athlon XP's seem like a good target for optimization, please also try and optimize for Pentium 3's. - Sincerely Pentium 3 Gang

NS-Clone commented 5 months ago

people using some SSE4 emulators on W10? for run "new" games is there any SSE1 emulators from "good old times"?

and why windows still doesn't emulate it natively? undoc opcode interrupts/exceptions exist from 8086 oh yes security updates security updates round corners round corners buy buy buy buy 🤦‍♂️

FalconFour commented 4 months ago

+1. Of course XP isn't anywhere near my main system, but I have a Pentium Pro (YES...) system that runs XP (UH-HUH), which is used for retro tasks. To me, there's no reason to use Windows 2000 (a "beta" Windows XP, unpolished and lacking so many critical APIs), so I just use XP and trim it down where needed.

My biggest struggle with this thing is finding a browser that will connect to, and properly render sites where I go get retro stuff - like WinWorldPC or oldversion. SeaMonkey has held me well in the past, but even that one now fails to render sites and gives SSL errors on others, so it's unusable.

Please, before considering Windows 2000, consider a build that targets non-SSE, and even non-MMX (like my Pentium Pro). It'll be slow, but if I want fast, I just reach over and grab my Windows 11 laptop! It's not about fast or "practical", it's about being usable. I don't even know if it's possible, but I would think that a big part of Supermium's purpose is to fill the gap between the "modern" internet and retro-computing.

EyeAndTea commented 1 month ago

I also wish to see support for Non SSE processors such as the Athlon XP. I know from experience that these machines are fast enough to run a lot of the web, and the machine that I tested on is not top of the line either.

In the meantime, for people looking for alternatives, search for the browsers New Moon, and Serpent. New Moon still has non SSE builds, but I am unsure about Serpent.

I hope the maintainers change their mind on this, and add support for such machines. To me, a project like Supermium is about reducing waste. It allows continued usage of old operating systems to allow the usage of old software avoiding wasting the human effort put on developing such software. And it allows the continued usage of old hardware avoiding wasting such hardware.

People have forgotten, or made to forget, what the CPU is and reduced it to a fancy toaster. If they had not, a remarkable project like Supermium would not be needed.