Comparing Today's Computers To 1995's

I really like this old computer specs with prices. I'm so glad we've gone past 9600 baud modems, 80MB HDDs, etc.

Our first computer was a 386SX (no math coprocessor "DX"), 2MB of RAM (later upgraded to 8), 20MB HDD. Eventually I bought a 14.4 modem. SMOKIN'

HA! Those were the days of disk compression by Double Stacker (?)

Thanks for posting!
 
I've still got a 100MB hard drive that works great to this day. (western digital)
 
I remember these days. 8MB of RAM was screaming in 93/94.

Now I wouldn't flesh out a machine with less than 8GB RAM.
 
...the sound of a plasma blaster in DOOM is not a musical instrument.
Click to expand...

bfg_90001.png


I'd beg to differ.
 
DeathPrincess said:
Higher level 1995 PC = smartphone level hardware now.

Need a time machine...
Click to expand...

I think smartphones are closer to year 2000 PCs than 1995. In 1995 a high-end CPU was a 90MHz Pentium. Smartphones have 1.2GHz dual-core chips. They also have 1GB of RAM compared to 1995's 8MB.

Though I don't know how current-generation ARM hardware compares to 1995 x86 clock-for-clock. Maybe comparing frequencies is unfair.
 
in 1993, I bought my Amiga 3000 computer and then bought the Newtek Video Toaster 4000 card.
$2500 for the computer and $2500 for the Toaster, then another $750 for a 345MB hard drive and 12MB of ram.
In 1995 I bought a Warp Engine card for the computer, it was a CPU card with 4 simm slots and a 68040 @ 40Mhz for $1400. shit was crazy expensive back then.

I don't have the disposable income I used to have to blow on top of the line stuff as soon as it comes out, so I just upgrade slowly buying usually 1 generation back.
 
DeathPrincess said:
Higher level 1995 PC = smartphone level hardware now.

Need a time machine...
Click to expand...

Higher level 2003 PC = smartphone level hardware now

It seems that the higher end PowerVR series mobile GPU is as powerful as a Radeon 9700 pro, and theres about as much memory though not quite as much disk space in modern phones
 
Oh the good old days of Windows 95, i remember my mum paying £2000 for a computer with 4mb of ram :eek:
 
TheSpoon said:
In 1995 a high-end CPU was a 90MHz Pentium. Smartphones have 1.2GHz dual-core chips. They also have 1GB of RAM compared to 1995's 8MB.
Click to expand...

My 1995 computer shipped with up to 1GB of RAM, and a 170Mhz CPU. A more expensive model from the same company had 3D graphics and dual 200MHz CPUs.

SonicTron said:
Higher level 2003 PC = smartphone level hardware now
Click to expand...

We had 2.4Ghz Athlon64s in 2003. Are smartphones that fast yet?
 
Ahhh memories of running memmaker and game specific boot floppies...

Pleas type the 3rd word of the 5th paragraph on page 12. :rolleyes:
 
LightningCrash said:
My 1995 computer shipped with up to 1GB of RAM
Click to expand...

Either you've forgotten the details, or you aren't talking about any personal computer. In 1995, the largest memory module was 16MB and it cost over $500. And, the newly released Windows 95 only supported up to 480MB, and wouldn't boot with more than that.
 
All this hardware, and more, on display at the local Goodwill store. Could build a house out of 4x external CD-ROM drives and external modems. Core memory, older IBM 33-series disk drives, Lisas, Altairs, etc are old enough (and rare enough) to be nerdy-cool. Circa 1995 hardware will never be cool!
 
LightningCrash said:
My 1995 computer shipped with up to 1GB of RAM, and a 170Mhz CPU. A more expensive model from the same company had 3D graphics and dual 200MHz CPUs.



We had 2.4Ghz Athlon64s in 2003. Are smartphones that fast yet?
Click to expand...

Every enthusiast here knows that clock speed isn't everything and that architecture matters. If you don't believe that I have a nice fast Pentium D 965 (3.73 GHz) I'm willing to sell ya! :D
 
TheSpoon said:
I think smartphones are closer to year 2000 PCs than 1995. In 1995 a high-end CPU was a 90MHz Pentium. Smartphones have 1.2GHz dual-core chips. They also have 1GB of RAM compared to 1995's 8MB.

Though I don't know how current-generation ARM hardware compares to 1995 x86 clock-for-clock. Maybe comparing frequencies is unfair.
Click to expand...

I would peg it at roughly 2:1 in clock speed for equal performance. 600mhz ARM being roughly equivalent to 300Mhz x86 as far as we know it desktop wise.

My 800Mhz phone does about as well as my 350Mhz box did when I played Quake on it.

That's not even getting into the can of worms that is SOC graphics.
 
I was taking a Cobol programming class in 1995, and one of the fellow classmates was like,"Wow I could download the whole internet if I had a 1 GIGAbyte Hard Drive. I can't wait to buy one.." :)
 
Zepher said:
I don't have the disposable income I used to have to blow on top of the line stuff as soon as it comes out, so I just upgrade slowly buying usually 1 generation back.
Click to expand...
I'm with you - wierd, as a college student I would spend more on computer upgrades than I do now!

That article is right about spending the extra $400 on a 17" monitor, though. I did that in around '95 or '96 and that was one of the best computer purchases I made. I used that thing for over 10 years. Crazy thing, in 95/96 I was fine spending $700 to $800 for a 17" monitor. Will I spend $800 for a 27" flat panel now? Nope - too much money! :p
 
LightningCrash said:
My 1995 computer shipped with up to 1GB of RAM, and a 170Mhz CPU. A more expensive model from the same company had 3D graphics and dual 200MHz CPUs.



We had 2.4Ghz Athlon64s in 2003. Are smartphones that fast yet?
Click to expand...

No way you had 1GB of ram in 1995. I would believe that you had a 1GB HDD in 1995 though.

1GB of ram didn't really become common on desktop PCs until around 2003 or 2004.
 
Cmdrmonkey said:
No way you had 1GB of ram in 1995. I would believe that you had a 1GB HDD in 1995 though.

1GB of ram didn't really become common on desktop PCs until around 2003 or 2004.
Click to expand...

That is more like it.

I remember having 256MB on my Apple G3 333 and that was an epic shit ton of memory in 1998.
 
The 1995 Computers were a lot more advanced than the DEC Rainbow 100A (I added a DEC 5 MG HD later for $500.00 more which made it a 100B) that I bought about 1886 or so, for about $2,550.00. The list price for the system, with two Monitors, a CPU with 995 Kb RAM, two floppy 400 Kb SS Quad dirives, an LA-100 Serial Printer, and a 1200 Baud Modem was over $12,000.00 at the time.
By 1987 or so, my 386DX. 25 PC with 40 MG HD, CGA Monitor, 1 Kb RAM and no Modem cost over $4,000.00 and was obsolete within a couple years.
Glad things have advanced since then.
 
LightningCrash said:
My 1995 computer shipped with up to 1GB of RAM, and a 170Mhz CPU. A more expensive model from the same company had 3D graphics and dual 200MHz CPUs.
Click to expand...

http://redhill.net.au/b/b-95.html

Motherboards from 1995.

Types of CPU supported were typically 486 DX's running at 100 or 120Mhz.

That first one, the FIC... was supported as late as 1998. And the manual for it was updated through then. It's still online.

ftp://ftp.fic.com.tw/motherboard/manual/486/486-PVT/

Max memory installable using 4 slots?

EgLoa.gif


128MB.
 
the sound of a plasma blaster in DOOM is not a musical instrument.
Click to expand...

Holy shit that was a big nostalgia rush. I swear it's little things like this that I thought only I did in Doom, tapping the "Shoot" key with the plasma rifle equipped to make different musical patterns. It was one of those little tiny spontaneous things that you think have no relevance, but apparently we all did it at one point. Amazing.
 
Stone Cold said:
Either you've forgotten the details, or you aren't talking about any personal computer. In 1995, the largest memory module was 16MB and it cost over $500. And, the newly released Windows 95 only supported up to 480MB, and wouldn't boot with more than that.
Click to expand...

We were talking about higher end computers, not bottom-barrel PCs.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EKF/is_n2091_v41/ai_17809980/
"The high-end Model 170E features 32MB to 1GB memory,"

Cmdrmonkey said:
No way you had 1GB of ram in 1995. I would believe that you had a 1GB HDD in 1995 though.

1GB of ram didn't really become common on desktop PCs until around 2003 or 2004.
Click to expand...

*shipped* with up to 1GB. Mine didn't have 1GB. I didn't buy mine in 1995, either.

techrat said:
Max memory installable using 4 slots?

128MB.
Click to expand...

cool but irrelevant
the dual CPU computer i mentioned could be ordered with up to 2GB of memory in 1995.
 
The price for the Dell in '93 seems way overpriced. Just before the school year started in '93 I got a brand new Dell 486DX2 66 with 8MB RAM, Soundblaster 16(forget what the upgrade was over the base), a video card I don't remember (but it sure was great for X-Wing), CD drive (2x speed I think), a 15 inch monitor, a 14.4 modem (that I was not allowed to use until '95!), and a 320MB HDD, old clicky keyboard, and a two button mouse all in non-threatening beige. This was about $3,000 and only high end consumer computer gear came in black.

Then it arrived in the mail DOA. I had paid an extra $50 for a 72 hour burn in test where Dell was supposed to make sure EVERYTHING worked. My first positive Dell experience, but at least after two weeks of aggravation I got a free upgrade to a 500MB HDD out of it. The best was my HP Deskjet 1200C color printer that had four massive ink cartridges (which actually held lots of ink) and could print a detailed full page color image in under five minutes!
 
Anyone attempt running win95 on 4megs of edo? holy slide show, 8megs sure did the trick!

Not even sure if it was edo memory or if im getting my p166 mixed up with my 486DX.


its funny, i think the military still runs those sparc systems somewhere.
 
awsiemieniec said:
I really like this old computer specs with prices. I'm so glad we've gone past 9600 baud modems, 80MB HDDs, etc.

Our first computer was a 386SX (no math coprocessor "DX"), 2MB of RAM (later upgraded to 8), 20MB HDD. Eventually I bought a 14.4 modem. SMOKIN'

HA! Those were the days of disk compression by Double Stacker (?)

Thanks for posting!
Click to expand...

386 DX didn't have a math coprocessor either. And a 20MB HDD? I had a computer from mid-to late 80's with a 141MB drive. I'm not sure Windows 3.1 + MSDOS 6.2 would fit in 20MB with any room left for other applications.
 
ryan_975 said:
386 DX didn't have a math coprocessor either. And a 20MB HDD? I had a computer from mid-to late 80's with a 141MB drive. I'm not sure Windows 3.1 + MSDOS 6.2 would fit in 20MB with any room left for other applications.
Click to expand...

could have just ran DOS.
 
Trimlock said:
Anyone attempt running win95 on 4megs of edo? holy slide show, 8megs sure did the trick!

Not even sure if it was edo memory or if im getting my p166 mixed up with my 486DX.


its funny, i think the military still runs those sparc systems somewhere.
Click to expand...

I ran Win95 on a 386SX-20 with 4MB (eight 30-pin SIMMs) for about a year. One of my mom's friends gave me a 486DX/2-80 with 8MBs of ram and I thought I'd died and gone to heaven. I could finally play Hover. :D
 
Trimlock said:
could have just ran DOS.
Click to expand...

Not saying it wasn't likely, Just surprised that anyone in 1995 would want to tolerate such a small drive. Incidentally, that's when I'd bought my first drive becuase I'd filled up the 141MB I did have. Got a whopping 1,280MB for just $350.
 
Trimlock said:
Anyone attempt running win95 on 4megs of edo? holy slide show, 8megs sure did the trick!

Not even sure if it was edo memory or if im getting my p166 mixed up with my 486DX.


its funny, i think the military still runs those sparc systems somewhere.
Click to expand...


I tried it once, installed windows 95 on bare minimum specs, 386 cpu (4) 1mb simms. Made it to the desktop and moved the mouse, heard the hard drive go nuts with the swap file just from the mouse moving.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top