Is there anyway I could speed it up a bit?(inside the dungeoun in the very beginning stage was okay but once I came out it became really slow). Music is normal though..

wich game are you talking about???

If you're running Arena, use a dynamic core and 22500 cycles for best performance. If you're running Daggerfall, use a dynamic core and set the cycles to "max", but don't put it in quotes. These are the optimal setups for Arena and Daggerfall.

If the CPU on the host computer is too fast, then Daggerfall will run buggy with the max setting. Just like how Daggerfall will run buggy if it's natively on a too fast CPU. The town NPCs will jitterbug, and the climbing won't work and so on.

Besides, the dynamic core and max cycles are default for protected mode software, which Daggerfall is.

In Arena you have in game speed option. + and ' (next to backslash)

With this, you can successfully lower game speed, if you have to fast computer.

I've heard that rumor also, but it runs nice and smooth on my old P3/633 and P3/800 using 98SE. Never had that problem of NPCs warping, except on slower machines where things choked out on the CPU. And I have NEVER seen or heard of DOSBox changing a user's settings to dynamic/max just because a game is in protected mode, and I am fairly sure you're wrong here. I have used the setup of 15k cycles on a normal core for Doom/UDoom and it has NEVER switched to max/dynamic on me.

The + and - are not his problem if he is using a cycles setting that is too low, as the emulated CPU is his bottleneck. If you use the rigth DOSBox setup to begin with, you won't have to adjust that option and it'll run great after a clean install.

Not a rumor.

That's what core=auto and cycles=auto do, and those are the default settings for the newer DOSBox releases.

Ah well I don't use the automatic features as they tend to cause more problems than not, so I guess you're right. I still have not experienced the jerky players or what-not, but I haven't tried DF on a 3.20GHz machine attempting to run DOS either. I mean that's ASKING for problems! I can say beyond the shadow of a doubt that both my old roommate and I played DF on 98SE on an 800MHz system and an 866MHz system without a hint of problems.

I've had serious issues with Daggerfall on a 350MHZ machine, you lucked out there then for sure, or just didn't notice them!

I also had problems with a pentium II 350... climbing, straffing, swimming and moving backwards wouldn't work. I have to underclock it to 200mhz to get everything working as it should.

Odd, I played it on a P2/233 for years, then the P3/633, P3/800, and I may have had it on the P3/866 at one point. Bear in mind though, I tweak my entire system out, not just the game. A tweaked game on a crap OS isn't worth a dime. Maybe one of my 98SE tweaks was the fix.

Yes you're right, it does run well at 233mhz I've just tried it on my old comp. Climbing is not as smooth though and a bit harder to get started, but everything else works perfect.

I would like to try out some of the tweaks you applied on Win98 and test them on mine, because Daggerfall won't work properly at 350mhz on my system and seems to be having timing problems, maybe these tweaks are the answer.

Nevermind

Well post your system specs and I'll dig out my old 98SE tweaking notes. Many of them require registry editing, but if you know RegEdit fairly well, you'll be fine. Others include pagefile modifications and INI settings. Did you know for example, that you can specify a pagefile size in 9X, but force 9X to use all physical RAM prior to using the pagefile? This can result in big performance gains.

Thank's for offering to dig out your old win98 tweaks I appreciate it, but I'm not too keen on editing the registry especially when its running stable. I had a bad experience editing the registry on WinXP a few years ago, and..... killed it!

...

Well that explains a lot there. Windows runs like crap out of the box, XP included. If you're not tweaking the OS, and the OS runs like crap, how can anything running on the OS run worth a crap? I wasn't going to give you any tweaks I myself have not run, but if you're not comfortable toying with the registry then it's best not to touch it.

Tweaks I do include the following:

• Unloading program libraries when they're done being used, not holding them in RAM for up to 2hrs
  
• Setting a proper pagefile size and forcing Windows to use it without modification
  
• Forcing Win9X machines to use all physical RAM before using the pagefile for massive performance boosts
  
• Disabling the prefetcher in 2K/XP as it is known to cause problems with programs that change versions
  
• Limiting the BITS service so it won't eat your bandwidth in 2K/XP
  
• Limiting the QoS service so it can't eat your bandwidth in 2K/XP
  
• Enabling CPU caching on 9X machines
  
• And various other 9X/XP tweaks

This machine is running multiple tweaks right now, although XP doesn't have as many registry tweaks as 9X does. Most of the XP tweaks are available in policies.