VOGONS


First post, by cde

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

After building a retro PC for the purpose of compatibility with games from a large period (late 80s to early 2000s) using the Abit KT7A (see /viewtopic.php?f=25&t=67476) I wanted to build an equivalent PC for the purpose of playing games from the early 2000s to ~2016 in a compact form factor (micro ATX).

With that in mind, I chose Ivy Bridge Z77 as a chipset, with the following rationale:
- Skylake and newer dropped USB 2.0 ports, and might require ACPI patches to work with Windows XP ;
- Haswell/Broadwell are not that much faster, less easy to delid/overclock, and lack official XP drivers from Intel ;
- Ivy Bridge is the newest platform that officially supports XP, and the oldest that officially supports Windows 10.

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z77M-D3H 1.1

Compared to other Z77 mATX board, this one has several advantages:

- COM and LPT header ports available ;
- True Intel 82801 PCI Bridge instead of buggy Asmedia ASM1083/1085 PCIe to PCI Bridge ;
- Up to 32 GB of memory, compatible with LPDDR3 ;
- SATA ports placement does not conflict with the GPU ;
- Atheros Gigabit Ethernet compatible with all operating systems ;
- Very good internal audio with low noise ;
- Solid capacitors.

One drawback of the BIOS is that CPU voltage cannot be configured, so overclocking works as long as the power drawn stays within the predefined power envelope (in my case, up to 4.3 GHz). Presumably the GA-Z77MX-D3H does not have this limitation but lacks COM/LPT ports.

Motherboard: ASRock Z77M

A very good alternative to the Gigabyte Z77M. It is limited to 16 GB however, but offers the possibility of raising the CPU Vcore, and also provides more fan connectors (5 instead of 3). Here I've been able to attain 4.5 GHz with an increase to 1.17V. This motherboard features an ASM1083/1085 PCIe to PCI Bridge revision 3 which is supposed to be less buggy than revision 1 often found on Z68 motherboards.

EDIT: further testing shows that unfortunately as soon as the 77W TDP is exceeded, the CPU gets downclocked to 3.5 GHz every so often, and the BIOS offers no option to raise the turbo boost power limit, so pretty disappointing. Even at 4.3 GHz the frequency drops regularly when running Prime95, which is not the case with the GA-Z77M-D3H where it stays at a constant 4.3 GHz.

CPU: Intel i7 3770K

This CPU is easier to delid and overclock than Haswell as it does not feature CMS components underneath the IHS. I used a delidding tool bought on eBay to remove it, cleaned up the default thermal paste and the silicon rubber, and applied Coolaboratory Liquid Ultra. Then I relidded with silicon red RTV and let it cure for 24h. The result is excellent with a temperature drop of 10-15C (same cooler and fan profiles).

Sadly a number of drivers have been removed by Intel, with seemingly no good reason, including the USB 3 C210 driver for Windows 7 🙁. So I've been using the following website to locate XP/7 drivers in the archive, in addition to Gigabyte's driver page:
https://www.gigabyte.com/fr/Motherboard/GA-Z7 … v-11/support#dl
https://www.touslesdrivers.com/index.php?v_pa … e=12&v_code=379 (latest versions of the drivers)
https://www.touslesdrivers.com/index.php?v_pa … e=26&v_code=379 (archive of previous versions)
https://www.touslesdrivers.com/index.php?v_pa … 371&v_langue=en (last USB 3 PCH 7 driver for Ivy Bridge)

Please note, the V1.1 BIOS is not compatible with V1.0 boards. Be careful when updating your BIOS!

Atheros AR8161 drivers can be found at:
https://www.ath-drivers.eu/download-driver-fo … wsXP-32bit.html
https://www.ath-drivers.eu/download-driver-fo … ows7-64bit.html

GPU: MSI GeForce GTX 960 GAMING 4GB

The 960 is the latest and most powerful GPU that is officially supported by NVIDIA on XP, up to the 368.81 driver (2016-07-14). The 970 and 980 would have worked with a modification to the INF file, but I appreciate the low power draw of the 960 and the fact that this MSI card is extremely silent under load, while staying relatively cool (66C max when running FurMark). It is also very well supported by the nouveau Linux driver, with full 3D acceleration.

A small issue with the Maxwell line of GeForce cards is the lack of compatibility with FreeSync/Adaptive Sync (contrary to Pascal and newer). It will only support G-Sync displays on Windows 10. That being said, it does support 1920x1080 @ 144 Hz without issues.

Operating system compatibility

I've run on this build Windows XP/7/10 as well as Debian 10 and macOS 10.10.5.

EDIT: although this was not the goal, many non speed sensitive DOS games run fine with OPL3LPT sound, and a USB keyboard/mouse (the BIOS provides excellent PS/2 emulation). In this case the VGA ouput of the internal HD4000 is used instead of the GTX 960 (which provides 1920x1080 instead of 720x400). The monitor I'm using, the AOC G2590PX, provides a 4:3 ratio option and can handle 70 Hz without frame dropping which is great.

Overall, this is another very good build that should stay useful for a long time.

Last edited by cde on 2020-02-16, 09:39. Edited 3 times in total.

Reply 1 of 11, by pentiumspeed

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Intel Pro/1000 PT is 32 bit XP, 7 64bit and 10 64bit supported, can run 10, 100 as well, available in x1 with one port. I bought this specially to relieve the TCP/IP processing overhead, called "IP offload" for my XP C2D E8600 Dell optiplex 780, saw about 15% to 25% faster when loading websites and helped me to save up for a year to get HP Z220 that I'm using now.

Since then, bought few more of Pro/1000 PT cards for my computers. Plan to get few more.

Cheers,

Reply 3 of 11, by Tertz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

There is one problem to use Ivy as retro PC. Such PC should work for longer than common. While those CPU have thermopaste under the cover (unlike 2xxx) which dry out, and the temperature should rise in performance tasks as games. Ivy is not significantly better in the performance, so 2600/2600k seem as better choice for such PC.

DOSBox CPU Benchmark
Yamaha YMF7x4 Guide

Reply 4 of 11, by cde

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Tertz wrote on 2020-02-14, 22:39:

There is one problem to use Ivy as retro PC. Such PC should work for longer than common. While those CPU have thermopaste under the cover (unlike 2xxx) which dry out, and the temperature should rise in performance tasks as games. Ivy is not significantly better in the performance, so 2600/2600k seem as better choice for such PC.

I do agree. In my case I did delid the 3770K to apply Coolaboratory, with some very good results. But indeed the 2600K is an excellent CPU for XP.

Reply 5 of 11, by lordmogul

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

The best you could build for XP overkill would probably a 2600K on Z68 and a GTX 780 TI (Faster than the 960, but also higher power draw and slightly older)
Those should be the fastest with proper driver support.

I like the idea of an all-in-one build, it keeps the room from overflowing on rigs (unless that is what you want), but somehow feels wrong to me not having atleaast one build per decade 😉
Aaaaand, that is pretty close to my daily driver.

P3 933EB @1050 (7x150) | CUSL2-C | GF3Ti200 | 256M PC133cl3 @150cl3 | 98SE & XP Pro SP3
X5460 @4.1 (9x456) | P35-DS3R | GTX660Ti | 8G DDR2-800cl5 @912cl6 | XP Pro SP3 & 7 SP1
3570K @4.4 GHz | Z77-D3H | GTX1060 | 16G DDR3-1600cl9 @2133cl12 | 7 SP1

Reply 6 of 11, by cde

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
lordmogul wrote on 2020-02-19, 10:16:
The best you could build for XP overkill would probably a 2600K on Z68 and a GTX 780 TI (Faster than the 960, but also higher po […]
Show full quote

The best you could build for XP overkill would probably a 2600K on Z68 and a GTX 780 TI (Faster than the 960, but also higher power draw and slightly older)
Those should be the fastest with proper driver support.

I like the idea of an all-in-one build, it keeps the room from overflowing on rigs (unless that is what you want), but somehow feels wrong to me not having atleaast one build per decade 😉
Aaaaand, that is pretty close to my daily driver.

Indeed, very good point 😀

By the way, as an amusing coincidence, PhilsComputerLab released a video titled "Building Ultimate Windows XP Retro Gaming PC with i7-4790 and GTX 960" a couple days before my post, it is worth checking out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjR2X39BVyo

He chose Haswell which is a fine choice (unless you need the built-in graphics, only a unofficiel driver for XP Embedded works), and a GTX 960. The motherboard he picked sports LPT and COM ports (not bracket needed) which is nice too.

Reply 7 of 11, by Baoran

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I thought this place was only for retro PCs and not for the modern ones. My main pc is still 4770k with 1080ti. It had 780ti when I built it in 2013 and I would just have to switch the old video card back to have something close to same.
Can you play some older games on that kind of pc that you can't using a newer windows 7 pc?

Reply 8 of 11, by gerwin

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Interesting and well thought out choice of parts there. In several ways similar to the setups which I have at home and at the office. But instead of Z77 these are Gigabyte Z68 models. These come with Etrontech USB 3.0 chip, which is also functional in Windows XP. These Z68 boards are Ivy Bridge CPU compatible, with a BIOS update, and most systems are now using i5-3550 CPUs. I did not know about the thermal paste concern.

About the intel HD drivers for Windows XP. I had issues with the last release. It has less options in the configuration dialog, but more importantly it seemingly assigns less memory to the GPU. Intel driver 6.14.10.5384 works better.
Though in a desktop I always add an NVidia or AMD graphics card, if only because they have more useful options in the driver.

--> ISA Soundcard Overview // Doom MBF 2.04 // SetMul

Reply 9 of 11, by lordmogul

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
Baoran wrote on Yesterday, 16:39:

I thought this place was only for retro PCs and not for the modern ones. My main pc is still 4770k with 1080ti. It had 780ti when I built it in 2013 and I would just have to switch the old video card back to have something close to same.
Can you play some older games on that kind of pc that you can't using a newer windows 7 pc?

That is a question I ask myself rather often. At what point can a game be simply run on a more recent system with a more recent OS.
For example Doom 1&2 or Unreal (Gold) run perfectly fine on a modern machine. For Doom it needs a modern sourceport, but Unreal runs pretty much natively.
I don't see a point in having a machine for each year in history, but having more than one might mean enjoying games the way they were meant to be, especially with stuff that just isn't supported or supported properly anymore (Glide, EAX, SecuROM, CRTs, PS/2, etc)

P3 933EB @1050 (7x150) | CUSL2-C | GF3Ti200 | 256M PC133cl3 @150cl3 | 98SE & XP Pro SP3
X5460 @4.1 (9x456) | P35-DS3R | GTX660Ti | 8G DDR2-800cl5 @912cl6 | XP Pro SP3 & 7 SP1
3570K @4.4 GHz | Z77-D3H | GTX1060 | 16G DDR3-1600cl9 @2133cl12 | 7 SP1

Reply 10 of 11, by cde

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
lordmogul wrote on Yesterday, 17:39:
That is a question I ask myself rather often. At what point can a game be simply run on a more recent system with a more recent […]
Show full quote
Baoran wrote on Yesterday, 16:39:

I thought this place was only for retro PCs and not for the modern ones. My main pc is still 4770k with 1080ti. It had 780ti when I built it in 2013 and I would just have to switch the old video card back to have something close to same.
Can you play some older games on that kind of pc that you can't using a newer windows 7 pc?

That is a question I ask myself rather often. At what point can a game be simply run on a more recent system with a more recent OS.
For example Doom 1&2 or Unreal (Gold) run perfectly fine on a modern machine. For Doom it needs a modern sourceport, but Unreal runs pretty much natively.
I don't see a point in having a machine for each year in history, but having more than one might mean enjoying games the way they were meant to be, especially with stuff that just isn't supported or supported properly anymore (Glide, EAX, SecuROM, CRTs, PS/2, etc)

I agree, it is a completely legitimate question.

One game that I had trouble with in the past is Bioshock (not Bioshock Remaster which I believe came out in 2016). Basically when running the original Bioshock on Windows 7, many sounds were simply gone making the game a lot less enjoyable. See for example https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/78 … nd-in-windows-7 . At the time I tried all workarounds and the only one that worked was to plug in a microphone. Now the Remastered edition has no such problem on Windows 7, but it feels wrong to pay for the game again to have a bug fixed.

Another game that is showing problems on anything newer than Windows XP is the original CD version of Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory. It required an anti-copy scheme that installed a kernel driver, something that does not work on Windows 7 x64. These days I only buy games from GOG, so I don't run into this problem, but to play the original SC:CT I need XP. Do I need the very fastest PC to do so? Obviously not, but it's still nice to being able to play a whole range of games from the early 2000's to now without needing multiple PCs.

Reply 11 of 11, by Baoran

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
cde wrote on Yesterday, 20:16:
I agree, it is a completely legitimate question. […]
Show full quote
lordmogul wrote on Yesterday, 17:39:
That is a question I ask myself rather often. At what point can a game be simply run on a more recent system with a more recent […]
Show full quote
Baoran wrote on Yesterday, 16:39:

I thought this place was only for retro PCs and not for the modern ones. My main pc is still 4770k with 1080ti. It had 780ti when I built it in 2013 and I would just have to switch the old video card back to have something close to same.
Can you play some older games on that kind of pc that you can't using a newer windows 7 pc?

That is a question I ask myself rather often. At what point can a game be simply run on a more recent system with a more recent OS.
For example Doom 1&2 or Unreal (Gold) run perfectly fine on a modern machine. For Doom it needs a modern sourceport, but Unreal runs pretty much natively.
I don't see a point in having a machine for each year in history, but having more than one might mean enjoying games the way they were meant to be, especially with stuff that just isn't supported or supported properly anymore (Glide, EAX, SecuROM, CRTs, PS/2, etc)

I agree, it is a completely legitimate question.

One game that I had trouble with in the past is Bioshock (not Bioshock Remaster which I believe came out in 2016). Basically when running the original Bioshock on Windows 7, many sounds were simply gone making the game a lot less enjoyable. See for example https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/78 … nd-in-windows-7 . At the time I tried all workarounds and the only one that worked was to plug in a microphone. Now the Remastered edition has no such problem on Windows 7, but it feels wrong to pay for the game again to have a bug fixed.

Another game that is showing problems on anything newer than Windows XP is the original CD version of Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory. It required an anti-copy scheme that installed a kernel driver, something that does not work on Windows 7 x64. These days I only buy games from GOG, so I don't run into this problem, but to play the original SC:CT I need XP. Do I need the very fastest PC to do so? Obviously not, but it's still nice to being able to play a whole range of games from the early 2000's to now without needing multiple PCs.

Would love to have a list of windows xp games or other software that don't work on windows 7 to get an idea of what having a windows xp retro system would be useful for.