renejr902 wrote on 2020-07-31, 10:32:
Thanks so much guys for all theses answer. Cant wait to see the result of your test Bloodem. Can you tell me if TNT2 and/or Voodoo3 is ok or not ? i could have a friend deal.. ( i just read your answer about tnt2 being ideal!)
A TNT2 itself will perform basically identically, you'll be completely bottlenecked on the CPU in both cases. The difference is that it will let you use much older drivers that are lighter on the CPU. Which drivers are you using on the FX? Iirc Detonator 44.03 from 2003 was the best choice for FX5200. That's 6 years newer than your system, in a time when 6 years really mattered. By comparison, with a TNT2 you could use Detonator 2.08 from 1999. Just look at the difference in file size (17.96MB vs 1.99MB 😮 )
But i will probably wait for a Voodoo2, Banshee or Voodoo3 , if you tell me that voodoo 3 is ok ?
Voodoo2 would be best - but only if you ditch the FX. Adding Voodoo2 to FX just means twice the CPU load. Voodoo2+Mystique is fine as Mystique drivers are trivial. Voodoo3 is nice, probably comparable to TNT2 for most purposes. Difference is that V3 gives you GLide, where TNT2 gives you 32b colour (which you can't use because no game using 32b would run sensibly on your CPU).
and last question , About my 128mb ram. How much performance in 3d game in % of fps i can gain if i downgrade to 64 mb? just give me your opinion, i know nobody can be sure.
Complicated, as it depends on how much memory you are using. If you run out of memory, Windows starts using hard disk as virtual memory. This is a factor 1000 slower than RAM. If you go over L2 caching limits, your RAM above that is uncached, which is maybe 20% slower depending on what's in that RAM and how it's accessed.
Bottom line is that if you regularly use >64MB, you will have *much* better performance with 128MB, but if you don't ever use more than 64MB, you will have better performance with only 64MB RAM. Overall I hear people quote about 5% impact in games etc.
Now, if you just use the machine for games and don't multitask, you're probably staying well under 64MB. Games that needed more than that wouldn't run on your CPU anyway. So say you win about 5%. Nice, but not enough to make manifestly unplayable stuff playable. Probably ditching that heavy, late nVidia driver would have more impact.
If i remember correctly in 1998-99 my p200 mmx at 220mhz with voodoo 1 played NFS III very stable at 30 fps min at 800x 600 with most graphics setting at high. About Porsche unleashed maybe it was with my banshee and celeron 400 i dont remember well if i played with my p1 200 and voodoo1.
RIGHT NOW my P1 233mmx with FX 5200 run, no racing games at 640x480 near 30 fps, its more 15-25fps . NFS III at 640x480 most graphics setting at low except 2 of them at medium no car shader and i got i think ( i dont use fps counter right now) around 15-25fps . 25fps when no car around me. 5fps if all cars near me at same time. 15fps when 3 cars around me
( my nvidia setting are all at best performance setting no aa no anisotropic) Porsche unleashed is unplayable its like 5-15fps even in low-medium graphics.
I was never into racing games, so can't really comment on specifics, but overall picture is clear:
- P200@220MHz (sure you don't mean 225? 3x75MHz makes more sense) was overclocked, so faster anyway.
- higher bus speed really mattered with So7, as cache and RAM also clocked higher.
- Voodoo1 used GLide, which is less CPU-intensive than Direct3D, also much lighter drivers than Gf FXxxxx
- the heavy impact of number of cars, particularly when you say "around me" (so not necessarily in view) suggests that you're bottlenecking heavily on CPU. You need to ditch that Gf FX.
Some tests that i got some strange result.
- If i played NFS iii with a ps4 usb gamepad instead of my gravis gamepad in gameport, my fps cut by half or maybe 1/3 .
USB takes CPU time too, and USB 1.0 was slow, so it takes more time to do stuff - costing a lot more CPU. On a modern system this is stuff you don't need to think about, but with this old hardware, every cycle matters.
- in NFS III 320x240 and 640x480 the fps seems exactly the same, i even think that in run worst in 320x240 LoL!
Very conclusively CPU-limited. Your CPU doesn't care about resolution, it has to do the same physics/game logic calculations regardless, and is failing. Your GPU is so fast it doesn't care whether you're running 320x240, 640x480 or probabyl even higher.
- For info: Tomb raider 3 and wipeout XL in d3d seems near 20-30fps. Tomb raider play at same fps at 640x480 or 800x600 and even in 1024x768. not a big fps difference thats for sure.
Same again, your GPU is massively over-specced, so resultion is irrelevant to performance. Your CPU is the bottleneck.
( edit2: i will try tommorow to gwt my p1 233mmx at 262 or 290 mhz with 75mhz or 83 mhz jumper, i hope it can do a difference in 3d games, i hope it wont destroy my dos games performance in my 6.22 dos partition 😀
If it's stable, it will be faster in DOS too. Be sure to test stability thoroughly at 75MHz before you try 83MHz. Note that biggest risk with this OC isn't CPU but HDD controller. If you run faster than the controller can handle, you'll get massive file corruption on your HDD(s). For that reason I'd recommend using a different OS install to test 83MHz (maybe clone the HDD if you have the tools), so you don't lose all your softwre if it can't handle it.
I'd say there's about a 99% chance the PIIX3 southbridge can handle 75MHz and maybe 66% chance it does 83MHz. I had an Asus P55T2P4 with same i430HX and PIIX3 that happily ran a K62+ at 500MHz (6x83MHz) with 512MB RAM (all cached because Asus did include a second tag RAM option). As for the P233MMX, it depends. Later revisions were massively over-engineered (or rather: artificially capped at 233MHz to avoid eating into P2 sales), so they could reach very high speeds. I'd give 262MHz >99% chance and 290MHz >75% chance. I once ran a late-stepping P200MMX stable at 350MHZ (3.5x100MHz) on a different board, and others went higher still. But as always with overclocking, YMMV. Worst-case you fry your CPU and board, garble your HDD contents and maybe kill the cat too. Realistically, I'd say HDD data corruption is the only significant risk (and that only at 83MHz). If the CPU can't handle it, the system won't boot - but it should be fine if you set the jumper back to stable speeds.