The 6200s with a AGP connector keyed to work in a AGP 2x slot may not actually be capable of it. I've read that this possibly is an error on the part of the manufacturer and that the chip doesn't support 3.3v signaling.

Most of the cards have 64-bit RAM buses but a few do have 128-bit (google it).

More about AGP compatibility: http://www.playtool.com/pages/agpcompat/agp.html

Thanks swaaye, I am still in doubt though. On one hand the Geforce 6 series are usually stated as a 1,5 Volt signalling chips. But I posted this question because I found messages describing 6200's that run on a 440BX mainboard or similiar. To some extend at least. Here are some:

source
Mar 7 2008, 10:49 AM
Same here for an old Pentium-III board with BX440 chipset, and Nvidia GeForce 6600 graphics board ( advertised as AGP8x, but with 2 keys in the slot interface so that I was able to install it ). conflict is on W2k

source
So, ich habe jetzt einige Grafikkarten ausprobiert. Die Ati 9000er Serie (9100, 9200 und 9600) lief absolut stabil ueber mehrere Stunden. Die Gf6er Karten liefen auch ohne Probleme (6200 und 6600)

source
I set up an old Slot 1 Motherboard by Gigabyte - the GA6-BXC. Connected a Pentium III 733 via S370-adapter. FSB of 133MHz, heck yeah, 440BX Chipset running out of specs.
I put on a GF6200 AGP and fired the system up, installed Windows 2000 and, well, there is some sort of resource conflict.

and Something taiwanese? with a photo Very interesting!, but my taiwanese is lacking.

Maybe some cards in the 6 series have a more legacy friendly AGP-bridge chip?
PS. I made an extra cut in my 6200 and tried it in a 440bx, no Post...

I think I've seem posts like that too, describing success with 6200 on 440bx. It looks so hit and miss though that it annoys me.

@gerwin, I was interested to read your O.P. about the 6200, mx440, and the fx5200 nVidia cards. You say that the fx5200 is "too crappy" - given the existance of both the 'later' 6200 and also the 'earlier' mx440 graphics cards, would also having a fx5200 make little or no sense? Or, to rephrase this differently, what are the fx5200 card's unique "plus points"?

retro games 100 wrote:

Or, to rephrase this differently, what are the fx5200 card's unique "plus points"?

If I may answer: 1) it can run NVIDIA Dawn demo
2) It is DirectX 9 compatible, and the ultra version is at least as fast as Radeon 8500/9000 pro and thereby much faster then the good old MX440.

Only the 64-bit 5200 sucks. 128-bit is relatively useful.

Most of the 6200s, on the other hand, can be soft modded into 6600, making them a good choice to play also some of the newer games.

Personally, I would differentiate 3 generations of cards:
1) oldies (ISA/early PCI/VLB),
2) DX 3-7 era (3dfx, TNTs, S3 Savage, GF2/4 MX) and
3) Shader (DX8 and up) era (GF3, GF4 Ti, Radeon 8500 and up)

Every retro gamer should have at least one card of each era. For the last era - you dont need GF 6200/5200 or Radeon 8500 - better go with even newer el cheapo cards, like Radeon 3850 or NV equivalent. First of all, you get warranty and better performance/compatibility then any older card. If AGP is the limitation, then look no further then Radeon x1950 pro (AIW even better). Now... the question asked here is if they work on the 440bx. I would prefer to ask a different question - why plug in a DX9 (or DX8) card into a late 90s mainboard? 😀

i really wonder, what use it should be if the graphics card is way too fast for the system. So if you put in a GF4 Ti or a x1950 Pro what difference would it make? (on DX8) Probably none.
So if f.e. a GF4 Ti is on the 'too fast' limit of everything a 440BX can handle in terms of CPU power any other card that's in the same speed range or faster is just a matter of taste. Ofcourse there is no general rule where the CPU limitation is as this depends on the games you want to play.

elianda wrote:

i really wonder, what use it should be if the graphics card is way too fast for the system. So if you put in a GF4 Ti or a x1950 Pro what difference would it make? (on DX8) Probably none.

Eye candy. Newer cards have better filtering and FSAA. These do not depend on CPU speed.

Like having Multisample anti-aliasing enabled to render trees in Ghost recon 😀. But what motivated me this time is because I can hardly run Wings Over Vietnam/Europe/Isreal. Whilst I have manually cut out and downsized many graphical features. Not that I don't have a better PC 😉 , but it was still disappointing. (CPU cycles were fine)

I personally like the lower end-nvidia cards because they have a reasonable heat output and great compatibility allround. The TNT2/Geforce2/MX440's all work very well in DOS, AFAIK just as well as an S3 PCI. (Geforce 5 and some MX440-8X have the Vesa refresh rates locked)

Maybe the FX5200 Ultra is an option, I don't know much about it. The normal FX5200 got bad reviews when it was out: 'nice features, but no speed to use them for anything' or 'My old MX440 is even faster'. But at the time I did not know about 64- versus 128-bit memory. I Actually had an FX5200 for 15 minutes, but it caused instability.

Honestly, I do not care too much for the new features, but over time the chips get a smaller manufacturing method > lower voltages > extra speed without the heat.

It seems the 6200 is still produced, most are now based on the NV44a chip. AFAIK only the early models had the NV43 which could unlock extra pipelines, but wikipedia says it can also be done with the later chips? Seems unlikely.

You don't want a FX5200. Ever. It's as bad as everyone says (but I think it's even worse considering it's slower than gf2mx). It'll be the worst video card you'll ever purchase. Savage4 is more fun to play with than it.

@everyone, thanks a lot for your interesting comments.

Regarding the FX5200, I already have one 😦 - its performance is not impressive. I think I will shelve my plan of using it in any retro rig, and instead investigate both the MX 440 and also the 6xxx series - such as the fanless 6200 card.

The reason I got the FX5200, is that the fanless design appealed to me. Regarding powerful graphics cards and windows 98, I think the last cards with official drivers are ATI's 9800 Pro, and nVidia's 6xxx series cards. Anything released after those two cards probably only has official support for NT & XP.

leileilol wrote:

You don't want a FX5200. Ever. It's as bad as everyone says (but I think it's even worse considering it's slower than gf2mx). It'll be the worst video card you'll ever purchase. Savage4 is more fun to play with than it.

I bet you tried the 64-bit version! 😁 I did also. Then I said the same thing you just wrote. But afterwards, I got myself a 128-bit one and it had performance in range of Radeon 8500 (pretty useful at that time). Of course, a passive cooled Radeon 9600, or even 9550 is a much better choice.

Cheers! 😎

@elfuego, ah! That's a very interesting point: I had no idea you could get a 128-bit FX5200. I thought they were all 64-bit. Please can you suggest any specific 128-bit models for me to try?

(Also, I was thinking of adding a passively cooled ATI Radeon 9600 to my "retro plans". 😀 )

I figured that is the FX5200 Ultra, with a fan on top.
Often the same with the MX440's, most 128-bit ones have a fan (exception: ASUS).
At least the two mentioned above have DDR RAM in any case, whilst the Geforce 2 MX and earlier have SDR RAM.

Personally I doubt the entire Geforce 5 series. At the time I was in the market for a new card, but after reading (and trying out two ATI cards) I just decided to wait it out until the next lineup. Not that I can currently say exactly why...

gerwin wrote:

6200 is usually found with 64-bit DDR2 250MHz, AFAIK this just equals my MX440 with 128-bit DDR, giving 8 GB/s.

Correction, it gives 3,2 GB/sec on the 64-bit 6200. It is surprising a 6200 works so reasonable with that value.

retro games 100 wrote:

@elfuego, ah! That's a very interesting point: I had no idea you could get a 128-bit FX5200. I thought they were all 64-bit. Please can you suggest any specific 128-bit models for me to try?

(Also, I was thinking of adding a passively cooled ATI Radeon 9600 to my "retro plans". 😀 )

Here - the first result of google search:
http://www.buy.com/prod/pny-geforce-fx-5200-2 … /208890886.html
PNY GF FX5200, non ultra, passively cooled 😀

Hell its even PCI! 😁

BTW, radeon 9600 won't work in AGP 2x. The last Radeon that can do AGP 2x is R350 aka Radeon 9800. Not all 9800s can do it though. Make sure the AGP connector is keyed properly.

I have been a ardent Geforce follower since the days of Geforce2. I have skipped the FX series altogether, when I was concentrating on my academic matters at that time. I have that Geforce 6200, which is quite troublesome to make it work in older motherboards. It just won't boot.

I do love my Geforce4 Ti series, and have been using them in my classic system. I have a Ti4200 AGP 8X and a Ti 4800SE. Though I don't use them very regularly, due to the presence of my Virge PCI and Voodoo2 combo config.

Whereas my mid-range system has the 6800 Ultra AGP, with a Voodoo3 pci. This system is W98/W2k based, and believe it or not, I actually built this system to play System Shock 2. Of course, other games of that era play well too.

I had one of those GeForce 6200 128bit; it was AGP 4x/8x only (keyed for 8x). A lot better performer than my cousin's GF 6200 PCI-Ex, 64bit, TurboCache; mine, around 10500 3d Marks '01; his, barely around 4000. Cpu's and RAM were almost identical; mine: Sempron 2600+; his: 2800+; both systems with 512 DDR400.

The 6200 TurboCache card is worse then a normal 64-bit RAM card. As it uses system RAM, IIRC. You won't find these as AGP cards.

Inspired by this thread, I just acquired a second-hand(returned to shop) XFX 6200 AGP card.... 😎

But seems to be 64bit only 😵
(PV-T44A-YAJG)

Anyway, put it into an Abit BH6 slot1 mobo, and kinda expecting smoke and flames, but... at least boots just fine, so...
No idea how it'd do in windows - maybe I'll test some more at a later time.
(my daily win98 machine uses a PCI FX5200 !... 64bit most likely)

Would've preferred a PCI version(flexibility), but those are expensive and relatively hard to find.

But, would the Geforce 6600 also work, I wonder ?
(as per comments/snippets earlier in this thread)
The ones I have don't have the correct keying, so I'd have to go shopping again if...

Oh well, don't really NEED any of them 😜

PS: anyone know what happened to that Albatron PCI 8600GT ?