That works 🤔👍

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-08-29, 08:33:

It’s crazy. These usb 2.0 cards are cancer for retro systems. Imagine all the lag we could have avoided back in the day 🤣

I used PS2 ports into the Athlon 64 days because of bad experiences with USB on 440BX. CPU usage, problems with USB and PCI card interaction, Win9x quirks.

Repo Man11 wrote on 2022-08-29, 02:39:

There was a recent thread that detailed the performance hit that a Pentium 3 system had with a USB 2.0 card, and that got me thinking about my "Weak" Pentium 4 system. Amptron M930, 2.8/533/512 P4, SiS 645, one gig of DDR @ 266 MHz, a Radeon 9800 SE with Omega drivers unlocking the extra four pipelines, and Win98SE.

What chip is on your NEC card. The first generation PD720100 are very slow. The second generation PD720101 are quite good. There is also a PD720102, but I haven't been able to find one. I think it might have only been used as an embedded chip on laptops.

Does Walter Oney care about his wdmstub.sys anymore?

I could use it to resolve missing functions to make XP's USB 2.0 drivers work on 98SE, but I don't know if he still cares about the license.

And would anyone be interested enough in using XP's USB 2.0 drivers on 98SE anyway?

Kahenraz wrote on 2022-10-30, 09:26:

Repo Man11 wrote on 2022-08-29, 02:39:

There was a recent thread that detailed the performance hit that a Pentium 3 system had with a USB 2.0 card, and that got me thinking about my "Weak" Pentium 4 system. Amptron M930, 2.8/533/512 P4, SiS 645, one gig of DDR @ 266 MHz, a Radeon 9800 SE with Omega drivers unlocking the extra four pipelines, and Win98SE.

What chip is on your NEC card. The first generation PD720100 are very slow. The second generation PD720101 are quite good. There is also a PD720102, but I haven't been able to find one. I think it might have only been used as an embedded chip on laptops.

D720101GJ. I haven't bothered to measure the speed, but it's significantly faster than the USB 1.1 port.

I just read this thread and was interested to try it out.

I have a p3 1000 on a via 133pro chipset.

The was a bit drop in performance, but not really worth to mention.

Without i had 6491 and with 6339 in 3d mark 2000. Besides that no problems with using usb. I have an Ali m5271 chip on

I use these two -

Duffman wrote on 2022-11-01, 13:06:

Does Walter Oney care about his wdmstub.sys anymore?

I could use it to resolve missing functions to make XP's USB 2.0 drivers work on 98SE, but I don't know if he still cares about the license.

And would anyone be interested enough in using XP's USB 2.0 drivers on 98SE anyway?

What's this about? I have have some stability problems with USB 2.0 on Windows 98 and would love to see if using the ones from Windows XP will improve things.

Sphere478 wrote on 2021-03-23, 18:29:

With and without my usb 2.0 card

Which card should I buy to replace it?

I have a 3.0 card but that won’t work in win ME right?

I have this exact card with the NEC D720101GJ and it caused a similar ~30% negative performance impact on my Win98SE super socket 7 build (Asus P5A, K6-2 550).

I found it is best to put a hub on the usb 1.1

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-11-30, 00:47:

I found it is best to put a hub on the usb 1.1

Yeah that's a good idea. Unfortunately, for my build the mobo does not have a USB header, only a couple ports on the back. I am still looking for a decent card with an internal header so I can connect some front panel ports.

I see My PCI-E USB 2.0 card with a 10-port USB hub connected to it behaves just fine in XP, but nothing is detected when I boot 98SE on the same QC6000M system, so there's definitely some unresolved bugs in NUSB 3.6

Anyone interested in helping me port XP's USB 2.0 drivers back to 98SE?
There are some missing imports so I think wdmstub.sys will need functions added before this can work though.

wiibur wrote on 2022-11-30, 07:25:

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-11-30, 00:47:

I found it is best to put a hub on the usb 1.1

Yeah that's a good idea. Unfortunately, for my build the mobo does not have a USB header, only a couple ports on the back. I am still looking for a decent card with an internal header so I can connect some front panel ports.

I found this one, and it works fine: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004576JGI/ … 0?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I think that card pictured is using one of the chips that really slows the system down on socket 7 builds I have tried it on.

I like that internal header design though. That is handy for specific builds

wiibur wrote on 2022-11-30, 07:25:

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-11-30, 00:47:

I found it is best to put a hub on the usb 1.1

Yeah that's a good idea. Unfortunately, for my build the mobo does not have a USB header, only a couple ports on the back. I am still looking for a decent card with an internal header so I can connect some front panel ports.

Re: Adding more usb ports to old motherboards without using a card

Repo Man11 wrote on 2022-12-01, 18:57:

wiibur wrote on 2022-11-30, 07:25:

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-11-30, 00:47:

I found it is best to put a hub on the usb 1.1

Yeah that's a good idea. Unfortunately, for my build the mobo does not have a USB header, only a couple ports on the back. I am still looking for a decent card with an internal header so I can connect some front panel ports.

I found this one, and it works fine: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004576JGI/ … 0?ie=UTF8&psc=1

What systems have you tested it on? It looks perfect but, as mentioned, it appears to use the same chip.

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-12-01, 19:04:

I think that card pictured is using one of the chips that really slows the system down on socket 7 builds I have tried it on. […]
Show full quote

I think that card pictured is using one of the chips that really slows the system down on socket 7 builds I have tried it on.

I like that internal header design though. That is handy for specific builds

wiibur wrote on 2022-11-30, 07:25:

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-11-30, 00:47:

I found it is best to put a hub on the usb 1.1

Yeah that's a good idea. Unfortunately, for my build the mobo does not have a USB header, only a couple ports on the back. I am still looking for a decent card with an internal header so I can connect some front panel ports.

Re: Adding more usb ports to old motherboards without using a card

Nice writeup, I'll consider doing something like this.

wiibur wrote on 2022-12-01, 21:19:

What systems have you tested it on? It looks perfect but, as mentioned, it appears to use the same chip. […]
Show full quote

Repo Man11 wrote on 2022-12-01, 18:57:

wiibur wrote on 2022-11-30, 07:25:

Yeah that's a good idea. Unfortunately, for my build the mobo does not have a USB header, only a couple ports on the back. I am still looking for a decent card with an internal header so I can connect some front panel ports.

I found this one, and it works fine: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004576JGI/ … 0?ie=UTF8&psc=1

What systems have you tested it on? It looks perfect but, as mentioned, it appears to use the same chip.

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-12-01, 19:04:

I think that card pictured is using one of the chips that really slows the system down on socket 7 builds I have tried it on. […]
Show full quote

I think that card pictured is using one of the chips that really slows the system down on socket 7 builds I have tried it on.

I like that internal header design though. That is handy for specific builds

wiibur wrote on 2022-11-30, 07:25:

Yeah that's a good idea. Unfortunately, for my build the mobo does not have a USB header, only a couple ports on the back. I am still looking for a decent card with an internal header so I can connect some front panel ports.

Re: Adding more usb ports to old motherboards without using a card

Nice writeup, I'll consider doing something like this.

Re: Which USB 2.0 cards for old motherboards

Repo Man11 wrote on 2022-12-02, 01:21:

wiibur wrote on 2022-12-01, 21:19:

What systems have you tested it on? It looks perfect but, as mentioned, it appears to use the same chip. […]
Show full quote

Repo Man11 wrote on 2022-12-01, 18:57:

I found this one, and it works fine: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004576JGI/ … 0?ie=UTF8&psc=1

What systems have you tested it on? It looks perfect but, as mentioned, it appears to use the same chip.

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-12-01, 19:04:

I think that card pictured is using one of the chips that really slows the system down on socket 7 builds I have tried it on.

I like that internal header design though. That is handy for specific builds

Re: Adding more usb ports to old motherboards without using a card

Nice writeup, I'll consider doing something like this.

Re: Which USB 2.0 cards for old motherboards

The best way to think of Socket 7 is as a very low powered car that you remove everything you possibly can to make it accelerate acceptably (who needs a passenger seat anyway?), so I live with the stock USB ports on those systems.

USB 1.1 is actually pretty good for moving data on and off of these old symptoms. The only time is becomes intolerable is if you want to copy large files, such as an ISO. Then it would be faster to shut the machine down and pop a drive onto the IDE bus.

So I noticed that NUSB 3.6 does not like my 10-port USB hub.

But XP SP1 works just fine with it.

I used Walter Oney's WDMCHECK to see if there were any missing imports for XP SP1's usbehci.sys usbd.sys usbhub.sys usbccgp.sys usbport.sys

all seems OK according to WDMCHECK

So I thought I'd try making an NUSB 3.7 beta using these XP SP1 files.

I've made a 7Z archive but I'm unsure how to turn it into a self extracting cabinet EXE

Does anyone know how to turn a 7Z into a self extracting cabinet EXE so I can install this for testing?

You can tick the 'Create SFX Archive' checkbox when creating the 7z archive to make it self-extracting (if that's what you're looking for).