VOGONS


First post, by script-fu

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Which video card would be best for Win 98 SE?

AGP 2X Slot
---
TNT 2 32mb
GeForce Ti 4200 64mb
GeForce FX 5200 256mb
Radeon 9800 Pro 128mb

These are what i have on hand now.

Last edited by script-fu on 2020-11-02, 01:41. Edited 1 time in total.

Gb GA-6BXC r.2.0 b.F4C, PIII 1.0GHz SL5QV, 768MB PC133, GF Ti 4200 64MB, VD3 2K, CT4760 & CT4860 AGP 2X
Abit KN8, 64 3400+ (754), 2x1GB G.SKILL PC3200, GF 6800GT 256MB AGP 8X
Abit Fatal1ty AN9 32X, 64 x2 6000+, 2X2GB PC6400, 8800 GTS 320MB x2 SLI

Reply 1 of 15, by BinaryDemon

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Those all seem overpowered for an agp 2x system. Based on that I’d recommend the GeForce Ti 4200 64mb . What cpu you running?

Check out DOSBox Distro:

https://sites.google.com/site/dosboxdistro/ [*]

a lightweight Linux distro (tinycore) which boots off a usb flash drive and goes straight to DOSBox.

Make your dos retrogaming experience portable!

Reply 2 of 15, by script-fu

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

This setup in my signature is the one I'm speaking of - Gigabyte GA-6BXC r.2.0 b.F4C / PIII 1000MHz SL5QV / 3x256 PC133 / GeForce 4 Ti 4200 64MB / CT4760 & CT4860

Gb GA-6BXC r.2.0 b.F4C, PIII 1.0GHz SL5QV, 768MB PC133, GF Ti 4200 64MB, VD3 2K, CT4760 & CT4860 AGP 2X
Abit KN8, 64 3400+ (754), 2x1GB G.SKILL PC3200, GF 6800GT 256MB AGP 8X
Abit Fatal1ty AN9 32X, 64 x2 6000+, 2X2GB PC6400, 8800 GTS 320MB x2 SLI

Reply 4 of 15, by script-fu

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I guess i should have added my TNT 2 32mb for good measure to the list.

Gb GA-6BXC r.2.0 b.F4C, PIII 1.0GHz SL5QV, 768MB PC133, GF Ti 4200 64MB, VD3 2K, CT4760 & CT4860 AGP 2X
Abit KN8, 64 3400+ (754), 2x1GB G.SKILL PC3200, GF 6800GT 256MB AGP 8X
Abit Fatal1ty AN9 32X, 64 x2 6000+, 2X2GB PC6400, 8800 GTS 320MB x2 SLI

Reply 5 of 15, by leileilol

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

I'd choose the Radeon 9800 only for the drivers being a bit more friendly than Nvidia regarding older fullscreen directdraw games. Nvidia for a long time has had a stall with palette changes (at least since the Geforce2) that's even commonly affected default DOSBox use. Otherwise it's a pretty bottlenecked card meant for the high-end P4/AXP crowd.

apsosig.png

Reply 6 of 15, by maximus

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I'd go with either the TNT2 for a more period-correct, "slumming it" feel, or the 9800 Pro for high FPS, AA+AF bliss.

I spent some time with a TNT2 Ultra on P3 1000 Windows 98 system a few years ago and enjoyed the heck out of it. It wasn't the fastest, but the VGA signal was incredibly clear and strong (Diamond Viper V770U), the 16-bit dithering was excellent, and all the games just looked and felt right. Nothing weird or out of place. This was with ForceWare 30.82.

ATI's R300 GPUs are also a real treat in Windows 98. Anything above the Radeon 9550 is ridiculous overkill, none more so than the 9800 Pro. But that excess power can often be put to good use by enabling antialiasing and anisotropic filtering. With the exception of fast GeForce 6 series cards (not the 6200), no other Windows 98-compatible video cards can deliver comparable combinations of frame rate and image quality. And ATI's latest Windows 98 drivers for R300 are remarkably good. Very few compatibility problems. Not sure how much AGP 2x will hold the 9800 Pro back, but it can hardly fail to be way faster than the TNT2 in any case.

As for the the Ti 4200 and 5200, I've never liked those in Windows 98 systems. Maybe it's just because Need for Speed: Porsche Unleashed has font rendering issues, but GeForce 4 and FX series just never feel like a good fit for Windows 98. Not terrible, but it just seems like there are better options.

For maximum fun, though, why not try out all four and compare? 😃

PCGames9505

Reply 7 of 15, by Joseph_Joestar

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Depends on which games you want to play and at what resolution.

  • Wanna run your games at 1280x1024 or higher at 60+ FPS with fully maxed out AA and AF? Skip the TNT2 and FX5200.
  • Playing lots of older games which rely on Table Fog and Palleted Textures? Stick with the GeForce cards.
  • Aiming for maximum performance and don't care about older game compatibility? Go for the Ati 9800.

For those Nvidia cards, you want drivers that aren't too new or you may experience visual glitches. Stick with version 45.23 or below.

Using Audigy drivers with a Sound Blaster Live
Installing DOS drivers on an Audigy2 ZS
OPL3 vs. ESFM vs. CQM vs. SBLive
OPTi 82C930 review

Reply 8 of 15, by script-fu

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
leileilol wrote on 2020-11-02, 01:43:

I'd choose the Radeon 9800 only for the drivers being a bit more friendly than Nvidia regarding older fullscreen directdraw games. Nvidia for a long time has had a stall with palette changes (at least since the Geforce2) that's even commonly affected default DOSBox use. Otherwise it's a pretty bottlenecked card meant for the high-end P4/AXP crowd.

Which drivers would be best for the 9800?

Gb GA-6BXC r.2.0 b.F4C, PIII 1.0GHz SL5QV, 768MB PC133, GF Ti 4200 64MB, VD3 2K, CT4760 & CT4860 AGP 2X
Abit KN8, 64 3400+ (754), 2x1GB G.SKILL PC3200, GF 6800GT 256MB AGP 8X
Abit Fatal1ty AN9 32X, 64 x2 6000+, 2X2GB PC6400, 8800 GTS 320MB x2 SLI

Reply 9 of 15, by script-fu

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
maximus wrote on 2020-11-02, 03:28:
I'd go with either the TNT2 for a more period-correct, "slumming it" feel, or the 9800 Pro for high FPS, AA+AF bliss. […]
Show full quote

I'd go with either the TNT2 for a more period-correct, "slumming it" feel, or the 9800 Pro for high FPS, AA+AF bliss.

I spent some time with a TNT2 Ultra on P3 1000 Windows 98 system a few years ago and enjoyed the heck out of it. It wasn't the fastest, but the VGA signal was incredibly clear and strong (Diamond Viper V770U), the 16-bit dithering was excellent, and all the games just looked and felt right. Nothing weird or out of place. This was with ForceWare 30.82.

ATI's R300 GPUs are also a real treat in Windows 98. Anything above the Radeon 9550 is ridiculous overkill, none more so than the 9800 Pro. But that excess power can often be put to good use by enabling antialiasing and anisotropic filtering. With the exception of fast GeForce 6 series cards (not the 6200), no other Windows 98-compatible video cards can deliver comparable combinations of frame rate and image quality. And ATI's latest Windows 98 drivers for R300 are remarkably good. Very few compatibility problems. Not sure how much AGP 2x will hold the 9800 Pro back, but it can hardly fail to be way faster than the TNT2 in any case.

As for the the Ti 4200 and 5200, I've never liked those in Windows 98 systems. Maybe it's just because Need for Speed: Porsche Unleashed has font rendering issues, but GeForce 4 and FX series just never feel like a good fit for Windows 98. Not terrible, but it just seems like there are better options.

For maximum fun, though, why not try out all four and compare? 😃

Yep i will give them all a shot and thanks for the input.

I think i answered my own question about which driver to use for the 9800 https://www.philscomputerlab.com/ati-9x-driver-archive.html

Gb GA-6BXC r.2.0 b.F4C, PIII 1.0GHz SL5QV, 768MB PC133, GF Ti 4200 64MB, VD3 2K, CT4760 & CT4860 AGP 2X
Abit KN8, 64 3400+ (754), 2x1GB G.SKILL PC3200, GF 6800GT 256MB AGP 8X
Abit Fatal1ty AN9 32X, 64 x2 6000+, 2X2GB PC6400, 8800 GTS 320MB x2 SLI

Reply 10 of 15, by script-fu

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2020-11-02, 05:04:
Depends on which games you want to play and at what resolution. […]
Show full quote

Depends on which games you want to play and at what resolution.

  • Wanna run your games at 1280x1024 or higher at 60+ FPS with fully maxed out AA and AF? Skip the TNT2 and FX5200.
  • Playing lots of older games which rely on Table Fog and Palleted Textures? Stick with the GeForce cards.
  • Aiming for maximum performance and don't care about older game compatibility? Go for the Ati 9800.

For those Nvidia cards, you want drivers that aren't too new or you may experience visual glitches. Stick with version 45.23 or below.

Yep i ran the 45.23's and had something that looked like tearing for lack of a better word. So i will back them down another revision. I hope today will be a little warmer as i don't run much heat in the shop.

Thanks

Gb GA-6BXC r.2.0 b.F4C, PIII 1.0GHz SL5QV, 768MB PC133, GF Ti 4200 64MB, VD3 2K, CT4760 & CT4860 AGP 2X
Abit KN8, 64 3400+ (754), 2x1GB G.SKILL PC3200, GF 6800GT 256MB AGP 8X
Abit Fatal1ty AN9 32X, 64 x2 6000+, 2X2GB PC6400, 8800 GTS 320MB x2 SLI

Reply 11 of 15, by chrisNova777

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

i can add that in my recent memory i was very pleasantly surprised at the performance of a GEFORCE 2 graphics card in windows 98SE
as far as the 2d/ work environment goes; driver support etc i remember thinking if only my win98se worked this well back in 1999

any Geforce 2 or Geforce 3 would perform excellent imho

i also remember having to edit the driver files manually to achieve the 1680 x 1050 resolution support in win98SE
which was a huge pain in the ass but brought alot of satisfaction when i was succesful!

especially since you describe an AGP2x slot
a9800 pro would be overkill for such a machine and wouldnt realize half of its potential being that its designed for a 8x slot
i have a couple of 9800 pros both in my g4 MDD + Powermac g5 macintosh machines

http://www.oldschooldaw.com | vintage PC/MAC MIDI/DAW | Asus mobo archive | Sound Modules | Vintage MIDI Interfaces
AM386DX40 | Asus VL/I-486SV2GX4 (486DX2-80) | GA586VX (p75) + r7000PCI | ABIT Be6 (pII-233) matroxG400 AGP

Reply 12 of 15, by script-fu

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

The problem is i threw away all my socket 754 and 939 boards trying to make some space in storage. I had no idea i would ever want to use them again. So unless i missed some of them they are gone. I did yank off all the cool heatsinks and stuff before i threw them away. Looking back now that was a mistake because i could used some of the parts off them to repair others as i now have soldering equipment. Well saylavee as they say

Gb GA-6BXC r.2.0 b.F4C, PIII 1.0GHz SL5QV, 768MB PC133, GF Ti 4200 64MB, VD3 2K, CT4760 & CT4860 AGP 2X
Abit KN8, 64 3400+ (754), 2x1GB G.SKILL PC3200, GF 6800GT 256MB AGP 8X
Abit Fatal1ty AN9 32X, 64 x2 6000+, 2X2GB PC6400, 8800 GTS 320MB x2 SLI

Reply 13 of 15, by script-fu

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Hell looking back now i remember throwing away 30 or 40 286, 386 & 486 machines too. I lived on a farm and we had a dump and i 86d tons of stuff...

Gb GA-6BXC r.2.0 b.F4C, PIII 1.0GHz SL5QV, 768MB PC133, GF Ti 4200 64MB, VD3 2K, CT4760 & CT4860 AGP 2X
Abit KN8, 64 3400+ (754), 2x1GB G.SKILL PC3200, GF 6800GT 256MB AGP 8X
Abit Fatal1ty AN9 32X, 64 x2 6000+, 2X2GB PC6400, 8800 GTS 320MB x2 SLI

Reply 15 of 15, by douglar

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
chrisNova777 wrote on 2020-11-03, 19:55:

i also remember having to edit the driver files manually to achieve the 1680 x 1050 resolution support in win98SE
which was a huge pain in the ass but brought alot of satisfaction when i was succesful!

My boys (8 & 10) used a hex editor make "Fall Guy" work correctly with their 16:10 monitors last month. They were so excited when it worked.

Nvidia did come out with win98 drivers that support 16:10 displays for GeForce2 MX through Geforce 6800:

https://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detai … and-1680-x-1050

Was it possible to get 16:10 resolutions on a TNT, TNT2, Geforce 256, or Geforce 2?