All about Win95 and getting around the CPU frequency limit issue:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/312108
http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/141402-window … u-limit-broken/

For 98 FE:

Microsoft issued a Hotfix for this problem in Windows 98 FE. It contains an updated version of NDIS.VXD that only works in 98. Apparently they forgot (intentionally?) or never realized that the updated version of NDIS.VXD in the DUN14-95 update solves this problem as well.

Win98 SE is not affected by the 2.1 GHz limit, which is why you had no problem installing it on the 2.8 GHz Pee4.

RAM issue:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q253912/

Although I have read somewhere that the technical limit for 95/98 is 2 GB. But if you ask me, even if you increase it beyond 512 MB, the OS can't really use it effectively.

EDIT: Nevermind, here it is:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/181594

ok thanks, i was wondering if the limits for 95 might be lower than for 98, looks like it's not a problem for me. 256mb and a 1.4ghz should be no problem 🤣

I've installed and used Windows 98SE on a P4 3.2GHz system without any problems. I used the Asrock intel 865g based motherboard. It has a Socket 775 and comes with an AGP8x slot.

The max practical RAM that can be used with Win9x system is 512mb. Can be used with higher RAM but requires some minor editing with the system.ini file.

Malik wrote:

I've installed and used Windows 98SE on a P4 3.2GHz system without any problems. I used the Asrock intel 865g based motherboard. It has a Socket 775 and comes with an AGP8x slot.

The max practical RAM that can be used with Win9x system is 512mb. Can be used with higher RAM but requires some minor editing with the system.ini file.

But does using more than show any real benefit? If not, you'd probably be better off using those RAM sticks in another machine than in one where they won't be doing much.

sliderider wrote:

Malik wrote:

I've installed and used Windows 98SE on a P4 3.2GHz system without any problems. I used the Asrock intel 865g based motherboard. It has a Socket 775 and comes with an AGP8x slot.

The max practical RAM that can be used with Win9x system is 512mb. Can be used with higher RAM but requires some minor editing with the system.ini file.

But does using more than show any real benefit? If not, you'd probably be better off using those RAM sticks in another machine than in one where they won't be doing much.

At that point more memory will only help if the program(s) you're running require those amounts of memory.

9x runs crappy after 64mb usually anyway due to how it manages memory, especially on socket 7 boards where nothing is cached after 64mb

I found ME runs just fine with 256MB RAM, even with 512MB RAM in one particular rig.
It runs more crappy then NT, but that doesn't mean that it will run crappy 😉

Yep, you don't need 512MB for a Win9x based system. Anything higher will cause malfunction - Windows might not even boot without editing the system.ini file.

Usually I use 512MB or more in a system which also runs Win2000 and/or XP.

64MB is nice. Windows95 may even be a "spoilt-kid" with 64MB RAM. (Or was that 128MB?) 😁

With 512MB or more, you may play around with the virtual memory setting in a Win9x based OS, if you want.

We actually had a thread about how much RAM people use with what version of Windows, lemme dig it up...

Here it is: What are your minimum Windows system requirements?

Hehehe... Tetrium... you're good at organizing databases! 😁

Malik wrote:

Hehehe... Tetrium... you're good at organizing databases! 😁

Hehe, thanks for the compliment Malik!! 😁
I'm actually VERY chaotic but I'm good at google searches ;D

And I have to organize if I make threads like this one L O L

I have a dual core Opteron 170 OC at 2.4 GHz with 2 GB RAM and an nvidia 7900GS AGP (256 MB version) + an 500 GB IDE HDD + a SATA HDD. This is a dual boot system with XP as well.

This setup meant multiple challange for Win98SE but I managed to make it stable with RLoew's Ram limitation patch and Terabyte Plus package (for HDDs larger than 137 GB and a win9x SATA driver)
Also, there is also only one working driver for the video card, the unoffical backported v82.69. Works well enough.
The A8V motherboard has a working NMI to SERR translation so Creative SB16 emulation is no problem - but I put a Vortex 2 card in it instead.