Reply 140 of 153, by StrangeD0s
I have a Radeon 9200 in my Windows 98 computer (Intel P4, 1GB RAM). Would a Geforce 4 Ti4200 be an improvement? I use it mainly to run FPS games up until 2002-2003.
I have a Radeon 9200 in my Windows 98 computer (Intel P4, 1GB RAM). Would a Geforce 4 Ti4200 be an improvement? I use it mainly to run FPS games up until 2002-2003.
In my DOS/WIN98 rig, I have a Diamond VOODOO1 in PCI slot and a Radeon9800SE 128M(using OMEGA softmod driver!)in AGP 2x slot
the motherboard is 440BX(MSI-6199 VER2) with 256MB*2 NEC PC-133 SDRAM and Pentium III 1000(run at 7.5*100,because Radeon dont like 89hz agp under 7.5*133...)
This rig runs very well,from early 3dfx dos game to DIABLO2,QUAKE3 etc, score near 5900 in 3dmark2000, support DX9, great 2D quality, and I can DVI output to IBM T117 LCD and VGA output to SONY Trinitron CRT 17 😊
I also have a VOODOO4 PCI,the problem is when both VOODOO1 PCI and VOODOO4 PCI inserted on the 440BX(no agp card), in DOS 7.10, early 3dfx games(like Tomb raider and Battle Arena Toshinden) and demos cannot detect VOODOO1 card 😢
wrote:I have a Radeon 9200 in my Windows 98 computer (Intel P4, 1GB RAM). Would a Geforce 4 Ti4200 be an improvement? I use it mainly to run FPS games up until 2002-2003.
Yes, but for major bump you should look into following generation.
What would be considered an upgrade for my WIN98SE rig (PC1 in signature)? A GF4 Ti4400 and a Radeon 9600Pro might be faster in older games but the FX5900XT would definitely be faster in games later than 2000. I'm trying to figure out what card would have better performance for older and newer games (DX5-DX8.1).
PC1😜 III-S 1.4GHz, GA-6VTXE, 512MB SDRAM, Albatron FX5900XTV 128MB, SB Live! 5.1
PC2😜 III 800MHz, MS-6178, 256MB SDRAM, 3DFX Voodoo3 2000 PCI, Creative CT4810
PC3😜 MMX 200MHz, SY-5EAS5, 128MB SDRAM, Diamond Monster 3D, Diamond Viper V330, ESS 1868F
My 2 cents in this long-running thread.
I'm only knowledgeable with Nvidia, so, yes, the fastest AGP card for 98 would be the 6800 Ultra. However, I have a 6800GT in my Pentium 4 system, which dual-boots 98SE and XP, and I have had no issues with it. Then again, I am using the penultimate (?) drivers for the card under 98SE (81.85), because I have heard with the 6000 series the latest driver causes system instability, so to be on the safe side I have just been using 81.85, and have had no issues. Also with that system I have installed DX9, and again, no issues. Now, backwards compatibility for early 9x games would surely be a bit hit and miss, due to the card not supporting palettized textures, but I don't touch those games with this GPU - that's why I have my Tualatin-Voodoo5 5500 system. 😁
Now, for some of the Nvidia GPUs, the later drivers do lack support for them under 98 (take for example the 6800GS). I have found that adding these modified strings (attached below) to the .inf file inside of the driver package after it has been extracted to the C:\Nvidia directory before installing the driver does allow you to install the driver and more or less give you all of the functionality of the driver as far as I am aware, although the GPU name might be misstated (sadly, the 6800 GS that I had got my hands on turned out to have something seriously wrong with it, both under 98 and XP, so I had to get a partial refund for it and send it to its grave).
If 100% compatibility is your shtick, then the FX series has you covered, although performance under XP isn't that great.
wrote:My 2 cents in this long-running thread.
If 100% compatibility is your shtick, then the FX series has you covered, although performance under XP isn't that great.
Well yes, that's what I have in mind. Compatibility for all win9x games with optimal performance. I'm pretty content with the FX atm but I want to know what other options I have for better performance under win98. I'm only going to use win98SE on this system. I run WinXP on a P4 3.0GHz HT/Radeon HD4650 AGP system. Wish I had a V5 5500 though for Glide 😁
PC1😜 III-S 1.4GHz, GA-6VTXE, 512MB SDRAM, Albatron FX5900XTV 128MB, SB Live! 5.1
PC2😜 III 800MHz, MS-6178, 256MB SDRAM, 3DFX Voodoo3 2000 PCI, Creative CT4810
PC3😜 MMX 200MHz, SY-5EAS5, 128MB SDRAM, Diamond Monster 3D, Diamond Viper V330, ESS 1868F
wrote:Well yes, that's what I have in mind. Compatibility for all win9x games with optimal performance. I'm pretty content with the FX atm but I want to know what other options I have for better performance under win98. I'm only going to use win98SE on this system. I run WinXP on a P4 3.0GHz HT/Radeon HD4650 AGP system. Wish I had a V5 5500 though for Glide 😁
The V5 5500 is a beast of a card. Although, I have to say, I use my P4-6800GT system under 98SE more than my P3-V5 5500 system. 😅
If I can't get my old X850XT running with Win98SE, what would be a good and cheap GPU? My favorite would be a Geforce 3 TI 500 with 128MB RAM because it was the fastest card before WinXP was released, so I tried to buy the best hardware I could afford from 2001. I looked at ebay and Geforce Ti 4200 are just 1/15 of the prize of a Geforce 3 TI 200 with 64MB RAM. But the Geforce 4 series was released 4 month too late. 😒
Can an Athlon XP 1700+ with 266MHZ DDR and VIA KT266A benefit from an Ti4600 or is an Ti4200 fast enough and camparable to a GF3 Ti 500? I just want to have a good compatibility with games from 1995 to 2001 and being able to play them on highest settings. I my past I used a Voodoo2 or maybe voodoo 3 2000, GF 2 Ti or ATI 9500, GF FX5700 Ultra, Radeon HD 5770 and GF GTS450 and now a GTX1060.
If you want to be era appropriate either a GF3 or even better a Radeon 8500.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8C0GUeUVIjs
The GF4 Ti 4200 would be even faster though, if you don't mind that it's a 2002 release.
PC1😜 III-S 1.4GHz, GA-6VTXE, 512MB SDRAM, Albatron FX5900XTV 128MB, SB Live! 5.1
PC2😜 III 800MHz, MS-6178, 256MB SDRAM, 3DFX Voodoo3 2000 PCI, Creative CT4810
PC3😜 MMX 200MHz, SY-5EAS5, 128MB SDRAM, Diamond Monster 3D, Diamond Viper V330, ESS 1868F
An FX5200 would also work. They can be had for little to nothing and should be powerful enough.
Ok, thanks 😀
I looked at some old benchmarks and it seems like the Ti4200 is the closest "affordable" card compared to the GF3 Ti 500. Nearly the same speed in the games they tested and even faster in most synthetic benchmarks. I never see any GF3 Ti500 and the slower GF3 TI 200 cards are priced at aroud 150€. The Ti4200 is just 20€ and only 5 months released later. So I think I should get an Ti4200 even if it is some months to new. I also use never PSUs and mechanical drives for reliability, so I think as long as it is comparable to a highend 2001er graficcard it should be fine.
Edit:
Bought two Medion Ti4200. Altogether 17€ incl. post-fee. Were working atleast 6 months ago. Atleast I've got a spare one if one of them will die 😀
Yeah Ti 4200 is definitely a winner for your old game needs.
Back then i thought the Radeon X850 XT PE is the fastest W98 AGP card.
Now i see the GeForce 6800 Ultra is.
When i bought my X800 XT PE i did not read about 8-bit Paletted Textures and Table Fog.
1. Is this only relevant for Glide (3dfx) games?
2. Does it work in nGlide and dgVoodoo2?
3. Will nGlide (OpenGL) run better with a Quadro FX 2000/3000 than a Radeon X800?
Would be nice to run all W98 games at 1600x1200 with 16x AA and 8x AF.
For me W98 games are games that don't have XP in the Readme or on the Box, Jewel Case...
MrGlasspoole wrote on 2020-06-04, 17:37:1. Is this only relevant for Glide (3dfx) games?
No, it also applies to Direct3D games and probably OpenGL as well. Thief2 is an example of a late Win98 game which still uses table fog while running on Direct3D. It was released in March of 2000.
Would be nice to run all W98 games at 1600x1200 with 16x AA and 8x AF.
While the 3D visuals might look a bit better at that resolution, the UI most likely won't. During those days, 800x600 was the de facto standard, and most 3D games had a 2D UI which was tailored toward that resolution. The more you go above that, the tinier the UI icons become.