Ozzuneoj wrote:

Awesome! If Crysis can run at 67fps minimum and 100fps average, then presumably any less intensive games that are natively DX9 should run at least as fast.

You should run something really old, like the earliest 3D accelerated Windows games that work in XP. 🤣

Some really early XP games were broken with the release of service pack 2, and may not run. Just putting that out there, a lesser known issue.

kithylin wrote:

Ozzuneoj wrote:

Awesome! If Crysis can run at 67fps minimum and 100fps average, then presumably any less intensive games that are natively DX9 should run at least as fast.

You should run something really old, like the earliest 3D accelerated Windows games that work in XP. 🤣

Some really early XP games were broken with the release of service pack 2, and may not run. Just putting that out there, a lesser known issue.

Hope its okay to bump to ask, do you know where I can find a list of games that SP2 broke?

Sounds like a reason to keep an early copy of XP around...

Not a Windows XP game... but I do remember specifically that Starship Titanic was perfect on Windows XP but SP2 broke it.

I guess it's time to comment I did come up with the fastest XP video card. At first I figured it was the nvidia 700 series. Then I found out that EVGA hand-binned all of the GTX 780 classified cards to at least 80% or higher ASIC Quality and they all overclock to the moon with a tuned bios. And I picked up one off ebay for $180 and got it here and tuned it's bios myself and have it clocked at 1268 core and 1900 mhz (7600 effective) memory and mated it with my Z77 gigabyte board and a i5-2500K @ 5.1 ghz and it's now my system that dual boots XP and Vista64. The only point of reference is some random website reviews that ran other cards like the 780 Ti and titan black and 970's through 3dmark 2006 and found my 780 in this system slots in between the 970 and 980 cards. https://www.3dmark.com/3dm06/18033387

Supposedly these GTX 780 Classified cards (mine came at 86% ASIC quality) can do 1500 mhz core on a water loop, but I can't find a water block for it yet. I would like to know if anyone's been able to enable SLI With nvidia 700 series under XP-32 and has it working. I've heard someone rumored that it should be possible, but I haven't heard of anyone actually doing it.

If we're chasing down the absoultely fastest possible graphics setup for XP, then this might be useful info. I don't really want to spend another $200 on a whim in case it doesn't work.. plus my 2500K system is a pain in the ass and would have to be completely disassembled and motherboard removed to fit a second card, so would like to know if it works some how before "going down that road".

kithylin wrote:

I guess it's time to comment I did come up with the fastest XP video card. At first I figured it was the nvidia 700 series. Then I found out that EVGA hand-binned all of the GTX 780 classified cards to at least 80% or higher ASIC Quality and they all overclock to the moon with a tuned bios. And I picked up one off ebay for $180 and got it here and tuned it's bios myself and have it clocked at 1268 core and 1900 mhz (7600 effective) memory and mated it with my Z77 gigabyte board and a i5-2500K @ 5.1 ghz and it's now my system that dual boots XP and Vista64. The only point of reference is some random website reviews that ran other cards like the 780 Ti and titan black and 970's through 3dmark 2006 and found my 780 in this system slots in between the 970 and 980 cards. https://www.3dmark.com/3dm06/18033387

Supposedly these GTX 780 Classified cards (mine came at 86% ASIC quality) can do 1500 mhz core on a water loop, but I can't find a water block for it yet. I would like to know if anyone's been able to enable SLI With nvidia 700 series under XP-32 and has it working. I've heard someone rumored that it should be possible, but I haven't heard of anyone actually doing it.

If we're chasing down the absoultely fastest possible graphics setup for XP, then this might be useful info. I don't really want to spend another $200 on a whim in case it doesn't work.. plus my 2500K system is a pain in the ass and would have to be completely disassembled and motherboard removed to fit a second card, so would like to know if it works some how before "going down that road".

Technically GTX TItan-X Maxwell supports Xp, if you add the card to the ini file it will be detected and should work

Won't Titan X (M) crash WinXP x86 when VRAM usage goes over 4GB ?

agent_x007 wrote:

Won't Titan X (M) crash WinXP x86 when VRAM usage goes over 4GB ?

no

candle_86 wrote:

kithylin wrote:

I guess it's time to comment I did come up with the fastest XP video card. At first I figured it was the nvidia 700 series. Then I found out that EVGA hand-binned all of the GTX 780 classified cards to at least 80% or higher ASIC Quality and they all overclock to the moon with a tuned bios. And I picked up one off ebay for $180 and got it here and tuned it's bios myself and have it clocked at 1268 core and 1900 mhz (7600 effective) memory and mated it with my Z77 gigabyte board and a i5-2500K @ 5.1 ghz and it's now my system that dual boots XP and Vista64. The only point of reference is some random website reviews that ran other cards like the 780 Ti and titan black and 970's through 3dmark 2006 and found my 780 in this system slots in between the 970 and 980 cards. https://www.3dmark.com/3dm06/18033387

Supposedly these GTX 780 Classified cards (mine came at 86% ASIC quality) can do 1500 mhz core on a water loop, but I can't find a water block for it yet. I would like to know if anyone's been able to enable SLI With nvidia 700 series under XP-32 and has it working. I've heard someone rumored that it should be possible, but I haven't heard of anyone actually doing it.

If we're chasing down the absoultely fastest possible graphics setup for XP, then this might be useful info. I don't really want to spend another $200 on a whim in case it doesn't work.. plus my 2500K system is a pain in the ass and would have to be completely disassembled and motherboard removed to fit a second card, so would like to know if it works some how before "going down that road".

Technically GTX TItan-X Maxwell supports Xp, if you add the card to the ini file it will be detected and should work

I've tried this with other maxwell cards (tried a friend's GTX 980), the drivers will not work even if you add it to the ini file. It will load the card but you reboot and the card will come up "Windows has stopped this device because it has reported a problem" and it never loads. Kepler is the last nvidia XP video card.

kithylin wrote:

candle_86 wrote:

Technically GTX TItan-X Maxwell supports Xp, if you add the card to the ini file it will be detected and should work

I've tried this with other maxwell cards (tried a friend's GTX 980), the drivers will not work even if you add it to the ini file. It will load the card but you reboot and the card will come up "Windows has stopped this device because it has reported a problem" and it never loads. Kepler is the last nvidia XP video card.

When my dad upgrades his video card, I might be able to see if his GTX 970 Mini-ITX card will work on XP with this driver hack. IIRC it works on some Titan-X cards but not all of them.

EDIT: 462nd post (think of Socket 462).

Actually, downsampling under XP is no issue. I did it years ago with a 8800 GT on a 19" CRT.
That thing officially supported 1600x1200 @ 60 Hz but I managed to get it to 2048x1536.
As long as it uses the "new" control panel and got the Custom Resolutions entry, it should work.

kithylin wrote:

I guess it's time to comment I did come up with the fastest XP video card. At first I figured it was the nvidia 700 series. Then I found out that EVGA hand-binned all of the GTX 780 classified cards to at least 80% or higher ASIC Quality and they all overclock to the moon with a tuned bios. And I picked up one off ebay for $180 and got it here and tuned it's bios myself and have it clocked at 1268 core and 1900 mhz (7600 effective) memory and mated it with my Z77 gigabyte board and a i5-2500K @ 5.1 ghz and it's now my system that dual boots XP and Vista64. The only point of reference is some random website reviews that ran other cards like the 780 Ti and titan black and 970's through 3dmark 2006 and found my 780 in this system slots in between the 970 and 980 cards. https://www.3dmark.com/3dm06/18033387

Supposedly these GTX 780 Classified cards (mine came at 86% ASIC quality) can do 1500 mhz core on a water loop, but I can't find a water block for it yet. I would like to know if anyone's been able to enable SLI With nvidia 700 series under XP-32 and has it working. I've heard someone rumored that it should be possible, but I haven't heard of anyone actually doing it.

That is quite a nice result, but the step up from weaker hardware isn't that great:
https://www.3dmark.com/compare/3dm06/17909032 … /3dm06/18033387

Guess it's time to put that 780 under water.
Or rather put the i5 higher, because that is clearly a CPU limitation (see my results with the 1060 and 660 Ti, the later got 2000 more just because of 200 MHz on the CPU.)

Would make more sense to test in actual games, maybe even compare how they perform compared to 7/8/10 on the same hardware while at it.
Especially games (and benchmarks) that aren't from the really late XP era. (Like Aquamark3 which scores higher under XP, but the HWbot wrapper changes that alot to almost identical results)
Would suggest stuff like BF2, Fallout 3/NV, Oblivion, Skyrim, Crysis (high preset, because oficially "very high" isnt supported under XP), Far Cry 1/2, Stalker, Half Life 2.
So basically games rom around 2004-2010, afaik the high time of XP
Could run some tests with mx Xeon/660 Ti rig as well (got XP and 7 on it and could also throw in a HD4870 for good measure)

All that mainly to see how reasonable it would be to go with a combination of XP and hardware after 2010-2012.
Sure that hardware would be the "best" if better means faster, but there could be diminishing returns after a certain point.

Few questions to expand the specific details:

XP SP2 what breaks certain games, can you expand on these and list some games, how common was?

Suppose I have GTX 960 or GTX 950 which are all my highest end out of many video cards and is installed on XP SP3, no problem running most games from 2003 on? Also please note what issues could have found with specific games in this context?

I could roll back to GTX 580, GTX 680 or GTX 780 ti in order to get more older drivers or not worth being concerned about?

How much games support physX? Does that add fun to the game?

Cheers, pentiumspeed

Surely there must be Windows XP games that have glitches or bugs of sorts if you're using Kepler cards... Far Cry 1?

I'm in the process to buy a Radeon of the 2nd, 3rd or 4th generation GCN architecture primarily for use in Linux. It would be ideal to also cover Windows XP with that card. So does anyone know what the fastest Windows XP compatible GCN2/3/4 Radeon is? Would I miss out on any graphical effects/quality with such a GPU for example similar to the missing fog table issue (just for comparison, I know fog table isn't an issue with XP games)?
Another question I came to reading through this thread: What's the result of missing out on PhysX by going with a Radeon?

*EDIT* I was too eager to find out about the GCN Radeons on Windows XP so I did take the time to do the research and I think I can definitely say that there are no Windows XP compatible GCN2/3/4 GPUs. The last Radeon with available XP drivers seems to be the R9 270X, which is a 1st gen GCN GPU. However the fastest Radeon with XP drivers available should be the Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition (excluding all Crossfire stuff).

I'd still like to know the answers to the questions regarding compatibility and PhysX though!

For PhysX, you will be limited to software only with a Radeon card.

That is, unless you do a Hybrid setup with a Radeon card and an nVidia card.

http://physxinfo.com/wiki/Hybrid_PhysX

@cyclone3d: Thanks! Software only PhysX means reduced PhysX or just that the CPU will be used more?

BTW according to comments on this PhilsComputerLab video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3B5lqZPdbs there are compatibiliy problems between newer GPUs and games that cause visual glitches although from the comments it doesn't become clear which games are affected apart from the few mentioned & if it's entirely driver dependend or indeed related to the GPU hardware.

lordmogul wrote:

That is quite a nice result, but the step up from weaker hardware isn't that great: <snip> Guess it's time to put that 780 under […]
Show full quote

That is quite a nice result, but the step up from weaker hardware isn't that great:
<snip>
Guess it's time to put that 780 under water.
Or rather put the i5 higher, because that is clearly a CPU limitation (see my results with the 1060 and 660 Ti, the later got 2000 more just because of 200 MHz on the CPU.)

In the above test, the i5-2500K there is already running at 5.11 Ghz, it won't go any higher, sadly. My next goal will be to switch this system up to a ivy bridge processor and try for 5.5+ Ghz with it.

Would make more sense to test in actual games, maybe even compare how they perform compared to 7/8/10 on the same hardware while at it.
Especially games (and benchmarks) that aren't from the really late XP era. (Like Aquamark3 which scores higher under XP, but the HWbot wrapper changes that alot to almost identical results)
Would suggest stuff like BF2, Fallout 3/NV, Oblivion, Skyrim, Crysis (high preset, because oficially "very high" isnt supported under XP), Far Cry 1/2, Stalker, Half Life 2.
So basically games rom around 2004-2010, afaik the high time of XP
Could run some tests with mx Xeon/660 Ti rig as well (got XP and 7 on it and could also throw in a HD4870 for good measure)

All that mainly to see how reasonable it would be to go with a combination of XP and hardware after 2010-2012.
Sure that hardware would be the "best" if better means faster, but there could be diminishing returns after a certain point.[/quote]

infiniteclouds wrote:

Surely there must be Windows XP games that have glitches or bugs of sorts if you're using Kepler cards... Far Cry 1?

I own this game! I haven't tested this but I will get to it later. So far I've played several games on this setup (GTX 780 in XP-32-SP3) and haven't seen any issues what so ever. I've tried: Descent III, Quake-III, Carmageddon II, Quake II, Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout 3, Fallout New Vegas, Borderlands 2, Race Driver: GRID, Half-life 2(all episodes), Half-Life 1, Diablo II, Sports Car GT. All work flawless, and where possible I use N-Glide glide wrapper, which allows me to map it as a DirectX backend for GLIDE games, and the N-Glide configuration lets me up-scale most games to 1080p (1920x1080), regardless of what ever maximum graphics setting the game allowed in-game, and because it's DirectX, I get to use Nvidia Inspector and force most older XP games up to 32xSSAA (Super-Sample Anti-Aliasing) which I think is actually rendering the game at 61440x34560 resolution and then scaling it down to 1920x1080. I love it myself, and this is why I want stupidly overpowered gpu hardware in XP. Some games can even almost give my overclocked GTX 780 a workout and take it up to 80% gpu usage @ maximum boost speed. But it's damn nice never ever seeing any jaggies on any edges anywhere. I'm actually wanting to try and get my paws on a water cooled GTX 780 Ti instead for my XP gaming machine. I almost bought one on ebay recently, but restrained myself.

We can't edit so wanted to add: In the above listed games I have -NOT- observed any issues what so ever with using kepler for them. No graphical glitches, nothing rendered wrong, no issues what so ever. It just works as it should.

Throwing more cores/cache at the problem 😀
3DMark 06 : LINK
^Air cooling (reference GPU)
Crysis FullHD (gpu_benchmark) :

Crysis FullHD + 16xQ "Assault" (gameplay) :

Quake III Arena (1024x768) :

Some Far Cry and Doom 3 screenshots from Geforce 960 on Windows XP 32-bit SP3, driver 368.81:

https://imgur.com/a/AW68q3n

A lot of other games dont work or have glitches though. But when they do work, they look very nice when you force SGSSAA or 4x4 supersampling as seen above. I have compared the above screenshots with a more period correct Geforce 7 (in the same system) and they seem 99% identical in terms of visuals. Even Doom 3 stutters exactly the same on both cards (not sure where does that issue come from though).

edit: Forgot to mention that the Geforce 7 was used with 175.19 drivers.

duga3 wrote:

Some Far Cry and Doom 3 screenshots from Geforce 960 on Windows XP 32-bit SP3, driver 368.81: […]
Show full quote

Some Far Cry and Doom 3 screenshots from Geforce 960 on Windows XP 32-bit SP3, driver 368.81:

https://imgur.com/a/AW68q3n

A lot of other games dont work or have glitches though. But when they do work, they look very nice when you force SGSSAA or 4x4 supersampling as seen above. I have compared the above screenshots with a more period correct Geforce 7 (in the same system) and they seem 99% identical in terms of visuals. Even Doom 3 stutters exactly the same on both cards (not sure where does that issue come from though).

edit: Forgot to mention that the Geforce 7 was used with 175.19 drivers.

What games have trouble with GTX 960? I was under the impression clear majority of DirectX 9 games work just fine with the last cards that still supported Windows XP, even with newer drivers. Pre-dx9 games of course being a different story.