Right. From a purely unscientific, gut feeling standpoint, the GeForce2 is also just a better bet for Windows 98 builds. It was released during Windows 98 and DirectX 7's lifetime, so that is where the driver development effort went. The GeForce4 MX belongs to the post-Windows XP, post-DirectX 8 family of Nvidia chips from the GeForce3 to the GeForce 6 that can be gotten to work on Windows 98 but were not primarily intended to be used there, so YMMV.

Second the Quadro FX 3000. Basically a FX5900 on the cheap, and can be forced into a FX if you want to. And overclocks like a beast.

it was fx5900 on the cheap a few years ago, but sellers have picked up on it already, current quadro fx 3000 listings on ebay are for 200 euros a piece

God Of Gaming wrote on 2021-03-05, 07:31:

it was fx5900 on the cheap a few years ago, but sellers have picked up on it already, current quadro fx 3000 listings on ebay are for 200 euros a piece

Must be due to the gpu shortage 🤣

maximus wrote on 2021-03-04, 21:15:

Right. From a purely unscientific, gut feeling standpoint, the GeForce2 is also just a better bet for Windows 98 builds. It was released during Windows 98 and DirectX 7's lifetime, so that is where the driver development effort went. The GeForce4 MX belongs to the post-Windows XP, post-DirectX 8 family of Nvidia chips from the GeForce3 to the GeForce 6 that can be gotten to work on Windows 98 but were not primarily intended to be used there, so YMMV.

Ge force 3 are also a good pick. They feature the same fixed function T&L unit as geforce 2 features not found in the 4 series with a few added ones like EMBM and MSAA. The comparisons drawn usually are putting a geforce 2 ultra as faster than any 3 version. However You can still run older drivers like 12.xx with a 3 series. I think they will run on drivers as low as 8.xx

The 4 series maybe a evolution of the 3 series however the 3 series are closer to the 2 series than even a MX440. Even though its been widely repeated that a 440mx is a evolution of the 2 series its slower than a 3 series. Even in titles that don’t have full support for vertex or pixel shaders or any of the features removed from the mx440 it still gets beaten in games like Quake 3 by even the lowely 3 ti 200.

Quadro FX 3000 was a good value until Phils computer lab and other people made videos about it. Which basically ruined it for average people.

Warlord wrote on 2021-03-05, 10:59:

Ge force 3 are also a good pick. They feature the same fixed function T&L unit as geforce 2 features

Why would they do that?

Putas wrote on 2021-03-08, 05:01:

Warlord wrote on 2021-03-05, 10:59:

Ge force 3 are also a good pick. They feature the same fixed function T&L unit as geforce 2 features

Why would they do that?

Because you didn't start to see shader effects being used super often on PC until around late 2000/2001, though technically you did see some similar stuff on the N64 in really late games like Majora's Mask.

Why have TnL unit when you have vertex shader?

Warlord wrote on 2021-03-05, 11:37:

Quadro FX 3000 was a good value until Phils computer lab and other people made videos about it. Which basically ruined it for average people.

I grabbed a Quadro Fx 1100 (Between 5700 and 5700U) and a Quadro FX 3000 (5900) before those videos were made. Thought I had a Quadro FX 2000 around as well... maybe it is in a system or maybe I never actually bought one.

Not too long ago I snagged a BFG 5950U for $50 off eBay. The only problem was that the fans in the cooler were bad. One aftermarket cooler later and it works like new and runs way cooler than it would have stock.

Every once in a while I still see a higher-ish end FX for a good price.

Here is a 5900 for $100:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/ASUS-V9950-NVIDIA-Ge … re/124575785121

Here are some Quadro FX 2000 for $95:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-nVIDIA-QUADRO-FX2 … 01/254852742163

Another option if you have PCIe for video is the Quadro FX 1300 which is basically a way lower clocked 5950U with only 128MB instead of 256MB RAM.
You can usually get them on eBay for around $15-$25.

I haven't tried it myself, but from what I have read the PCIE FX quadro 1300 apparently have garbage windows 98 drivers.

mothergoose729 wrote on 2021-03-08, 07:05:

I haven't tried it myself, but from what I have read the PCIE FX quadro 1300 apparently have garbage windows 98 drivers.

Should be able to add the ID string to the .inf file for any driver set that supports the 5950U and be good to go.

I haven't tried it myself, but I have no reason to think it wouldn't work.

I tired the whole Quadro FX 1300 and the problem is that you can't use drivers older than 7x.xx. So even though it has all the right features on paper those drivers suck so bad that you cannot really use them to run games that often require those features. The main issue the the AGP/Express Bridge chip isn't supported in earlier drivers. You need a pure AGP card.

Putas wrote on 2021-03-08, 05:35:

Why have TnL unit when you have vertex shader?

since the Geforce 3 only has 1 vertex shader. Geforce 4 had 2.

Warlord wrote on 2021-03-08, 15:20:

Putas wrote on 2021-03-08, 05:35:

Why have TnL unit when you have vertex shader?

since the Geforce 3 only has 1 vertex shader. Geforce 4 had 2.

If the Geforce3 had one TnL unit and one vertex shader why wouldn't it beat the single TnL unit of GeForce 2?

mothergoose729 wrote on 2021-03-08, 07:05:

I haven't tried it myself, but from what I have read the PCIE FX quadro 1300 apparently have garbage windows 98 drivers.

I tried the fx1300 and can confirm. Even after inf modding various drivers, game compatibility was hit or miss. It doesn't help that 70 series and later drivers in general break compatibility with some older games even with normal AGP cards.

What kind of problems were you seeing with the Quadro FX 1300?

I'm wondering if the same problems would be seen with the Geforce PCX cards (official PCIe FX cards)

What specific games have issues with the newer drivers?

someone posted in another thread some 3dmark results for the FX1300 under windows 98 and it was awful, way bellow an AGP card, it seems the drivers are very broken, with many games failing to work.

I ran a couple benchmarks with it in XP a while ago and it was very fast. I think I was somewhere around 300fps-400fps in quake III. The bridge chip is probably why it runs so poorly in 98. The late driver version doesn't help.

I don't see anybody having tried the official 81.98 set which has support for the Geforce PCX cards. Doesn't list the Quadro FX 1300, but since it supports the PCX cards, it should work fine with the Quadro FX 1300.

Filename is:
81.98_forceware_win9x_english.exe

The old drivers are not available from nVidia anymore though the download page is still there.

When I get a chance, I'll have to mess with it and see if I can get a high performance driver pack put together for 98SE.

Anybody else remember the video card driver file mixing that was done back in the day to get the best possible performance from the cards?