VOGONS


First post, by hwh

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I read/considered the large "best card for XP" thread but I don't really want to mix up that with this, so...

My GTX 460 just died (how hilarious, the socket for the fans fell off the card and the card ran without fans until it broke). When I got it, I wasn't impressed by its lack of DOS mode compatibility, but, well, I guess time passes and standards change. I no longer worry about NTVDM as the "official" DOS, it either works or you use you-know-what. But you do lose a little compatibility here and there. Usually without knowing!

Taking this into consideration, my initial reaction of a GTX 960 (the standard "bleeding edge performance" answer) now seems incorrect. If I choose to run a DX7 game, heh, it's not unlikely there will be issues, but I don't want more issues than I already have for performance that I almost never need.

The devil, advocating says I should get another GTX 460, and I hate him because it's an old card and I don't want to go backwards. This isn't some "vintage" system, it's what I use. So that would be a last resort. I could probably get more performance with lower TDP in a newer card. I care more about noise than performance.

I have heard the um, GTX 750 might be the way to go for shader 3.0 (non unified) because that breaks some stuff. I have also heard tell that some games bug out at the sight of tons of video memory. 4GB, to be specific. My GTX 460 has 768MB. Is there some known point (say 2 or 4GB) at which problems occur? Or would a random GTX 750 just be the ticket?

Then there's the matter of ATI (errr...AMD? I haven't bought one of their cards in 17 years). I have nothing against them although there is always a give and take with the drivers, nVidia too. Does it matter? I feel like compatibility is less of an issue with nVidia. But I might just be thinking of 2002, I don't know. So if you have reason to believe that AMD is the way to go and know the best card that isn't worse (compatibility) than a GTX 460, please share that reasoning.

TLDR: Better performance than GTX 460, equal or better compatibility with, pretty much, Windows 98 games to today. Who am I?

Reply 2 of 11, by SScorpio

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

The GTX 460 didn't have great 98 game compatiblity either. It doesn't support 8-bit palleted textures, and I believe some fog table and shadow buffer stuff doesn't work. A GeForce 4 or FX would be the latest Nvidia cards to support those features and those are very much 98 cards as I also view XP as DX9 which neither of those cards handle well.

The main thing I'd look at is what games are you hoping to run? Many XP games can be played on a modern PC running Windows 10 without issue. dgVoodoo works with older Direct3D/Draw games and may fix the issues you ran into.

A 2GB 750 should be plenty to run any XP game that doesn't work in Windows 10.

Reply 5 of 11, by ODwilly

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

HD6800's and 6900's are super cheap and plentiful. They havent had good drivers for years for windows 10, last release was 2016. Not really an issue for XP tho.

Main pc: AsRock x370 Killer SLI a/c, Ryzen 5 2600, 1tb WD black nvme ssd, 24g ddr4 2400 @2933mhz, rx 480 8gb reference card, 2tb Hitachi Deskstar.
Retro PC: Soyo P4S Dragon, 3gb ddr 266, 120gb Maxtor, Geforce Fx 5950 Ultra, SB Live! 5.1

Reply 6 of 11, by Baoran

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Basically my thought on this matter is that you can't get everything with a single card. The newer card you get the better the performance is and older card you get better the compatibility is. It was said in this thread before too that you can play especially newer windows xp games on a modern pc too so you might not need as much performance with the older games you play and could concentrate on older cards and better compatibility.

Reply 7 of 11, by agent_x007

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Ask yourself this questions :
1) Do you require a GPU that is more powerfull than DX9c GPUs can provide ?
(last NV GPUs with 98 support : 6800 Ultra/7900 GTX [depending on official or non-official driver] and for ATI it's X800/X850 XT).
Keep in mind : There are NO newer GPU that will provide 3D acceleration support in WIndows 98/Me.
Also, ATI cards have worse OpenGL support (they are usually slower in it than NV cards from the same year)
2) Do you want to play games that will not work with XP ?
(or, which are a pain to make work with it [depends on configuration])

If you need better GPU, and still want to play games that don't work well with XP - you either :
1) Need a seperate box for Win98 specific support, OR
2) Make dual GPU configuration inside one box work (cards can be from both ATI and NV, they will be used seperatly, however you will have to swap video outputs depending on OS you want to use).

108080818886.png

Reply 8 of 11, by leileilol

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Baoran wrote on 2020-11-23, 05:12:

The newer card you get the better the performance is and older card you get better the compatibility is.

Not always. RadeonHD is worse at legacy compatibility than the GCN series after it, somehow... Yes this implies Win7+GCN > WinXP+RadeonHD for some retro setups.

apsosig.png

Reply 9 of 11, by hwh

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Hi. Thank you for the replies.

I am dual booting with 7 right now (forgot to...see the relevance), so I can certainly run post XP games with the same system.

---
A little fun - the card does work (with various shadow/light horizontal line artifacts) as long as it's completely off; if the device is disabled it will work and it works in safe mode. Just looks like crap and drawing is obviously very slow.

I decided to put in the next best card I have - well, technically I have a 9800 PRO that would be just the thing, but this is an 1156 system, no AGP. Next best card is...a Trio 64V+ 🤣

And it's surprisingly better than a cruddy 1280x1024 image. With that, I could watch Youtube videos in the small player, but framerate couldn't keep up in full screen. Plus the image was messed up. With the Trio, it tops out at 1024x768x16 which I don't mind (it's just not native) but, uh, I can watch high resolution video in full screen. And it looks pretty good. And I can scroll pages decently. I could actually use this thing as long as I keep it 2D. Pretty funny.

Hwinfo reports it's got 2MB EDO at 60Mhz and the chip is 135Mhz, really cooking now. Say whatever the hell you want about S3, they built some top quality adapters, just bulletproof, and they just work. As long as you stay in 2D. :p
---

I've reviewed the replies and the data, and I think I want the GTX 750 Ti. It's got an incredible 60W TDP (the 460 is 160W). Synthetic benchmarks say it's almost 100% faster in 3D and 25% faster in 2D. That's what I'm talking about.

Due to the low TDP, it's known for being a quiet card. There are several amazing (to me) options for this card - almost all used. First there is the Palit KalmX. There's no fan. Just like the old days. This probably can do - and I am so impressed, with nVidia and with Palit for having the courage to do it - but reviewers mentioned it may need "airflow" such as a case fan. I sort of understand, you can't suffocate it, but I don't want the card to overheat while I'm playing a game, break, and so on. Probably wouldn't happen but reviewers were nervous. So this 70C or whatever, full load could get worse over time. Thermal compound isn't invincible.

There are several third party choices that either feature large, low speed fans, or special editions where the fans can be made even less noisy. Believe it or not I looked at this data when I bought my large GTX460. Technology got better even if the world hasn't...

The other one which was pointed out to me is the Asus Strix edition. It's basically an OC'd card (which I care nothing about or for) but, of course, it's the one with the feature that turns the fans off when the temperature is below I think 55C. Why is the one that generates the most heat (I think it's 75W) the one with the silent fan feature? Damned if I know. Why do economy cars not have sound insulation, but the quiet cars all have gas guzzling motors? Because fuck me, that's why. Anyway. This Strix. Not entirely clear if it's software based as seems likely. One user mentioned a PCB switch (oh god yes). Also hard to get.

One on Amazon is going for $210 with shipping. It was only $160 new! And that was a couple of years ago. One went in Australia for not too much, maybe only $110US, postage uncertain. Does not ship here. I offered that he invoice me the $62AUD shipping if I bought it and he ignored me. Then I found this misclassified one (as a non Strix) going for $100. I also saw a couple of Palits.

I prefer not to deal with background services applying settings at startup. So I tried and more or less failed, reading the so called Strix manual to discover how the silent feature works other than that the Asus program has a profile for it, which obviously works. In some operating system or other. I verified the non Strix card had XP support. Then I bought the card. Then I found the Strix page (I was concerned someone else would buy the card - happened to me with a Palit I wasn't sure about) which hilariously starts at Vista up. Even for drivers. So, I don't know. The utility exists for XP too (a somewhat older version). I don't know if it's Strix specific. Would be just damn perfect if the Strix version isn't able to go in silent mode for XP, what a pain in the ass. I even had to double check driver support - yeah, even though they don't list the utility (or any driver) for XP under Strix, definitely has nVidia driver support.

So I'll see how it goes. I tried installing the Vista utility here and it worked. It won't load - I don't know what this world's coming to when a Trio64V+ without DirectX makes the Asus overclocking utility complain about ...dlls? (that sounds like a Vista/XP issue). Won't go further until I have the card. Then I shall see. And maybe report here about it. Can't be worse than the GTX460!

Reply 10 of 11, by ODwilly

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

The EVGA SC 750ti is really nice. It doesnt have the 6pin power connector and the two decent sized fans dont really make any noise because the card never gets hot.

Main pc: AsRock x370 Killer SLI a/c, Ryzen 5 2600, 1tb WD black nvme ssd, 24g ddr4 2400 @2933mhz, rx 480 8gb reference card, 2tb Hitachi Deskstar.
Retro PC: Soyo P4S Dragon, 3gb ddr 266, 120gb Maxtor, Geforce Fx 5950 Ultra, SB Live! 5.1

Reply 11 of 11, by SScorpio

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

The fans on a 750ti are very quiet, you shouldn't need to worry about having them stop completely. They aren't like blower-style coolers that force a lot of air movement.

If you absolutely need to have custom fan curves you can modify them directly in the card's BIOS. The tools that change settings on launch just do a temporary override, while the BIOS is what the card has when it is given power. But first, try using the card without messing with it.