Alistar1776 wrote on 2022-05-05, 18:10:
Tetrium wrote on 2022-05-05, 17:41:
If you really want to literally run that Barton at half its rated speed, I'd say pick a graphics card similar to what one would […]
Alistar1776 wrote on 2022-05-02, 10:59:
So, my Win98SE machine needs graphics drivers, but im not fully sure i want to keep the ATI Radeon HD 4650 AGP card in it. Im curious whats a good gaming card that would pair up well with a 1.1ghz Athlon XP 3200+? Ive thought about possibly a Voodoo 3 card, then using the HD4650AGP in a Win2000 machine (cause i have games that will run on win2000, but not 98SE) Looking forward to some of your suggestions, and thanks in advance!
If you really want to literally run that Barton at half its rated speed, I'd say pick a graphics card similar to what one would pick for a Tualatin or Thunderbird build.
I suppose the running it at half speed is some kind of error and in such a case I think the HD 4650 would suit the Barton 3200+ well enough.
Btw, does the HD 4650 even have any official drivers for Windows 2000?
I wouldn't want to run a 3200+ with a Voodoo 3, even if your board would support it.
I assume "Barton" is the code name for the architecture of the cpu? kinda like intel's Sky Lake, Coffee Lake, etc?
Correct. We often use these names instead of CPU names for reasons like for instance to adds more clarity and decrease confusion as the official CPU names are often confusing or even senseless which may result in error of judgement and more confusion (and perhaps even broken parts which would be a real shame if it was caused by some kind of cheap/lazy communications error).
For instance one could ask why his Athlon XP 2000+ won't work on board A, but Athlon XP 2000+ could be multiple things, like a Palomino or a Thoroughbred or one of the mobile CPUs each of which may make board A respond differently.
Some CPUs have the same name so specifying additional information can prove crucial to troubleshoot a problem, like for instance the Cyrix MII 300 could be a 2.9v or a 2.2v part which can make a huge difference even though it may look kinda trivial to the untrained eye.
And some CPUs are quite frankly very different, like Pentium 4 having been made for 3 different sockets (not counting any of the mobile-only sockets) with several different cores, so a Pentium 4 3.0GHz could actually be 1 of 5 different CPUs with different performance, different features and even different CPU sockets.
So not specifying will usually just result in more questions needing to be asked and more confusion (and possibly bad advice).
If someone asks "What CPU you got?" and he gets a response "I got a pentium" yes...so which one? 🤣
If someone sais "I got a 5900 XT graphics card" it could be a Radeon RX 5900 XT or a GeForce 5900 XT.
So it's usually better to specify.
anyway, running it at half speed wasnt intentional... If its supposed to run at 2.2ghz, hell yea I want the rest of its speed 🤣. The FSB defaults to 200, and last I messed with it, it wouldnt go much past 348 i think. and the system wont POST at all past 1.6ghz. Im curious if there is some kind of jumper config for it on the mobo, kind of like older Socket 7 systems? I have my doubts, but i thought id ask.
Edit: Forgot some other points, my bad.
I havent looked into the availability of Win2K drivers for the HD4650, so im not sure really.
Jumpers weren't a main thing anymore at that time. They kinda went out of fashion once CPU manufacturers started locking their CPUs while at the same time doing the tweaking in software became a more important feature (in BIOS you don't need to open up the case every time you want to change a setting etc).
With 348 I presume you mean 348MHz FSB? That's a non-standard speed, which means the PCI bus could also be overclocked and not all system configurations like that.
It's not a huge overclock from 333 though, I doubt the bus overclock would make it stop posting with such a minor overclock (assuming 348 is indeed correct) and especially since your CPU is supposed to be able to clock to 2.2GHz (using a 400MHz FSB) stock.
The standards used for Athlon XP (any) goes from 200MHz to 400MHz in 66MHz increments (so 200, 266, 333 and 400).
It may be the power delivery crapping out.
What PSU are you using in that build? perhaps it's already been mentioned and I missed it.