Here is the driver that DVI Dual-Link ALREADY works with:

GeForce ForceWare 185.20 (Dated December 26, 2008).

And here is the previous version of the driver, with which the image is NOT YET:

GeForce Forceware 182.52 (Dated April 30, 2009).

I managed to find out that INF has no effect (You can take INF from one driver and add it to another, the result will not change).

Has anyone mentioned powerstrip yet? Maybe it can help?

@DoZator

You linked to an XP driver not a 98 driver, are you running XP or 98?

Dualboot Windows 98 & Windows XP.

I am now trying to fix DVI Dual-Link with old drivers (<185.20) first under Windows XP to understand the reason. The next step is to apply the found solution to earlier drivers for Windows 98 (ForceWare 77.72 and 82.69 for Win9x). The goal is to make DVI Dual-Link work under Windows 98 (not just Windows XP or higher) with native monitor modes (1920x1080@120Hz or higher).

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-10-28, 15:45:

Has anyone mentioned powerstrip yet? Maybe it can help?

What specifically needs to be done with powerstrip?

DoZator wrote on 2022-10-28, 15:11:

Here is the driver that DVI Dual-Link ALREADY works with: […]
Show full quote

Here is the driver that DVI Dual-Link ALREADY works with:

GeForce ForceWare 185.20 (Dated December 26, 2008).

And here is the previous version of the driver, with which the image is NOT YET:

GeForce Forceware 182.52 (Dated April 30, 2009).

I managed to find out that INF has no effect (You can take INF from one driver and add it to another, the result will not change).

What could have changed in the 185.20 driver, compared to the previous ones, that it now began to detect a monitor connected via DVI Dual-Link and display a normal image?

So, I tried playing around with the modes in PowerStrip and I was able to set some previously unavailable modes and resolutions on a dual link DVI cable, connected according to darry's recipe. Such modes, for example, as 1024x768@120hz or 1600x900@100hz or 1920x1080@100hz (With some font distortions) or 1920x1080@75hz (Without distortions) could be set, but at the same time, for example, with 1600x900@100hz the monitor writes, they say "Not correct cable. Use the dual link DVI cable that came with the monitor." Accordingly, since the cable is exactly the one you need and works flawlessly in Windows XP with GeForce ForceWare 185.20 or higher drivers, in full dual-channel mode, we can confidently say that the video card does not switch to dual-channel mode under Windows 98 when using the method, suggested by darry on the previous page.

It turns out that the video card initially, even at startup, produces the correct DVI Dual-Link signal, but for some reason the monitor does not understand it, showing a black screen. At the same time, the GeForce ForceWare 185.20 (From 2008) or higher driver switches the video card to another DVI Dual-Link output mode, which modern monitors already understand. To get around this difference and use a modern monitor under Windows 98 (For which there is no driver newer than 2006, 82.69), it was suggested above to try options with hardware converters and EDID emulators, but is there a simpler option, without the need for additional hardware? Well, like, for example, modifying the VBIOS of video cards in the likeness of modern ones (Which already at the BIOS stage issue the required DVI Dual-Link signal), or maybe in Windows 98 somehow override the original EDID with the correct one? What else is it possible to try to do?

Does the Windows 98 driver have that Nvidia CP like these days where you can create custom modes?

DoZator wrote on 2022-11-04, 02:10:

So, I tried playing around with the modes in PowerStrip and I was able to set some previously unavailable modes and resolutions on a dual link DVI cable, connected according to darry's recipe. Such modes, for example, as 1024x768@120hz or 1600x900@100hz or 1920x1080@100hz (With some font distortions) or 1920x1080@75hz (Without distortions) could be set, but at the same time, for example, with 1600x900@100hz the monitor writes, they say "Not correct cable. Use the dual link DVI cable that came with the monitor." Accordingly, since the cable is exactly the one you need and works flawlessly in Windows XP with GeForce ForceWare 185.20 or higher drivers, in full dual-channel mode, we can confidently say that the video card does not switch to dual-channel mode under Windows 98 when using the method, suggested by darry on the previous page.

It turns out that the video card initially, even at startup, produces the correct DVI Dual-Link signal, but for some reason the monitor does not understand it, showing a black screen. At the same time, the GeForce ForceWare 185.20 (From 2008) or higher driver switches the video card to another DVI Dual-Link output mode, which modern monitors already understand. To get around this difference and use a modern monitor under Windows 98 (For which there is no driver newer than 2006, 82.69), it was suggested above to try options with hardware converters and EDID emulators, but is there a simpler option, without the need for additional hardware? Well, like, for example, modifying the VBIOS of video cards in the likeness of modern ones (Which already at the BIOS stage issue the required DVI Dual-Link signal), or maybe in Windows 98 somehow override the original EDID with the correct one? What else is it possible to try to do?

I would really like to suggest something helpful, but I'm out of both ideas and practical experience (I have never owned a DVI dual-link equipped monitor nor have I ever tried to run >165MHz resolutions over HDMI or DP on any Windows version older than 10 or maybe 7 ).

darry wrote on 2022-10-25, 18:41:

DoZator wrote on 2022-10-25, 18:37:

darry wrote on 2022-10-25, 18:15:

Maybe the old Nvidia driver is trying to push wacky timings with huge blanking intervals that exceed even 330MHz by default .

This is also possible, but the problem starts earlier - a black screen immediately after turning on the PC, even at the boot stage. Which confirms your assumption about the absence of the necessary BIOS EDID information in the video card. Or even in the monitor itself.

That's not necessarily a big problem, as it could be overcome with an EDID emulator (are there ones with dual-link passthrough support, or otherwise need to modify build your own) or maybe a dual-link to DP converter with a programmable EDID.

EDIT : If you've got spare cash and time, this might be worth a try https://www.amazon.com/Gefen-GTV-DVIDL-2-MDP- … r/dp/B01LZT2Z15 . According to some reviews, it is more flexible than official specs let on, but still might not help at all, depending on what is actually causing the issue in your case .

It is worth paying attention to the following things. This converter converts the DVI Dual-Link signal coming from the graphics card to "Mini DisplayPort". Thus, to connect to a monitor with a DVI Dual-Link input (Without any DP, which in my case), you will also need a converter back from Mini DisplayPort to DVI Dual-Link.

I also paid attention to the following characteristics of this converter - "Advanced EDID Management: Mode 1: 2560x1600, Mode 2: 2560x1440, Mode 3: EDID pass-through"

Mode 3: EDID pass-through - this, apparently, will be transmitted to the monitor what the video card still produces (the Monitor does not understand this).
Mode 2: 2560x1440 and Mode 1: 2560x1600 - the monitor is also unlikely to understand, because its ceiling is 1920x1080.

As I understand it, initially the GeForce 7950GT outputs something similar via DVI Dual-Link (2560x1440 or 2560x1600), assuming that a high-resolution monitor is connected, it scales the source signal at the hardware level (For example, at the BIOS and MS-DOS boot stage) up to higher the specified permissions. Naturally, the monitor rejects such a signal (For it is designed for 1920x1080).

In modern video cards, support for 1920x1080 in DVI Dual-Link mode has already been added at the VBIOS level, so there are no such problems. On older video cards, such support is provided by the video driver (I would like to figure out what it changes there).

Thus, if you rely on converters to DisplayPort and vice versa, it seems that, in addition to the converters themselves, you will also need to scale from the original signal 2560x1440 or 2560x1600, which the video card produces by default, to 1920x1080.

However, this way seems to me still not ideal (Even in the case of implementation), since it certainly imposes additional output delays. I would still prefer the option of modifying the VBIOS of the video card to output 1920x1080 initially, instead of 2560x1440 or 2560x1600 when connected via DVI Dual-Link.

Are there any experts on modifying the VBIOS of retro video cards? Could you suggest something about this?

I never meant to imply that https://www.amazon.com/Gefen-GTV-DVIDL-2-MDP- … r/dp/B01LZT2Z15 was a sure thing in your use case, far from it.
Based solely on official disclosed specs, it likely would not have done anything useful. However, reading some of the comments on it suggested it could do more than official specs implied (not that it necessarily would have helped you).
Moreover, I also missed the fact that you have a XL2411 , not the XL2411P (which also has DP input). Sorry about that .

That being said, I am not at all convinced that a patched vBIOS would help with getting 1920x1080@144Hz working under Windows 98, as it isn't necessary for Windows XP . My guess is the XP driver is just more flexible/better. I could be wrong, of course .

EDIT :
Anyway, my current line of thinking regarding that Gefen gizmo is that it might be possible to boot your system with it while having the vBIOS "think" that a proper dual-link 2560x1440 monitor is connected at boot into Windows 98's DOS (who care's if there's no picture at this point), then switch the EDID to passthrough and then finally start Windows 98 .

It might work, it might not and the fact that this thing costs 200$ and that a DP to DVI dual-link converter would also be required (and possibly have its own issues/limitations), makes this an expensive gamble, IMHO .

It was generally possible to fix the DVI port by using the usual "Single-Link" digital EDID from the HDMI port of the same monitor (With some modifications). The original EDID, with which the image does not work, contains, for example, the following data:

Established Timings I & II:
IBM : 720x400 70.081663 Hz 9:5 31.467 kHz 28.320000 MHz
DMT 0x04: 640x480 59.940476 Hz 4:3 31.469 kHz 25.175000 MHz
DMT 0x06: 640x480 75.000000 Hz 4:3 37.500 kHz 31.500000 MHz
DMT 0x09: 800x600 60.316541 Hz 4:3 37.879 kHz 40.000000 MHz
DMT 0x0b: 800x600 75.000000 Hz 4:3 46.875 kHz 49.500000 MHz
Apple : 832x624 74.551266 Hz 4:3 49.726 kHz 57.284000 MHz
DMT 0x10: 1024x768 60.003840 Hz 4:3 48.363 kHz 65.000000 MHz
DMT 0x12: 1024x768 75.028582 Hz 4:3 60.023 kHz 78.750000 MHz
DMT 0x24: 1280x1024 75.024675 Hz 5:4 79.976 kHz 135.000000 MHz
Apple : 1152x870 75.061550 Hz 192:145 68.681 kHz 100.000000 MHz
Standard Timings:
DMT 0x52: 1920x1080 60.000000 Hz 16:9 67.500 kHz 148.500000 MHz
GTF : 800x600 119.999886 Hz 4:3 77.160 kHz 83.950000 MHz
GTF : 1024x768 119.999931 Hz 4:3 98.760 kHz 139.054000 MHz
DMT 0x23: 1280x1024 60.019740 Hz 5:4 63.981 kHz 108.000000 MHz
GTF : 1280x1024 120.000185 Hz 5:4 131.640 kHz 233.793000 MHz
GTF : 1440x900 119.999896 Hz 16:10 115.800 kHz 229.747000 MHz
GTF : 640x480 119.999084 Hz 4:3 61.800 kHz 52.406000 MHz
Detailed Timing Descriptors:
DTD 1: 1920x1080 60.000000 Hz 16:9 67.500 kHz 148.500000 MHz (531 mm x 298 mm)
Hfront 88 Hsync 44 Hback 148 Hpol P
Vfront 4 Vsync 5 Vback 36 Vpol P
Display Product Serial Number: ...
Display Range Limits:
Monitor ranges (GTF): 56-144 Hz V, 30-160 kHz H, max dotclock 330 MHz

Detailed Timing Descriptors:
DTD 2: 1920x1080 99.930409 Hz 16:9 113.221 kHz 235.500000 MHz (531 mm x 298 mm)
Hfront 48 Hsync 32 Hback 80 Hpol P
Vfront 3 Vsync 5 Vback 45 Vpol N
DTD 3: 1920x1080 119.982181 Hz 16:9 137.260 kHz 285.500000 MHz (531 mm x 298 mm)
Hfront 48 Hsync 32 Hback 80 Hpol P
Vfront 3 Vsync 5 Vback 56 Vpol N
DTD 4: 1920x1080 144.000765 Hz 16:9 158.113 kHz 325.080000 MHz (531 mm x 298 mm)
Hfront 24 Hsync 32 Hback 80 Hpol P
Vfront 3 Vsync 5 Vback 10 Vpol P

And the video card apparently cannot provide this initially (vBIOS cannot do this yet). The newer XP driver from 2008 already does this, so the video card used Dual-Link after entering XP. And the Windows 98 driver from 2005 naturally cannot do anything like that. I associate this problem with the widespread adoption around 2008 of LCD monitors for 3D Stereo, with support for 120Hz. Apparently, just for their normal support, the vBIOS of video cards was redesigned.. And for old cards they made a fix in the driver. And Windows 98 did not receive this fix. Therefore, the monitor cannot negotiate with the video card, which believes that the EDID is broken and turns off the signal. Video BIOS is not friendly with this EDID.

Hence the idea to try to find a monitor with DVI Dual-Link support, released BEFORE this whole story with the introduction of 120hz 3D to the masses. And this is approximately 2005 +\- 12 months. If you find such a monitor, you can try to take the EDID from it. At least the video card will work with it. Well, and most importantly, it will provide a two-channel connection that understands both vBIOS and ForceWare 77.72. And then you can try to modify it, gradually increasing the frequencies, setting the correct resolutions.

But where can I find a list of all DVI Dual-Link monitors of that time from among those that are in the EDID database?

DoZator wrote on 2022-10-28, 20:31:

Dualboot Windows 98 & Windows XP. […]
Show full quote

Dualboot Windows 98 & Windows XP.

I am now trying to fix DVI Dual-Link with old drivers (<185.20) first under Windows XP to understand the reason. The next step is to apply the found solution to earlier drivers for Windows 98 (ForceWare 77.72 and 82.69 for Win9x). The goal is to make DVI Dual-Link work under Windows 98 (not just Windows XP or higher) with native monitor modes (1920x1080@120Hz or higher).

Sphere478 wrote on 2022-10-28, 15:45:

Has anyone mentioned powerstrip yet? Maybe it can help?

What specifically needs to be done with powerstrip?

DoZator wrote on 2022-10-28, 15:11:

Here is the driver that DVI Dual-Link ALREADY works with: […]
Show full quote

Here is the driver that DVI Dual-Link ALREADY works with:

GeForce ForceWare 185.20 (Dated December 26, 2008).

And here is the previous version of the driver, with which the image is NOT YET:

GeForce Forceware 182.52 (Dated April 30, 2009).

I managed to find out that INF has no effect (You can take INF from one driver and add it to another, the result will not change).

What could have changed in the 185.20 driver, compared to the previous ones, that it now began to detect a monitor connected via DVI Dual-Link and display a normal image?

If I recall correctly you can use it to make custom resolutions and refresh rates

This stage has already been passed and everything that could be squeezed out of Single-Link seems to have been squeezed out now.
It remains to try to start a Dual-Link, which would overcome the limits of Single-Link capabilities.
But to do this, you need to find a monitor with a DVI Dual-Link connection from the early 2000s (Up to 2006 release approximately), in order to remove the compatible EDID from it, with which the video card driver for Windows 98 from 2005 release can work.

However, I have already found one of these monitors:

Apple Cinema Display HD 30 (M9179)

The description of which, in particular, just indicates the compatibility requirement:

Mac Pro compatibility All new Mac Pro systems support two Apple Cinema Displays, including dual‑link DVI for one 30‑inch model. […]
Show full quote

Mac Pro compatibility
All new Mac Pro systems support two Apple Cinema Displays, including dual‑link DVI for one
30‑inch model. Support for two 30‑inch Apple Cinema HD Displays requires two dual‑link DVI
ports — available in configurations with either the ATI Radeon X1900 XT or the NVIDIA Quadro
FX 4500 — or by installing an additional NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT card. Support for more than
two displays requires installation of one or more additional NVIDIA GeForce 7300GT cards.

Power Mac G5 compatibility
Any new dual‑ or quad‑core Power Mac G5 supports two Apple Cinema Displays, including
dual‑link DVI for one 30‑inch model. Support for two 30‑inch Apple Cinema HD Displays
requires two dual‑link DVI ports, available in configurations with the NVIDIA Quadro FX 4500
or by installing an additional NVIDIA GeForce 6600 card. Support for more than two displays
requires installation of one or more additional NVIDIA GeForce 6600 cards

The NVIDIA GeForce 6600 is one of the first nVidia cards in the sixth series to officially support Dual-Link.

NVIDIA Quadro FX 4500 - I currently use it, which means that when connecting such a monitor, there should be no problems, in theory. It remains to find the EDID from it and you can try it.

DoZator wrote on 2023-09-23, 08:44:

This stage has already been passed and everything that could be squeezed out of Single-Link seems to have been squeezed out now. […]
Show full quote

This stage has already been passed and everything that could be squeezed out of Single-Link seems to have been squeezed out now.
It remains to try to start a Dual-Link, which would overcome the limits of Single-Link capabilities.
But to do this, you need to find a monitor with a DVI Dual-Link connection from the early 2000s (Up to 2006 release approximately), in order to remove the compatible EDID from it, with which the video card driver for Windows 98 from 2005 release can work.

However, I have already found one of these monitors:

Apple Cinema Display HD 30 (M9179)

The description of which, in particular, just indicates the compatibility requirement:

Mac Pro compatibility All new Mac Pro systems support two Apple Cinema Displays, including dual‑link DVI for one 30‑inch model. […]
Show full quote

Mac Pro compatibility
All new Mac Pro systems support two Apple Cinema Displays, including dual‑link DVI for one
30‑inch model. Support for two 30‑inch Apple Cinema HD Displays requires two dual‑link DVI
ports — available in configurations with either the ATI Radeon X1900 XT or the NVIDIA Quadro
FX 4500 — or by installing an additional NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT card. Support for more than
two displays requires installation of one or more additional NVIDIA GeForce 7300GT cards.

Power Mac G5 compatibility
Any new dual‑ or quad‑core Power Mac G5 supports two Apple Cinema Displays, including
dual‑link DVI for one 30‑inch model. Support for two 30‑inch Apple Cinema HD Displays
requires two dual‑link DVI ports, available in configurations with the NVIDIA Quadro FX 4500
or by installing an additional NVIDIA GeForce 6600 card. Support for more than two displays
requires installation of one or more additional NVIDIA GeForce 6600 cards

The NVIDIA GeForce 6600 is one of the first nVidia cards in the sixth series to officially support Dual-Link.

NVIDIA Quadro FX 4500 - I currently use it, which means that when connecting such a monitor, there should be no problems, in theory. It remains to find the EDID from it and you can try it.

As I see it, the problem is that dual link isn’t working at all in the win98 driver.
At the time, probably nobody using win98 needed dual link. I mean, who wanted to connect his 30” Apple Cinema Display to his 98 PC back in 2005?
Certainly nobody, as otherwise they might have continued some kind of support for 98, but they stopped support at that time (last 98 driver from 11/2005), as 98 was dead for the market for a long time.

The only way I see would be to patch the patched 98 driver one more time, to add the dual link support that we have in XP to win98.

Only the unofficial patched driver supports the 7series that all seem to have dual link, while only very few models of the 6 series have dual link as well (Apple models and some 6800Ultra).

The first official driver to support a dual link card (6800ultra) is 61.76. Does anybody have one of the dual link models and can test those drivers under 98 if they support high refresh rates over DVI?

I wish there was a way, I also have my xl2411 and a 7900gs and many other gpus sitting here wishing they could play counter strike 1.5 with A3D2.0 @ 144Hz in windows 98.
Maybe it’s more likely that A3D will be ported to WinXP one day.
I think that an external VGA to dual link DVI / HDMI 1.3 adapter might be the best bet, as the VGA port seems to have some kind of support for higher refresh rates. I don’t know what the maximum of VGA on the GeForce 6 or 7 series is and if such an adapter for high refresh rates exists.

This implies that the 6600gt did not have dual link: https://forum.pcgames.de/threads/full-hd-mit- … roblem.6343210/

This implies only the Apple 6600 has dual link: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3112992?sortBy=best

It seems that all Quadros have dual link.

Only some 6series had dual link, but most 7series had it: https://arstechnica.com/civis/threads/dual-li … 0-ultra.312821/

Question is if the patched 7 series driver for 98 implements dual link correctly. I guess not.

Have there ever been any drivers for 98 that specifically claimed added support for dual link?

DoZator wrote on 2022-11-04, 02:10:

So, I tried playing around with the modes in PowerStrip and I was able to set some previously unavailable modes and resolutions on a dual link DVI cable, connected according to darry's recipe. Such modes, for example, as 1024x768@120hz or 1600x900@100hz or 1920x1080@100hz (With some font distortions) or 1920x1080@75hz (Without distortions) could be set, but at the same time, for example, with 1600x900@100hz the monitor writes, they say "Not correct cable. Use the dual link DVI cable that came with the monitor." Accordingly, since the cable is exactly the one you need and works flawlessly in Windows XP with GeForce ForceWare 185.20 or higher drivers, in full dual-channel mode, we can confidently say that the video card does not switch to dual-channel mode under Windows 98 when using the method, suggested by darry on the previous page.

It turns out that the video card initially, even at startup, produces the correct DVI Dual-Link signal, but for some reason the monitor does not understand it, showing a black screen. At the same time, the GeForce ForceWare 185.20 (From 2008) or higher driver switches the video card to another DVI Dual-Link output mode, which modern monitors already understand. To get around this difference and use a modern monitor under Windows 98 (For which there is no driver newer than 2006, 82.69), it was suggested above to try options with hardware converters and EDID emulators, but is there a simpler option, without the need for additional hardware? Well, like, for example, modifying the VBIOS of video cards in the likeness of modern ones (Which already at the BIOS stage issue the required DVI Dual-Link signal), or maybe in Windows 98 somehow override the original EDID with the correct one? What else is it possible to try to do?

I don’t understand what exactly is working with the 185 drivers in XP that is not working in earlier versions for you.

I have a 7900gs AGP that runs 1080p@144hz under XP over dual link cable on the BenQ XL2411 at driver version 93.71. Also a 7600gt at Version 84.44.
Both sadly only 60Hz in 98.

I don’t have any older GPU with dual link dvi that I could test.

What do the 185 drivers improve for you?

@Jonsmith0815

Check the number of pins on your DVI port, you might have some cards with dual link.
i.e this chinese Geforce FX 5500 PCI has one - https://www.ebay.com/itm/204036143864

Duffman wrote on 2024-04-28, 03:29:

@Jonsmith0815

Check the number of pins on your DVI port, you might have some cards with dual link.
i.e this chinese Geforce FX 5500 PCI has one - https://www.ebay.com/itm/204036143864

The pins on the port don’t tell if the chip supports dual dvi. I have tested around 10 cards that all have a dual dvi port.

For example GeForce 4200 ti has dual dvi port but doesn’t actually support it. The problem is that the chips don’t support it. dual dvi was a new technology at the time. Most cards used the same dual dvi connector while not supporting it.

Only GF7, some Quadro and some special cards from that period actually support dual dvi.

The problem is that the win 98 drivers don’t enable the use of it. They treat all cards as single dvi. The driver seems to be broken, Nvidia seems to not have cared about 98 anymore.

Today I tested the Quadro FX3450 (NV41/42 chip?) with the 77.72 drivers (added device ID for NV30 in Nvaml.inf). Next older card to test would be FX3400. FX4000 would be even older but hard to find. Those high end Quadro and 6800Ultra cards have confirmed dual dvi through external chips as I understand. Later GF7 seem to have dual dvi integrated in the G70 chip.

So I am trying to find out if there is an early driver that supports dual dvi output and high refresh rates. 61.76, 66.94 and 71.84 are the next older driver version candidates that support NV42 FX4000 and 6800Ultra.

NV40 FX4400 and FX3400 should also work by patching the older drivers similar to FX3450.

But very likely the driver is also broken in all those older versions. I don’t have the cards so I can’t test it myself.

56.64 is the next older driver version, but that one has only GeForce FX (5) series and Quadro FX 2000 support. All those older cards don’t have dual link dvi, none of the those chips implemented it.

An alternative might be ATI, but it’s not clear which models have dual link and if any drivers support it in 98. I have the x850 agp but I couldn’t even get 1080p working.

Jonsmith0815 wrote on 2024-04-27, 19:33:

I think that an external VGA to dual link DVI / HDMI 1.3 adapter might be the best bet, as the VGA port seems to have some kind of support for higher refresh rates. I don’t know what the maximum of VGA on the GeForce 6 or 7 series is and if such an adapter for high refresh rates exists.

Unfortunately not. This is certainly the simplest option, but the quality is the worst. I've already tried 5 different converters, including GEFEN and OSSC, but with all of them, the image is, sorry, crappy (Not clear, not bright, with visible distortions and broken colors). Even the standard VGA input on the monitor itself has image quality issues. Only a digital connection gave the correct beautiful and clear image on my LCD monitors. VGA is good for CRT monitors (Very good). But for LCD better DVI Dual-Link \ DVI\HDMI or (Maybe) active DVI (DL\SL) to DP converter. At least that's what I see on the two LCD monitors I already have (from different companies).

I have already solved all the problems that concern me by flashing a different EDID to the DVI-DL port. However, I have so far abandoned the original goals outlined in the topic title. I looked at it thoroughly, tested it, and decided that 1920x1080 was still too much for my monitor, and I liked how everything looks better with a resolution of 1600x900@100Hz (For which SingleLink + PowerStrip is quite enough). I made it native in EDID (Instead of the previous 1920x1080) and flashed it. From now on, the driver in Win98 considers 1600x900 as native for this monitor, instead of the original 1920x1080. This helped solve all the problems with setting lower resolutions (Which are most often used under Win9x in older games), especially non-standard ones that arise due to the driver's attempts to scale some of them to 1920x1080, which, combined with a high refresh rate, gave a black screen (Exceeding the Single-Link bandwidth limit). Thanks to changing the native resolution to 1600x900, I now have all lower resolutions working correctly at 100hz (which is what was required). Since then, I have 1600x900@100hz on my desktop (although this is exactly the resolution I always used on my earlier 22-inch CRT monitor).

I described in detail all these problems that arise and the solutions I found that I had to deal with in another topic here (I'll try to find them if necessary).

Yes, this is not the result indicated in the topic title. But I didn't like these 1920x1080 images (at all). Even in XP, I now use the same 1600x900 (Although I can put 1920x1080 without any problems - I just don't like it, everything is too small). But at the same time, I do not give up the idea of further searching for a full-fledged solution, it's just that the ideas have already run out. Yes, and the result that I already have is completely satisfactory, because everything has become almost the same as it was on the old CRT monitor.

Jonsmith0815 wrote on 2024-04-27, 21:13:

I don’t understand what exactly is working with the 185 drivers in XP that is not working in earlier versions for you. […]
Show full quote

I don’t understand what exactly is working with the 185 drivers in XP that is not working in earlier versions for you.

I have a 7900gs AGP that runs 1080p@144hz under XP over dual link cable on the BenQ XL2411 at driver version 93.71. Also a 7600gt at Version 84.44.
Both sadly only 60Hz in 98.

I don’t have any older GPU with dual link dvi that I could test.

What do the 185 drivers improve for you?

I do not exclude that in my particular case there was an additional error in the monitor's EDID itself (Maybe it was simply damaged), which was confusing and thus added additional difficulties in finding an acceptable solution. It led, so to speak, on the wrong track (Added sticks to the wheels). The specified driver version for XP can, however, circumvent this problem with EDID (that is, fully support DVI-DL, even despite the EDID curve). You may have a more correct EDID initially, an earlier implementation (Or a corrected later one) that doesn't have a similar problem. Most likely, if I flash your EDID, everything will also work for me under XP in the same way as you have now. This is good news! What happens if you try driver 77.72 (Or earlier) for Windows XP? Will 144Hz work? Or do you need exactly "93.71" and higher?

By the way, the 300 series drivers for Windows XP support on-the-fly EDID redefinition for nVidia Quadro video cards, which greatly simplifies testing (this feature does not work on GeForce cards).

1600x900@100hz sounds indeed like a good solution. I would use it, if I could, but it seems that I would also have to go down the EDID route.

This thread seems also to imply that dual link is impossible under win98 even with the 45.23 drivers: Trying some resolutions with old nVidia video cards on Win9x...

I will check the 77.72 driver under xp when I get to install xp on my pcie system. So far only 98, 7 and 10 run on that.

Jonsmith0815 wrote on 2024-04-30, 16:33:

The pins on the port don’t tell if the chip supports dual dvi. I have tested around 10 cards that all have a dual dvi port. […]
Show full quote

Duffman wrote on 2024-04-28, 03:29:

@Jonsmith0815

Check the number of pins on your DVI port, you might have some cards with dual link.
i.e this chinese Geforce FX 5500 PCI has one - https://www.ebay.com/itm/204036143864

The pins on the port don’t tell if the chip supports dual dvi. I have tested around 10 cards that all have a dual dvi port.

For example GeForce 4200 ti has dual dvi port but doesn’t actually support it. The problem is that the chips don’t support it. dual dvi was a new technology at the time. Most cards used the same dual dvi connector while not supporting it.

Only GF7, some Quadro and some special cards from that period actually support dual dvi.

The problem is that the win 98 drivers don’t enable the use of it. They treat all cards as single dvi. The driver seems to be broken, Nvidia seems to not have cared about 98 anymore.

Today I tested the Quadro FX3450 (NV41/42 chip?) with the 77.72 drivers (added device ID for NV30 in Nvaml.inf). Next older card to test would be FX3400. FX4000 would be even older but hard to find. Those high end Quadro and 6800Ultra cards have confirmed dual dvi through external chips as I understand. Later GF7 seem to have dual dvi integrated in the G70 chip.

So I am trying to find out if there is an early driver that supports dual dvi output and high refresh rates. 61.76, 66.94 and 71.84 are the next older driver version candidates that support NV42 FX4000 and 6800Ultra.

NV40 FX4400 and FX3400 should also work by patching the older drivers similar to FX3450.

But very likely the driver is also broken in all those older versions. I don’t have the cards so I can’t test it myself.

56.64 is the next older driver version, but that one has only GeForce FX (5) series and Quadro FX 2000 support. All those older cards don’t have dual link dvi, none of the those chips implemented it.

An alternative might be ATI, but it’s not clear which models have dual link and if any drivers support it in 98. I have the x850 agp but I couldn’t even get 1080p working.

According to the information from GpuReview.com if it is completely accurate (and I did not miss anything), not many NV 3x-4x (FX-6 series) video cards support DVI Dual-Link, but only some models:

NV45:
ASUS EN6800GT/2DT/256M 350 500 256 bit 256 MB DL-DVI/DVI-I
ASUS EN6800GT-DUAL/2DT/512M 350 500 256 bit 512 MB DL-DVI/VGA
EVGA e-GeForce 6800 GT 350 500 256 bit 512 MB DL-DVI/DVI-I
inno3D GeForce 6800 Ultra 400 550 256 bit 256 MB DL-DVI/DVI-I
PNY Quadro FX 4400G 400 550 256 bit 512 MB DL-DVI/DL-DVI
PNY Quadro FX 4400 400? 525? 256 bit 512 MB DL-DVI/DL-DVI
PNY Quadro FX 3400 350? 450? 256 bit 256 MB DL-DVI/DVI-I

NV44:
MSI NX6200TC-TD128ELF 128-TC/512MB 350? 350? 128 bit? 128 MB DL-DVI/VGA

NV43:
EVGA e-GeForce 6600 GT 500 500 128 bit 128 MB DL-DVI/DVI-I
EVGA e-GeForce 6600 GT 500 500 128 bit 256 MB DL-DVI/DVI-I
inno3D GeForce 6600 DDR2 (SLi soft) 350 350 128 bit 256 MB DL-DVI/VGA

NV42:
XpertVision GeForce 6800 GS 425? 500? 128 bit 128 MB DL-DVI/VGA

NV41:
PNY Quadro FX 3450 425? 500? 256 bit 256 MB DL-DVI/DVI-I

NV40\NV40GL:
ASUS V9999ULTRA/2DT/256M 425 550 256 bit 256 MB DL-DVI/DVI-I
inno3D GeForce 6800 Ultra 400 550 256 bit 256 MB DL-DVI/DVI-I
LeadTek WinFast A6800XT TDH 300 350 256 bit 128 MB DL-DVI/VGA
PNY Quadro FX 4000 375? 500? 128 bit 256 MB DL-DVI/DL-DVI

NV35:
PNY Quadro FX 3000G 400? 425? 256 bit 256 MB DL-DVI/DVI-I
PNY Quadro FX 3000 400? 425? 256 bit 256 MB DL-DVI/DVI-I

Interesting list!
So far only the FX3000 from that list can work with the 45.23 driver, and that driver is the last one that wasn't broken.
I found a report that it supported 2k resolutions, so the dual link support under 98 is there, so that's something:
https://www.voodooalert.de/board/forum/index. … ralt-plattform/
He reported 81.98 to support WQHD by manually adding the resolution to the registry.
So funny enough the also newest driver supports it, but only with the first card that supported dual dvi, not the later ones.

Now the question is if refresh rates can also be customized.
I have the feeling that those are more restricted, but I don't know.
In the Nvidia release notes they dont state 1080p 144Hz as a standard resolution, only 100Hz at 1080p and 144Hz at 166x900:
https://download.nvidia.com/Windows/45.23/NVI … otes_v45.23.pdf
https://http.download.nvidia.com/Windows/77.7 … lease_Notes.pdf
https://download.nvidia.com/Windows/93.71/93. … lease_Notes.pdf
But that doesnt mean anything as it seems, as that is also the same for the 93.71, which works here at 1080p 144hz under xp.