I just read a post here the other day where someone successfully got an ATI pci-e card to work in 98, but I can't remember the name of the thread. Try searching. I think they had to manually install the drivers (not via installer) and then disable something in device manager. Might work in your case too.

stanwebber wrote on 2023-02-02, 23:54:

i already have a no expense spared win9x build so i'm doing this new build on a lark. my total net outlay is $0 and so far it's […]
Show full quote

i already have a no expense spared win9x build so i'm doing this new build on a lark. my total net outlay is $0 and so far it's actually looking pretty good. i managed to get a lga775 system running win98se stably with 4gb of ram and ahci native mode ssd using r loew patches and updated ich7 inf files.

so i've got this gt 710 pci-e card laying around that i want to try to get working and i'm not sure how to proceed. i tried the modified 82.69 nvidia drivers available here:

https://www.mdgx.com/files/nv8269.php

but the installer claims my card is unsupported. is it? is there any other way to hack this or other drivers to work?

These 82.69 drivers are from 2006. The GT 710 is from a GPU architecture introduced around 2013. So that won't work.

gerwin wrote on 2023-02-03, 02:12:

stanwebber wrote on 2023-02-02, 23:54:

i already have a no expense spared win9x build so i'm doing this new build on a lark. my total net outlay is $0 and so far it's […]
Show full quote

i already have a no expense spared win9x build so i'm doing this new build on a lark. my total net outlay is $0 and so far it's actually looking pretty good. i managed to get a lga775 system running win98se stably with 4gb of ram and ahci native mode ssd using r loew patches and updated ich7 inf files.

so i've got this gt 710 pci-e card laying around that i want to try to get working and i'm not sure how to proceed. i tried the modified 82.69 nvidia drivers available here:

https://www.mdgx.com/files/nv8269.php

but the installer claims my card is unsupported. is it? is there any other way to hack this or other drivers to work?

These 82.69 drivers are from 2006. The GT 710 is from a GPU architecture introduced around 2013. So that won't work.

I believe that any unified shader cards wont work under 9x, pretty sure even modded driver wont help here as its directly related to how 9x handles hardware. IIRC the 7000 series nVidia cards were the last nVidia cards that could be made to work with Win9x, they are also the last nVidia cards without unified shaders.

Grab an antique card

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=abYeIixYrbk

Pcie antiques exist

gerwin wrote on 2023-02-03, 02:12:

These 82.69 drivers are from 2006. The GT 710 is from a GPU architecture introduced around 2013. So that won't work.

Or is it? Some of them based on earlier 400 series cores.

BitWrangler wrote on 2023-02-03, 04:27:

gerwin wrote on 2023-02-03, 02:12:

These 82.69 drivers are from 2006. The GT 710 is from a GPU architecture introduced around 2013. So that won't work.

Or is it? Some of them based on earlier 400 series cores.

Even then .. its still Unified shaders and wont work under 98 .. XP itll work fine.

rmay635703 wrote on 2023-02-03, 04:03:

Grab an antique card

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=abYeIixYrbk

Pcie antiques exist

Good luck with finding a X850XT PE let alone a working one at a price that doesn't make you cry. ...hahaha

Been down this road myself hunting for an AGP variant, got two and both are quite dead even though they were listed as tested and working.

GT 710 is NOT a GF7 class (or 7000 series) card. Best you can do on it and Win98, is to have VGA compatible driver working and an desktop image (but no 3D, and no high res support).

agent_x007 wrote on 2023-02-03, 05:45:

GT 710 is NOT a GF7 class (or 7000 series) card. Best you can do on it and Win98, is to have VGA compatible driver working and an desktop image (but no 3D, and no high res support).

Not sure anyone claimed it was .. it is however a unified shader card and thus will never function under Win9x except as a basic VGA adapter which pretty much defeats the purpose OP wanted it for, they are better off with a 7000 series GPU which does support Win98se. There are also a few versions of it using different cores, the most recent version uses the Kepler 2.0 core where as the older versions use the Fermi 2.0 core (Rebadged GT520/GT610), not that any of this matters as there are no drivers for Kepler or Fermi for Win9x.

@TrashPanda If OP didn't assumed "GF7" = GT 7xx, we wouldn't have this topic (at least that's how I read his initial post) 😉
Unless, he just likes to throw random stuff together and doesn't care what's actually supported ("I figure it out as I go" - type of thinking) ?

Either way, there is no point in beating around the bush (and like you wrote already) :
There is no Win98 support* for DX10 and later GPUs (and probably never will be).
*over VGA compatible mode

Haven't got GMA 950 graphics onboard to lean back on do you stan? I heard of ppl getting those working in '98.

GeForce GT 710? No, that card was released way after Windows 98 went EOL and has nothing to do with the GeForce 7 series as agent_x007 mentioned.

Geforce 6/7 were also used in some chipsets as on-board VGA. nForce chipsets, I think.
My father had an AMD Athlon system with such an annoying on-board VGA.
It couldn't assist Flash acceleration on XP with Flash 10.2 and later (that required a Geforce 8/9 minimum).
So we installed a proper graphics card.

The Mac Pro 1.1 also comes with an annoying Geforce 7 card and 256 MB of video RAM.
Horrible, because even the Mac OS drivers in Snow Leopard expected 512MB of video RAM minimum.
Acceleration in Virtual box on Mac doesn't work correctly, thus.

Stay away from Geforce 7, please. And Geforce 8.
The latter had a horrible memory leak.
GF210 in turn was based on Geforce 9 series, afaik.

Edit: Don't forget about a dedicated 2D graphics core for good GDI performance. Geforce 6 and up do use a 3D core only, afaik.
Geforce FX was the last one with a dedicated 2D core.
However, the FX wasn't exactly.. Good. It could render Vista's Aero Glass, however.

A Geforce 2 or Geforce 3 is a more solid choice, maybe.
The Geforce 4 MX uses an updated Geforce 2 core, afaik.
The Geforce 3 Ti was nice, too, but is rather rare.
All those are also popular on classic Power Macs (once flashed).
The Geforce 5200/FX can't do 3D acceleration on Mac OS 8/9 anymore, though.

Jo22 wrote on 2023-02-04, 11:58:

Edit: Don't forget about a dedicated 2D graphics core for good GDI performance. Geforce 6 and up do use a 3D core only, afaik.
Geforce FX was the last one with a dedicated 2D core.
However, the FX wasn't exactly.. Good. It could render Vista's Aero Glass, however.

NV40 was developed before Windows Vista shader GUI was a consideration, so I highly doubt that it doesn't have 2D core. And GUI acceleration works just fine under Win9x environment too.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2023-02-04, 14:18:

Jo22 wrote on 2023-02-04, 11:58:

Edit: Don't forget about a dedicated 2D graphics core for good GDI performance. Geforce 6 and up do use a 3D core only, afaik.
Geforce FX was the last one with a dedicated 2D core.
However, the FX wasn't exactly.. Good. It could render Vista's Aero Glass, however.

NV40 was developed before Windows Vista shader GUI was a consideration, so I highly doubt that it doesn't have 2D core.
And GUI acceleration works just fine under Win9x environment too.

The Geforce FX5200 (NV30 series) was the among the earliest DirectX 9/ Shader Model 2 cards.
- I got one used in the late 2000s solely for Windows Vista's Aero Glass, because my Vista book did mention it (in a negative way). ^^
That was reason/justification enough to me to get one of these bad boys. For being so poor and advanced at same time, I knew it was going to be a collector's item.

Note: If we can believe this site, then the remaininings of the 2D part vanished after Geforce 7000, not FX.
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/2d-windo … gdi,2547-2.html
(And after the Radeon HD 1000 series from ATI - now part of AMD.)

Personally, I don't really care about such minor details and won't argue. I don't insist to be right, I'm more of a 2D person.
GF 5/6/7.. To me, at the heart, these cards are all the same old mess. 🤷 That being said, I try my best to remember that some other people feel nostalgic for them.
What I like about its predecessors, however, they were easily flashable, didn't need huge noisy fans and monstrous coolers or their own three-phase connection. 🤣

Alright, the Geforce FX series may keep a legendary status for it's insanely loud fan and the Dawn demo, maybe.
It was the series who made countless people laugh and make fun of exagerated 3D or PC gaming, which is a good thing. 😄 👍
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v97nv2IHB0Y&t=180
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOVjZqC1AE4

And it will be remembered for being compatible with the PowerPC Cube G4, maybe. It can do draw all visual effects of Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger".
Namely Core Image, Core Animation and Quartz 2D Extreme. AGP cards were prefered. PCI cards needed the PCI Enabler and have glitches.
The FX also added OpenGL 2.0, which certain graphic programs like Celestia could take advantage of.
https://lowendmac.com/video/agp/geforce-5200.html
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2005/04/macosx-10-4/14/
https://barefeats.com/cubeup3.html

Drivers of later cards do use the 3D core for 2D operations, too, as far as I know.
These cards do have poor 2D performance if compared to true 2D cards of the 90s or early 2000s.

Here's a benchmark to check 2D performance on Windows, also:
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/2d-windo … gdi,2547-5.html

Edit: Found it. Somer versions of the nForce 4 series had a GeForce 6100 / GeForce 6150 / GeForce 6150 LE / GeForce Go 6100 / GeForce Go 6150..
These were installed in of my father's PCs. A later revision of the same mainboard we installed as a replacement had the 7000 series, afaik. It was awful, too.
If memory serves, these old GPUs were so limited that they couldn't even run the Direct3D shaders available in certain unofficial DOSBox releases.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvidia_nForce4

BitWrangler wrote on 2023-02-03, 14:57:

Haven't got GMA 950 graphics onboard to lean back on do you stan? I heard of ppl getting those working in '98.

yeah, it's an intel board with gma950 graphics. it works, but there's no 3d acceleration. i decided to give up on win98se. i replaced it with winxp pro x64 which has full support for the gt 710. i kept a 2gb fat16 partition at the top of the drive so maybe i will dual-boot msdos.