"second one actually runs @ 4X speed so it wouldn't be fast enough with a modern high-end GPU)."

yes it would i ran a 7600gt in a 4x slot and that card is at least 5 times faster than a 5750

ps: you dont have a modern high-end GPU the pcx5750 is 11years old and it wasnt a quick card in 2003

Holering wrote:

Mobo onboard USB is sharing an IRQ with video card.

I think you will find this is a common arrangement on many systems. I doubt it is the cause of your problems.

Have acpi disabled in Win 98se BTW; system hangs if I try enabling it.

You mean you went into Device Manager and disabled that particular item? I'm not sure that's a good idea.

I meant current GPUs. Not modern but still old. Putting a current highend single card with dual gpu's (ever heard of the Nvidia Titan Z ? 😀 ) in a 4x slot would be retarded. Don't think I need anything beyond a PCX5750 for Dos-Win9x gaming (if there was 64-bit DOS with Final Fantasy 20 written in assembly, things would be different 😈 )

I actually installed 98Se with acpi disable switch "setup /P I". I have some sort of unknown pci management device (which installs abunch of stuff and hangs system if I use the acpi driver with it). Maybe I can try again without the /P I switch but I'm quite happy with my current setup (hate waiting for setup to install too. 6 core piledriver with 16gb of ram and it still takes a good while; go figure). Can't disable ACPI from bios...

Still say the IRQ is causing a problem. Had many odd things happen on other builds sharing USB IRQ with other stuff without reporting conflict (slow downs, lots of HDD light activity, thrown back to desktop during gameplay). It's very common for issues to creep in when you start adding more than two expansion cards in a system with many USB ports. Just because ACPI and modern OS's can have many devices on one IRQ without crashing, doesn't mean it'll perform well. Automagic isn't always good... Each device deserves its own personal interrupt.

How did you even manage to get a current AMD platform to work under 98SE? If anything I'd start looking at that being the issue...

Holering wrote:

but I'm quite happy with my current setup

How exactly can you be "quite happy" when it is plagued with "strange things"?

Also, how are you restricting your RAM usage? I have seen at least one reference that suggests HIMEMX is essential for getting nVidia's drivers to behave properly.

It's very common for issues to creep in when you start adding more than two expansion cards in a system with many USB ports.

If I'm not mistaken, all the ports are shared by the same bus and it doesn't really matter how many ports are physically present.

Automagic isn't always good... Each device deserves its own personal interrupt.

I'm sure this sounds good in your head, but if this really was a common issue, you would not be having trouble finding the software to do what you want.

Holering wrote:

Putting a current highend single card with dual gpu's (ever heard of the Nvidia Titan Z ? 😀 ) in a 4x slot would be retarded.

But you dont have a current highend single card with dual gpu's. You have a card that was considered ok-ish 2003
run some benchmarks and see for yourself
a pci-e 16x slot has ten times more bandwidth than a 5750 would need
If you want your card to use a different irq your only option is to change the slot either do that or live with what you have.

Jorpho wrote:

if this really was a common issue, you would not be having trouble finding the software to do what you want.

Blimey you're right! I've looked to no end and cannot find any software for the life of me. I swear I used something a few years back...

d1stortion wrote:

How did you even manage to get a current AMD platform to work under 98SE? If anything I'd start looking at that being the issue...

I guess Windows 98SE can be a memory hog. Actually heard a Vortex2 soundcard frees up all your ram if you get one with a daughterboard included. Soundblaster Live! I currently use, is using some ram for soundfonts (without soundfonts I get no wavetable midi period).

Davros wrote:

you dont have a current highend single card with dual gpu's. You have a card that was considered ok-ish 2003

Will a Radeon 295X2 be okay? I don't want Wolfenstein chugging to 15 frames per second. Has to work with VESA modes too. What if I get a second one to piggy back the 4X PCIE slot? I don't want to lose memory with 256 color modes 😢 .

Most shared IRQs (in modern systems) are being designed to be shared on the hardware level. Not something you can change through software. The mainboard manual usually tells you which slots are shared with other slots or onboard features like USB, so one is able to put audio or graphics card into an unshared one.

Holering wrote:

I guess Windows 98SE can be a memory hog. Actually heard a Vortex2 soundcard frees up all your ram if you get one with a daughterboard included. Soundblaster Live! I currently use, is using some ram for soundfonts (without soundfonts I get no wavetable midi period).

It's supposed to give trouble with above 512 MB on a stock configuration, but that's not what I meant. I haven't actually run such a setup myself, but the notion that it wouldn't fully work due to lacking chipset support comes up rather often here.

Holering wrote:

d1stortion wrote:

How did you even manage to get a current AMD platform to work under 98SE? If anything I'd start looking at that being the issue...

I guess Windows 98SE can be a memory hog. Actually heard a Vortex2 soundcard frees up all your ram if you get one with a daughterboard included. Soundblaster Live! I currently use, is using some ram for soundfonts (without soundfonts I get no wavetable midi period).

What does Windows 98SE being a "memory hog" have to do with it? I can't think of anything you'd want to run under Win9x at this point that would require a few hundred megabytes. (You probably could consume that much RAM with the right applications, but not ordinary gaming.) Even a high-quality soundfont will only take up a hundred or so, tops.

Holering wrote:

Will a Radeon 295X2 be okay?

No it wont, there are no win9x drivers for such a card, plus it would be overkill for dx 8.1
if you insist on using win98 why not get a pci (not pci-e) card a 6200 perhaps

Have you tried your card in the other slot

Last two statements in last post was meant to be a joke. And yes, card in other slot exhibits same issue. Maybe it's as good as it gets... Going to just order a PS2 y splitter for ps2 keyboard and mouse and be done with it. Hope the Chinese don't take over.

There's plenty of memory managers that make Windows 9x possible on current mobos. Himemx is the only one that allowed my particular machine to work reliably in Windows (maybe others but can't remember). Only problem I've noticed is lacking the full 32-bit address space on my setup. In other words I only have about 2gb of usable ram in DOS (without problems). A full 32-bit address space without paging problems would be a lot better (PAE or 64-bit XMS more so).

Kind of surprised people would expect Windows 9x (98SE really) not to work without chipset support (it already has standard drivers for most stuff; kinda like Linux). I only have one unknown device and I'm not sure if it's ACPI device or my capture card... I'm guessing most members here (or users in general) don't like the command line and some tinkering?

Really appreciate the help!

BTW can this thread be closed?

Holering wrote:

Going to just order a PS2 y splitter for ps2 keyboard and mouse and be done with it.

FYI, the connector on your motherboard must be explicitly designed to support a Y-splitter if you want it to work. And personally I haven't had much luck with USB-to-dual-PS/2 adapters.

In other words I only have about 2gb of usable ram in DOS (without problems).

What would you do with 2 GB of RAM in DOS!?

Kind of surprised people would expect Windows 9x (98SE really) not to work without chipset support (it already has standard drivers for most stuff; kinda like Linux).

The strange problems you are experiencing suggest it does not work very well. Also, the standard drivers included with Win9x most certainly were not written with support for PCI-e and the like.

Holering wrote:

I'm guessing most members here (or users in general) don't like the command line and some tinkering?

wat

BTW can this thread be closed?

You keep asking questions! 🤣

We generally only close threads that went off in a flaming direction (or when about illegsl stuff). Ending civil discussions is not something we normally do.