Some general advice:
Use an IDE hard drive / CD drive, not SATA.
Your RAM should not exceed 1 GB.
Better don't install chipset drivers! Unless you really need it (only if the device has a yellow exclamation mark in the Device Manager).

tauro wrote on 2024-06-02, 22:36:

Some general advice: Use an IDE hard drive / CD drive, not SATA. Your RAM should not exceed 1 GB. Better don't install chipset d […]
Show full quote

Some general advice:
Use an IDE hard drive / CD drive, not SATA.
Your RAM should not exceed 1 GB.
Better don't install chipset drivers! Unless you really need it (only if the device has a yellow exclamation mark in the Device Manager).

he will need chipset drivers to enable the GART diver which will allow his videocard to work.

RetroPCP4W98 wrote on 2024-05-27, 15:38:

I recently bought an ECS p4m800pro-m rev 1.0 motherboard, I had no problem installing Windows XP on this machine, but I also want to install Windows 98 SE on a separate HD, but I'm having problems since installation when installing the chipset drivers. , I have also had problems with the CD ROM drive not appearing after installing the OS, and I am unable to increase the resolution and color depth to 32 bits, whenever I try to set a higher resolution the system crashes. I already removed the network card and the sound card but I didn't get good results. I've already checked some previous topics about problems with this type of chipset, but none of them were helpful. If anyone knows how to install win98 on this mobo, could you tell me the correct procedure?

what drivers have you tried? theres multiple variants of the via 4in1 drivers. 4.56v and 5.24a i know are supported.
maybe try a different version.

tauro wrote on 2024-06-02, 22:36:

Some general advice: Use an IDE hard drive / CD drive, not SATA. Your RAM should not exceed 1 GB. Better don't install chipset d […]
Show full quote

Some general advice:
Use an IDE hard drive / CD drive, not SATA.
Your RAM should not exceed 1 GB.
Better don't install chipset drivers! Unless you really need it (only if the device has a yellow exclamation mark in the Device Manager).

Actually, windows 98 starts having problems with more than 512meg ram. So best to keep it below that.

But definitely, your life will be much easier if you avoid SATA hard drives/CD drives with windows 98.

canthearu wrote on 2024-06-03, 11:08:

tauro wrote on 2024-06-02, 22:36:

Some general advice: Use an IDE hard drive / CD drive, not SATA. Your RAM should not exceed 1 GB. Better don't install chipset d […]
Show full quote

Some general advice:
Use an IDE hard drive / CD drive, not SATA.
Your RAM should not exceed 1 GB.
Better don't install chipset drivers! Unless you really need it (only if the device has a yellow exclamation mark in the Device Manager).

Actually, windows 98 starts having problems with more than 512meg ram. So best to keep it below that.

But definitely, your life will be much easier if you avoid SATA hard drives/CD drives with windows 98.

I run a sata SSD and it's fine? I don't get what the issue is with that. Optical drive I can see there being issues.
I run a sata SSD via an IDE to SATA (reversed) and no issues there either.

biohazardx9 wrote on 2024-06-03, 15:26:

I run a sata SSD and it's fine? I don't get what the issue is with that. Optical drive I can see there being issues.
I run a sata SSD via an IDE to SATA (reversed) and no issues there either.

I'm not going to say it is impossible to run windows 98 with a SATA SSD or Hard drive ... because you can often get it to work. BUT, using IDE drives will yield a far better chance of success than SATA drives. And more likely to avoid performance downfalls like BIOS compatibility modes within the 9X kernels.

For a beginner struggling to get their first few systems running, it is better to choose hardware that is more consistently compatible like this.

For your 10-20th system install, sure, bust out the PCI-e graphics cards, SATA hard drives/SSDs, nforce motherboards, 1 GB memory sticks and random assortments of adaptors. It definitely will work sometimes ... with varying levels of working (sometimes perfectly, sometimes partially, sometimes not at all)

canthearu wrote on 2024-06-04, 13:42:

I'm not going to say it is impossible to run windows 98 with a SATA SSD or Hard drive ... because you can often get it to work. […]
Show full quote

biohazardx9 wrote on 2024-06-03, 15:26:

I run a sata SSD and it's fine? I don't get what the issue is with that. Optical drive I can see there being issues.
I run a sata SSD via an IDE to SATA (reversed) and no issues there either.

I'm not going to say it is impossible to run windows 98 with a SATA SSD or Hard drive ... because you can often get it to work. BUT, using IDE drives will yield a far better chance of success than SATA drives. And more likely to avoid performance downfalls like BIOS compatibility modes within the 9X kernels.

For a beginner struggling to get their first few systems running, it is better to choose hardware that is more consistently compatible like this.

For your 10-20th system install, sure, bust out the PCI-e graphics cards, SATA hard drives/SSDs, nforce motherboards, 1 GB memory sticks and random assortments of adaptors. It definitely will work sometimes ... with varying levels of working (sometimes perfectly, sometimes partially, sometimes not at all)

for sure, just saying I personally not had an issue. even my 440bxx slot 1 PII runs a sata SSD fine using an ide to sata adaptor okay.

I think I managed to get the system to work, after several attempts I disabled the SATA controller in the bios and put the two hard drives in the IDE input with adapters, it seems to have eliminated the problems recognizing the chipset drivers, I used version 4.56, I tried to put Rloew's SATA patch but I was unsuccessful, as for the ram I limited the system to recognizing only 512 mb of the 2gb of ram. The only problem that still persists is that when I click on the nvidia drivers menu the screen blinks, I've already tried it on two different motherboards, and two video cards, what's more, what's the best glide wrapper for MS DOS, no? I managed to use glidos or dgvoodoo 1.0, I don't know if I'm doing something wrong or not.