predator_085 wrote on 2025-04-22, 08:37:Sorry for the delated reply. Was busy with other stuff. A new option came up besides building the system new. […]
Show full quote
Sorry for the delated reply. Was busy with other stuff. A new option came up besides building the system new.
One of my old pc from earlry 2006 was found in the basement and it still works.
I wonder now If I can use the parts for my new project.
It has a Intel pentium D 930 SKt775
the mainboard is the Asus P5WD2-E
Seagae Barracuda 7200.9 250 GB SATTA-II
A radeon x 1800XT 512 MB DDR3
512 Mb ram SDRAM 533 MHZ (PC2-3200)
Which components like ram, gpu and cpu would you recommend to max out the mainboard in question?
and would it be a good pick for rather powerful xp gaming rig?
And thanks a lot for the other information you guys have provided.
Like some of the others suggested here, first upgrade the RAM - bump it up to 2 GB. I personally don't think it's necessary to go to 4 GB, as neither XP will see it (without PAE) nor would any of the games use that much even if it was there. From my experience from my video card test system (s939 Athlon 64 3200+ @ 2.5G, 2 GB of RAM), among many other XP systems I have tested, I have not found any games from the XP era to need more than 2 GB. Crysis is probably about the only exception (or one of handful at most.)
Seeing that you have a Pentium D (basically two Pentium 4's in one package), I'd prioritize it to getting PC-6400 RAM, as Netburst architecture really needs all the help it can get, and this should help it. Your mobo has 4 slots, so you have plenty of options. You can get either 2x 1 GB sticks or 4x 512 MB... OR... if you want to be an "odd duck" (quite literally), you can do 2x1 GB + 2x 512 MB for a total of 3 GB 🤣. Of course, you could also go with 4x 1 GB for 4GB total... but again, it probably won't be needed.
For video card, stay with the current X1800XT and see how it goes with the games you like.
FWIW, 1024x768 resolution is not that demanding, so I reckon you should be able to get good FPS (if not above 60, then at least above 50) with most games maxed out.
Shponglefan wrote on 2025-04-22, 13:40:
Since the board supports Pentium 4 / D processors, there's not a lot of upgrade room. You could swap the processor for a 3.4GHz or 3.6Hz Cedar Mill Pentium 4, which would consume less power and run cooler, while providing a bit more performance.
I'm not sure the P4 Cedar Mill CPUs will provide more performance.
Pentium D = two Pentium 4's (Prescott cores) in one package = a real dual-core CPU
Pentium 4 Cedar Mill = 65 nm die-shrunk of the Pentium 4 Prescott (so more power-efficient indeed) = single core CPU with HT (so 1 core but 2 threads).
In games that can take advantage of more than 1 core (e.g. anything from Valve's Source engine) the Pentium D will/should do considerably better.
So I don't suggest to the O/P to swap his PD 930.
Shponglefan wrote on 2025-04-22, 13:42:
Before going after an nVidia 8800, I recommend reading up on the "bump gate" issues that plagued this era of graphic cards. Long story short, this era of GPUs suffered from design/manufacturing flaws that lead to a higher chance of failure.
+1
Though it's worth noting here that the "bump gate" issues actually started much earlier than that - as far back as the late models of 6000's series (i.e. the die-shrunk GeForce 6200 TC and subsequently all GeForce 6100/6150/6200 motherboard chipsets.) The 7000's series were equally bad, especially the 7900 video cards (mostly due to manufacturers using inadequate coolers on these.) And from the 8000 series, only the "first generation" of cards were affected - i.e. anything based on G8x cores. The worst offenders, of course, were the 8800 GTS, GTX, and Ultra (and equivalent Quadro series.) However, then came out the 8800 GT and GTS 512 a little less than a year later. Despite the "8800" in the model name, these are based on the new 65-nm G92 core with the bump gate issues fixed... more or less. Same goes for the 9800 GT and GTX. Of course, even these (8800 GT, 8800 GTS 512, 9800 GT, 9800 GTX) still exhibit relatively high failure rates. But what can one expect? In the case of the 8800 GT / 9800 GT, nVidia slapped a single-slot cooling solution onto a 128-Watt TDP GPU. These cards tend to run in the mid-50C just idling and easily hit temperatures of 80C under load. So no wonder they die. As for the older 8800 cards based on the G80 core (8800 GTS, GTX, Ultra): while these have a much better dual-slot cooling solution, they still run too hot - partially due to the cards consuming considerably more power (140 Watts for the GTS, more for the GTX and Ultra) and also due to quiet/slow fan profiles... making the bump gate issue really show its horns on these cards. On the ATI/AMD side, guess what - same exact issues without there actually being an "official" bump gate issue/scandal. In particular, the HD4850 and 4870 cards are quite notorious for failing... and again, all of that stems from cheap/inadequate cooling.
With all of that said, if you do really want an "8800" series card, go with either a 8800 GT or 9800 GT and swap the cooler for something dual-slot and capable of handling that TDP. A big 3rd party passive cooler with a few fans strapped onto it will do nicely. Alternatively, you can take the dual-slot cooler out of another high(er)-end nVidia card... e.g. a dead 980 GTX or GTS 250 or 260... then bump the fan speeds up a bit on the BIOS cooling profile so that the GPU is not cooking all the time. I do that with my HD4850 cards by giving them 4870 coolers.
predator_085 wrote on 2025-04-22, 14:02:
In general would say that for the early to mid xp area the mobo would enought?
For early 2000's, - YES.
But starting with Half-Life 2 / Source Engine / F.E.A.R., I think you will find the P4/PD to be a bit lacking in performance.
Probably will still get good average FPS around 50-60, but might see dips as low as low 40's.
*edit*
predator_085 wrote on 2025-04-23, 18:23:
about radeon x 1800XT Would do you think about that card?
It's honestly a good match for your CPU. Anything better probably won't show much improvement on that Pentium D CPU (or any other Pentium 4 CPU for that matter), so no point in upgrading, I think.
Well, you can take it to something like GTS 450 or GTX 550... but I wouldn't go beyond that with these. Heck, these GPUs will suffice even for the much better higher-end Core 2 Duo's.
FWIW, at some point I had an MSI GeForce GT 430 in Core 2 Quad Q6600 rig, and I could run games like Portal 2, CS Source, and Half-Life 2 / EP1 / EP2 maxed out (except for AA, since I game on a CRT mostly) at 1280x960 and V-synced to 85 Hz. Never saw a dip below 85 FPS with this setup and both my CPU and GPU were nowhere near fully utilized (thus running cool).
predator_085 wrote on 2025-04-23, 18:39:
Would you recommend a certain coreduo or iv bridge cpu plus some certain graphic cards.
i7-3770k for the rich kids with deep pockets who like to waste their cash 😜
i5-2400 or 2500 (non-K) for the conscious buyer 😀
i3 2nd or 3rd gen (i.e. i3-3220 or similar) for the ones that know the above two options really are unnecessary for an XP build, because most XP-era games don't really care for more than 2 cores / 2 threads (Crysis excepted.) On top of that, i3 CPUs have lower TDP and thus can often be OCed with ease (and potentially higher than the i7 CPUs)... meaning, in some games, you may get better performance out of an OC-ed i3 than you would with an i5 or i7.
If any of these are still to expensive where you live, a system with a late Core 2 Duo like the E8400 or E7600 should do quite fine too.
For video card, I like the HD6850 and GTX 460 / 560 as "high-end" options of that era.
But more often than not, I prefer the lower-power cards that run cooler and still give very decent performance. These are: HD6770, 5750, and 4770.
However, my favorites are: HD4670, HD7570, GT430/630 - these run even cooler and are dime-a-dozen (especially the HD7570). Now these won't really max out 2005 era and newer games in most cases. But they still provide decent performance without producing much heat (important to me in the hot summer months.)
