Depends on which environment you want to run. Win2k has no issues with Matrox G450 and VIA chipsets, while Win9x may not boot properly after installing drivers.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2025-05-07, 08:16:

Depends on which environment you want to run. Win2k has no issues with Matrox G450 and VIA chipsets, while Win9x may not boot properly after installing drivers.

Would primarily be using Win 98. So it looks like a no go with this card. Any other PCI you think would fare better? How about FX5500 PCI (ebay chinese variants) or any other PCI cards?

G450 is slow for Windows gaming, GeForceMX 440-460 is much better, FX5500 is ok too.

DundyTheCroc wrote on 2025-05-07, 09:25:

G450 is slow for Windows gaming, GeForceMX 440-460 is much better, FX5500 is ok too.

If G450 is slow then ATi Rage XL (Rage Pro) is what? I use Rage3 cards for older Win9x d3d/ogl/3dcif games + voodoo add card for glide.

marxveix wrote on 2025-05-07, 09:34:

DundyTheCroc wrote on 2025-05-07, 09:25:

G450 is slow for Windows gaming, GeForceMX 440-460 is much better, FX5500 is ok too.

If G450 is slow then ATi Rage XL (Rage Pro) is what? I use Rage3 cards for older Win9x d3d/ogl/3dcif games + voodoo add card for glide.

Well, for late 90s games, GF4 MX440+, FX5500 (2002-2004), are in a different league than the Matrox G450 (2000) or ATI Rage XL (1998). You might be able to do what you want with late 90s games with any of them, but where you want to limit them is up to you.

I think the games you listed aren't particularly demanding, but I don't know how the Matrox or ATI Rage fare. I was using 3dfx at the time.

Consider an Nvidia NVS Quadro 280. Where I am they are still very inexpensive. In fact they are the very cheapest PCI card available. My understanding is they're based on the FX5200 64 bit.
I got mine recently, gave it a quick test, and it's more capable in opengl than my 128 bit Radeon 9000.
I also gave it a quick try in Aliens vs Predator, where the Radeon had some rendering errors. The NVS 280 played it just fine.
So I'm keeping it.

DundyTheCroc wrote on 2025-05-07, 09:25:

G450 is slow for Windows gaming, GeForceMX 440-460 is much better, FX5500 is ok too.

All GeForces are forward looking into the 2000s. Forget them for this purpose.

Spark wrote on 2025-05-07, 17:34:

Consider an Nvidia NVS Quadro 280. Where I am they are still very inexpensive. In fact they are the very cheapest PCI card avail […]
Show full quote

Consider an Nvidia NVS Quadro 280. Where I am they are still very inexpensive. In fact they are the very cheapest PCI card available. My understanding is they're based on the FX5200 64 bit.
I got mine recently, gave it a quick test, and it's more capable in opengl than my 128 bit Radeon 9000.
I also gave it a quick try in Aliens vs Predator, where the Radeon had some rendering errors. The NVS 280 played it just fine.
So I'm keeping it.

Looks like they are indeed on the expensive side on ebay comparatively. Also no VGA port in any of the Quadros.

vvbee wrote on 2025-05-08, 03:00:

All GeForces are forward looking into the 2000s. Forget them for this purpose.

The only two decently priced and abundant PCI ones are the Rage XL 8 mb and FX 5500. The other PCI cards are ridiculously priced or hardly available. The G450 pci is also surplus, but supposedly doesn't mix well with via chipsets.

I don't know your budget but $100 or so isn't that much to put into a gaming graphics card.

stealthjoe wrote on 2025-05-08, 09:55:

Spark wrote on 2025-05-07, 17:34:

Consider an Nvidia NVS Quadro 280. Where I am they are still very inexpensive. In fact they are the very cheapest PCI card avail […]
Show full quote

Consider an Nvidia NVS Quadro 280. Where I am they are still very inexpensive. In fact they are the very cheapest PCI card available. My understanding is they're based on the FX5200 64 bit.
I got mine recently, gave it a quick test, and it's more capable in opengl than my 128 bit Radeon 9000.
I also gave it a quick try in Aliens vs Predator, where the Radeon had some rendering errors. The NVS 280 played it just fine.
So I'm keeping it.

Looks like they are indeed on the expensive side on ebay comparatively. Also no VGA port in any of the Quadros.

They've been available for under £20 for a few years now on ebay uk. You also need a dms59 cable to go with it but these can be had in dvi or vga for a few pounds.

I used an NVS280 for this exact purpose in a dual P3 system without AGP. I got it for 20€ iirc.
It works ok but i used it in Win XP (Because dual CPU). Never tried it on W98.

I tested the system on HalfLife 2 for fun and it was playable with low settings. (Can't remember the average fps but it ran reasonably well). The Dual 1ghz P3 might help a bit though.

stealthjoe wrote on 2025-05-07, 09:02:

Would primarily be using Win 98. So it looks like a no go with this card.

Ignore the previous advice - the G450 PCI works perfectly fine with the Apollo 133T chipset, which your mobo uses. I have noticed issues with VIA chipsets for later sockets, however.