Maybe replace the 1.1GHz Coppermine with a pin-modded Tualeron? Also, more than 512MB is kindda useless for a Win98 retro-gaming machine. For dual booting Windows 2000 or XP, though, it can be useful. Does the TUSL2-C have ISA slots? If not, the CUBX build is probably a better retro machine IF you want to run non-speed sensitive DOS games in pure DOS mode.

alexanrs wrote:

Maybe replace the 1.1GHz Coppermine with a pin-modded Tualeron? Also, more than 512MB is kindda useless for a Win98 retro-gaming machine. For dual booting Windows 2000 or XP, though, it can be useful. Does the TUSL2-C have ISA slots? If not, the CUBX build is probably a better retro machine IF you want to run non-speed sensitive DOS games in pure DOS mode.

So basically a 1.5Ghz Tualatin celeron then, given that we aren't OC'ing in this hypothetical context.

blank001 wrote:

Hi Vogons […]
Show full quote

Hi Vogons

I come to ask your opinion on which do you consider the superior Windows 98SE / Y2K platform for gaming. Suppose you could construct either of the following computers, but only have space for one. Which would you choose? This question is based on your own personal needs (and your own gaming habits) not mine (although I am highly curious about your answers for my own needs). Consider the PCI, ISA and AGP slots to be populated by whatever you feel are most appropriate for the configurations. Overclocking is not allowed otherwise the obvious answer would be the Cubx with 1.4S.

1.1Ghz 100Mhz Coppermine S370
Asus Cubx-E, with 2 ISA slots
1Gb CL2

or

1.4Ghz Tualatin S
Asus TUSL2-C
512Mb CL2

Im using the Tualatin 1400-S only with a CUSL2 motherboard. The system has 512MB PC133 CL2 memory, a Sound Blaster Live! and a Geforce FX 5900 Ultra. I tried a few chipsets but liked i815 the best, the setup is very streight forward with a single sound card and one video card. I run my system overclocked but it isnt needed as both the CPU and video card performance is overkill even at stock speed.

The system isnt used for playing any DOS games.

Could I have that TUSL2-C with mem maxed out?
Win98-only is not a rig that I would use ISA cards in.

Now...
110+ mhz V2-SLI and a GF4-ti4200+
SB Pci 128 or better. (Yamaha XG perhaps)
Maxed out HDD-Space, using ATA-133 using Raid for speed and reliability.
DVD-Rom and CD-RW drives.

OS is Win98SE

My love went to the tusl2-c... see my sig. Very happy with that system. I could build faster systems for 98se but there is absolutely no need for that, anything faster gets xp.

1gb in 98se is like a big fat exhaust under a honda civic 1.3 , It even sounds weird...and doesn't make it go any faster.

brostenen wrote:

Could I have that TUSL2-C with mem maxed out? Win98-only is not a rig that I would use ISA cards in. […]
Show full quote

Could I have that TUSL2-C with mem maxed out?
Win98-only is not a rig that I would use ISA cards in.

Now...
110+ mhz V2-SLI and a GF4-ti4200+
SB Pci 128 or better. (Yamaha XG perhaps)
Maxed out HDD-Space, using ATA-133 using Raid for speed and reliability.
DVD-Rom and CD-RW drives.

OS is Win98SE

Isn't the TUSL2-C maxed on memory?

Anyway, there seems to be a decently heavy preference for building on TUSL2 over CUBX. I would've maybe predicted the other way around due the CUBX being the fastest BX with ISA.

They all will perform well. I doubt you will be able to tell a difference between them when gaming 😀

The ISA slots is the main criteria IMO. If you want to do anything with DOS games, I highly recommend an ISA card.

If I'm installing any version of Windows 9x, it's going to run DOS games, and so I'd want an ISA sound card. I'd go with the CUBX-E or the P3B-F. I greatly prefer Slot 1 over Socket 370, but I think P3B-F boards may be expensive to obtain.

philscomputerlab wrote:

They all will perform well. I doubt you will be able to tell a difference between them when gaming 😀

The ISA slots is the main criteria IMO. If you want to do anything with DOS games, I highly recommend an ISA card.

That's a vote for the CUBX then?

blank001 wrote:

philscomputerlab wrote:

They all will perform well. I doubt you will be able to tell a difference between them when gaming 😀

The ISA slots is the main criteria IMO. If you want to do anything with DOS games, I highly recommend an ISA card.

That's a vote for the CUBX then?

Yes. There should be little difference in performance. So look at features. Does the CUBX have on-board LAN? IDE66 instead of 33? Things like that are likely to be more of a difference than the performance. I wouldn't be surprised if they perform withing a few % of each other.

philscomputerlab wrote:

blank001 wrote:

philscomputerlab wrote:

They all will perform well. I doubt you will be able to tell a difference between them when gaming 😀

The ISA slots is the main criteria IMO. If you want to do anything with DOS games, I highly recommend an ISA card.

That's a vote for the CUBX then?

Yes. There should be little difference in performance. So look at features. Does the CUBX have on-board LAN? IDE66 instead of 33? Things like that are likely to be more of a difference than the performance. I wouldn't be surprised if they perform withing a few % of each other.

It depends on the video card if the CUBX system with a Celeron 1400* will be as fast as the TUSL2 with a PIII 1400-S. With a Voodoo 3/5 or Geforce 2 the difference will not be noticeable but with a Geforce 4 ti4600 or Geforce FX5900 I think the TUSL2 will be faster, not that it matters much.

*I do not think you will find the Tualatin Celeron 1500, its super rare and you will also need an adapter. The Korean guy sells modded Celeron 1400 CPUs.

But he's got a 1.1Ghz 100Mhz Coppermine S370. So against the 1Ghz 100Mhz Slot 1 Asus P3B-F I expect bugger all difference.

philscomputerlab wrote:

But he's got a 1.1Ghz 100Mhz Coppermine S370. So against the 1Ghz 100Mhz Slot 1 Asus P3B-F I expect bugger all difference.

While the topic is Coppermine PIII 1.1 GHz on BX vs Tualatin PIII 1.4-S on i815 he changed his mind in a later post and mentioned the Tualatin Celeron 1500 as an option for the CUBX 😀. The Tualatin Celeron 1500 is however rarer than hens teeth and cant be bought premodded by the Korean guy.

Im not sure he owns any of the CPUs or boards yet.

Reading all the posts in a thead is sometimes good 😉

Between the two BX boards I agree there wont be much performance difference. The issue is that CPUs faster than 800 MHz are bottlenecked by memory on BX at 100 MHz FSB. This is the reason that made me choose i815 over BX.

There are better options for Dos games, than a P-III. How about P-II, P-I, K5, K6-II/III, 5x86? (even 486's)
P3 is mainly for Win98 games and other software for me.
At those speed's, dos games are going by at alarming rates. Resulting in no ISA card for me.

On the other hand, if you were to have only one machine, and only one of the above.
And you needed ISA cards for those 3 or 4 dos games. Perhaps it would be wise to get CUBX-E?
If games would turn out to be MIDI compatible, and require EMM386 in an Dos invironment.
Well... Then you really don't need that ISA card, do you? Most early PCI's have Wavetable/MIDI.
Thus bringing it down to stuff like DOOM, running fine and actually have great sound this way.
Using an Creative Ensonic PCI Audio card. (stereo-card with Wavetable and some sort of MIDI)

Ah, I see it now 😊

philscomputerlab wrote:

Ah, I see it now 😊

I have the luxury of having all the time in the world for reading forum posts as I am at work 😁

I don't like to deal with slot motherboards, and I always want an ISA slot for my AWE64 in any W98 machine, so my mandatory choice would be the first one. For the RAM, if I will not build the rig as a XP multiboot one, 512 is more than ok, 1GB will come with its own problems to solve (minor but, well...) without any gain (repeat, as long as there will no XP on the same system). I never overclock any of my systems, retro or modern.

When it comes to my real preferences, but I also choose not to use Celerons, while there is the real deal. Celerons were the cheap alternatives during the days, but today, a real PIII and a similar Celeron (disregarding the rarity of some pieces) doesn't cost any different. So my choice of CPU for a PIII W98 system will be either a 1000MHz Coppermine, or a 1400MHz Tualatin, (according to the motherboards' capabilities). I also like 133MHz FSB and some other features that came with it, so I also choose Via Apollo 133 chipsets over the others.

For the display card, my choice will be a GF2 Ultra or a GF4 Ti4400/4600, supported if possible by a Voodoo2 SLI setup. I will definitely have a NIC (3com 905) and a SCSI controller (Adaptec 29160) for the 73/146 GB data SCSI disk I must have. My IDE channels will have two IDE 80-120GB HDDs, an IDE DVD and an IDE to CF adapter (possibly front panel type, although its relatively more expensive. one of the HDDs will have W98SE, the other one will have MS-DOS 6.22 and W95 OSR2.1/2.5. SCSI disk is for data (ghost images, ISOs, zips, drivers, etc.).A real 1.44 floppy and a Gotek USB to floppy adapter will be good, too. Sound card will be AWE64, preferably gold with SIMMCONN and 32MB RAM.

So:
Tualatin 1400 on a branded board with Via Apollo Pro 133T chipset (Gigabyte?)
512MB PC133 RAM
Geforce4 Ti4600 128MB (Asus?)
Voodoo2 12MB SLI (Diamond Monster?)
Sound Blaster AWE64 with SIMMCONN + 32MB (Gold?)
3Com 3c905 series NIC
Adaptec 21960 Series Controller
120GB IDE HDD (Windows98 SE)
120GB IDE HDD (Windows95 OSR 2.1/2.5 and MS-DOS 6.22 + Windows 3.11- 2GB + 118GB partitions)
146GB SCSI HDD (Data - 2GB + 127GB partitions)
IDE DVD player, burner, etc.
1.44 Floppy
Gotek Floppy emulator
3.5" front panel IDE-CF adapter
USB CF reader
Lara Croft wallpaper

Optional:
A 73/146 GB SCSI for Windows ME/Windows 2000
A Matrox (Millennium II or Mystique 220, preferably with Rainbow Runner) for Windows 3.11

Yeah I don't actually have all of that stuff (I have some of it (see sig)). I wanted to pose a hypothetical question to you guys based on your needs more than mine really.

It looks like few people with a fast P-III play dos games on it, which means few really need ISA for an end of life win98 build. Is that the consensus?

ah, and I added the tualatin celey because I wanted to impose the rule of no overclocking, but as was pointed out there are high speed celeys that obey that rule, despite needing a mod. Anyway, this is obviously a rather nuanced question (choosing between high end P-III builds), but because many people are interested in these types of builds I figured it would be good to try to flush out some of the nuances.

blank001 wrote:

Yeah I don't actually have all of that stuff (I have some of it (see sig)). I wanted to pose a hypothetical question to you guys based on your needs more than mine really.

It looks like few people with a fast P-III play dos games on it, which means few really need ISA for an end of life win98 build. Is that the consensus?

ah, and I added the tualatin celey because I wanted to impose the rule of no overclocking, but as was pointed out there are high speed celeys that obey that rule, despite needing a mod. Anyway, this is obviously a rather nuanced question (choosing between high end P-III builds), but because many people are interested in these types of builds I figured it would be good to try to flush out some of the nuances.

Just to clarify what I wrote about the Tualatin Celeron 1400 and the Coppermine 1000/1100 with 100 MHz FSB suffering from a memory bottleneck with the 440BX chipset. While the bottleneck is very noticeable in benchmarks and affects the max FPS in many games this has very little inpact in real life scenarios if you do not play at 640*480 with a (for Windows 98) very fast video card. Even a Coppermine 1000 with 100 MHz FSB is fast enough for every game you normally want to play in Windows 9x.

The 440BX actually has a little bit better memory performance than i815 when running at the same FSB. The big selling point of the i815 chipset is the 1/2 AGP divider that allows for 133 MHz FSB without overclocking the AGP bus. If my AOpen AX6BC or any other of my 440BX boards had been rock stable at 133 MHz FSB running my FX5900 Ultra or my Quadro4 980 XGL at 89 MHz AGP bus speed I would have gone that route but sadly I only achieved 99% stability.

I still thought I would go with the BX platform but with the Tualatin Celeron 1400 to get around the issues with running 89 MHz AGP bus. It wasnt until I benched the 440BX board with the Celeron 1400 against the Tualatin PIII 1400-S running in the i815 board I changed my mind. Im the kind of person who have a hard time accepting the second best even when it dosnt really matter.