vetz wrote:Yes, it will eventually boot into Win98SE, but I had all kind of strange issues with the 775Dual VSTA and Win98. I would NOT recommend this board for Win98SE usage. You will get it up and running, but it will not be stable.
kanecvr wrote:vetz wrote:Yes, it will eventually boot into Win98SE, but I had all kind of strange issues with the 775Dual VSTA and Win98. I would NOT recommend this board for Win98SE usage. You will get it up and running, but it will not be stable.
Same experience here. I get odd BSODs and system hangs. It seems to be a bit more stable when using a PCI-E card (6600GT) then with an AGP card (6800LE) but still not usable by my standards.
The only modernish mainboard I've been able to run win98se stable on is a Gigabyte GA-MF3 (socket AM2 + DDR2 + AGP / nForce 3 chipset) - but only with a IDE drive. Win98 installs fine on SATA drives but I get file system corruption soon after.
I managed to install a set of odd Abit? nforce3 drivers, and got everything but the on-board lan working in win98 with 1GB of ram and a A64 X2 5000+. I tried running newer chips like an Athlon II X4 640 but there's loads of instability, even with only one core enabled.
Carlos S. M. wrote:kanecvr wrote:vetz wrote:Yes, it will eventually boot into Win98SE, but I had all kind of strange issues with the 775Dual VSTA and Win98. I would NOT recommend this board for Win98SE usage. You will get it up and running, but it will not be stable.
Same experience here. I get odd BSODs and system hangs. It seems to be a bit more stable when using a PCI-E card (6600GT) then with an AGP card (6800LE) but still not usable by my standards.
The only modernish mainboard I've been able to run win98se stable on is a Gigabyte GA-MF3 (socket AM2 + DDR2 + AGP / nForce 3 chipset) - but only with a IDE drive. Win98 installs fine on SATA drives but I get file system corruption soon after.
I managed to install a set of odd Abit? nforce3 drivers, and got everything but the on-board lan working in win98 with 1GB of ram and a A64 X2 5000+. I tried running newer chips like an Athlon II X4 640 but there's loads of instability, even with only one core enabled.
was the SATA drive larger than 128 GB? I do remember Windows 9x having corruption issues with drivers larger than the 28 bit LBA limit (128 GB)
Carlos S. M. wrote:Idk about the stability with the Athlon II x4 640, but aparentlty, acording to Gigabyte, the board doesn't support AMD K10 based CPUs officially, fatest supported CPU officially is the Athlon 64 x2 6400+, BIOS might not have the requiered AGESA version to support AMD K10 CPUs properly, i can be worng at some point, but there might be changes of begin possible to mod the BIOS with AMD K10 microcode/support
Probably it will hit 3.6 Ghz with a touch of FSB,
Yeah.. it will boot and die when you try to test stability in Prime95 or other intensive CPU test.exxocet wrote:You can't kill a motherboard by increasing FSB. If it's too much it won't boot, that's all.
agent_x007 wrote:Yeah.. it will boot and die when you try to test stability in Prime95 or other intensive CPU test.exxocet wrote:You can't kill a motherboard by increasing FSB. If it's too much it won't boot, that's all.
I'm pretty sure you can melt this MBs VRMs at Load with QX6700 as main CPU, Vcore @ 1,5V and a vDroop mod on top of all that.
So... I hope you got active cooling on those MOSFETs
Well... to be fair, best choise is QX9650/QX9770 - but those are even more rareexxocet wrote:Yep, QX6800 and QX6850 are the best choice, but still too expensive (3 times more than QX6700) and QX6850 is rara avis.
agent_x007 wrote:Well... to be fair, best choise is QX9650/QX9770 - but those are even more rareexxocet wrote:Yep, QX6800 and QX6850 are the best choice, but still too expensive (3 times more than QX6700) and QX6850 is rara avis.
QX6700 is the hottest Quad Core in Intel lineup (along with Q6600 rev. B3).
From Perf/$ QX6700 is best, but QX6800/QX6850 are useful when you can't have a big cooler on top.
On that note : I recently bought Mugen II rev. B, to TR 120 Ultra Extreme I already own (both with full accesories kits), just in case I needed something on PGA 478/754 sockets
agent_x007 wrote: QX9650/QX9770 - but those are even more rare
You are right... but I meant they are as rare as QX6850 : LINKThe Serpent Rider wrote:Rare QX9650? What a lovely anekdot.
The Serpent Rider wrote:agent_x007 wrote: QX9650/QX9770 - but those are even more rare
Rare QX9650? What a lovely anekdot.
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/FREE-SH ... 3512e7b355
Same thing goes for so called rare QX6850.
Buying old CPUs on extra price
Azrael wrote:the bank interleave option has AUTO value on default. Now in order to summarize:
Official bios (2.20)= max 2GB:
single channel (1 module) 2GB memory = AUTO =8-WAY (detected by diagnostic utility from the operating system);
modified bios (2.20a)= max 4GB (3.25 more or less detected based on VGA and agp aperture size value):
single channel (1 module) 2GB=AUTO=4-way;
dual channel 2GBx2GB=AUTO=4-way;
dual channel 2GBx2GB=8-WAY errors occur;
How to know about the increasing performance? x8600 + ddr2 first boot allows the system to start regularly (the step from 4-way to 8-way increases of 420MB/s when MEMTEST86+ is used) After rebooting system is unable to MAP the memory rightly, so the errors occur:
post = single channel (although 2 module od 2GB of ram are installed;
BIOS shows a total ram of 11964MB) and shows the first module value installed of 2048MB, the second module installed of 512MB (although it is a module of 2048MB).
No problems occur when the bank interleave is configured on AUTO or 4-way, problems appears only on 8-way although the memories support 8-way bank interleave.
Return to General Old Hardware
Users browsing this forum: knowledge [bot], Windows9566, Zup and 12 guests