VOGONS


First post, by RJDog

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I am getting around to thinking about getting some parts together to maybe eventually make a P3/Win98SE build. Not too long ago I bought a Gateway branded Intel Socket 370 motherboard and correaponding Coppermine 667Mhz P3. I was/am aiming for a 1999 build, but the board and CPU are from 2000... not too far off though.

So my only decision that I can't seem to make is what GPU to use with this build, still aiming for a mostly-correct-1999/2000-ish build. My choices are:

nVidia TNT (1998)
nVidia GeForce4 MX 400 (2002)
nVidia GeForce FX 5200 (2003)
nVidia GeForce 6600 (2005?)

I think for period correctness(ish) its between the TNT and GeForce4, but neither are perfect. A TNT2 would ideal, but I'd really like to avoid buying anything else and add to my collection and use what I have instead.

Should I just go with the GeForce4 and say that's close enough without being older than my target period?

Reply 1 of 16, by duralisis

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

It's practically a GF2 MX anyway, so yes. Also similar in performance to a GF 256 DDR.

Reply 2 of 16, by BeginnerGuy

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

My pick of the litter would probably be the 5200, I think with 4x.xx drivers it will do very well in Win98. (supposing those drivers work, I haven't done the research on 5 series yet).

Nobody can really say which to use, it's really just whatever suits you. I've been going through the same trials with my system using spare cards I had laying around. I ended up settling on a GeForce 3 Ti200. It does well with pretty much everything and does a fairly nice job scaling up 320x200 dos over DVI. It runs everything quite well and works very well with a glide wrapper on 90s glide games. It also handles DOS games much better than other cards I've tried (Looking at you ATI Rage 3D and screen jumping all over).

I've been considering upgrading to a card that can handle multiple monitors. I think that would be GF5xxx series but haven't done the research yet.

Sup. I like computers. Are you a computer?

Reply 3 of 16, by RJDog

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
BeginnerGuy wrote:

Nobody can really say which to use, it's really just whatever suits you.

Oh for sure, this whole "vintage"/"retro" scene is pretty subjective to begin with, I'm always just curious what other people's opinions are.

duralisis wrote:

It's practically a GF2 MX anyway, so yes. Also similar in performance to a GF 256 DDR.

That is very good to know; the MX400 is the low end GeForce4... I think I've made up my mind 😀

Reply 4 of 16, by SPBHM

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

nVidia GeForce4 MX 400 (2002)

Geforce 2 MX 400, Geforce 4 MX 440 or Geforce MX 4000?
also, these cards had a lot of cut down models, so you have to check the memory bus and clock of each to make a more informed decision.

nVidia GeForce FX 5200 (2003)
same thing, it was common to find 5200s with slow 64bit memory

Reply 5 of 16, by ElectroMan

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

‎‎‎

Last edited by ElectroMan on 2017-12-03, 13:44. Edited 1 time in total.

Reply 6 of 16, by bjwil1991

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I have different graphics cards myself for my Socket 370 build:

*nVidia Riva TNT2 M64 (VisionTek NV996.0 Rev. B) AGP 2x- grey horizontal lines when running GUI (Windows), but not in MS-DOS (text mode).
3dfx VooDoo3 3000 PCI (had to install a fan on the heatsink) - good for some games, but newer ones from 1999 and onwards require T&L or H&L GPUs
**nVidia GeForce4 MX440 AGP 4x (Dell OEM) - no video output, but gets detected by the motherboard (all of the caps seem good, but I have a feeling the capacitors are dead)
nVidia GeForce4 MX4000 PCI - games run too slow
nVidia GeForce 6200 (in a Dimension 4550 that had the MX440 installed, and I'm planning on taking the card out so that way I can test the card to see if it'll work in the Socket 370 board).

The GeForce4 MX440 uses the SMD Electrolytic capacitors, while the GeForce4 uses the same caps that are commonly used on motherboards.

Luckily, the board I have supports AGP 1x/2x/4x cards (nVidia GeForce 6200 AGP can be used in this system).

*De-soldered the VGA connector recently and it had a rust spot and a solder point on the PCB is dark (going to fix that by using a redneck method: jumping the wire from the affected pin to the appropriate layout by following the trace on the board), and I'm gonna purchase about 5 VGA connector ports.

**Broke unexpectedly when removing the VGA connector port, but, that was because I didn't have the right equipment handy, and now I do.

Last edited by bjwil1991 on 2017-11-01, 12:03. Edited 1 time in total.

Discord: https://discord.gg/U5dJw7x
Systems from the Compaq Portable 1 to Ryzen 9 5950X
Twitch: https://twitch.tv/retropcuser

Reply 7 of 16, by appiah4

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Potential issue with GF4 MX440 (or expecially with MX4000 if you have that) is that the oldest drivers that will work with those cards are at least 2-2.5 years newer than the oldest drivers that will work with GF2 MX cards, which are nearly period correct drivers for a Win98 build. While it may never be a thing for you, the MX440 (or MX4000) drivers may cause strange issues with older games.

For that build I'd really advise going with a Voodoo3/TNT2/GF256 but the MX will also work. TNT would not cut it for a late Pentium system.

Reply 8 of 16, by Jade Falcon

User metadata
Rank BANNED
Rank
BANNED

If this was me I'd use the 5200 if its a 128bit card, other wise the 400mx

Reply 9 of 16, by kanecvr

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Jade Falcon wrote:

If this was me I'd use the 5200 if its a 128bit card, other wise the 400mx

Same here. The 6600 is way wasted on a P3.

Reply 10 of 16, by blank001

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
ElectroMan wrote:
Though I'm not quite building my P3 just yet, Ti500 seems to be the most attractive option. Sadly, it looks like many people thi […]
Show full quote
BeginnerGuy wrote:

I ended up settling on a GeForce 3 Ti200.

Though I'm not quite building my P3 just yet, Ti500 seems to be the most attractive option. Sadly, it looks like many people think the same 😠.

Ti200 or even Ti4200 are both decent options as well for an Nvidia fan, and I guess Radeon 7500/8500 for ATI. However I'm going slightly under 1Ghz and specifically target 2000-2002 GPUs.

In your case I would go with GeForce 4 and try to swap it to something better at the first opportunity - actually, that's exactly my situation as well - have one lying around.

It took me the last 2 years to find a Ti500 for a reasonable price online (ebay filter < $30 BIN). They're not plentiful that's for sure.

_: K6-III+ 450apz@550, P5A-B, 128Mb CL2, Voodoo 5500 AGP, MX300, AWE64 Gold 32mb, SC-55v2.0
_: Pentium III 1400 S, TUSL2-C, 512Mb CL2, Voodoo 5500 AGP, MX300

Reply 11 of 16, by stinkydiver

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Sorry to hijack the thread, but I am also needing opinions for a video card for my PIII rig also. Here are the current specs:

PIII Katmai slot 1 at 450MHz
Intel SE440BX-2 Motherboard
256MB Ram
Nvidia TNT2 M64 32MB
2x Voodoo2 12MB in SLI
Creative AWE64 Gold

I recently just purchased a 100MHZ FSB PIII @ 800MHZ for an upgrade so wanted to update the video card too...

It will mainly be used to play games from mid to late 90's, (mainly Star Wars games tbh), but I may throw the odd Quake III engine game at it (such as Jedi Outcast).

Was considering a Geforce4 TI4600, but thought that might be a bit overkill, so am now looking at either a Geforce2 TI or a Geforce3 TI400 (if I can find one...)

Would a GF2 TI be sufficient to run something like JO at 1024x768 at MAX settings and get a good frame rate? Or should I just fork out and get a GF3?

The motherboard only supports AGP 2x, but from what I can tell the bump up to a 4x AGP slot doesn't yield a huge increase in FPS... see https://www.anandtech.com/show/556/4

Last edited by stinkydiver on 2017-11-15, 00:32. Edited 2 times in total.

Take that there and put it in here

Reply 12 of 16, by appiah4

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

The one and done card for late P3, early P4/AthlonXP period for me is the Radeon 8500. I would suffer a Ti4200 if I had to.

Reply 13 of 16, by stinkydiver

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Yeah I was thinking about a Radeon 8500 too. There are none around though! Ebay is totally empty.

I used to have an 8500 LE back in the day and It really went the distance...

Take that there and put it in here

Reply 14 of 16, by stinkydiver

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

After much thought and research I decided on a Geforce2 Ti. I would have opted for a Geforce 256 to keep all the components pre y2k but these are pretty rare. A GF2 Ultra would be nice but I can't justify paying the ridiculous prices. I mean $400? C'mon!

Got a good bargain for the Ti at around $40 NZD including postage... https://www.ebay.com/itm/272836619607

Yes I know I could have got a Geforce4 Ti4200 for that price, but hey let's save a purchase like that for another build completely 😉

Take that there and put it in here

Reply 15 of 16, by Dirk Daring

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
stinkydiver wrote:

Yeah I was thinking about a Radeon 8500 too. There are none around though! Ebay is totally empty.

I used to have an 8500 LE back in the day and It really went the distance...

The 8500 series is pretty rare on ebay....atleast for sane prices, the 9000 series though is really easy to find on ebay, and for cheap. The 9500 likely performs pretty close to a regular 8500 and quite a better than the 8500 LE, with the added benefit of DX9 compatibility and double the VRAM..... I know you went with a GF2 TI, but just something to consider next time you're putting a build together and want to chuck in an old Radeon.
I've got a 9600 XT paired with an Athlon XP 1800+ in my Windows XP build, and this has proven to be a really nice combo.

Reply 16 of 16, by appiah4

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Radeon 9100 is basically a rebranded Radoen 8500LE so you can also look for that.

Radeon 9000PRO in a pinch is basically a Radeon 8500 with 1 vertex pipeline disabled but it doesn't make a world of difference.

The 128-bit 900/9200/9250 are also fair alternatives to the 8500LE; They also have 1 vertex pipeline disabled, some have lower core clocks, some have lower memory clocks, but they are pretty much the same silicon - so you can (like me) pretend to have a 8500 in PCs you can't fit one in (PCI only P3 builds etc.).

The R200 family was never too popular despite being the best card of its time (same thing goes for a lot of ATI silicon except the R300 which actually got the attention it deserved). I have a Radoen 8500 64MB and a Radeon 9250 128MB PCI and they are treasured pieces of my collection.