For Windows 3.11 any ISA/VLB/PCI accelerator will be fine. Even a crappy "Virge" will be an overkill.

PS:
Virge is crappy only on 3D front. 2D is more than OK.

I remember while back someone had similar problem. Pretty sure it was on board TNT2 but not sure about the motherboard.
In the end they had to use specific drivers from the motherboard manufacture, not the generic NVidia one. quick google of M754MLRTP didn't bring up anything though, anything else you can search under?

http://www.win31.de/edrivers.htm

I'd say it's a waste of a good graphic card to run Windows 3.11. Unless you have multi-boot with different OS's.

kixs wrote:

I'd say it's a waste of a good graphic card to run Windows 3.11. Unless you have multi-boot with different OS's.

^This. Why in God's green earth would you use a TNT2 in win 3.11? The S3 is more then enough for win311

Why not? Messing with period incorrect hardware can be as fun as period correct.
My guess is that the TNT2 is too late to have any real support. I had no idea it supposedly did at all honestly.

I *never* had any luck with win3.xx and riva128/tnt/tnt2 drivers. TNT cards froze at boot IIRC for me as well and RIVA128(/zx) cards would freeze at random times while using the system.
The drivers are really buggy and ALPHA stage at best, I have wasted a good amount of time with it and Elia1995 I suggest you spend your time doing something else with your system 🤣 🤣 🤣

is there even anywhere any docs for how to build windows 3.1 drivers?

Well, in fact I want to multi-boot Windows 3.11 (and DOS, obviously), OS/2 and Windows 95 as the final result when that computer's gonna be completed (I need an SD-IDE adapter as last hardware piece)

If you want to multi-boot, the generic Windows 3.11 VGA driver will be enough for Windows 3.11, as each OS will be using its own set of drivers anyway. Furthermore, considering the lack of Windows 3.11/DOS software that makes use of TNT2-era hardware acceleration, it is beyond me why you'd actually want a driver that can do that...

The same goes for OS/2, really.

Windows 95 is another story, of course (although Windows 98SE might be a better choice).

yawetaG wrote:

If you want to multi-boot, the generic Windows 3.11 VGA driver will be enough for Windows 3.11, as each OS will be using its own set of drivers anyway. Furthermore, considering the lack of Windows 3.11/DOS software that makes use of TNT2-era hardware acceleration, it is beyond me why you'd actually want a driver that can do that...

The same goes for OS/2, really.

Windows 95 is another story, of course (although Windows 98SE might be a better choice).

The generic driver will give you 640x480 with 16 colors, and nothing else in most cases. Of course there is the question about "what would you do with more on a Windows 3.1 system?" but at least, people who puts Windows 3.11 in their system would probably want to experience their past times with this or that old software, myself included. Even with a Oak 067 that I owned at that times, I could use 800x600 with 256 colors, which is way better than 640x480x16. So, there is nothing weird about trying to have the similar experience today with whatever card you have in your system, I guess. 🤣

I can't remember what I did exactly (possible links are below) at the moment but, with a modified driver mostly done with people using Windows 3.11 in their virtual machines in mind, I can use 1024 x 768 with 256 colors at the moment in a multiboot rig with Geforce 2 Ultra.

Windows 3.1x SVGA Patched Driver - *UPDATE*
https://sites.google.com/site/chitchatvmback/misc
https://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?t=1033

There's also a generic SuperVGA driver in Windows 3.1 and later (actually, there are a bunch of generic drivers for a lot of devices). Back when I used Windows 3.11 I didn't bother to install the driver specific to my Trident VLB card for a long time, and was able to have 800x600 with 256 colors nevertheless (although when I later tried the Trident driver included with the card it gave me nicer colors).

Elia1995 wrote:

Well, in fact I want to multi-boot Windows 3.11 (and DOS, obviously), OS/2 and Windows 95 as the final result when that computer's gonna be completed (I need an SD-IDE adapter as last hardware piece)

It would be less of a headache to use a mid 90's PCI video card + Voodoo 2. Win 3.11 drivers are no issue for these.

Heh I wish I had any Voodoo graphics card

Sorry to bump this, but I also can’t get my Riva 128dx to load with the agp Windows 3.11 drivers. I have Windows for Workgroups specifically. I seem to be limited to normal VGA. The official drivers let me select different resolutions and colors in system setup, but none will work. Any ideas?

Edit:

So I tried every driver google was aware of to no success even the generic SVGA driver. None worked. I fear the ZX revision is out of support for Windows 3.11. What card would guys recommend for a mix of dos and Windows 3.11? AGP would be a plus, not PCI is ok to.

utahraptor wrote on 2020-09-12, 12:00:

Sorry to bump this, but I also can’t get my Riva 128dx to load with the agp Windows 3.11 drivers. I have Windows for Workgroups specifically. I seem to be limited to normal VGA. The official drivers let me select different resolutions and colors in system setup, but none will work. Any ideas?

Edit:

So I tried every driver google was aware of to no success even the generic SVGA driver. None worked. I fear the ZX revision is out of support for Windows 3.11. What card would guys recommend for a mix of dos and Windows 3.11? AGP would be a plus, not PCI is ok to.

You might try an ATI Rage XL (PCI) just because they are so cheap, until you find another card later on that you like more. They work in WfW 3.11 as a Mach64.
The early PCI SVGA card I actually had back then was a Cirrus Logic 5446 - common enough that qemu emulates it.
Trident TGUI9680 is another early PCI card you should be able to find drivers for.

mrau wrote on 2016-11-02, 20:06:

http://www.win31.de/edrivers.htm

I've tested some Windows 3.1x drivers and modified them to enable true color in the highest resolutions.
The supported color depths are 256, 65536 and 16777216 in all resolutions.
The supported resolutions are 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, 1152x864, 1280x1024 and 1600x1200.
However, I was NOT able to enable 16:9 resolutions.
There are 2 attachments, one for nVIDIA Riva 128 chips, one for TNT or TNT2 chips.
Since the drivers do NOT support any kind of GeForce chips, those may work with the generic VESA framebuffer drivers instead.
Additional information for CRT users: All drivers are set to use 60 Hz non-interlaced and may need an .inf file to be adapted for higher refresh rates.

If you know any GeForce driver for Windows 3.1x, please let me know.

Note: There is a patch by mkarcher that fixed a problem when graphics card and SCSI controller use the same IRQ: FIX: Riva TNT / TNT2 graphics cards, Windows 3.1(1) and PCI IRQ sharing

Well done, thanks! I can't think right now what I might need to run on 3.1 that I can't get working on 95 with a machine using earlier nVidias, but it's nice to have options should that edge case occur. ... It's looking kinda likely I might have riva128s and maybe a TNT going into lower end pentium boxes, which will feel like they might want to have 3.xx on them... oh right, just remembered there's an Xwindow server (which is a terminal for X) for 3.x.. that might be something.

Disruptor wrote on 2021-12-22, 17:53:

I've tested some Windows 3.1x drivers and modified them to enable true color in the highest resolutions.
The supported color depths are 256, 65536 and 16777216 in all resolutions.

Good job. Did you test that the drivers are stable? Keropi wrote about load crash/freeze problems but it might be specific for his HW config only. Could you give some more info how did you add truecolor modes? I try to do so on Matrox Millennium II drivers where I did a registry hack under WinXP to enable 1600x1200/32bpp but I also would like to patch it for WNT4. Under Win3.x this mode works out of the box.