Trashbytes wrote on 2024-10-06, 02:07:

People have mentioned the 9700 Pro but I would like to suggest one of the 9600XT/9800XT cards, both have big improvements over the older 9700/9800 pro cards including thermal protection and improved cooler design. Being based on the newer RV360/R360 they also run cooler and have plenty of extra head room if one wants to tweak their speeds a bit.

If performance is similar with 9700 Pro then it is indeed better idea to go with XT versions then.

Studiostriver wrote on 2024-10-06, 02:27:

Trashbytes wrote on 2024-10-06, 02:07:

People have mentioned the 9700 Pro but I would like to suggest one of the 9600XT/9800XT cards, both have big improvements over the older 9700/9800 pro cards including thermal protection and improved cooler design. Being based on the newer RV360/R360 they also run cooler and have plenty of extra head room if one wants to tweak their speeds a bit.

If performance is similar with 9700 Pro then it is indeed better idea to go with XT versions then.

The 9600XT isn't but the 9800XT will be, the 9700Pro was a special card even back in the day but it never got the XT treatment, with how prices are on the 9700Pro cards it may be cheaper to get a 9800XT. The 9700 Pro has a higher chance of being DOA due to the shit cooler design and I have a few of them I have bought and they have shown up very dead with no chance of necromancy helping, So working ones that are verified and tested tend to be very expensive.

Studiostriver wrote on 2024-10-06, 02:21:

I guess for Pentium 4 specs games i will use just modern machine then. I`m not into having too much computers. I got this old machine for very nostalgic reasons that i could never even dream to afford Pentium 3 as kid in time of civil war in my country. I want to make overkill machine and enjoy in DOS/95/98 and early XP games so i fullfill my childhood dreams so to speak.

Then my recommendation would be to focus on maximizing compatibility between DOS, Win 95/98 and XP. In my own experience, a GeForce 4 is great in this regard which is why I chose it for my Pentium 4 build. You can also add a Voodoo2 card if you want native Glide support for additional graphics options for early 3D games.

I also favor the GeForce4 over ATI cards because GeForce cards tend to have have better compatibility under DOS. There is a chart available here which compares various cards under DOS: https://gona.mactar.hu/DOS_TESTS/

[/quote]

The 9600XT isn't but the 9800XT will be, the 9700Pro was a special card even back in the day but it never got the XT treatment, with how prices are on the 9700Pro cards it may be cheaper to get a 9800XT. The 9700 Pro has a higher chance of being DOA due to the shit cooler design and I have a few of them I have bought and they have shown up very dead with no chance of necromancy helping, So working ones that are verified and tested tend to be very expensive.
[/quote]
Well it seems 9800XT will be very rare bird to be found as much as working 9700 Pro judging on my fast searches in aroun 10 minute of googling. I cant found any of it, not even on ebay. Regular 9800 can be found, and 9600 XT thou.

[/quote]

Then my recommendation would be to focus on maximizing compatibility between DOS, Win 95/98 and XP. In my own experience, a GeForce 4 is great in this regard which is why I chose it for my Pentium 4 build. You can also add a Voodoo2 card if you want native Glide support for additional graphics options for early 3D games.

I also favor the GeForce4 over ATI cards because GeForce cards tend to have have better compatibility under DOS. There is a chart available here which compares various cards under DOS: https://gona.mactar.hu/DOS_TESTS/
[/quote]

You have valid points there. I will have to think about it. Most DOS games that i will play in this age would be early rpgs like Ultima series, point click adventures, and RTS games like Dune 2 etc.

Studiostriver wrote on 2024-10-06, 03:02:

Then my recommendation would be to focus on maximizing compatibility between DOS, Win 95/98 and XP. In my own experience, a GeForce 4 is great in this regard which is why I chose it for my Pentium 4 build. You can also add a Voodoo2 card if you want native Glide support for additional graphics options for early 3D games.

I also favor the GeForce4 over ATI cards because GeForce cards tend to have have better compatibility under DOS. There is a chart available here which compares various cards under DOS: https://gona.mactar.hu/DOS_TESTS/
[/quote]

You have valid points there. I will have to think about it. Most DOS games that i will play in this age would be early rpgs like Ultima series, point click adventures, and RTS games like Dune 2 etc.
[/quote]

Oh if you are going to do DOS too then I second the GF4 option and nice Ti 4200 or even a nice Ti4400 if you can find one would be an excellent all rounder for everything from DOS through to DX8 games with very little compatibility issues, nvidia has excellent VESA support. (ATI VESA can be very hit and miss)

I'm tempted to say that if you just got back into the hobby and are already making a Tualatin build, of all things, then you'll inevitably get a slower Pentium III or II for a "proper" Win98/DOS build later. Might as well come to terms with it now, maybe?

My 2 cents: You have a 1.4ghz Tualatin, just go for it, get a 9600XT and have a great time with Mafia, GTA III/Vice City, Max Payne, and everything else from that fantastic period and before. Install WinME (yes, really) and you'll still be able to scratch the DOS games itch via DOS window. Or Win2000 of course, which benchmarks a little under WinME, and with no DOS. You'll love it, it will feel satisfyingly fast and somehow still perfectly period correct.

And then when you're satisfied you'll inevitably still want that "proper" Win98 DOS etc., and then, also inevitably, an overpowered WinXP machine. And even then you might lust for a 486, just because... We've seen it time after time on these forums... just food for thought

One of the fastest cards that officially supports both Win98SE (no driver mods) and WinXP would be a Radeon X850 XT PE. Nvidia's GeForce 6800 Ultra may be faster in OpenGL games. In terms of compatibility, Nvidia GeForce 4 Ti and GeForce FX cards have a slight edge due to supporting some legacy features like table fog and paletted textures which are used by older Win9x games.

Still, the raw power of an X800 series card under Win98SE is a sight to behold. Most games made before 2002 will run smoothly at 1600x1200 with 4xAA and 16xAF. That said, you may want to pair such a card with a powerful CPU for best results. A high end Athlon64 or Pentium 4 at the very least, but preferably a Core 2.

With a X850 XT PE you can get 400+ FPS on Win 98 with Quake 3. It’s nuts. Slight overkill 😉

Studiostriver wrote on 2024-10-06, 02:27:

If performance is similar with 9700 Pro then it is indeed better idea to go with XT versions then.

It won't be... the 9600 is basically half a 9700, running at slightly higher clock speeds. 😀

This PC fits 128bit Radeon 9550, 9600,9600 Pro, 9600XT. Even with these AGP cards it has CPU bottelneck. All these are smaller 130nm chips, but 9550 / 9600 take less heat and can be 100% silent, also slower clocks and ram speeds, even 9600 Pro/ XT can with bigger heatsink be silent. Win9x use Catalyst 6.2 and for XP Catalyst 7.11. 9600XT is bit faster, but takes more power 22W for XT and 18W for 9600 Pro. Radeon 9600 Pro and XT can be with 2.8ns ram, i would take 9600 Pro with fast 2.8ns ram or non pro / 9550. For 9600 non pro and /9550 look that it is 128bit version, there are many 64bits out there for lower cards. For this CPU i would use older Catalyst drivers for Win9x and XP 7.11 with fog and retro ogl it has.

Some Radeon 9600 core clocks and memory speeds info with bios dl: http://www.unoid.net/9600pro/bios.html

stamasd wrote on 2024-10-06, 01:49:

I use a Radeon 9700 (non-Pro) on my P3-S 1266 system. It works just fine. I have had good luck with 9700s, none of the 3 I have show any problems at all after many years of use. Of course YMMV.

Back in the day I bought a non pro as it was much cheaper than the pro. With unlocked bios, it was a piece of cake to overclock the card equivalent to pro. If my memory serves me correct, my particular unit had the same memory as pro version, so it was an equivalent card other than it was clocked lower and locked in bios.

In fact, with waterblock on the GPU I had the core at 400MHz vs 325 on pro. It was an amazing card.

Trashbytes wrote on 2024-10-06, 02:37:

The 9600XT isn't but the 9800XT will be, the 9700Pro was a special card even back in the day but it never got the XT treatment, with how prices are on the 9700Pro cards it may be cheaper to get a 9800XT. The 9700 Pro has a higher chance of being DOA due to the shit cooler design and I have a few of them I have bought and they have shown up very dead with no chance of necromancy helping, So working ones that are verified and tested tend to be very expensive.

9800 pro card coolers aren’t good either, so they were prone die prematurely too. That is the reason why both cards are harder to find nowadays than equivalent nVidia cards, althoug they were very polular among enthusiasts.

If you happen to find either one in working condition, slapping something more powerful on the core is highly recommended.

CharlieFoxtrot wrote on 2024-10-06, 11:07:

Trashbytes wrote on 2024-10-06, 02:37:

The 9600XT isn't but the 9800XT will be, the 9700Pro was a special card even back in the day but it never got the XT treatment, with how prices are on the 9700Pro cards it may be cheaper to get a 9800XT. The 9700 Pro has a higher chance of being DOA due to the shit cooler design and I have a few of them I have bought and they have shown up very dead with no chance of necromancy helping, So working ones that are verified and tested tend to be very expensive.

9800 pro card coolers aren’t good either, so they were prone die prematurely too. That is the reason why both cards are harder to find nowadays than equivalent nVidia cards, althoug they were very polular among enthusiasts.

If you happen to find either one in working condition, slapping something more powerful on the core is highly recommended.

ATI had a habit of slapping tiny coolers on cards that needed bigger ones or big coolers but with no retention system which simply made the problem happen faster.

They loved cutting corners and living dangerously.

Why many 9500 / 9700 / 9800 had heating problems. Also 9600Pro and 9600XT do not need extra power from PSU and are 130nm cooler chips.
https://youtu.be/rX1_JZZtT1k?t=287

Studiostriver wrote on 2024-10-06, 02:21:

I guess for Pentium 4 specs games i will use just modern machine then. I`m not into having too much computers. I got this old machine for very nostalgic reasons that i could never even dream to afford Pentium 3 as kid in time of civil war in my country. I want to make overkill machine and enjoy in DOS/95/98 and early XP games so i fullfill my childhood dreams so to speak.

A PIII, even a super-duper-high-end Tualatin, is not an "overkill machine" for early XP games in my opinion. It's a very reasonable, solid, period-correct machine, but it's not overkill in the way that it would be overkill running ~1996-7 games.

VivienM wrote on 2024-10-06, 13:03:

Studiostriver wrote on 2024-10-06, 02:21:

I guess for Pentium 4 specs games i will use just modern machine then. I`m not into having too much computers. I got this old machine for very nostalgic reasons that i could never even dream to afford Pentium 3 as kid in time of civil war in my country. I want to make overkill machine and enjoy in DOS/95/98 and early XP games so i fullfill my childhood dreams so to speak.

A PIII, even a super-duper-high-end Tualatin, is not an "overkill machine" for early XP games in my opinion. It's a very reasonable, solid, period-correct machine, but it's not overkill in the way that it would be overkill running ~1996-7 games.

Its not for XP of course, but for 98 SE it is, not to say for older games from 95/DOS period.

zuldan wrote on 2024-10-06, 07:44:

With a X850 XT PE you can get 400+ FPS on Win 98 with Quake 3. It’s nuts. Slight overkill 😉

It sounds pretty cool i must say. 😀 I myself have very soft spot for 90s/early 00s games, from consoles or computer and would rather play and old gem, classic or mess around with newest games even i am abled to. I remember when i got in 2012 super high end computer, and the very day i start using it, lets see how old games run at max specs, haha. 😀 That was my first try and desire to play, nothing changes even today.

andre_6 wrote on 2024-10-06, 05:39:

I'm tempted to say that if you just got back into the hobby and are already making a Tualatin build, of all things, then you'll inevitably get a slower Pentium III or II for a "proper" Win98/DOS build later. Might as well come to terms with it now, maybe?

My 2 cents: You have a 1.4ghz Tualatin, just go for it, get a 9600XT and have a great time with Mafia, GTA III/Vice City, Max Payne, and everything else from that fantastic period and before. Install WinME (yes, really) and you'll still be able to scratch the DOS games itch via DOS window. Or Win2000 of course, which benchmarks a little under WinME, and with no DOS. You'll love it, it will feel satisfyingly fast and somehow still perfectly period correct.

And then when you're satisfied you'll inevitably still want that "proper" Win98 DOS etc., and then, also inevitably, an overpowered WinXP machine. And even then you might lust for a 486, just because... We've seen it time after time on these forums... just food for thought

I waited to get into this hobby for years to be honest, but i had no opportunity to do so due to lifestyle obligations, no one who was into such a thing (i`m the only one in my town and in whole country there are few dudes out there, consoles are more popular here and new computers). Before 2 years after i got some connections with few guys in my country, they literaly donated me this Pentium 3 as gift with solid motherboard for future updates. I wanted this from the start, and for older 98/DOS games if needed i will use some apps to slow it down if it runs bit faster then needed, the only concern is that it would be compatible and work well on the machine. Sadly i have no space were to put more old computers even if i would like to. This would be my only old configuration to work on and enjoy reconfigurating new parts etc.

Its not like i have too much money to waste on old computers and parts, i spare a lot for it, and cut corners as most of us make things happen, i just waited for such a long time for it (talked and think about it for such a long time), and for emotional and nostalgic reasons i making Pentium 3, which i want to make into pleasant experience with new mods available in future. I ordered with Tualatan, better heatsing and PCI USB 2.0 card with NEC chip. Via refused to work on my motherboard after few days of using it just stops respoding.

Kind regards.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-10-06, 07:39:

One of the fastest cards that officially supports both Win98SE (no driver mods) and WinXP would be a Radeon X850 XT PE. Nvidia's GeForce 6800 Ultra may be faster in OpenGL games. In terms of compatibility, Nvidia GeForce 4 Ti and GeForce FX cards have a slight edge due to supporting some legacy features like table fog and paletted textures which are used by older Win9x games.

Still, the raw power of an X800 series card under Win98SE is a sight to behold. Most games made before 2002 will run smoothly at 1600x1200 with 4xAA and 16xAF. That said, you may want to pair such a card with a powerful CPU for best results. A high end Athlon64 or Pentium 4 at the very least, but preferably a Core 2.

Thanks for all info provided! Well i only have Pentium III motherboard, and i recently ordered Tualatan so i will stick with that and have no plans making any new configurations in a future. You gave me lot of food for thought. In your opinion will it be bad if I go with Radeon X series or 6800 or in my case most logic thing to go for would be GeForce 4/FX like few guys already stated to be my best choices?