VOGONS


First post, by Filosofia

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

My personal history with PC was roughly divided between this two microsoft os: ms-dos and windows 98. My ms-dos gaming machine is almost ready so I already started another project. 😁

From the first games that could use Windows 98 to the establishment of Windows XP as a gaming platform it was a shorter period: 1998 to the end of 2002. Shorter than XP (2003-2013) anyway.
It was nonetheless full of excellent games so I decided to build a Windows 98 Dream Machine.
While browsing for components I found an "old" PC with 10 years, the whole set with CRT and speakers, selling for less you would spend dinning out.

I don't know why, but most of the systems I've gathered through the years where built December or January, and this one is no exception.

When it was built, back in January 2003, this system was pretty decent, although it was clearly budget-oriented , as you will see by the choice of components. The case was the most common, wherever you'd go if you'd ask for the cheapest case it would be something like this (colors may vary):

caixa.JPG

With the frontal USB! I got sick of looking at this cases anywhere I'd go.

usb.JPG

DVD Writers were very expensive in the beginning of 2003 and could cost as much as the rest of the goodies inside the case, so this combination was very popular, a DVD-ROM and a CD-RW, these ones being OEM , made by Samsung I think:

cdrw.JPG

dvd.JPG

The PSU is still (unfortunately) the Premier choice when it comes to cut costs, and inside the case was this powerful LC-B300: (don't know how it lasted so long without screwing anything up)

crap.JPG

The cheapeast ASUS Motherboard at the time was A7V8X-X , with a VIA chipset made for AMD cpus 😀 , it is a rock solid foundation:

mboard.JPG

Here it is, the P4 killer, AMD Athlon XP 2000+ , and it was unlocked too, that's a bonus! Currently at 500MHz for some testing with substituting the Pentium II machine in mind!

xp2000.JPG

With the Boxed cooler:

cooler.JPG

512MB PC2700 (333MHz in spite the KT400 chipset, oh well , so far it manages to save money in every category...)

pc2700.JPG

A good (and the cheapest along samsung at this time) 80GB P-ATA hard disk:

seagate.JPG

A Geforce 4 yes, but an MX one (what woould you expected from El Cheapo?!): 64MB , no DVI.

mx400.JPG

Maybe some tweaks here and there, but its funny to see a low-cost from 2003 turning into a Windows 98 gaming monster! (in 2012 🤣 ) And I found very rewarding to have a PC with its original configurations, its a piece of pc history that has a very honorable present 😉

BGWG as in Boogie Woogie.

Reply 1 of 8, by Old Thrashbarg

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

512MB PC2700 (333MHz in spite the KT400 chipset, oh well , so far it manages to save money in every category...)

The KT400 chipset was named based on DDR400 support, but the truth is that doesn't actually support DDR400 properly... Via couldn't get it completely stable, but they released it anyway and just scratched the official DDR400 support from the specs. Some boards did still advertise it as an 'unofficial' feature, but it never really worked very well with anything over DDR333.

Running the memory faster than the FSB doesn't help performance on the AthlonXP... so DDR333 (or even DDR266, since you have a 266fsb chip) is really the most appropriate thing for that system.

Reply 2 of 8, by Filosofia

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Hmm, thanks. So that is why all the reviews stated it was no significant advantage using DDR333 over DDR266! Ans also the DDR400 did not make any difference over 333.

The chipset is KT400A, not KT400 does it mean something?

This is one of those times when not going crazy on a new technology hype realy pays, history is here to prove it! It is cool that whoever bought this PC new did not went crazy about a new technology hype.

BGWG as in Boogie Woogie.

Reply 3 of 8, by Old Thrashbarg

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

The KT400A got some changes in the memory controller that (mostly) fixed the DDR400 support. It still only supported 333FSB, though, so the DDR400 support was still a useless feature.

Reply 4 of 8, by Filosofia

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I should probably worry about replacing the PSU in the first place, however this is going sooner or later to the AGP slot: a brand new Ti4200.

box4200.JPG

ti42000.JPG 😈

BGWG as in Boogie Woogie.

Reply 5 of 8, by elianda

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

The first VIA chipset that really worked well and stable with FSB400 was the KT600 with the VT8237 southbridge.
KT400A despite the naming does not support FSB400. The KT880 was too late and the nForce2 is a good alternative with Dual channel memory support.

Retronn.de - Vintage Hardware Gallery, Drivers, Guides, Videos. Now with file search
Youtube Channel
FTP Server - Driver Archive and more
DVI2PCIe alignment and 2D image quality measurement tool

Reply 6 of 8, by swaaye

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

From what I've read, the VIA chipsets actually do get a small boost from async RAM operation.

example
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/mainboards/d … s745.html#sect8

Reply 7 of 8, by Old Thrashbarg

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I'm inclined to say those results are more likely due to poor optimization at DDR266 speed than it was good performance at DDR333 speed.

The KT400-series was kind of a joke, really. The KT400 non-A was faster with DDR333 than with DDR400. The 400A was faster with DDR400 than with DDR333... but it was slower with both than the non-A version. In other words, the hierarchy was: KT400 DDR333 > KT400 DDR400 > KT400A DDR400 > KT400A DDR333.

Reply 8 of 8, by swaaye

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

It was a mess, no doubt. KT333 is also essentially KT266A with a new label. And then there are KT333 boards with re-labeled KT400 chips that caused problems. It goes on and on with VIA.

This generation of chipsets does tend to be reliable at least though.