Sphere478 wrote on 2021-02-20, 00:20:

is the link broken for you also? […]
Show full quote

darry wrote on 2021-02-19, 23:55:

Sphere478 wrote on 2021-02-19, 23:14:

I am having unbelievable problems with my internet nothing will load nothing will download can you help me out here I've been lo […]
Show full quote

I am having unbelievable problems with my internet nothing will load nothing will download can you help me out here I've been looking all day and by that I mean trying to get things to load. I can't find the link I had earlier that mentioned a unsigned release for x series for ME that works with 98 also the original link to ati was broken in the page

I found another link to omega drivers which also seems to be broken... ugh!!!
https://www.techrepublic.com/forums/discussio … for-windows-me/

https://www.guru3d.com/files-details/radeon-o … rs-4-8-442.html
was wanting to check these but links won't work on my end they say xp/2k though but wanted to check to make sure

https://www.guru3d.com/files-details/at ... (x86).html
again can't get to download

Here are the release notes for Catalyst 6.5 . Only Windows 2000 and XP are supported . The note about ME drivers being usable on Windows 98 and 98 SE is a holdover ftom the time ME was supported . The note is no longer pertinent with ME support having been dropped and was likely left there by accident .

https://drivers.amd.com/relnotes/catalyst_65_ … ease_notes.html

is the link broken for you also?

yes that's the reference I found also that other link where some people seemed to think they solved it that I linked above but none of those links are working for me

that seems odd for the notes to have a error like that...?

well if all else fails I can try forcing a x300 driver?

The link to the release notes works for me . Here is zipped copy of the HTML file . That page does not have a driver download link .

I found the driver on an obscure FTP site ftp://ftp.kazachya.net/Install/Drivers/Video/ … m_enu_32464.exe and also in my own archives .

The sha256 checksum matches, so the file has not been altered compared to my copy .
05805a2573933d29279e3a46d1d2bd94b64065fa99ca176fbfcc7e8880b879b2 6-5_xp-2k_dd_ccc_wdm_enu_32464.exe
Even the driver filename implies that it is meant for Windows 2000 and Windows XP .

IMHO, it is extremely unlikely that the X300 driver will work .

x300 might work but its a waste of time even if its working because its unstable, personal experience from getting it working on 98se before.

A good PCI card is one that has low driver overhead and compatible features.

see here
Graphics card for Pentium Pro build

geforce2 mx400 with det 6.5 then slap a couple vood00 2s to the side and this is the best u can do with pci 2.1 with such a slow cpu and old motherboard

alternatively he tested a radeon 7000

PS: I forgot to mention a PCI Radeon 7500 might work also . However I wouldn't expect much since its PCI.

Not my listing https://www.ebay.com/itm/ATI-Radeon-7500-128M … g-/333163967067

I tried a x300 and x700 driver from that 6.6 catalyst win ME package installer using 7zip to extract it and no success 🙁 shame to not be able to use this card, I just got it 🤣.
I emailed ati dirrectly for clarification on the release note. but I haven't as of yet been able to make the 1300 work on ME just as you guys have said :'(

I would like something that packs a bit more punch than the 6200 on this computer so if you have an idea of something else that would be better than a 6200 and work on 9x/ME I'm all ears.

I see that radeon 7000 and 8000 have unofficial drivers? do they have pci variants?

Warlord wrote on 2021-02-20, 02:08:

x300 might work but its a waste of time even if its working because its unstable, personal experience from getting it working o […]
Show full quote

x300 might work but its a waste of time even if its working because its unstable, personal experience from getting it working on 98se before.

A good PCI card is one that has low driver overhead and compatible features.

see here
Graphics card for Pentium Pro build

geforce2 mx400 with det 6.5 then slap a couple vood00 2s to the side and this is the best u can do with pci 2.1 with such a slow cpu and old motherboard

alternatively he tested a radeon 7000

PS: I forgot to mention a PCI Radeon 7500 might work also . However I wouldn't expect much since its PCI.

Not my listing https://www.ebay.com/itm/ATI-Radeon-7500-128M … g-/333163967067

it seems like those cards would be slower than my 6200 am I just missing something? it seems just weird that I would have to go to cards that old. :'(

looking for x1300 win 9x/ME driver this ended up being discussed in two threads accidently so anyone reading this in the future can read both here is the link

the cpu, ram, chipset, pci is the bottle neck and driver overhead. Like it really doesn't make any difference if your card can support dx 8 or 9 if you can't actually play any of those titles. And because the 6 series doesn't support 8 bit palets, or table fog then you cant actually enjoy any of the games you can play on such a system. Seems like a waste of time but that just my opinion.

kinda like ricing up a honda civic, slapping on a fart can on the back doesn't make it anything more that what it is.

I found a pci geforce 8400 gs and my research seems to say that there are unofficial drivers that will support it in 9x/ME and of course it should naturally work on my dual boot windows 7. This seems to be the most modern pci win9x graphics card I can find? but my question is, will the drivers require sse? will it require a direct x version that requires sse? will the card having 512mb of ram be an issue with ME/98SE I think I read that 256mb is max vid mem for 9x/ME I also hear that newer cards like this will have built in video decoders which will be handy cause I want to try and play some movies/shows on it. I read a post about a guy that removed some ram chips from a 7000 series card and modded the bios to make it work with 98 this is something I may be willing to do... for science, but would prefer to just buy a 256mb variant 🤣 if it can be found haha. but before I get too crazy and ahead of myself, the sse question.. and then I'll consider my motivation on the subject.

yeah, I realize my build isn't "going with the grain" here warlord. and I hear you and actually do expect you to likely be correct haha. but nothing about the build has been "traditional". it's been an experiment in testing the limits. in most respects I haven't been able to do better than what "they/you guys" said I would be able to do. but I have had a few successes. like no one thought that I'd get a m.2 nvme working on a pentium 1 motherboard. while it ultimately turned out to be a terrible idea because of some kind of pio mode it was using, the drive did work and I was able to load onto it. There was also the success in getting 768mb of simms into the motherboard that intel and every reference I can find says should only support 512mb. also these boards were only supposed to have 2.8v core settings but I found 2.2v settings and even a 1.5v setting which I,m actually using on my k6-3+ (mobile voltage).
I'm not building a computer from a recipe here, I'm having fun!, and testing the limits of what I can do. and of course documenting it all so people can see what I figured out. 😀

windows 7 wont even run without sse but no the drivers don't require sse

there is a 512mb nvidia card patch by rloew but im not sure which cards its for or how well it works

ya you did get the m2 working. Gratz on that I don't remember saying it wouldn't work, if I recall right I just tried to say a sata 150 or 3 card with a fast SSD like a samsung or something like that would already saturate the computer and M2 couldn't go faster because there was no headroom to do so.

which is kinda similar to what I'm trying to say here is that not that it wouldn't work, but that it might bog the system down instead of making it faster. And whatever benefit you may get from it probably comes with some kinda compromise. If i wanted hardware assist dvd or video I might look instead to some kinda dedicated card for that. Like holy-wood or xcard because they will drop cpu usage a lot and not just a little. there's also those stb cards that attach to older video cards with a ribbon.

but if you want hardware assist from the video card itself ATI is the way to go they were light years ahead of nvidia.

Sphere478 wrote on 2021-02-20, 06:09:

I tried a x300 and x700 driver from that 6.6 catalyst win ME package installer using 7zip to extract it and no success 🙁 shame t […]
Show full quote

I tried a x300 and x700 driver from that 6.6 catalyst win ME package installer using 7zip to extract it and no success 🙁 shame to not be able to use this card, I just got it 🤣.
I emailed ati dirrectly for clarification on the release note. but I haven't as of yet been able to make the 1300 work on ME just as you guys have said :'(

I would like something that packs a bit more punch than the 6200 on this computer so if you have an idea of something else that would be better than a 6200 and work on 9x/ME I'm all ears.

I see that radeon 7000 and 8000 have unofficial drivers? do they have pci variants?

Warlord wrote on 2021-02-20, 02:08:

x300 might work but its a waste of time even if its working because its unstable, personal experience from getting it working o […]
Show full quote

x300 might work but its a waste of time even if its working because its unstable, personal experience from getting it working on 98se before.

A good PCI card is one that has low driver overhead and compatible features.

see here
Graphics card for Pentium Pro build

geforce2 mx400 with det 6.5 then slap a couple vood00 2s to the side and this is the best u can do with pci 2.1 with such a slow cpu and old motherboard

alternatively he tested a radeon 7000

PS: I forgot to mention a PCI Radeon 7500 might work also . However I wouldn't expect much since its PCI.

Not my listing https://www.ebay.com/itm/ATI-Radeon-7500-128M … g-/333163967067

it seems like those cards would be slower than my 6200 am I just missing something? it seems just weird that I would have to go to cards that old. :'(

looking for x1300 win 9x/ME driver this ended up being discussed in two threads accidently so anyone reading this in the future can read both here is the link

A Geforce 6200 will likely be CPU limited on a K6-2/K6-3 variant (especially an underclocked one running on a socket 7 board) in many applications anyway, so a faster card would probably not make that much a difference . I don't see how you could get much more "punch" from a newer graphics card as pretty much anything newer than a 6200 will either not have Windows 9x drivers, not be available in a PCI variant . Even older cards past the Nvidia Riva TNT and Voodoo 3 era were pretty much AGP only in their higher speed incarnations .

Here are some benchmarks on a K6-2/350 system with a variety of cards : Best graphics card for AMD K6-2 350 Mhz processor.

Warlord wrote on 2021-02-20, 10:01:

windows 7 wont even run without sse but no the drivers don't require sse […]
Show full quote

windows 7 wont even run without sse but no the drivers don't require sse

there is a 512mb nvidia card patch by rloew but im not sure which cards its for or how well it works

ya you did get the m2 working. Gratz on that I don't remember saying it wouldn't work, if I recall right I just tried to say a sata 150 or 3 card with a fast SSD like a samsung or something like that would already saturate the computer and M2 couldn't go faster because there was no headroom to do so.

which is kinda similar to what I'm trying to say here is that not that it wouldn't work, but that it might bog the system down instead of making it faster. And whatever benefit you may get from it probably comes with some kinda compromise. If i wanted hardware assist dvd or video I might look instead to some kinda dedicated card for that. Like holy-wood or xcard because they will drop cpu usage a lot and not just a little. there's also those stb cards that attach to older video cards with a ribbon.

but if you want hardware assist from the video card itself ATI is the way to go they were light years ahead of nvidia.

I’m using windows 7 on the k6 right now. Settles out at about 150-160mb of ram it’s of course slow but it is usable and has been pretty handy helping me set up ME a few times by recopying the setup files 🤣.

You mean like the all in wonder cards or just ati cards in general?

A x300 seems like the best pci card for my application right as far as most modern?

I actually found another 8400 gs for $25 and figured ah what the heck and ordered it. So I’ll see if it even boots, then see if it works without sse. I see references to some people being able to disable sse on some drivers. I’m sure something will keep it from working 🤣 but for less than I spent on pizza last night it’s worth a shot.

darry wrote on 2021-02-20, 15:28:

Sphere478 wrote on 2021-02-20, 06:09:

I tried a x300 and x700 driver from that 6.6 catalyst win ME package installer using 7zip to extract it and no success 🙁 shame t […]
Show full quote

I tried a x300 and x700 driver from that 6.6 catalyst win ME package installer using 7zip to extract it and no success 🙁 shame to not be able to use this card, I just got it 🤣.
I emailed ati dirrectly for clarification on the release note. but I haven't as of yet been able to make the 1300 work on ME just as you guys have said :'(

I would like something that packs a bit more punch than the 6200 on this computer so if you have an idea of something else that would be better than a 6200 and work on 9x/ME I'm all ears.

I see that radeon 7000 and 8000 have unofficial drivers? do they have pci variants?

Warlord wrote on 2021-02-20, 02:08:

x300 might work but its a waste of time even if its working because its unstable, personal experience from getting it working o […]
Show full quote

x300 might work but its a waste of time even if its working because its unstable, personal experience from getting it working on 98se before.

A good PCI card is one that has low driver overhead and compatible features.

see here
Graphics card for Pentium Pro build

geforce2 mx400 with det 6.5 then slap a couple vood00 2s to the side and this is the best u can do with pci 2.1 with such a slow cpu and old motherboard

alternatively he tested a radeon 7000

PS: I forgot to mention a PCI Radeon 7500 might work also . However I wouldn't expect much since its PCI.

Not my listing https://www.ebay.com/itm/ATI-Radeon-7500-128M … g-/333163967067

it seems like those cards would be slower than my 6200 am I just missing something? it seems just weird that I would have to go to cards that old. :'(

looking for x1300 win 9x/ME driver this ended up being discussed in two threads accidently so anyone reading this in the future can read both here is the link

A Geforce 6200 will likely be CPU limited on a K6-2/K6-3 variant (especially an underclocked one running on a socket 7 board) in many applications anyway, so a faster card would probably not make that much a difference . I don't see how you could get much more "punch" from a newer graphics card as pretty much anything newer than a 6200 will either not have Windows 9x drivers, not be available in a PCI variant . Even older cards past the Nvidia Riva TNT and Voodoo 3 era were pretty much AGP only in their higher speed incarnations .

Here are some benchmarks on a K6-2/350 system with a variety of cards : Best graphics card for AMD K6-2 350 Mhz processor.

Lol by the time this is done I may be able to do my own benchmark conparison most of my trouble has been getting the cards to work AT ALL though, I wish I could nail down the formula for what cards will and will not post in these boards. I’m not convinced it has anything to do with the bridge chips as this x1300 works with one. And I have other cards that have them. It seems like a vbios thing..