What chipset does the motherboard have?usb works in windows 95 on intel 430tx chipset.

Nahkri wrote:

What chipset does the motherboard have?usb works in windows 95 on intel 430tx chipset.

430HX. What version of 95? I believe it's currently vanilla.

According to visual inspection and the model name of the motherboard...430HX.

Windows 95 osr 2.5 version C and maybe osr 2.1 version B,not sure about the last 1,but C works with the tx chipset.

http://toastytech.com/files/cruzerwin95.html

here is some more info about how to make it work,not 100% it will work on the hx chipset,but u can try.

Thanks. I'll keep that in mind in case I do a re-install. Besides, the header on the MB uses standard pinout, but one of them is reversed. I'd have to find a bracket with separate cables for the ports or make my own... combining that with the fact I don't really need USB, I'll focus my efforts on something else for now 😈

oerk wrote:

I'm half tempted to try the USB ports the Gigabyte board has, but without a OS supporting USB, there's no point really. I transfer all my stuff over the network anyway.!

Yikes, USB 1.0... so slow. Network, or physically moving drives, is best.

FWIW another option an old Knoppix 3.1 CD. Runs well on these boxes and has good FDD and USB support.

Yeah, using the network is about as fast as using the hard drive on this machine.

Yes, no point in USB, but I'm always tempted to max a system out, and that means using what the board has available. I'm sure I'm not the only one 😈

oerk wrote:

I do have a P200, P200 MMX and a K6-200 laying around, but the K5 is much cooler 😎

Agreed! Nice system!

Thank you! I'm having a blast with this.

At first I wasn't sure about Windows 95 or why I'd want a 95 install - pure DOS or 98SE should be better in every way, right? After using it a bit I've grown to like it - 95 has a pure, basic, nostalgic quality to it that 98 doesn't have. And it's period correct for this system. And it's way faster than I expected it to be.

UPDATE: Found that the two 4MB sticks had 70ns timing, searched my pile of PS/2 sticks for some faster ones, and found a pair of 16MB 60ns SIMMS instead, so now we're up to a whopping 64MB RAM!

Oerk, have you tried bumping the FSB to 75MHz? I actually have tried this, and my K5-PR166 was somewhat stable. I believe that if somehow we could feed the chip something like 3.7V and some very good cooling it could do slightly better.

An AMD K5 PR200 running at 150MHz (2 x 75) would eat a Cyrix 6x86 PR200 for lunch, with better integer and FPU performance than the Cyrix. It would trounce a Pentium 200 on integer and maybe be around the performance of a Pentium 120 on FPU.

- ELSA Winner 1000 - S3 Trio 64 w/ 2 MB

They made a video card called the "Winner" ? 🤣

oerk wrote:

Thank you! I'm having a blast with this.

At first I wasn't sure about Windows 95 or why I'd want a 95 install - pure DOS or 98SE should be better in every way, right? After using it a bit I've grown to like it - 95 has a pure, basic, nostalgic quality to it that 98 doesn't have. And it's period correct for this system. And it's way faster than I expected it to be.

Windows 95 / NT4 have a significantly faster interface than 98 or later. The shell enhancements of Win98 make it slower. Those enhancements can be added to 95/NT4 by using an option in the IE4 installer. But at that point, with the performance impact you might as well just run 98 instead.

I think the only reason to install those enhancements on Win95 would be if one wanted the Win98 style interface but needed 95 for some compatibility reason.

shamino wrote:

- ELSA Winner 1000 - S3 Trio 64 w/ 2 MB

They made a video card called the "Winner" ? 🤣

ELSA had several "Winner" models, most of them S3 based.
I *think* Winner refers to the cards being designed for Windows, besides the obvious play on words.