VOGONS


Reply 200 of 264, by Joseph_Joestar

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
mockingbird wrote on 2022-04-06, 20:34:

Next issue is that the KT7A has some compatibility issues with GeForce3 and GeForce4 cards... Looks like that was fixed with Geforce FX and later series.

I currently have a KT7A revision 1.0 running just fine with a GeForce4 Ti4200.

Back in he day, I used a GeForce3 Ti200 on that motherboard for several years, and didn't have any problems either.

PC#1: Pentium MMX 166 / Soyo SY-5BT / S3 Trio64V+ / Voodoo1 / OPTi 82C930 / AWE64 Gold / SC-155
PC#2: AthlonXP 1700+ / Abit KT7A / Voodoo3 / SBLive / Vortex2
PC#3: Athlon64 3000+ / Asus K8V-MX / GeForce4 / Audigy1
PC#4: i5-3550P / MSI Z77A-G43 / GTX 650Ti / X-Fi

Reply 201 of 264, by mockingbird

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2022-04-07, 05:29:
mockingbird wrote on 2022-04-06, 20:34:

Next issue is that the KT7A has some compatibility issues with GeForce3 and GeForce4 cards... Looks like that was fixed with Geforce FX and later series.

I currently have a KT7A revision 1.0 running just fine with a GeForce4 Ti4200.

Back in he day, I used a GeForce3 Ti200 on that motherboard for several years, and didn't have any problems either.

Interesting...

I have a KT7A-Raid 1.1 as well (needing a re-cap)... I'll have to test on that too.

...but when you say "running just fine", can you please confirm stability with Flatout2? You'll need the original ISO, not the GOG repack. This is also a DirectX9 game, and you'll need the unofficial updated August 2007 DX9 package with the newer files. You can install Daemon Tools 3.47, enable all protection emulation options, then mount and install. DTools requires the updated Windows Installer... I just install Unofficial Service Pack 3.5 (and then 3.6) "main/core updates" beforehand.

3DMark2001SE is not adequate as a stability test alone, as confirmed by @dj_pirtu.

jw0vu3.png
(Decommissioned:)
7ivtic.png

Reply 202 of 264, by Joseph_Joestar

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
mockingbird wrote on 2022-04-07, 13:50:

...but when you say "running just fine", can you please confirm stability with Flatout2? You'll need the original ISO, not the GOG repack.

I don't own Flatout 2, so I can't test it.

For the record, I played several GPU intensive games on that system (link in signature) including the original Splinter Cell, Gothic 1 and Star Trek Voyager: Elite Force. No issues with any of them. Splinter Cell using the highest possible graphical settings is particularly demanding, as shown in Phil's video.

PC#1: Pentium MMX 166 / Soyo SY-5BT / S3 Trio64V+ / Voodoo1 / OPTi 82C930 / AWE64 Gold / SC-155
PC#2: AthlonXP 1700+ / Abit KT7A / Voodoo3 / SBLive / Vortex2
PC#3: Athlon64 3000+ / Asus K8V-MX / GeForce4 / Audigy1
PC#4: i5-3550P / MSI Z77A-G43 / GTX 650Ti / X-Fi

Reply 203 of 264, by mockingbird

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2022-04-07, 14:47:

I don't own Flatout 2, so I can't test it.

For the record, I played several GPU intensive games on that system (link in signature) including the original Splinter Cell, Gothic 1 and Star Trek Voyager: Elite Force. No issues with any of them. Splinter Cell using the highest possible graphical settings is particularly demanding, as shown in Phil's video.

Are you interested in borrowing my copy for testing purposes? After you're done, you must erase it from your hard drive.

You would be helping out the consensus on this thread if you did...

jw0vu3.png
(Decommissioned:)
7ivtic.png

Reply 204 of 264, by Joseph_Joestar

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
mockingbird wrote on 2022-04-07, 16:01:

Are you interested in borrowing my copy for testing purposes? After you're done, you must erase it from your hard drive.

No, it's too much of a hassle with bypassing copy protection via Daemon Tools, plus installing an unofficial DX9 version and/or that craptastic Unofficial Service Pack for Win98.

Furthermore, a quick Google search indicates that Flatout 2 came out in 2006, which is well after the mainstream Win9x support period had expired. Unless I'm missing something, it seems like that game should be played on a WinXP machine.

If you want to compare stability, how about you run Splinter Cell at the highest possible settings on your system? Even the initial training level will stress the hell out of any GPU which supports Shadow Buffer effects (GeForce3, GeForce4 and GeForceFX) if the game is configured as per Phil's instructions. Either the retail or the GOG version of the game can be used for testing purposes, both work fine.

PC#1: Pentium MMX 166 / Soyo SY-5BT / S3 Trio64V+ / Voodoo1 / OPTi 82C930 / AWE64 Gold / SC-155
PC#2: AthlonXP 1700+ / Abit KT7A / Voodoo3 / SBLive / Vortex2
PC#3: Athlon64 3000+ / Asus K8V-MX / GeForce4 / Audigy1
PC#4: i5-3550P / MSI Z77A-G43 / GTX 650Ti / X-Fi

Reply 206 of 264, by mockingbird

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2022-04-07, 16:28:

...plus installing an unofficial DX9 version and/or that craptastic Unofficial Service Pack for Win98.

That's perfectly understandable... Just a correction about the 'unofficial' DX9 installer for 98... The only thing 'unofficial' about it is that it includes the later files up to August 2007, which were the last released files for DX9 on 98... Another way of accomplishing the same thing is using the official installer, and then manually adding the later DX9 files yourself to bring it fully up-to-date.

Also, the Unofficial Service Pack is unnecessary... Daemon Tools however does require a small official update, and that is the Windows Installer 2.0 update, which it will whine about when trying to install it without that update present.

Furthermore, a quick Google search indicates that Flatout 2 came out in 2006
...
If you want to compare stability, how about you run Splinter Cell at the highest possible settings on your system?

I think Splinter Cell would run perfectly fine... It is Flatout2 which is exposing a weakness in this board, and as @dj_pirtu just stated, he had this issue in WinXP.

I have Azza, Biostar and iWill KT133A boards in addition to my KT7A which I intend to test with in the future to see if this is unique to the KT7A.

jw0vu3.png
(Decommissioned:)
7ivtic.png

Reply 207 of 264, by Kaisersoze

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Another report of bad times...

Now that the pc seems to be ok i've encountered another matter.
Win98/Xp gets installed without issues, so i would try a clean msdos 6.22 install, in order to create a Msdos 6.22/win98 system, after an hd formatting and partitioning using the win98 cd boot menu ( tried a 60gb partition - 20% - on a 320gb sata hdd connected through Marvell 88SA8052 SATA-PATA ). And here i am with problems again: the first of the 3 dos 6.22 installation disks ( which should be the bootable one ) does not do the job, in fact, when i insert it at the boot, after the summary screen following the post, the pc tells me to remove the disk and than to reboot. Tried several version of msdos 6.22 found around with the same behaviour.

Then, before i started to wonder about a floppy drive issue, i tried too a bootable floppy created within win98: it works, so the floppy drive is not the issue. However, unfortunately i HAVE to use mandatorily the dos 6.22 first disk as bootable one if i want to install msdos.

Now, getting to the point, what's the matter with the dos 6.22's disks? A command.com and io-msdos.sys/hardware incompatibility?

Reply 208 of 264, by mockingbird

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Kaisersoze wrote on 2022-04-07, 20:38:

Another report of bad times...<snip>

Windows 98 FAT32 partition type is "FAT32 LBA". Each partition type has a different equivalent hex value. Connect your drive to a later Windows PC and run AOMEI partition manager, then edit the partition properties and it will show you what it's set at. Maybe Dos 6.22 is getting confused.

Either way, I must humbly tell you that this is not a good idea... I have a DOS system, it's a 486 with a CF Card with FAT16, and that's strictly for compatibility. Perhaps consider building something older for pure dos. "All-in-one" systems never work, no matter how much planning goes into it.

jw0vu3.png
(Decommissioned:)
7ivtic.png

Reply 209 of 264, by Joseph_Joestar

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
mockingbird wrote on 2022-04-07, 21:13:

Either way, I must humbly tell you that this is not a good idea... I have a DOS system, it's a 486 with a CF Card with FAT16, and that's strictly for compatibility. Perhaps consider building something older for pure dos. "All-in-one" systems never work, no matter how much planning goes into it.

I fully agree that having a dedicated DOS machine is the best approach for achieving maximum compatibility, and can save you a lot of headaches.

That said, an AthlonXP with an unlocked multiplier (like my Thoroughbred B) paired with SetMul (for disabling L1 cache) and Throttle can easily go down to 386, 486 and early Pentium speeds. I still occasionally use the DOS mode of Win98SE on that system and it works reasonably well.

Of course, there could always be a game which refuses to run on a slowed down non-period correct system due to some obscure reason. Personally, I've encountered issues with using a joystick while Throttle was active, so there's that. Furthermore, I have rarely used my AthlonXP for DOS gaming ever since I built myself a Pentium MMX rig, so take my experiences with a grain of salt.

PC#1: Pentium MMX 166 / Soyo SY-5BT / S3 Trio64V+ / Voodoo1 / OPTi 82C930 / AWE64 Gold / SC-155
PC#2: AthlonXP 1700+ / Abit KT7A / Voodoo3 / SBLive / Vortex2
PC#3: Athlon64 3000+ / Asus K8V-MX / GeForce4 / Audigy1
PC#4: i5-3550P / MSI Z77A-G43 / GTX 650Ti / X-Fi

Reply 210 of 264, by mockingbird

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2022-04-07, 21:56:

That said, an AthlonXP with an unlocked multiplier (like my Thoroughbred B) paired with SetMul (for disabling L1 cache) and Throttle can easily go down to 386, 486 and early Pentium speeds. I still occasionally use the DOS mode of Win98SE on that system and it works reasonably well.

Wait a moment, you're saying SETMUL will also work on non-Mobile Athlons (after the appropriate PCI register change with PCISET)? I'll have to test that.

jw0vu3.png
(Decommissioned:)
7ivtic.png

Reply 211 of 264, by Joseph_Joestar

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
mockingbird wrote on 2022-04-07, 22:18:

Wait a moment, you're saying SETMUL will also work on non-Mobile Athlons (after the appropriate PCI register change with PCISET)? I'll have to test that.

Just for disabling the L1 cache, not for changing the multiplier from the command line.

I use the SoftMenu section of the BIOS for changing the multiplier on my system.

PC#1: Pentium MMX 166 / Soyo SY-5BT / S3 Trio64V+ / Voodoo1 / OPTi 82C930 / AWE64 Gold / SC-155
PC#2: AthlonXP 1700+ / Abit KT7A / Voodoo3 / SBLive / Vortex2
PC#3: Athlon64 3000+ / Asus K8V-MX / GeForce4 / Audigy1
PC#4: i5-3550P / MSI Z77A-G43 / GTX 650Ti / X-Fi

Reply 212 of 264, by cde

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Kaisersoze wrote on 2022-04-07, 20:38:
Another report of bad times... […]
Show full quote

Another report of bad times...

Now that the pc seems to be ok i've encountered another matter.
Win98/Xp gets installed without issues, so i would try a clean msdos 6.22 install, in order to create a Msdos 6.22/win98 system, after an hd formatting and partitioning using the win98 cd boot menu ( tried a 60gb partition - 20% - on a 320gb sata hdd connected through Marvell 88SA8052 SATA-PATA ). And here i am with problems again: the first of the 3 dos 6.22 installation disks ( which should be the bootable one ) does not do the job, in fact, when i insert it at the boot, after the summary screen following the post, the pc tells me to remove the disk and than to reboot. Tried several version of msdos 6.22 found around with the same behaviour.

Then, before i started to wonder about a floppy drive issue, i tried too a bootable floppy created within win98: it works, so the floppy drive is not the issue. However, unfortunately i HAVE to use mandatorily the dos 6.22 first disk as bootable one if i want to install msdos.

Now, getting to the point, what's the matter with the dos 6.22's disks? A command.com and io-msdos.sys/hardware incompatibility?

I would recommend you start with a blank partition table, and let DOS's fdisk create the first partition. Then you will be able to install as planned. To protect this partition from lfn, you can use the trick described in the first post.

Reply 213 of 264, by dj_pirtu

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Took the KT7A out of the case to do some troubleshooting with multimeter and different AGP-cards but now I'm having severe problems to even boot the whole thing...
CMOS reset -> boots -> FSB to 133 -> save & boot -> back to bios, change NOTHING, save, boot -> no picture. Power cycle, reset, nothing helps, just dead, no beeps.

I think I just sell the damn thing away from my sight and move to Intel 440BX goodness for awhile to save my nerves. 😁

Reply 214 of 264, by cde

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
dj_pirtu wrote on 2022-04-08, 06:53:

Took the KT7A out of the case to do some troubleshooting with multimeter and different AGP-cards but now I'm having severe problems to even boot the whole thing...
CMOS reset -> boots -> FSB to 133 -> save & boot -> back to bios, change NOTHING, save, boot -> no picture. Power cycle, reset, nothing helps, just dead, no beeps.

I think I just sell the damn thing away from my sight and move to Intel 440BX goodness for awhile to save my nerves. 😁

Be extremely careful when testing the voltage. Shorting Vcc and ground even for a short time is enough to fry important components.

Reply 215 of 264, by shamino

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Check any voltages you can and see if they're fluctuating under load.
Check if the 3.3V supply to the AGP slot is powered directly from the ATX connector. If so, the PSU could be an important factor.

I'm kind of curious about this myself now, but my board is buried somewhere.

I also wonder if the Vcore circuit on these boards is a weakness when using the more power hungry CPUs. Maybe MOSFETs have weakened over the years and need replacement?

Reply 216 of 264, by Kaisersoze

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
mockingbird wrote on 2022-04-07, 21:13:
Kaisersoze wrote on 2022-04-07, 20:38:

Another report of bad times...<snip>

Windows 98 FAT32 partition type is "FAT32 LBA". Each partition type has a different equivalent hex value. Connect your drive to a later Windows PC and run AOMEI partition manager, then edit the partition properties and it will show you what it's set at. Maybe Dos 6.22 is getting confused.

Either way, I must humbly tell you that this is not a good idea... I have a DOS system, it's a 486 with a CF Card with FAT16, and that's strictly for compatibility. Perhaps consider building something older for pure dos. "All-in-one" systems never work, no matter how much planning goes into it.

Never mind. It was a minor issue, since i have recompiled autoexec.bat and config.sys from dos 7.1 on my own in order to get sound card, mouse and cdrom to work well in dos. The only annoyance is that i have to start from win98 and then exit to msdos ( i won't mess with mbr ), but as i stated before, it is a trifle. And probably this way is even the best since i save me the hd partition limit with fat 16 ( also, i've a 486dx2 machine that i'm going to set up when i finish with my athlon xp build, to use just in case i am in need of ).

Reply 217 of 264, by dj_pirtu

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Look what I've got today! Two v1.2 KT7A-RAIDs.

Going to test these on weekend... with Geforces. 😉

Edit: first one on testbench, geforce 6800gt gives blue screen for nv4_disp.dll like my previous KT7A when playing FlaOut2. And PS/2 keyboard port is dead. Lights blink on keyboard when turning on but that's it. Mouse-port works. Fuses are OK.

Edit2: second tested, same thing with geforce, bsod with nv4_disp. It's going to look like a software problem if all my four KT7A (KT7A v1.1 & v1.3 and KT7A-RAID v1.2 & v1.2) mobos dont like geforces...

Edit3: this fully working mobo takes FSB like crazy 😮 with default voltage 152MHz. Runs 3dmarks fluently (with Radeon X800Pro). My previous boards took maybe 145MHz and that's it.

Attachments

Last edited by dj_pirtu on 2022-04-13, 16:07. Edited 6 times in total.