VOGONS


Reply 20 of 34, by baguete

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Installed a Core 2 Duo E8600 and overclocked it to 4.80GHz on a ASUS P5Q3 motherboard, seems to be hitting the limits of this system, here are the results:

3DMark 99 Max: https://youtu.be/9IU-usKmRV4
3DMark 2001 SE: https://youtu.be/nWHYWmEyQzY

I think I will call this a day and move to other projects, maybe return to the old setup with Xeon X5260 @ 4.00GHz + 6800GT and install everything on a nice case and enjoy some retro gaming on it.

I would like to see other people doing similar stuff and maybe on newer platforms and see if everything works properly (USB 2.0, SATA drives, PCIe 2.0/3.0, etc...).

Cheers 👌

Reply 22 of 34, by cyclone3d

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Did you have the video card running at stock clocks or was it overclocked as well?

This makes me want to set up my XEON 1680v2 (8 core - 16 thread LGA2011) stuff with a 7900GTX and see what kind of scores I can get. I can easily clock the CPU up to 4.6Ghz on all cores on air. Wonder what it would do with only a single core enabled.

Yamaha YMF modified setupds and drivers
Yamaha XG resource repository - updated November 27, 2018
Yamaha YMF7x4 Guide
AW744L II - YMF744 - AOpen Cobra Sound Card - Install SB-Link Header

Reply 23 of 34, by baguete

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
psybyrd wrote on 2021-06-19, 16:51:

Speed kills.

Only if you stop suddenly 😀

cyclone3d wrote on 2021-06-19, 17:17:

Did you have the video card running at stock clocks or was it overclocked as well?

This makes me want to set up my XEON 1680v2 (8 core - 16 thread LGA2011) stuff with a 7900GTX and see what kind of scores I can get. I can easily clock the CPU up to 4.6Ghz on all cores on air. Wonder what it would do with only a single core enabled.

The GPU was at stock clocks.

The 7900GTX has a higher core clock at stock (+200MHz iirc), should be interesting to see it paired with a better CPU.

Reply 24 of 34, by baguete

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Squeezed a bit more... 🤣

E8600 @ 4,86GHz and 7900GT @ 532/784MHz

Attachments

Reply 27 of 34, by baguete

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Interesting findings in 3D Mark 99 Max:

- E8600 @ 4.00GHz and 7900GT @ stock clocks scores 53540 3DMarks and 105220 CPU 3DMarks.

- E8600 @ 4.86GHz and 7900GT @ 532/784MHz scores 62869 3DMarks and 125672 CPU 3DMarks.

It's around 19% more points, that equals the 19% overclock on the CPU.

- E8600 @ 4.00GHz and 7600GT @ stock clocks scores 52268 3DMarks and 105613 CPU 3DMarks.

The 7900GT and the 7600GT have similar scores with the same CPU at the same clocks, looks like the 7600GT is a good match for the E8600 @ 4.00GHz and maybe the 7600GT is bottlenecking a little bit, nothing that you will notice in games or general usage of the system.

The 7900GT is around 70% better than the 7600GT, even with the CPU overclock the 7900GT still has headroom for a better CPU, like one with around 1000 points in CPU-Z 1.76.0, maybe a 2nd/3rd/4th Gen i5 or i7 with only one active Core and 5GHz+ overclock, but then the chipset support can be lacking for other stuff like USB and SATA. Using a 7900GTX won't improve the results, the bottleneck will always be the CPU as only one Core will be used in Windows 98.

What are your thoughts? For me I will install the E8600 in the ASUS P5G41T-M LX motherboard, clock the CPU @ 4.00GHz, get the 7600GT and the rest of the parts inside a nice case, call it a day and enjoy 😁

Reply 28 of 34, by baguete

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Squeezed a little more but this time with a 7900GTX that I got for very cheap on eBay, can´t get anymore from this LGA 775 platform. Please break my record 😀

I also made a more "modest" setup with an ASUS P5G41T-M LX V2 motherboard, Core 2 Duo E8600 @4.0GHz, 4GB DDR3 @1227MHz, GeForce7900GT, CMI8738 sound card and RGB case:

https://www.instagram.com/p/CTVscI5iKQZ/

Attachments

Reply 29 of 34, by melbar

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
baguete wrote on 2021-06-21, 16:09:

E8600 @ 4,86GHz

This is an amazing clock.

A reduced multiplier to 9.5x and a FSB of 512 Mhz would result because of the FSB strap:

10x / 9.5x = 1.0526...
1.0526 * 512Mhz = 539Mhz --> Northbridge clock.

Do have measured the CPU temps and the NB temps especially?

Reply 30 of 34, by HangarAte2nds!

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Interesting. I built a P4 650 HT with a 7800GT for XP gaming. It never occurred to me that it might run 98. But calling it a "Windows 98 Gaming PC" is a bit spurious since it is total overkill for 98 and isn't really a machine that is likely to have originally had 98 running on it. I have 2 other machines in the works which are far better suited for 98 and would definitely have been running 98 at some point.
I guess even the C2D seems weird for XP even though technically there was a 1 year overlap between the Core 2 launch and the Vista launch. But the E8600 was released in '08 and would have shipped during the Vista era. I have numerous C2D and C2Q CPUs and I could have used any of those and called it an XP machine. But it wouldn't really be true. I can go and install XP on my Ryzen but that doesn't make it an "XP Gaming Machine".

Reply 31 of 34, by Doornkaat

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
HangarAte2nds! wrote on 2021-09-19, 02:50:

Interesting. I built a P4 650 HT with a 7800GT for XP gaming. It never occurred to me that it might run 98. But calling it a "Windows 98 Gaming PC" is a bit spurious since it is total overkill for 98 and isn't really a machine that is likely to have originally had 98 running on it. I have 2 other machines in the works which are far better suited for 98 and would definitely have been running 98 at some point.
I guess even the C2D seems weird for XP even though technically there was a 1 year overlap between the Core 2 launch and the Vista launch. But the E8600 was released in '08 and would have shipped during the Vista era. I have numerous C2D and C2Q CPUs and I could have used any of those and called it an XP machine. But it wouldn't really be true. I can go and install XP on my Ryzen but that doesn't make it an "XP Gaming Machine".

Different opinion:
If you are primarily running Win98 on any computer to play games that released during the Win9x era you have a Win98 gaming PC, regardless of the hardware you're using. It may not be a PC from the heyday of Win98 but it's a Win98 PC nonetheless.
Likewise a server is any computer that does server tasks. Even if it is an old netbook that does not have any typical features of server hardware.

Also the Core2 line are most definitely WinXP era CPUs. Not only because XP was MS's latest OS for home users when the Core2 line was first introduced but also because WinXP had mainstream support until April 2009 and extended support until April 2014. Vista wasn't popular and many people didn't upgrade their OS until Win7. Some were even using registry hacks to receive updates meant for the embedded version to extend XP's life for another few years because the OS was still that popular.
Hardware support reaches well beyond the Vista launch too. Almost every S775 board has full official WinXP driver support.

Just because a newer OS releases doesn't mean the era of the previous OS abruptly ends. There is a lot of overlap between OS eras.

And I just realised you joined the forum today so welcome! 😃

Reply 32 of 34, by HangarAte2nds!

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
Doornkaat wrote on 2021-09-19, 06:25:
Different opinion: If you are primarily running Win98 on any computer to play games that released during the Win9x era you have […]
Show full quote
HangarAte2nds! wrote on 2021-09-19, 02:50:

Interesting. I built a P4 650 HT with a 7800GT for XP gaming. It never occurred to me that it might run 98. But calling it a "Windows 98 Gaming PC" is a bit spurious since it is total overkill for 98 and isn't really a machine that is likely to have originally had 98 running on it. I have 2 other machines in the works which are far better suited for 98 and would definitely have been running 98 at some point.
I guess even the C2D seems weird for XP even though technically there was a 1 year overlap between the Core 2 launch and the Vista launch. But the E8600 was released in '08 and would have shipped during the Vista era. I have numerous C2D and C2Q CPUs and I could have used any of those and called it an XP machine. But it wouldn't really be true. I can go and install XP on my Ryzen but that doesn't make it an "XP Gaming Machine".

Different opinion:
If you are primarily running Win98 on any computer to play games that released during the Win9x era you have a Win98 gaming PC, regardless of the hardware you're using. It may not be a PC from the heyday of Win98 but it's a Win98 PC nonetheless.
Likewise a server is any computer that does server tasks. Even if it is an old netbook that does not have any typical features of server hardware.

Also the Core2 line are most definitely WinXP era CPUs. Not only because XP was MS's latest OS for home users when the Core2 line was first introduced but also because WinXP had mainstream support until April 2009 and extended support until April 2014. Vista wasn't popular and many people didn't upgrade their OS until Win7. Some were even using registry hacks to receive updates meant for the embedded version to extend XP's life for another few years because the OS was still that popular.
Hardware support reaches well beyond the Vista launch too. Almost every S775 board has full official WinXP driver support.

Just because a newer OS releases doesn't mean the era of the previous OS abruptly ends. There is a lot of overlap between OS eras.

And I just realised you joined the forum today so welcome! 😃

Thanks for the welcome. While I see your point, I will refer you to the fact support for Windows 98 ended on July 11, 2006. Therefore, your hardware postdates the end of support by about 4 years. No sale in my book. I can install Windows 98 on my Ryzen 2600 with RTX 3070, in which case I have the "ultimate" Windows 98 Gaming PC! You cannot realistically utilize the full performance of your build in Windows 98SE (you are running on one core only and even then it is way overkill).
The C2D launch predates the launch of Vista by only 6 months. Your E8600 launched in Q3 2008. I had an 8000 series C2D from 2009, running Vista. The C2D was not discontinued until June 8, 2012. Windows 7 was released on October 22, 2009. This means the C2D is really a Vista/Windows 7 era CPU. Just because XP had an abnormally long service life is no reason to call the C2D an XP machine because a very small percentage of the total of prebuilt C2D machines would have originally shipped with XP. The fact that some eccentric holdouts were installing XP on C2Ds throughout its production run doesn't really make it an "XP era cpu".
Windows CE EOL was in 2018. that doesn't exactly make my Ryzen the "Ultimate Windows CE device" even though it will probably run.

Reply 33 of 34, by baguete

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

My point of view:

A Ultimate "something" Gaming PC is a computer that has that specific OS installed and that all the hardware is fully supported, fast or not.

This PC has fully working SATA 2, USB 2.0, 7900GT, CMI8738, chipsets, etc... Some are standard drivers, others are modded, but at the end everything works as it should.

Your Ryzen wouldn't be a Ultimate Windows CE Gaming PC because you don't have drivers to make everything work properly and at full speed, but it would run it.

Phil also made a Ultimate Windows XP Gaming PC with an i7- 4790K and a GTX 960, not because the hardware was available at the time Windows XP was king but because all the hardware is fully supported and you have insane framerates with all the details maxed out.

Me and lots of other people also install Windows 10 on Pentium 4's (6x1 series), it's a bit slow but we are having fun messing with it, that's the best thing in life.

Reply 34 of 34, by baguete

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
melbar wrote on 2021-09-16, 03:39:

Do have measured the CPU temps and the NB temps especially?

The NB and SB are cool to the touch, the case has 2 fans that do a great job, the CPU must be cool enough (can't check the temps in Windows 98), but that cooler was good enough for a Quad Core Xeon X5460 at around 3.8GHz on the same board, now using only 1 core of the E8600 it should be fine.