smeezekitty wrote:

Robin4 wrote:

oerk wrote:

Stability? I wouldn't run games on 98SE if they can run on XP as well. 98SE is for the games that won't run on NT based OSes.

My pick would be the Athlon and GF4Ti, paired with 512MB RAM. Preferably with an ISA slot if you want to run DOS as well (like a KT7 or KT7A 😊 )

I know that some games just have problems running on windows xp.. And would only run on windows 98 se..and win2000

And really nothing would help to fix that problem.

I have definitely seen those games that only run on 9x. That is where dual boot comes in handy

I know, thats why iam going to make a dual boot system for that purpose.

Nowadays the big problem is adware. Antivirus can't block them because you have to, in some way, agree to their terms (and avira even comes with a toolbar adware), so they are technically legitimate software.

Thanks for your very helpful postings.

Well, I guess the Athlon 1200 would be my first choice after all, because Socket 462 mainboards are much easier to find for a good price and you still get many cooler for this socket. However, I don't know whether it might be too fast for some older Direct3D or DirectDraw games on Windows 98 SE, because I reckon that some games could run "too fast" or a bit buggy with a quite modern Athlon 1200. What do you think?

Furthermore, do Socket 462 mainboards have an ISA Slot? There is still the AWE 64 Gold for 25$ (27,90 €) with one year guarantee on eBay and some auctions which are only on 3$ currently. Playing DOS games on this machine "natively" (Don't know whether it's the right word) would be really cool, on the other hand most of them work fine with DosBox.

Mr.Blade wrote:

Thanks for your very helpful postings.

Well, I guess the Athlon 1200 would be my first choice after all, because Socket 462 mainboards are much easier to find for a good price and you still get many cooler for this socket. However, I don't know whether it might be too fast for some older Direct3D or DirectDraw games on Windows 98 SE, because I reckon that some games could run "too fast" or a bit buggy with a quite modern Athlon 1200. What do you think?

Furthermore, do Socket 462 mainboards have an ISA Slot? There is still the AWE 64 Gold for 25$ (27,90 €) with one year guarantee on eBay and some auctions which are only on 3$ currently. Playing DOS games on this machine "natively" (Don't know whether it's the right word) would be really cool, on the other hand most of them work fine with DosBox.

Some socket A/462 boards have ISA , not as common but they do exist, whether you want to run an AWE64 on that machine depends on what games you want to run . for extensive DOS use I would say ISA is almost a must, but if you're going to focus on Windows it might actually be better to simply get a PCI Sound Blaster like a Live or Audigy. The basic Sound Blaster emulation they do is good enough for some of the later DOS games where the main function of the sound card was just to stream music off the CD (ie no FM or Midi done on the card)

as for processor speeds, When it comes to Windows games, most will have no issues with faster CPUs, The only exception I can think off the top of my head is Grim Fandango , which will run on a fast CPU (faster than 800Mhz) and play fine, but for whatever reason the menus lag quite alot. The other is C&C95 and Red Alert 95 , where on a fast CPU the scrolling will be very fast.

Its mainly DOS games that have speed issues with fast CPUs

I second the socket 462 choice. I just sold a Gigabyte board with ISA and an Athlon 1200. They are out there. I found it in a cragslist seller's stash for $10 with case and PSU. Just gotta search around. When buying, I also find that not getting your heart set on a specific board or processor helps. Pick a range and see what you can find. You might find something that turns out more interesting than what you set out to get and that's always fun.

As for 98SE vs XP, I'm dual booting both and find that I don't use XP much. A properly set up Win9x is just as stable as XP in my experience. I'm also a defender of ME, if you can believe it. 9x just tends to be more finicky and needs more attention paid to getting it running properly sometimes. To some, that may be a headache, but personally I enjoy the tweaking and little hiccups. That's part of what I find fulfilling about all this vintage computing. Getting things running 'just right' makes me happy.

Darkman wrote:

The other is C&C95 and Red Alert 95 , where on a fast CPU the scrolling will be very fast.

This is fixed in the C&C:X release (they'll even run on modern Core ** processors on 7x64 from that with a bit of tweaking (have to run as admin and Command & Patch is suggested)). I honestly forget if the RA1 + Aftermath setup had problems on my faster P3, but I don't recall it as an issue.

obobskivich wrote:

This isn't an attempt at a "flame war" or anything. 😀

I don't think you're missing anything, you just have a different opinion of how to do things than other people. And that isn't right, or wrong, compared to other people's opinions. Personally I'd rather get more performance out of my dollar, but some people really care about era accuracy, some people just want a specific piece of hardware, some people are trying to re-create a machine they used to own, etc.

My comments weren't meant to incite any hard arguments. I was thinking more like, "I see others on this board doing things differently and I don't understand why. Perhaps they've got a better way of doing things than I do, so I want to understand this so I can potentially improve my own legacy systems."

There are so many wildly different motives for building a legacy system that there is no "one size fits all" approach. I just try to understand them so I can make my own educated and informed decisions and choices. Awhile back, there was a huge thread about running WinME instead of Win98SE. It was long, detailed, and highly informative. I still prefer Win98SE, but I now understand the logic and reasoning behind running WinME instead.

obobskivich wrote:

I think targeting 1996-2002 is too broad for many of those "re-creation" goals though, because you're encompassing MMX to P4, Voodoo 1 to GeForce 4, etc. If you have games that are right on the end in 2002 (like Morrowind or Halo), you'd appreciate the faster machine. But if your games, instead, sit mostly on the earlier side in 1996 (like Lego Island or Command & Conquer), a P2 would easily be "the faster machine" there.

In general, I agree. I maintain what I like to think of as two "generations" of legacy systems: one for DOS and Voodoo 1 gaming, the other for Windows and GeForce/Voodoo 2+ gaming. By doing this, I can cover pretty much everything from 1994 through 2004. I agree that trying to cover 1996 through 2002 on a single system will be difficult. There will invariably be some DOS and Voodoo 1 titles that won't run. However, the DOS problems can be overcome with DOSBox and most of the more finicky V1 titles have workarounds now too.

Mr.Blade wrote:

Well, I guess the Athlon 1200 would be my first choice after all, because Socket 462 mainboards are much easier to find for a good price and you still get many cooler for this socket.

They run really hot, but you can certainly still find good coolers for the socket 462 boards. My biggest concern with maintaining my Athlon systems is the PSU. You really need to choose carefully. As time goes on, there are fewer and fewer options available.

I was hoping to buy a spare Rosewill RV350 on Black Friday. Last year, Newegg had 'em for $10 and free shipping. As of yesterday, now they're out of stock. 😒 There's still a guy with one on eBay, but he wants $35 for it. 😠

The Enermax 365 is also a good choice for an Athlon and there are several available on eBay for ~$30. However, I think I would be concerned about aging caps inside of them.

Mr.Blade wrote:

However, I don't know whether it might be too fast for some older Direct3D or DirectDraw games on Windows 98 SE, because I reckon that some games could run "too fast" or a bit buggy with a quite modern Athlon 1200. What do you think?

It's mostly DOS games that have that problem. Windows games are usually OK with faster CPUs. If you have problems with a game I suppose you could try underclocking, or just run it in DOSBox.

I still play the original Diablo on my Phenom II system. It runs great!

Mr.Blade wrote:

Furthermore, do Socket 462 mainboards have an ISA Slot? There is still the AWE 64 Gold for 25$ (27,90 €) with one year guarantee on eBay and some auctions which are only on 3$ currently. Playing DOS games on this machine "natively" (Don't know whether it's the right word) would be really cool, on the other hand most of them work fine with DosBox.

Some do, some do not. There are alot of choices out there, so research your boards before buying. For me, the ISA slot is the only remaining reason why I run my KT7A Athlon systems. Well, that and also because I already have them completed. There's not much point in getting rid of them since they work just fine. But still, if I could do things over again I would have chosen Coppermine or Tualatin systems instead.

By the way, another nice advantage of the AWE64 ISA card is that Win98SE has built-in drivers for it. Just pop it in and go! There is an official update for it, but it's completely unnecessary and I don't install it on my boxes. Unlike the SB Live! cards, there's no awful mess of drivers and support programs running in the background and consuming resources.

KT7AGuy wrote:

My comments weren't meant to incite any hard arguments. I was thinking more like, "I see others on this board doing things differently and I don't understand why. Perhaps they've got a better way of doing things than I do, so I want to understand this so I can potentially improve my own legacy systems."

There are so many wildly different motives for building a legacy system that there is no "one size fits all" approach. I just try to understand them so I can make my own educated and informed decisions and choices. Awhile back, there was a huge thread about running WinME instead of Win98SE. It was long, detailed, and highly informative. I still prefer Win98SE, but I now understand the logic and reasoning behind running WinME instead.

And here I had like a page+ of responses to your questions, but I felt it was too much and condensed. 😊

The short version, as someone who been consistently using XP since 2001, is that I haven't come across anything that I can't get working in XP with a very few exceptions, and that I'd rather go with Pentium 4 or similar aged hardware as the pricing tends to be the same (or less than) what folks are spending nowadays for Pentium 3 era machines. I've not come across any situation where the extra performance is a problem for early 2000s titles (and I do recall a recent thread about "understated CPU requirements" for games from that era), and you could even run 98 on such a machine in concept.

obobskivich wrote:

The short version, as someone who been consistently using XP since 2001, is that I haven't come across anything that I can't get working in XP with a very few exceptions, and that I'd rather go with Pentium 4 or similar aged hardware as the pricing tends to be the same (or less than) what folks are spending nowadays for Pentium 3 era machines. I've not come across any situation where the extra performance is a problem for early 2000s titles (and I do recall a recent thread about "understated CPU requirements" for games from that era), and you could even run 98 on such a machine in concept.

I think this is what I was trying to say as well. I think XP is fine, but more appropriate on a fast P4, Athlon 64, or newer. It'll run better and you'll have a better experience. I have an Athlon 64 3400 Venice with a 7900GS that I run XP on. I think it's a really nice system for most Windows gaming up until about 2009. There are even a few modern titles, like Surgeon Simulator, that run well on it. For pre-2002 stuff, I have my Win98SE systems.

Thanks. 😊

Cooling the Athlon shouldn't be a big deal, I intend to build the components in(to) a normal ATX Midi Tower with some (quiet) fans.

http://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/Sh … rot_829224.html

Can I buy every PSU or do I need a special one? I'd go with this be quiet! System Power with 300W - I guess it's sufficient.

http://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/30 … nze_822189.html

if Im reading this right, the +5v rating is at 15A, which is very low for an old system in general , let alone a higher end Athlon.

look for a PSU with a +5v of around 30 at least

I personally use this one

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?It … N82E16817103408

this one is an older PSU (not super old , but pretty old) , but the rating should give you an idea of what to look for , other people here could point you to a better PSU model.

The older Antec SmartPower units tended to have pretty robust 5V rails, as well as robust 12V supplies (I have a 500W that delivers something like 32A on the 5V, and around 40A on its two 12V rails). Fortron made some outstanding units, including a 530W model that provides nearly 50A on the 5V and an ATX Aux power connector.

On cooling an Athlon or AthlonXP - just going with a mid tower isn't a magic bullet; you should look for a quality heatsink from Swiftech, Thermalright, Zalman, etc, especially if you intend to overclock. These processors have TDP similar to modern chips (60-90W), so that should be considered. Especially if you want a quiet machine (many coolers and whatnot from back in the day tended to rely on fast moving, small fans which were not the quietest thing ever).

obobskivich wrote:

The older Antec SmartPower units tended to have pretty robust 5V rails, as well as robust 12V supplies (I have a 500W that delivers something like 32A on the 5V, and around 40A on its two 12V rails). Fortron made some outstanding units, including a 530W model that provides nearly 50A on the 5V and an ATX Aux power connector.

On cooling an Athlon or AthlonXP - just going with a mid tower isn't a magic bullet; you should look for a quality heatsink from Swiftech, Thermalright, Zalman, etc, especially if you intend to overclock. These processors have TDP similar to modern chips (60-90W), so that should be considered. Especially if you want a quiet machine (many coolers and whatnot from back in the day tended to rely on fast moving, small fans which were not the quietest thing ever).

I mostly use Chieftec PSUs from ~2000 - ~2005
They often have ~30 amps on the 3.3V and 5V rails.
I have never had one go bad so I rescue every old Chieftec PSU I see.

Mr.Blade wrote:

Can I buy every PSU or do I need a special one? I'd go with this be quiet! System Power with 300W - I guess it's sufficient.
http://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/30 … nze_822189.html

Nope, the +5v rail is too weak. This is what I was talking about previously when I said that PSU options for Athlon systems are becoming extremely limited.

You should have a look at this thread that discusses this same issue:
ATX Power Supply for 5v oriented motherboards

If you can find a PSU, then the Athlon is still a great choice. However, I worry about future availability of replacement PSUs.

computergeek92 wrote:

Safety is paramount.

While it's true for a primary machine, secondary rigs hardly ever contain any valueable information. Once I catch a virus that starts to spoil my experience, I back up savegames and reinstall windows. It almost never happens if you know what to aviod. Not having sex with strangers helps agains STDs better than the best condom on the Earth. Not having sex at all (being constantly offline) helps even better.

Not having sex with strangers helps agains STDs better than the best condom on the Earth. Not having sex at all (being constantly offline) helps even better.

😲 This got really weird fast!

Okay, thanks. I wonder why these old Athlons need such a high amperage on the +5V rail? Isn't these days the +12V rail the most important?

Anyway, it's pretty hard to find an appropriate PSU, even on eBay. I found this pretty cheap PSU from Xilence, which has at least 25A on +5V. Would this be sufficient?

http://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/40 … 80-_633141.html

And another very cheap one with 30A:

http://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/50 … 80-_426591.html

But the most interesting could be this one, it has only 350W but obviously 30A:

http://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/35 … lar_135617.html

The remaining PSUs with 30A have at least more than 500W which's a bit overpowered. 😒

By the way, these new PSUs have all for an old system required ports, plugs, connectors etc.?

I wouldn't buy a PSU with "very cheap" as a primary descriptor. As far as why they rely on 5V, it's just how boards/systems were designed years ago - the P4 brought about the shift to 12V power as the primary supply.

Mr.Blade wrote:

The remaining PSUs with 30A have at least more than 500W which's a bit overpowered. 😒
By the way, these new PSUs have all for an old system required ports, plugs, connectors etc.?

The "500 Watt Inter-Tech SL500 Non-Modular 80+" has specs that look OK, but the price indicates that it is probably using some very crappy components. However, I know nothing about that brand and I don't speak German, so I'm unable to research it.

Using an overpowered PSU is fine. When I built my last KT7A system, I used a Rosewill RP600V2-S-SL. That PSU is way more powerful than my system needs, but now I don't have to worry about these sorts of issues anymore! 😎

Amazon still has a few of those available here.