VIA KT133A for socket A Athlons. Has AGP+ISA, supports Athlon CPUs at 100-133FSB and clock up to about 2GHz.
KT266 and above don't have ISA anymore.

Thank you for that. Is it weird I think that a Xeon P3 slotted is sexier than an Athlon?

On a serious note, do you believe the notion that a P3 would likely be more stable?

The P3 is less thermally constrained, so it's easier to work with IMO. Good Intel chipsets like the i815 and 440BX are a more stable platform than anything for the socket A, but VIA vs VIA is a wash for chipsets as is Athlon vs P3 for CPUs, as long as you provide proper cooling.

Is there a specific reason for the limit of 100 MHz FSB?

A Tualeron 1.4 GHz on a Socket 370 440BX board would probably be the top of the heap (BP6 with Tualatin socket adapter that enables dual-CPU Celeron, perhaps?) Gets you the rock-solid-stable 440BX with all the trimmings of Tualatin on a 100 MHz bus.

I had the Intel MS440GX workstation board for a long time, using an Intel-internal BIOS that allowed the 700 and 900 MHz Xeons, but the Tualatin would be faster.

Of course, in both cases, the second CPU would be wasted in Win98, but you can run both systems as single-CPU, too.

It's not a Slot 2 system, but would say my 440BX build falls in that category as far as 100 MHz FSB systems goes, clicky. Scroll down a bit, it's in the bottom of the OP. Might give you some ideas 😀

Have a look at the DOS/W98 monster too, it's about as powerful it gets if you want ISA without going through the hassle of sourcing one of a few very specific industrial mobos.

I'd go

Athlon 1400B
KT133

That would be the fastest build, it also gets you ATA100 if you get the 636B chipset, more than 2 USB ports, 1-3 ISA slots (my AZ11E has 2 ISA slots), AGP 4X so you can run from AGP 1x to AGP 8x cards, support from 512mb High Density SD-Ram

Also by Socket A, VIA had very stable and realiable chipsets, it was the earlier Socket 7 ones that where troublesome, by the time of Socket A as long as you run them in spec they are rock solid stable with great memory controllers. My KT133 out does my 440BX in bandwith, latancy, write, and read according to ADIA64

candle_86 wrote:

I'd go […]
Show full quote

I'd go

Athlon 1400B
KT133

That would be the fastest build, it also gets you ATA100 if you get the 636B chipset, more than 2 USB ports, 1-3 ISA slots (my AZ11E has 2 ISA slots), AGP 4X so you can run from AGP 1x to AGP 8x cards, support from 512mb High Density SD-Ram

Also by Socket A, VIA had very stable and realiable chipsets, it was the earlier Socket 7 ones that where troublesome, by the time of Socket A as long as you run them in spec they are rock solid stable with great memory controllers. My KT133 out does my 440BX in bandwith, latancy, write, and read according to ADIA64

Would probably work well to run the 133MHz FSB version of Athlon XP 2600+ on a KT133A board supporting it, in 100MHz FSB mode too. Its default real frequency is 2133 MHz, would still do ~1600 MHz on 100 MHz FSB. As an added bonus, it would probably be less power hungry than a 1.4GHz Thunderbird, and go easier on those old VRM:s and caps. Guessing those XP:s are slightly faster clock for clock than the original Athlons aswell, since the 1.4 GHz XP was marketed as 1600+, iirc. Another way cheaper option, if you can sacrifice a little bit of speed, is the XP 2400+. Those can be picked up for next to nothing.

Dunno about other KT133A boards, might be a standard thing, but my Chaintech 7AJA2 got a feature I find pretty fascinating. It's got a 100/133 MHz selection jumper. Depending on the jumper's position, you get two completely different sets of selectable FSB frequencies in the BIOS setup. With the jumper in the 100 MHz position, it's ranging from like 85 to 130 MHz. and in the 133 MHz position, from 100 to 150 MHz, or something like that. Not sure about the numbers, but you get the idea anyways. I know for sure that the XP:s will run on 100 MHz FSB though, took me while to find that jumper, it's completely undocumented 😁

The Asus Cuv4x looks like it would be perfect. Agp Pro 4x, supports fast processors, and has a ISA slot. Plus there are a couple fair priced ones on ebay right now.

kaputnik wrote:

candle_86 wrote:

I'd go […]
Show full quote

I'd go

Athlon 1400B
KT133

That would be the fastest build, it also gets you ATA100 if you get the 636B chipset, more than 2 USB ports, 1-3 ISA slots (my AZ11E has 2 ISA slots), AGP 4X so you can run from AGP 1x to AGP 8x cards, support from 512mb High Density SD-Ram

Also by Socket A, VIA had very stable and realiable chipsets, it was the earlier Socket 7 ones that where troublesome, by the time of Socket A as long as you run them in spec they are rock solid stable with great memory controllers. My KT133 out does my 440BX in bandwith, latancy, write, and read according to ADIA64

Would probably work well to run the 133MHz FSB version of Athlon XP 2600+ on a KT133A board supporting it, in 100MHz FSB mode too. Its default real frequency is 2133 MHz, would still do ~1600 MHz on 100 MHz FSB. As an added bonus, it would probably be less power hungry than a 1.4GHz Thunderbird, and go easier on those old VRM:s and caps. Guessing those XP:s are slightly faster clock for clock than the original Athlons aswell, since the 1.4 GHz XP was marketed as 1600+, iirc. Another way cheaper option, if you can sacrifice a little bit of speed, is the XP 2400+. Those can be picked up for next to nothing.

Dunno about other KT133A boards, might be a standard thing, but my Chaintech 7AJA2 got a feature I find pretty fascinating. It's got a 100/133 MHz selection jumper. Depending on the jumper's position, you get two completely different sets of selectable FSB frequencies in the BIOS setup. With the jumper in the 100 MHz position, it's ranging from like 85 to 130 MHz. and in the 133 MHz position, from 100 to 150 MHz, or something like that. Not sure about the numbers, but you get the idea anyways. I know for sure that the XP:s will run on 100 MHz FSB though, took me while to find that jumper, it's completely undocumented 😁

It is faster clock for clock, but if we are going to go with Athlon XP @ 100mhz might as well do Athlon XP-M Barton 3000 with a 16.5 multi and 512k L2, that will give it a 1650mhz clock speed, lots of L2, and 130nm process, and would be similar in preformance to an AThlon Thunderbird at 1800mhz

candle_86 wrote:

I'd go […]
Show full quote

I'd go

Athlon 1400B
KT133

That would be the fastest build, it also gets you ATA100 if you get the 636B chipset, more than 2 USB ports, 1-3 ISA slots (my AZ11E has 2 ISA slots), AGP 4X so you can run from AGP 1x to AGP 8x cards, support from 512mb High Density SD-Ram

Also by Socket A, VIA had very stable and realiable chipsets, it was the earlier Socket 7 ones that where troublesome, by the time of Socket A as long as you run them in spec they are rock solid stable with great memory controllers. My KT133 out does my 440BX in bandwith, latancy, write, and read according to ADIA64

I had a Tyan KT-A that I recently tossed and it was one of the most unstable boards that I have ever used.

And the caps were all fine.

mastergamma12 wrote:

candle_86 wrote:

I'd go […]
Show full quote

I'd go

Athlon 1400B
KT133

That would be the fastest build, it also gets you ATA100 if you get the 636B chipset, more than 2 USB ports, 1-3 ISA slots (my AZ11E has 2 ISA slots), AGP 4X so you can run from AGP 1x to AGP 8x cards, support from 512mb High Density SD-Ram

Also by Socket A, VIA had very stable and realiable chipsets, it was the earlier Socket 7 ones that where troublesome, by the time of Socket A as long as you run them in spec they are rock solid stable with great memory controllers. My KT133 out does my 440BX in bandwith, latancy, write, and read according to ADIA64

I had a Tyan KT-A that I recently tossed and it was one of the most unstable boards that I have ever used.

And the caps were all fine.

Very strange. I've had a few KT133 boards, and a whole lot of KT266/KT333/KT400/KT600/KM266/KM333/KM400 boards and never any real issues with any of them, except my first Socket A board back in 2002 an FIC AZ11EA, it worked great right until i got struck by lightening

candle_86 wrote:

kaputnik wrote:

candle_86 wrote:

I'd go […]
Show full quote

I'd go

Athlon 1400B
KT133

That would be the fastest build, it also gets you ATA100 if you get the 636B chipset, more than 2 USB ports, 1-3 ISA slots (my AZ11E has 2 ISA slots), AGP 4X so you can run from AGP 1x to AGP 8x cards, support from 512mb High Density SD-Ram

Also by Socket A, VIA had very stable and realiable chipsets, it was the earlier Socket 7 ones that where troublesome, by the time of Socket A as long as you run them in spec they are rock solid stable with great memory controllers. My KT133 out does my 440BX in bandwith, latancy, write, and read according to ADIA64

Would probably work well to run the 133MHz FSB version of Athlon XP 2600+ on a KT133A board supporting it, in 100MHz FSB mode too. Its default real frequency is 2133 MHz, would still do ~1600 MHz on 100 MHz FSB. As an added bonus, it would probably be less power hungry than a 1.4GHz Thunderbird, and go easier on those old VRM:s and caps. Guessing those XP:s are slightly faster clock for clock than the original Athlons aswell, since the 1.4 GHz XP was marketed as 1600+, iirc. Another way cheaper option, if you can sacrifice a little bit of speed, is the XP 2400+. Those can be picked up for next to nothing.

Dunno about other KT133A boards, might be a standard thing, but my Chaintech 7AJA2 got a feature I find pretty fascinating. It's got a 100/133 MHz selection jumper. Depending on the jumper's position, you get two completely different sets of selectable FSB frequencies in the BIOS setup. With the jumper in the 100 MHz position, it's ranging from like 85 to 130 MHz. and in the 133 MHz position, from 100 to 150 MHz, or something like that. Not sure about the numbers, but you get the idea anyways. I know for sure that the XP:s will run on 100 MHz FSB though, took me while to find that jumper, it's completely undocumented 😁

It is faster clock for clock, but if we are going to go with Athlon XP @ 100mhz might as well do Athlon XP-M Barton 3000 with a 16.5 multi and 512k L2, that will give it a 1650mhz clock speed, lots of L2, and 130nm process, and would be similar in preformance to an AThlon Thunderbird at 1800mhz

Hm, that's interesting, didn't even know there were desktop mobos that accepted XP-M:s. Never occurred to me to try, might be worth looking into 😀

candle_86 wrote:

mastergamma12 wrote:

candle_86 wrote:

I'd go […]
Show full quote

I'd go

Athlon 1400B
KT133

That would be the fastest build, it also gets you ATA100 if you get the 636B chipset, more than 2 USB ports, 1-3 ISA slots (my AZ11E has 2 ISA slots), AGP 4X so you can run from AGP 1x to AGP 8x cards, support from 512mb High Density SD-Ram

Also by Socket A, VIA had very stable and realiable chipsets, it was the earlier Socket 7 ones that where troublesome, by the time of Socket A as long as you run them in spec they are rock solid stable with great memory controllers. My KT133 out does my 440BX in bandwith, latancy, write, and read according to ADIA64

I had a Tyan KT-A that I recently tossed and it was one of the most unstable boards that I have ever used.

And the caps were all fine.

Very strange. I've had a few KT133 boards, and a whole lot of KT266/KT333/KT400/KT600/KM266/KM333/KM400 boards and never any real issues with any of them, except my first Socket A board back in 2002 an FIC AZ11EA, it worked great right until i got struck by lightening

TBH though, when I got the board, the 1st USB port was really destroyed so I never knew what the previous owner did with it.

Anonymous Freak wrote:

Is there a specific reason for the limit of 100 MHz FSB? […]
Show full quote

Is there a specific reason for the limit of 100 MHz FSB?

A Tualeron 1.4 GHz on a Socket 370 440BX board would probably be the top of the heap (BP6 with Tualatin socket adapter that enables dual-CPU Celeron, perhaps?) Gets you the rock-solid-stable 440BX with all the trimmings of Tualatin on a 100 MHz bus.

I had the Intel MS440GX workstation board for a long time, using an Intel-internal BIOS that allowed the 700 and 900 MHz Xeons, but the Tualatin would be faster.

Of course, in both cases, the second CPU would be wasted in Win98, but you can run both systems as single-CPU, too.

From what I can see, 3dfx cards do not respond well to FSBs higher than 100. Yet I found out the test bench for the V6000 was a KT266 (I think)? I've come to realize this question is better suited on a 3dfx site. Not that the knowledge isn't here, tons of knowledge. But I feel like there's probably more people here who understand exactly what I'm looking for, but I think I may be overspeaking to my own capability here when someone on a 3dfx forum would better inform me.

Basically I'm trying to build the sexiest system that would be stable for a V5500 for late DOS\SE.

Well, Abit KT7-A (KT133a chipset) with Athlon 1500MHz and V5-5500, 512MB RAM and Win98se was very stable and usable here.

RetroFyre wrote:

Anonymous Freak wrote:

Is there a specific reason for the limit of 100 MHz FSB? […]
Show full quote

Is there a specific reason for the limit of 100 MHz FSB?

A Tualeron 1.4 GHz on a Socket 370 440BX board would probably be the top of the heap (BP6 with Tualatin socket adapter that enables dual-CPU Celeron, perhaps?) Gets you the rock-solid-stable 440BX with all the trimmings of Tualatin on a 100 MHz bus.

I had the Intel MS440GX workstation board for a long time, using an Intel-internal BIOS that allowed the 700 and 900 MHz Xeons, but the Tualatin would be faster.

Of course, in both cases, the second CPU would be wasted in Win98, but you can run both systems as single-CPU, too.

From what I can see, 3dfx cards do not respond well to FSBs higher than 100. Yet I found out the test bench for the V6000 was a KT266 (I think)? I've come to realize this question is better suited on a 3dfx site. Not that the knowledge isn't here, tons of knowledge. But I feel like there's probably more people here who understand exactly what I'm looking for, but I think I may be overspeaking to my own capability here when someone on a 3dfx forum would better inform me.

Basically I'm trying to build the sexiest system that would be stable for a V5500 for late DOS\SE.

I have my Voodoo5 5500 on an 815 system with a 133mhz Tualatin so no issues here.

RetroFyre wrote:

Anonymous Freak wrote:

Is there a specific reason for the limit of 100 MHz FSB? […]
Show full quote

Is there a specific reason for the limit of 100 MHz FSB?

A Tualeron 1.4 GHz on a Socket 370 440BX board would probably be the top of the heap (BP6 with Tualatin socket adapter that enables dual-CPU Celeron, perhaps?) Gets you the rock-solid-stable 440BX with all the trimmings of Tualatin on a 100 MHz bus.

I had the Intel MS440GX workstation board for a long time, using an Intel-internal BIOS that allowed the 700 and 900 MHz Xeons, but the Tualatin would be faster.

Of course, in both cases, the second CPU would be wasted in Win98, but you can run both systems as single-CPU, too.

From what I can see, 3dfx cards do not respond well to FSBs higher than 100. Yet I found out the test bench for the V6000 was a KT266 (I think)? I've come to realize this question is better suited on a 3dfx site. Not that the knowledge isn't here, tons of knowledge. But I feel like there's probably more people here who understand exactly what I'm looking for, but I think I may be overspeaking to my own capability here when someone on a 3dfx forum would better inform me.

Basically I'm trying to build the sexiest system that would be stable for a V5500 for late DOS\SE.

Certain Voodoo 1 cards can be sensitive to anything over 100FSB. All Voodoo 2/3/4/5 all are fine at 133fsb.

Are there particular games you want to play? If you are only going for glide games I'd say get a Voodoo 3 16mb and a 733~1GHz Pentium 3 or AMD equivalent.

If playing DirectX games its good to know which ones as some cards are better than others. Voodoos are limited to DX6/7 IIRC.

I haven't messed with my rig alot lately but its a 1.4GHz Pentium 3 with a AGP ATI 9800XT (had a Geforce 4600) and a PCI Vodoo 3 16mb installed with a SB Live!. I use the Bios to control with card I want to use. I would use Voodoo2 SLI but limited to 1024x768 but I need 1280x1024 for my 19" LCD monitor.

RogueTrip2012 wrote:

Certain Voodoo 1 cards can be sensitive to anything over 100FSB. All Voodoo 2/3/4/5 all are fine at 133fsb. […]
Show full quote

RetroFyre wrote:

Anonymous Freak wrote:

Is there a specific reason for the limit of 100 MHz FSB? […]
Show full quote

Is there a specific reason for the limit of 100 MHz FSB?

A Tualeron 1.4 GHz on a Socket 370 440BX board would probably be the top of the heap (BP6 with Tualatin socket adapter that enables dual-CPU Celeron, perhaps?) Gets you the rock-solid-stable 440BX with all the trimmings of Tualatin on a 100 MHz bus.

I had the Intel MS440GX workstation board for a long time, using an Intel-internal BIOS that allowed the 700 and 900 MHz Xeons, but the Tualatin would be faster.

Of course, in both cases, the second CPU would be wasted in Win98, but you can run both systems as single-CPU, too.

From what I can see, 3dfx cards do not respond well to FSBs higher than 100. Yet I found out the test bench for the V6000 was a KT266 (I think)? I've come to realize this question is better suited on a 3dfx site. Not that the knowledge isn't here, tons of knowledge. But I feel like there's probably more people here who understand exactly what I'm looking for, but I think I may be overspeaking to my own capability here when someone on a 3dfx forum would better inform me.

Basically I'm trying to build the sexiest system that would be stable for a V5500 for late DOS\SE.

Certain Voodoo 1 cards can be sensitive to anything over 100FSB. All Voodoo 2/3/4/5 all are fine at 133fsb.

Are there particular games you want to play? If you are only going for glide games I'd say get a Voodoo 3 16mb and a 733~1GHz Pentium 3 or AMD equivalent.

If playing DirectX games its good to know which ones as some cards are better than others. Voodoos are limited to DX6/7 IIRC.

I haven't messed with my rig alot lately but its a 1.4GHz Pentium 3 with a AGP ATI 9800XT (had a Geforce 4600) and a PCI Vodoo 3 16mb installed with a SB Live!. I use the Bios to control with card I want to use. I would use Voodoo2 SLI but limited to 1024x768 but I need 1280x1024 for my 19" LCD monitor.

Well if he needs DX8 or better than it would make more sense to go with

Athlon XP/Pentium 4
512mb Ram
Geforce 6 6800 Ultra
Voodoo 2 SLI

This would allow the machine to play Glide/old DirectX + newer DX titles at optimal speed

Yeah, anything Voodoo 2 or higher will work just fine on >100 FSB systems. You might be thinking of old information where systems were being overclocked above 100 MHz FSB - thus increasing the PCI bus frequency as well. Many cards (including even later PCI Voodoo cards,) don't like when the PCI bus is above 33 MHz, so overclocking the FSB (regardless of what it is "base") would overclock the PCI bus as well.

But a Voodoo 5 5500 works just fine on a 133 MHz bus Pentium III - or a 266 MHz bus / (1066 MT/s effective rate) Pentium 4, as long as the PCI bus is at stock 33 MHz. A nice nForce3 based Socket 939 board would work great, as it's generally regarded as the latest/newest chipset that still provided Windows 98 drivers. The chipset has Gigabit Ethernet, USB 2.0 and SATA built-in, so you can have modern connectivity. It even supports Athlon X2 dual-core processors! (Not that Win98 will take advantage of that second core, of course.)