@socket 3 Thanks a lot for your informative and detailed answer. Going with cheap and available parts is real sound advice. Your recommendation with a A socket 754/939 system and the ati radeon 9600 sounds like a great advice. The 9600 seems to be good card.

The advice from Joseph Joestar to hop a bit further in the "future" is also a interesting way of thinking.

It is also interesting to hear that the Geforce FX series is recommended in the retro gaming field. These cards were not very popular when they were new if I can remember correctly.

Some missing legacy features in that gen could a a problem but I believe the only missing features would be Table Fog & 8-bit Paletted Textures if I am wrong.

I need to check the vogons wiki page and the thread to find out how many games I am into really use that type of features. If there are not that many I could live without that feature.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2023-05-05, 12:57:

Socket3 wrote on 2023-05-05, 12:40:

Pair any of the above with either a high end 2001(ish) video card like a Radeon 8500 or Geforce 3 Titanium or a mid end 2003-2004 card like a FX 5700 / Radeon 9600 and you have your build.

Those cards are fine if all you want to do is max out the in-game graphical settings. But if you also want to bump the resolution to 1600x1200 as well as crank up AA and AF while maintaining a locked 60 FPS, you'll need something like a GeForce FX 5900 or a Radeon X800. You do lose a bit of compatibility with either of those cards, so there's a trade off. Personally, I think the GeForce 4 Ti cards hit the Win9x sweet spot in terms of power and compatibility.

Oh yes, a 9800 or 5900XT would be perfect for 1600x1200, maybe even a 6600GT AGP or x800GTO AGP, but high end cards are not common and usually command a premium.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2023-05-05, 12:57:

Some games like Diablo 2, Gothic, Deus Ex and Max Payne can benefit from 512 MB RAM (compared to 256 MB), but it's not a huge difference. Going over 512 MB under Win9x is asking for trouble though, and a couple of games can give weird errors on certain platforms even with PATCHMEM applied.

I've had resource monitor up in 98 with logging on and there are indeed games that can use over 256mb of ram, but those are pretty rare use-cases. Diablo II can indeed in multiplayer used up to 700MB. Total Annihilation in skirmish on very large maps and especially in multiplayer will use as much ram as you give it. No idea about deus ex, but i haven't seen max payne go over 90(ish). Gothic can again benefit from over 256MB, but in my opinion that game is best enjoyed on a more modern - say XP era machine.

Socket3 wrote on 2023-05-05, 17:50:

Oh yes, a 9800 or 5900XT would be perfect for 1600x1200, maybe even a 6600GT AGP or x800GTO AGP, but high end cards are not comm […]
Show full quote

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2023-05-05, 12:57:

Socket3 wrote on 2023-05-05, 12:40:

Pair any of the above with either a high end 2001(ish) video card like a Radeon 8500 or Geforce 3 Titanium or a mid end 2003-2004 card like a FX 5700 / Radeon 9600 and you have your build.

Those cards are fine if all you want to do is max out the in-game graphical settings. But if you also want to bump the resolution to 1600x1200 as well as crank up AA and AF while maintaining a locked 60 FPS, you'll need something like a GeForce FX 5900 or a Radeon X800. You do lose a bit of compatibility with either of those cards, so there's a trade off. Personally, I think the GeForce 4 Ti cards hit the Win9x sweet spot in terms of power and compatibility.

Oh yes, a 9800 or 5900XT would be perfect for 1600x1200, maybe even a 6600GT AGP or x800GTO AGP, but high end cards are not common and usually command a premium.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2023-05-05, 12:57:

Some games like Diablo 2, Gothic, Deus Ex and Max Payne can benefit from 512 MB RAM (compared to 256 MB), but it's not a huge difference. Going over 512 MB under Win9x is asking for trouble though, and a couple of games can give weird errors on certain platforms even with PATCHMEM applied.

I've had resource monitor up in 98 with logging on and there are indeed games that can use over 256mb of ram, but those are pretty rare use-cases. Diablo II can indeed in multiplayer used up to 700MB. Total Annihilation in skirmish on very large maps and especially in multiplayer will use as much ram as you give it. No idea about deus ex, but max payne does not go over 90(ish). Gothic can again benefit from over 256MB, but that game is best played on a more modern - say XP era machine.

Checked the prices and you are right the FX 5900 and the 9800 are no bargain. The price is steap but not ouf the reach for me but I am not sure if is really worth it go with the more expensive cards.

Playing with max details in 1600x1200 sounds nice in theory but I am not sure if the games from the 97 to late 2000 really look great in that high resolution. Need to do some research in that regard.

In general playing with that high resolutions would be a bonus but not a must. I would be more than content to just play games in 1024x768 with max settings on.

For that resolution a readeon 9600 or GF3 or GF 4 would be more than enough or I am wrong with that asumption?

predator_085 wrote on 2023-05-05, 16:35:

Some missing legacy features in that gen could a a problem but I believe the only missing features would be Table Fog & 8-bit Paletted Textures if I am wrong.

The GeForce FX cards support both of those. It's with the GeForce 6 series that Nvidia dropped paletted textures. Radeon cards don't support either of these features by default, but some workarounds are possible.

I need to check the vogons wiki page and the thread to find out how many games I am into really use that type of features. If there are not that many I could live without that feature.

Of the two, Table Fog is the one where you will likely notice a visual difference. In contrast, Paletted Textures are most commonly used for improving performance, though there are a few games like Driver and Final Fantasy 8 which lose some visual fidelity if those are not supported. There's also EMBM to consider I suppose, but that's more of a bonus feature since only a few period correct cards supported it back in the day.

Playing with max details in 1600x1200 sounds nice in theory but I am not sure if the games from the 97 to late 2000 really look great in that high resolution. Need to do some research in that regard.

In my opinion, very few Win9x era games have enough texture detail to benefit from being played at 1600x1200. Sure, the polygons will look sharper, but the textures will remain blurry which kinda stands out. Here's a screenshot of me running Thief 1 at 1600x1200 which shows this. But some later or more advanced games like Quake 3, Max Payne or Unreal can look quite nice at that resolution.

To me, the sweet spot for Win9x is either 1024x768 or possibly 1280x1024. And a GeForce 3 or 4 can handle those quite nicely, as long as you don't want to max out AA and AF.

predator_085 wrote on 2023-05-05, 18:14:

Checked the prices and you are right the FX 5900 and the 9800 are no bargain. The price is steap but not ouf the reach for me […]
Show full quote

Socket3 wrote on 2023-05-05, 17:50:

Oh yes, a 9800 or 5900XT would be perfect for 1600x1200, maybe even a 6600GT AGP or x800GTO AGP, but high end cards are not comm […]
Show full quote

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2023-05-05, 12:57:

Those cards are fine if all you want to do is max out the in-game graphical settings. But if you also want to bump the resolution to 1600x1200 as well as crank up AA and AF while maintaining a locked 60 FPS, you'll need something like a GeForce FX 5900 or a Radeon X800. You do lose a bit of compatibility with either of those cards, so there's a trade off. Personally, I think the GeForce 4 Ti cards hit the Win9x sweet spot in terms of power and compatibility.

Oh yes, a 9800 or 5900XT would be perfect for 1600x1200, maybe even a 6600GT AGP or x800GTO AGP, but high end cards are not common and usually command a premium.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2023-05-05, 12:57:

Some games like Diablo 2, Gothic, Deus Ex and Max Payne can benefit from 512 MB RAM (compared to 256 MB), but it's not a huge difference. Going over 512 MB under Win9x is asking for trouble though, and a couple of games can give weird errors on certain platforms even with PATCHMEM applied.

I've had resource monitor up in 98 with logging on and there are indeed games that can use over 256mb of ram, but those are pretty rare use-cases. Diablo II can indeed in multiplayer used up to 700MB. Total Annihilation in skirmish on very large maps and especially in multiplayer will use as much ram as you give it. No idea about deus ex, but max payne does not go over 90(ish). Gothic can again benefit from over 256MB, but that game is best played on a more modern - say XP era machine.

Checked the prices and you are right the FX 5900 and the 9800 are no bargain. The price is steap but not ouf the reach for me but I am not sure if is really worth it go with the more expensive cards.

Playing with max details in 1600x1200 sounds nice in theory but I am not sure if the games from the 97 to late 2000 really look great in that high resolution. Need to do some research in that regard.

In general playing with that high resolutions would be a bonus but not a must. I would be more than content to just play games in 1024x768 with max settings on.

For that resolution a readeon 9600 or GF3 or GF 4 would be more than enough or I am wrong with that asumption?

Radeon 9600xt should be able to play most if not all 99-2001 games 1600x1200 maxed out. GF4ti should be able to play everything from 99, most games from 2000 at 1600x1200 and no idea about 2001 games, I haven't tried. The geforce 3 ti is usually good for 1280x960.

If you plan to go for the 9600, check out the 9550 as well. There are some versions of the 9550 that come with very fast ram and run at 9600XT speeds. Gecube made one, HIS made one - with a blower cooler - easy to spot, and I think powercolor made one as well. The high performance versions can usually be identified by a larger quality cooling solution, but check the part number before buying.

Socket3 wrote on 2023-05-05, 20:00:

predator_085 wrote on 2023-05-05, 18:14:

Checked the prices and you are right the FX 5900 and the 9800 are no bargain. The price is steap but not ouf the reach for me […]
Show full quote

Socket3 wrote on 2023-05-05, 17:50:

Oh yes, a 9800 or 5900XT would be perfect for 1600x1200, maybe even a 6600GT AGP or x800GTO AGP, but high end cards are not common and usually command a premium.

I've had resource monitor up in 98 with logging on and there are indeed games that can use over 256mb of ram, but those are pretty rare use-cases. Diablo II can indeed in multiplayer used up to 700MB. Total Annihilation in skirmish on very large maps and especially in multiplayer will use as much ram as you give it. No idea about deus ex, but max payne does not go over 90(ish). Gothic can again benefit from over 256MB, but that game is best played on a more modern - say XP era machine.

Checked the prices and you are right the FX 5900 and the 9800 are no bargain. The price is steap but not ouf the reach for me but I am not sure if is really worth it go with the more expensive cards.

Playing with max details in 1600x1200 sounds nice in theory but I am not sure if the games from the 97 to late 2000 really look great in that high resolution. Need to do some research in that regard.

In general playing with that high resolutions would be a bonus but not a must. I would be more than content to just play games in 1024x768 with max settings on.

For that resolution a readeon 9600 or GF3 or GF 4 would be more than enough or I am wrong with that asumption?

Radeon 9600xt should be able to play most if not all 99-2001 games 1600x1200 maxed out. GF4ti should be able to play everything from 99, most games from 2000 at 1600x1200 and no idea about 2001 games, I haven't tried. The geforce 3 ti is usually good for 1280x960.

If you plan to go for the 9600, check out the 9550 as well. There are some versions of the 9550 that come with very fast ram and run at 9600XT speeds. Gecube made one, HIS made one - with a blower cooler - easy to spot, and I think powercolor made one as well. The high performance versions can usually be identified by a larger quality cooling solution, but check the part number before buying.

Thanks for the info. I will check out the 9550 with the faster ram as well and not only the 9600 series and GF 3 and 4 Ti models.

@Joseph_Joestar Thanks for the info. Have to agree that Table fog seems to be more important than the palleted textures because Table Fog is a feature that is used by some games I am interested in like Thief 2, European Air War und Need for Speed 1 and 2.

EMBM is a neat feature as well but as you said just a bonus because not as you said not many cards used it.

I have also have to agree that 1650x1200 is too much for most of the earlier games. I have already thought so but the picture you posted just confirmed my thoughts.

Have done some further research and like @socket3 already recommended a socket socket 754/939 would be really good choice judging the price and availability. I am not familiar with amd cpu so chosing the right cpu is a bit tricky?

Which cpu familiy would be the best bet for 97 to 99/2000 time machine rig? Teh athlon 64 , sempron or k8 athlon xmp?

I have not checked the prices or avaibility of the different cpu yet. That's just informal question which of the cpu families would be the best for my needed specs?

predator_085 wrote on 2023-05-08, 11:27:

Which cpu familiy would be the best bet for 97 to 99/2000 time machine rig? Teh athlon 64 , sempron or k8 athlon xmp?

Most cool CPU to s754 is Mobile AThlon
https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K8/AMD-Mobile% … 4000BKX5BU.html
But it's practically unreachable.
Good choice is Turion ML-44 or MT-40
https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K8/AMD-Turion% … ML44BKX5LD.html
https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K8/AMD-Turion% … MT40BQX5LD.html
But they are also practically unreachable.

And....remains
Athlon DH-E6 (E3) 3000+ ...3200+ ... 3400+ 😀
https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K8/AMD-Athlon% … 3400AIK4BO.html
Overall - 512k/1M L2 cache, 90nM, TDP <65 Watt.
The choice, to be honest, is not grandiose.

It's easier to find something like SL-KT600-RL and high-frequency Barton core CPU with 512к L2 and FSB 400MHz

Thanks a lot for the info @ shevalier. The availability is worse than I though then for some amd cpu. Your recommended alternations are more than welcome. Thanks.

predator_085 wrote on 2023-05-08, 14:37:

The availability is worse than I though then for some amd cpu.

If you're looking for Athlon64 CPUs based on the newer Venice or San Diego cores, those do tend to be higher priced and more difficult to find. However, CPUs based on the slightly older NewCastle and ClawHammer cores can be had for much less.

Last year, I ordered a NewCastle based Athlon64 3400+ from Germany and got it for less than 20 EUR. Those are still very fast for Win9x gaming, but they do run a bit warmer than CPUs based on the newer cores. If you want to see how my own Athlon64 system turned out, I have the specs and benchmarks in this thread.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2023-05-08, 14:56:

predator_085 wrote on 2023-05-08, 14:37:

The availability is worse than I though then for some amd cpu.

If you're looking for Athlon64 CPUs based on the newer Venice or San Diego cores, those do tend to be higher priced and more difficult to find. However, CPUs based on the slightly older NewCastle and ClawHammer cores can be had for much less.

Last year, I ordered a NewCastle based Athlon64 3400+ from Germany and got it for less than 20 EUR. Those are still very fast for Win9x gaming, but they do run a bit warmer than CPUs based on the newer cores. If you want to see how my own Athlon64 system turned out, I have the specs and benchmarks in this thread.

Thanks a lot for the info. I will look into the slighly older cores then. And I will check out your thread for sure. I am indeed quite curious how your system turned out.

This project is going to be my first system after all so I am really eager to learn from the experience people made with their previous systems.

@Joseph_Joestar,
@predator_085

The most compatible with Windows 9x is the chipset from VIA - k8t800.
In the "non-pro" version, Hypertransport is tied to AGP, i.e. you can forget about overclocking a entry/mid CPU to an top model.
VT8237, except "R Plus", "S" and "A", do not detect SATA2 device - you can forget about SSD, or you need to install an external controller.

I don't know a good socket 754 motherboard, based on VIA K8T800pro + VT8237 R plus 🙁
Theoretically - the platform is ideal, practically - alas, no.

shevalier wrote on 2023-05-08, 15:13:

@Joseph_Joestar, @predator_085 […]
Show full quote

@Joseph_Joestar,
@predator_085

The most compatible with Windows 9x is the chipset from VIA - k8t800.
In the "non-pro" version, Hypertransport is tied to AGP, i.e. you can forget about overclocking a entry/mid CPU to an top model.
VT8237, except "R Plus", "S" and "A", do not detect SATA2 device - you can forget about SSD, or you need to install an external controller.

I don't know a good socket 754 motherboard, based on VIA K8T800pro + VT8237 R plus 🙁
Theoretically - the platform is ideal, practically - alas, no.

Thanks again for the info. Yes it really seems to be tricky to find the right motherboard. I need to watch the used parts market very close in the next couple of month and then strike when the time is right to get a proper motherboard and the cpu.

The motherboard and the cpu are the most ricky part of the moment.

GPU wise it is easier to find the right parts. The gpu I am intersted in are either the Readeon9600(9550 maybe as well) and GF 3 or GF4. They are quite easy to find compared to the motherboard and the amd cpu.

It`s depend
You collect hardware or running applications.
If you want strange hardware, then this is one way. If you want to run certain applications with a certain level of expirience - another.
A lot of things run under Windows 11 on modern hardware.
But if you want, conditional, Unreal 99, with glide and A3D, you need a fundamentally different hardware.

shevalier wrote on 2023-05-09, 13:04:

It`s depend You collect hardware or running applications. If you want strange hardware, then this is one way. If you want to run […]
Show full quote

It`s depend
You collect hardware or running applications.
If you want strange hardware, then this is one way. If you want to run certain applications with a certain level of expirience - another.
A lot of things run under Windows 11 on modern hardware.
But if you want, conditional, Unreal 99, with glide and A3D, you need a fundamentally different hardware.

Like I said I am into functional retro hardware. I want to experience the premium late 90s windows 98 gaming experience in today. I have thing for such stuff. I also play retro console games on real consoles with an upscale and not via emulator.

You can say I am retro geek that wants to use the retro stuff a lot.

it is true that most stuff can on windows 11 but is rather bothersome to play old games like that. The sound is not as good as it should be and some games crashes quite often.

I know it might not be easy to get the proper parts and it will need lots of patience to get everything in time but I can wait until I have my functional retro rig.

Sorry for bumping up the thread again but got another question that suits in here.

I have the chance to get a hp HP Pavillion (a p3 800 system with socket 370) for almost nothing from an acquaintance. I Have not seen the system in "person" yet so I am not sure if I am going to take it. In case I take it I am thinking of modifying it. P3 800 seems a bit weak for planned GF3 or GF4 gpu.

I think the most powerful socket 370 CPU you can use is P3 Coppermine 1 GHZ right? Or am I overreacting and a p3 800 would be that big of a bottleneck for gf3 or 4?

The system all in all is a bit slower than the stuff I had originally planned but such a system would be a good starting point. Nothing is decided as of yet. I will visit him next week and check out the system in person. I just want to collect a few pieces of info about socket 370 beforehand.

coppermine is arguably a bottleneck for later games, but then again anandtech tested the gf3 with a 1ghz thunderbird. these were contemporary CPUs that people used when those cards came out.

the best thing would be to find some youtube videos of games running on that hardware and see if the performance suits you.

predator_085 wrote on 2023-05-18, 14:48:

I think the most powerful socket 370 CPU you can use is P3 Coppermine 1 GHZ right?

P3 -E(coppermine) differs from P3-EB(coppermine 133MHz FSB) in one pin - bsel_1

If you break off this pin, you get 133/100 = 1.33 performance increase.
The unofficial limit of Coppermine is around 1.2GHz
800 -900 Coppermine 100MHZ FSB, like SL5BS practically 100% will work at 133FSB and frequency ~1.2GHz

some warning.
Motherboards from Intel, HP or DELL in the latest BIOSes have a limitation on the work (not boot) of Coppermine with a frequency greater than or equal to 1.13GHz.
A message appears stating that the processor is not supported, contact technical support, and motherboard has halted.
Need BIOS for 2-3 releases earlier.

auron wrote on 2023-05-18, 15:35:

coppermine is arguably a bottleneck for later games, but then again anandtech tested the gf3 with a 1ghz thunderbird. these were contemporary CPUs that people used when those cards came out.

the best thing would be to find some youtube videos of games running on that hardware and see if the performance suits you.

Yes that's a great suggestion. I will check out youtube for sure. Have though so that cpu might be a bottleneck. No big surprise here. Powerwise such system would be bit downgrade compared to the A socket 754/939 system with a Athlon 64 New Castle based core that I have originally considered. I need to do some compersions how games on run on that hardware to see if is enough for me or not.

@shevalier I see. Thanks for the info.

I have no answer for your question but on my quest to find the right components for Win 98 gaming pc, I have been binge-watching youtube videos and remembered this video. Might be helpful.

It shows games running on a Pentium 3 Coppermine from many different eras.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDrY6c7mOGI

You could also check out the youtube channel Phil's computer lab. He has also reviewed many different CPUs. I believe a P3 1 GHZ was among the CPU he reviewed.