brostenen wrote on 2023-05-03, 09:30:

What is the deal with all that Socket 478 and Socket-A lately?
Are this becomming the "new black"?

It's just their time. Think that people used to be teens back then (early 2000s), are now in their late 30s, approaching middle age, have good jobs, but also are nostalgic about when they where young.
But there's something more, socket A is good for a wide range of operating systems, it works fine for DOS (especially if the board has an ISA slot), works with 95/98/Me, but also works fine in Windows XP with a good CPU and 512mb or more RAM.

acl wrote on 2023-05-02, 23:26:

Good motherboard. I use a CUBX-E... I don't know what is the difference. Socket 370 motherboard with 4 ram slots are not super c […]
Show full quote

Babasha wrote on 2023-05-02, 15:29:

1) Asus CUBX-L + Asus V7100

Good motherboard.
I use a CUBX-E... I don't know what is the difference.
Socket 370 motherboard with 4 ram slots are not super common.
I think I read somewhere that 4 slots is off specs for 440BX but some manufacturers did that anyway. (But not sure if it's true)

-L usually means integrated LAN.
-E Means less ISA
And -S = SCSI

bofh.fromhell wrote on 2023-05-03, 10:40:

[...] […]
Show full quote

[...]

-L usually means integrated LAN.
-E Means less ISA
And -S = SCSI

Asus messed around with the meaning of -E quite a bit.

In the Slot 1 / So370 era it indicated Enhanced, and usually meant upgraded chips (i.e. CUBX ATA-66 controller CUBX-E ATA 100 controller)
In Athlon/P4 era it indicated Economy, and usually meant a stripped-down board (i.e.A7V external ATA-100 IDE controller, A7V-E no external IDE controller, P4T 6-layer PCB P4T-E 4-layer PCB)
- but sometimes it was Enhanced after all, like in A7V266 (lacklustre KT266 chipset) vs A7V266-E (far better KT266A chipset)

Bottom line: lies, damned lies and marketing. Always check full specs before assuming what some marketing letter means.

Found a Geforce 7600 GS AGP video card with 256 MB for 5 euro's in a local good will. How much would this card be worth? It is in perfect condition and works after I tested it. I don't have any plans for it in my systems so I think I'll just sell it...

vmunix wrote on 2023-05-03, 09:53:

brostenen wrote on 2023-05-03, 09:30:

What is the deal with all that Socket 478 and Socket-A lately?
Are this becomming the "new black"?

Don´t know, but eventually having 32bit PCI and sometimes even ISA slots might be desirable for retro-computing, without falling into virtualization.
With the prices of good Socket 7 boards, this could be a good option, not sure about socket 370 prices, I haven´t checkd'

Most 478/A boards do not have ISA slots anyway. But there must be a reason why they are populair now if that is the case....

RaverX wrote on 2023-05-03, 10:11:

brostenen wrote on 2023-05-03, 09:30:

What is the deal with all that Socket 478 and Socket-A lately?
Are this becomming the "new black"?

It's just their time. Think that people used to be teens back then (early 2000s), are now in their late 30s, approaching middle age, have good jobs, but also are nostalgic about when they where young.
But there's something more, socket A is good for a wide range of operating systems, it works fine for DOS (especially if the board has an ISA slot), works with 95/98/Me, but also works fine in Windows XP with a good CPU and 512mb or more RAM.

I would say that Athlon64 are more suited for XP stuff, wich I deem 478/A to be most usefull for. Most do not have ISA anyway.

brostenen wrote on 2023-05-03, 14:24:

vmunix wrote on 2023-05-03, 09:53:

brostenen wrote on 2023-05-03, 09:30:

What is the deal with all that Socket 478 and Socket-A lately?
Are this becomming the "new black"?

Don´t know, but eventually having 32bit PCI and sometimes even ISA slots might be desirable for retro-computing, without falling into virtualization.
With the prices of good Socket 7 boards, this could be a good option, not sure about socket 370 prices, I haven´t checkd'

Most 478/A boards do not have ISA slots anyway. But there must be a reason why they are populair now if that is the case....

I never had a 478 setup back in the day. I went from Socket 939 to LGA775.

Still, I have quite a few PIAGP boards (industrial setup with AGP/PCI/ISA slots as well as a few S478 ATX boards with ISA slots.

For XP on up, ISA really is irrelevant so all these are primarily for pre-XP builds.

brostenen wrote on 2023-05-03, 09:30:

What is the deal with all that Socket 478 and Socket-A lately?
Are this becomming the "new black"?

When it comes to retro gaming/PC building, nostalgia is the driving factor. People who grew up with such systems (like me) are now in their 30's. And since they are still cheap and plentiful, they will often be coming up for years to come.

While I didn't have a s478 system myself (went from S462 to 939), I still remember drooling over a demonstration system in a PC shop near where I lived that had a big "experience the power of Pentium 4!" sign on it.

bassix6 wrote on 2023-05-03, 13:13:

Found a Geforce 7600 GS AGP video card with 256 MB for 5 euro's in a local good will. How much would this card be worth? It is i […]
Show full quote

Found a Geforce 7600 GS AGP video card with 256 MB for 5 euro's in a local good will. How much would this card be worth? It is in perfect condition and works after I tested it. I don't have any plans for it in my systems so I think I'll just sell it...

It's a capable little card but it's probably worth exactly $5. It's a low mid range card that won't work in Windows 9x and requires a newer AGP slot to fit. At that point you have such a plethora of better options that this one just isn't special.

I would use something like this in a test bench or a spare XP machine that only needed to run older games. It's nothing special otherwise. It will probably run Unreal Tournament 2004 just fine, but will struggle with Unreal Tournament 3.

Kahenraz wrote on 2023-05-03, 18:03:

bassix6 wrote on 2023-05-03, 13:13:

Found a Geforce 7600 GS AGP video card with 256 MB for 5 euro's in a local good will. How much would this card be worth? It is i […]
Show full quote

Found a Geforce 7600 GS AGP video card with 256 MB for 5 euro's in a local good will. How much would this card be worth? It is in perfect condition and works after I tested it. I don't have any plans for it in my systems so I think I'll just sell it...

It's a capable little card but it's probably worth exactly $5. It's a low mid range card that won't work in Windows 9x and requires a newer AGP slot to fit. At that point you have such a plethora of better options that this one just isn't special.

I would use something like this in a test bench or a spare XP machine that only needed to run older games. It's nothing special otherwise. It will probably run Unreal Tournament 2004 just fine, but will struggle with Unreal Tournament 3.

I remember playing UT3 using a 7600GS (and also a 6800) and it basically ran fine though.
We also played a (heavily modded) BF2, but with that game these cards did seem to sometimes struggle a bit when a lot of stuff was going on at the same time. But still very playable.

Kahenraz wrote on 2023-05-03, 18:03:

bassix6 wrote on 2023-05-03, 13:13:

Found a Geforce 7600 GS AGP video card with 256 MB for 5 euro's in a local good will. How much would this card be worth? It is i […]
Show full quote

Found a Geforce 7600 GS AGP video card with 256 MB for 5 euro's in a local good will. How much would this card be worth? It is in perfect condition and works after I tested it. I don't have any plans for it in my systems so I think I'll just sell it...

It's a capable little card but it's probably worth exactly $5. It's a low mid range card that won't work in Windows 9x and requires a newer AGP slot to fit. At that point you have such a plethora of better options that this one just isn't special.

I would use something like this in a test bench or a spare XP machine that only needed to run older games. It's nothing special otherwise. It will probably run Unreal Tournament 2004 just fine, but will struggle with Unreal Tournament 3.

Are you sure these won't work in Windows 9x? I have read some comments that they aren't perfect, but I've also seen discussions about 7xxx series being fine in 9x. Unless it's a specific issue with the 7600 cards because of the bridge chip? I have one identical to this, but I haven't tried in on 9x. Depending on the game it should perform somewhere between a 6600GT and 6800GS as far as I can tell.

Also, a 512MB model sold recently on ebay for $95, so it is likely worth a lot more than $5 to someone. I'd have definitely bought one for $5 if I found it and it wasn't damaged.

Ozzuneoj wrote on 2023-05-03, 19:18:

Are you sure these won't work in Windows 9x? I have read some comments that they aren't perfect, but I've also seen discussions about 7xxx series being fine in 9x. Unless it's a specific issue with the 7600 cards because of the bridge chip? I have one identical to this, but I haven't tried in on 9x. Depending on the game it should perform somewhere between a 6600GT and 6800GS as far as I can tell.

Also, a 512MB model sold recently on ebay for $95, so it is likely worth a lot more than $5 to someone. I'd have definitely bought one for $5 if I found it and it wasn't damaged.

I extrapolated from my experience with PCIe cards in Windows 9x. I may abe wrong, actually. I hadn't taken into consideration that it's an AGP card. Anything after the FX series starts to have compatibility issues in games, though. And now many games that run on Windows 98 would benefit from it? So I think its usefulness is still very limited for this use case. With few exceptions, FX cards are still a better choice.

Although it may depend greatly on the chipset, I was unable to get even GeForce FX cards that were for PCIe to work on either Windows 98 or ME.

Tetrium wrote on 2023-05-03, 19:11:

I remember playing UT3 using a 7600GS (and also a 6800) and it basically ran fine though.
We also played a (heavily modded) BF2, but with that game these cards did seem to sometimes struggle a bit when a lot of stuff was going on at the same time. But still very playable.

Does it really? I know that the 6800 would be fast enough, but I wasn't sure about the 7600 GS. I thought the "GS" branded cards might have been too cut down for Unreal Engine 3.

Kahenraz wrote on 2023-05-03, 20:07:

Ozzuneoj wrote on 2023-05-03, 19:18:

Are you sure these won't work in Windows 9x? I have read some comments that they aren't perfect, but I've also seen discussions about 7xxx series being fine in 9x. Unless it's a specific issue with the 7600 cards because of the bridge chip? I have one identical to this, but I haven't tried in on 9x. Depending on the game it should perform somewhere between a 6600GT and 6800GS as far as I can tell.

Also, a 512MB model sold recently on ebay for $95, so it is likely worth a lot more than $5 to someone. I'd have definitely bought one for $5 if I found it and it wasn't damaged.

I extrapolated from my experience with PCIe cards in Windows 9x. I may abe wrong, actually. I hadn't taken into consideration that it's an AGP card. Anything after the FX series starts to have compatibility issues in games, though. And now many games that run on Windows 98 would benefit from it? So I think its usefulness is still very limited for this use case. With few exceptions, FX cards are still a better choice.

Although it may depend greatly on the chipset, I was unable to get even GeForce FX cards that were for PCIe to work on either Windows 98 or ME.

I think for some people the appeal of just having an AGP system running 98 or even XP is interesting in itself, so with this being one of the last nvidia AGP cards made I think it still has a fair amount of value. Just looking at some quick benchmarks it may be (EDIT: Correction!) 30-50% faster than an FX 5950 Ultra with a powerful enough CPU in some situations and way more in later games, so a card like this would make a solid choice for a PC that will be playing some games that bridge the 98\XP era. Sure, there will be some compatibility quirks here and there, but that can be said for most things. It will just depend on the titles that will be played and if there are any fixes available for problematic games.

Also, it cost him $5. You can't even get an FX 5200 64bit for $5 most of the time. 😀

My opinion I think is very skewed as a result of this testing I did in the past:

NVIDIA GeForce FX driver testing on an Intel 440EX summary and report

I later concluded that a lot of the driver instability was due pairing the newer drivers with older CPUs without newer SSE instructions. And since that 7600 GS is already keyed for 1.5V, that means a Pentium 4 at a minimum. So it might actually work just fine in Windows 9x (with minor compatibility exceptions).

I stand corrected.

In summary, PCIe NVIDIA cards never work with Windows 9x (in my experience), or I have never found a chipset where it did, and newer drivers don't work well with pre-Prentium 4 CPUs. But pair later drivers with a Pentium 4 and AGP, it might work fine for most use cases.

Kahenraz wrote on 2023-05-03, 20:23:

My opinion I think is very skewed as a result of this testing I did in the past: […]
Show full quote

My opinion I think is very skewed as a result of this testing I did in the past:

NVIDIA GeForce FX driver testing on an Intel 440EX summary and report

I later concluded that a lot of the driver instability was due pairing the newer drivers with older CPUs without newer SSE instructions. And since that 7600 GS is already keyed for 1.5V, that means a Pentium 4 at a minimum. So it might actually work just fine in Windows 9x (with minor compatibility exceptions).

I stand corrected.

In summary, PCIe NVIDIA cards never work with Windows 9x (in my experience), or I have never found a chipset where it did, and newer drivers don't work well with pre-Prentium 4 CPUs. But pair later drivers with a Pentium 4 and AGP, it might work fine for most use cases.

About the SSE thing I came to the same conclusion on my side a couple of years ago but I also had the impression that installing very recent versions of DirctX 9 cause the same issue for the same reasons. With 2005-2006 versions I didn’t see such instabilities.

vmunix wrote on 2023-05-03, 09:53:

brostenen wrote on 2023-05-03, 09:30:

What is the deal with all that Socket 478 and Socket-A lately?
Are this becomming the "new black"?

Don´t know, but eventually having 32bit PCI and sometimes even ISA slots might be desirable for retro-computing, without falling into virtualization.
With the prices of good Socket 7 boards, this could be a good option, not sure about socket 370 prices, I haven´t checkd'

Socket 370 which support Tualatin chips have risen in price, it’s the « logical » thing to buy if you want just one board. Search for an Asus TUSL2-C and you’ll see.

Kahenraz wrote on 2023-05-03, 20:23:

My opinion I think is very skewed as a result of this testing I did in the past: […]
Show full quote

My opinion I think is very skewed as a result of this testing I did in the past:

NVIDIA GeForce FX driver testing on an Intel 440EX summary and report

I later concluded that a lot of the driver instability was due pairing the newer drivers with older CPUs without newer SSE instructions. And since that 7600 GS is already keyed for 1.5V, that means a Pentium 4 at a minimum. So it might actually work just fine in Windows 9x (with minor compatibility exceptions).

I stand corrected.

Ah, yeah it is probably pretty dependent on the system it's being put into. I don't think there's much point in using anything faster than a Geforce 4 Ti or higher end FX series in a 440BX board, and even those are going to be overkill that will just let you run at higher resolutions and AA\AF without much performance hit due to the CPU bottleneck. Cramming a Tualatin in a 440BX will help to a degree. If you're playing any games made in 2000 or later they will run much better on an Athlon XP or P4 (or even Athlon 64 or Core 2 depending on what is being run) and those systems will likely be much happier with these later AGP cards.

For reference... My 98SE test bench with a 440BX and an 850Mhz PIII only gets used for cards up to the Geforce 2 series. Anything Geforce 3 or later (even Geforce 4 MX) gets tested in my faster Nforce 2 system with a 2Ghz Athlon XP.

Minutemanqvs wrote on 2023-05-03, 20:28:

Kahenraz wrote on 2023-05-03, 20:23:

My opinion I think is very skewed as a result of this testing I did in the past: […]
Show full quote

My opinion I think is very skewed as a result of this testing I did in the past:

NVIDIA GeForce FX driver testing on an Intel 440EX summary and report

I later concluded that a lot of the driver instability was due pairing the newer drivers with older CPUs without newer SSE instructions. And since that 7600 GS is already keyed for 1.5V, that means a Pentium 4 at a minimum. So it might actually work just fine in Windows 9x (with minor compatibility exceptions).

I stand corrected.

In summary, PCIe NVIDIA cards never work with Windows 9x (in my experience), or I have never found a chipset where it did, and newer drivers don't work well with pre-Prentium 4 CPUs. But pair later drivers with a Pentium 4 and AGP, it might work fine for most use cases.

About the SSE thing I came to the same conclusion on my side a couple of years ago but I also had the impression that installing very recent versions of DirctX 9 cause the same issue for the same reasons. With 2005-2006 versions I didn’t see such instabilities.

I've heard this before, but I've never seen a reproducible test for this. A similar issue with DirectX 6 vs 6.1 was mentioned here:

dr.zeissler wrote on 2023-04-20, 20:32:

DX 6.1 has no benefits on that machine and there was a compatibility issue...but I can't remember yet.

Ozzuneoj wrote on 2023-05-03, 20:36:

Ah, yeah it is probably pretty dependent on the system it's being put into. I don't think there's much point in using anything faster than a Geforce 4 Ti or higher end FX series in a 440BX board, and even those are going to be overkill that will just let you run at higher resolutions and AA\AF without much performance hit due to the CPU bottleneck. Cramming a Tualatin in a 440BX will help to a degree. If you're playing any games made in 2000 or later they will run much better on an Athlon XP or P4 (or even Athlon 64 or Core 2 depending on what is being run) and those systems will likely be much happier with these later AGP cards.

For reference... My 98SE test bench with a 440BX and an 850Mhz PIII only gets used for cards up to the Geforce 2 series. Anything Geforce 3 or later (even Geforce 4 MX) gets tested in my faster Nforce 2 system with a 2Ghz Athlon XP.

I also feel that any GeForce 2 (including the MX) is "good enough" for Windows 98. If you're getting into games that use pixel shaders, then they will be DirectX 8 or 9 and probably play just fine on XP. My preferred 98 experience is from a simpler time. The GeForce 2 simply ticks all the boxes of excellent DirectX/OpenGL compatibility, Hardware T&L, multi-monitor, quiet and passive (MX), and very fast for anything contemporary. Anything that comes after that, GeForce 4 Ti for performance, GeForce 4 MX for an alternative DirectX 7 GPU, or a GeForce 5200 FX for DirectX 9 (I've never had a use case for this, but it's cool); it's all just a different flavor of icing after the GeForce 2.

The only exception is that GeForce cards after the TNT series all have minor bugs with texel alignment and texture filtering in DirectX 5 games, but this can be mitigated to a certain degree:

Mipmap settings that fix Incoming (DirectX 5) on the GeForce FX

bassix6 wrote on 2023-05-03, 13:13:

Found a Geforce 7600 GS AGP video card with 256 MB for 5 euro's in a local good will. How much would this card be worth? It is i […]
Show full quote

Found a Geforce 7600 GS AGP video card with 256 MB for 5 euro's in a local good will. How much would this card be worth? It is in perfect condition and works after I tested it. I don't have any plans for it in my systems so I think I'll just sell it...

'Buy now' prices on ebay for sold cards are up to 55 Euro. But auctions ended only around 20 Euro.
I had a 7600GT (PCIe) under XP and wouldn't use it for such a system. It was a good card for casual gamers at the time I bought it, but today I would use something way better. However should it run under 9x it would be pretty good 😀

Ozzuneoj suggested that it's faster than an FX 5950 Ultra, which I could believe. The GeForce 6 series was an incredible improvement, and the 7 series iterated on that. I wouldn't mind seeing some benchmark comparisons with AGP 8x where the CPU is not a bottleneck. Doom 3 should be playable at a high resolution.