Actually I'd try something like GF2MX or GF4MX. I know from experience that a GF2MX works fine on GA-5AX (Aladdin V). Those cards should run much cooler than most of the cards you mentioned.

Regarding the GF7600 I suppose you are asking for trouble (bridge chip and all), but I gather it's not about finding an adequate card.
Since you are mentioning k6plus, there is a post there claiming that a BFG Technologies GeForce 7300 GT works:
http://www.k6plus.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2325

Thank you for your contribution.
I tested the mx GeForce also (200-400 or 440), but they are slow.
An 8500 Radeon is way more fast and still compatible.
What I'm searching here, is really the "weird" thing.
I read the post you linked, the guy use the card on 2D applications only, like me with 6600GT.
On k6plus you can check my past attempts on it and my frustration towards the HSI bridge chip that apparently prevents any AGP card to work at 3.3V reliably.
Someone here claimed to had run a 7600 on a 440bx, so I wish to know how, if possible.

Slow - which game(s) did you test, and at what resolutions? Does the game use shaders?
Maybe a Radeon 9000 makes sense? Should run much cooler than a 8500, especially the non-pro version (be careful to get one with 128 bit memory, not 64 bit!).

I play DX8 games mostly, but I do that only to test my K6-III+, just for fun.
Just to know what it can handle woth powerfull components, it's weird, I know, but it's fun.

I found the guy:

j^aws wrote:

tincup wrote:

It's been discussed on Vogons though I can't find the most recent thread right now. This link offers some modded drivers to test […]
Show full quote

It's been discussed on Vogons though I can't find the most recent thread right now. This link offers some modded drivers to test:
http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/97786-geforce … e-by-zak/page-2

and this:
http://www.mdgx.com/files/nv8269.php

Regarding Vram - well, gonna find out!

Alright, did a quick test with an AGP GeForce 7600 GS (256MB VRAM), on a 440BX mobo at AGP 2x, and managed to get the unofficial drivers working on Win98SE - plenty of blue screens along the way!

Ran a few tests: 3DMark2001 SE completed successfully, but with severe rendering artifacts. Also, tried a random and old DX game (Flanker 2), and that seemed to run fine with no artifacts... Eventually, took the card out because of the 7600 GS being slower than my 6800 GT, and of many blue screens when loading Win98SE. With some luck, the drivers maybe fine with older games and some careful tweaking...

Now I have to say: HOW?
He says that he revert back to a 6800GT!
I know that the 6800 AGP is not bridged, but I fail to find one with the 3.3V notch on the AGP interface...

The fastest AGP 2x compatible (without hardware mods) VGA is GeForce FX5900 (not sure about FX5950) and Radeon 9700.
Using these on K6-III is pointless anyway. K6 is very slow, especially for gaming. Anything over TNT2 / R128pro / Voodoo3 will be extremelly CPU limited.

Check these results, even the Voodoo3 is significantly limited by the K6-III.

Thank you for your contribution.
Yes, it is definitely overkill, I know that for years, but still I am searching for the best possibility anyway.
I found this:

Geforce 6800XT AGP, 3.3V keyed, confirmed working on 440BX (even unlocked to GT).
Hard to find anyway.

The fastest AGP 2x compatible (without hardware mods) VGA is GeForce FX5900 (not sure about FX5950) and Radeon 9700.

I can confirm that an Asus FX5950 Ultra worked flawlessly in my K6-III+ rig.

And just for completion, a K6-plus in general, is seriously bottlenecked only by a Geforce GTS (Anandtech source, Quake III Arena benchmark), the "sweet spot" is Geforce-2MX.
But here is not about setting a balanced system. Not at all.

Which boards do you use? I'm very curious because 3,3v 6A is the max for these 3,3v agp slots so i think you are pushing your luck with some cards....

Cards with external power should not be a problem ofcourse.

You talk about ''fast'' and ''slow''. Do you see much difference with faster cards? Since the bottleneck is the cpu i wouldn't expect to see much difference... Do you have some benchmarks and numbers?

Looking at google images, i only found a galaxy 7600gt agp and a club3d 7600gt agp keyed for 3,3v. Do'nt know if these actually work... Same goes for 6800ultra, a lot of them are keyed right but not sure if they work (since they seem to use the bridgechip and that is usually the dealbreaker).

What COULD work is the old nv40 6800LE cards. Atleast the early ones seem to be native agp. Most can be unlocked and overclocked so you could get into 6800GT territory 😎

When the 6800LE came out i jumped on it and unlocked it right away. The ddr1 held it back a bit but it came very close to 6800GT performance for about half the price.
It was an Aopen card, a very early one as i bought it day one (these sold FAST!)

Good luck, keep us updated!

Hi, Thank you for your contribution,
Of course I'm looking for a vga with external power.
The fx5950 ultra has external power and works ok.
I posted a summary of my esperience I don't need to be more specific, it was only a way to say what I'm doing.
And I'm simply finding the fastest card that can properly work on a super7.
My mobo now is a Ga-5AX paired with a k6-III+@600Mhz.
Only AGP native cards can work I think, so every geforce bridged (or ATI) is off limits.

Ti4200 has no external power does it? It is a 30-40w card and should be to much, that's why i asked which board.
I asked about benchmarks just to see if there would be any benefits with a CPU that Slow.

Mamba wrote:

... Now I have to say: HOW? He says that he revert back to a 6800GT! I know that the 6800 AGP is not bridged, but I fail to fin […]
Show full quote

...
Now I have to say: HOW?
He says that he revert back to a 6800GT!
I know that the 6800 AGP is not bridged, but I fail to find one with the 3.3V notch on the AGP interface...

They're not very common cards, but they do exist, and they're keyed to work on AGP8x, 4x and 2x slots. The 6800GT was an Ultra specced variant where I needed to make the key, whilst the 7600GS was already physically keyed - both were tested on a 440BX with Win98SE. I used unofficial drivers for the 7600GS. IIRC, it wasn't really a clean builld, so that may have contributed to the 7600GS having artifacts in the demo, but worked fine on the one game I tested it on. With some 440BX boards, you may have to update the BIOS.

I also have a 600MHz K6III+ build, but never did get around to testing those cards on its AGP slot. BTW, both cards have external power connectors, with the 6800GT having twin molex connectors because of its Ultra spec.

Hi,
Thank you for your answer.
What game did you run with 7600gs?
Apart from artifacts, such a card shouldn't work in 3D due to HIS bridge and electrical incompatibility (that causes no agp acceleration).

^^ The game tested was Flanker 2, a DX6 flight sim for Win98, and it ran fine in D3D. If I have time this weekend, I can test on the K6 build too.

I use a Geforce3 ti200 in my GA-5AX build, a K6-3+ @600 Mhz dosnt really need a faster video card than that.

Just some clarification bits as an aggregate response:

- All GeForce 6800 are native AGP. Only the PCIe variants are bridged (AGP->PCIe). The 6800 Ultra is just a clock-bumped 6800GT. I've heard of them being "cut" to work on 3.3V AGP, but never done it myself (I have no need). The Asus V9999 seems to be a popular candidate though.

- All GeForce FX are universal AGP - so 5950 Ultra, 5900 Ultra, etc will all work on 3.3V AGP by spec.

- There are universal AGP variants of Radeon 9800 and other R300 cards, but not all of them are universal. Just check pictures of the specific item when looking on ebay or wherever if it's universally keyed.

- If AGP power delivery is a worry, something like the 5950 Ultra is probably a bad idea. It draws near the spec limit for the AGP slot (so if your board cannot do that, that's potentially an issue), whereas the 6800s draw most of their power through the extension port.

- In terms of 2D performance, my experience is that the R300s tend to be subjectively best - I notice smoother scrolling, text, etc on my 9550 and 9800XT vs GF-FX or GF6, but it's a fairly subtle difference IMO. Apparently Matrox cards can offer similarly good performance - Parhelia does pixel shaders too, so if you're using 2k/XP it may be worth looking at one (universal variants exist).

When you say "runs hot like hell" what do you mean? A lot of the cards you've mentioned will run hotter than you want to put your fingers against, but that isn't dangerous to them - for example my 5800 Ultra will regularly run under load in the high-60* C to low 70* C range. That's nothing I'd want to touch to my skin, but for the NV30 GPU it's no problem at all. A lot of these cards can also have their coolers swapped for something that will cool them down, but again they don't really require it.

obobskivich wrote:

Just some clarification bits as an aggregate response: […]
Show full quote

Just some clarification bits as an aggregate response:

- All GeForce 6800 are native AGP. Only the PCIe variants are bridged (AGP->PCIe). The 6800 Ultra is just a clock-bumped 6800GT. I've heard of them being "cut" to work on 3.3V AGP, but never done it myself (I have no need). The Asus V9999 seems to be a popular candidate though.

- All GeForce FX are universal AGP - so 5950 Ultra, 5900 Ultra, etc will all work on 3.3V AGP by spec.

- There are universal AGP variants of Radeon 9800 and other R300 cards, but not all of them are universal. Just check pictures of the specific item when looking on ebay or wherever if it's universally keyed.

- If AGP power delivery is a worry, something like the 5950 Ultra is probably a bad idea. It draws near the spec limit for the AGP slot (so if your board cannot do that, that's potentially an issue), whereas the 6800s draw most of their power through the extension port.

- In terms of 2D performance, my experience is that the R300s tend to be subjectively best - I notice smoother scrolling, text, etc on my 9550 and 9800XT vs GF-FX or GF6, but it's a fairly subtle difference IMO. Apparently Matrox cards can offer similarly good performance - Parhelia does pixel shaders too, so if you're using 2k/XP it may be worth looking at one (universal variants exist).

When you say "runs hot like hell" what do you mean? A lot of the cards you've mentioned will run hotter than you want to put your fingers against, but that isn't dangerous to them - for example my 5800 Ultra will regularly run under load in the high-60* C to low 70* C range. That's nothing I'd want to touch to my skin, but for the NV30 GPU it's no problem at all. A lot of these cards can also have their coolers swapped for something that will cool them down, but again they don't really require it.

The max temperature for my Asus Geforce FX5900 Ultra before it starts to throttle is 140C (Yes 140 degrees Celsius, its not a typo).

Edit here is a pic to show the insanity 😀, its hard to believe.

Skyscraper wrote:

The max temperature for my Asus Geforce FX5900 Ultra before it starts to throttle is 140C (Yes 140 degrees Celsius, its not a typo).

My 5800U (and other FX cards) is up there somewhere like that too; I've had the card run at temperatures of 80* C and above for hours with no hint of problems. Some modern cards can't even do that. 😲

If only the Radeons were so durable... 😒

obobskivich wrote:

- In terms of 2D performance, my experience is that the R300s tend to be subjectively best - I notice smoother scrolling, text, etc on my 9550 and 9800XT vs GF-FX or GF6, but it's a fairly subtle difference IMO.

Radeons from that time also tend to outperform the FX/GF6 cards when you crank up the resolution and use high levels of AA/AF. The x800XT and x850XT were well known for beating up on the GF 6800 cards with game settings on maximum although the gap wasn't quite as pronounced as with the previous generation. R300 squashed the FX series so badly it wasn't even a contest.