Radeon X850 PE Agp is native. No bridge chip.
Dunno about the X1xxx series, never had them.
All Radeon HDxxxx Agp are bridged.
P.S. There was the reversed case. Some early PCIe videocards were Agp cards with a PCIe bridge.

clueless1 wrote:

I also have a 6800GS AGP but sadly no official driver support for Win98. There is a hack but I've heard it is not worth it. Strangely, I believe the 6800 Ultra is supported in Win98. Not sure why the 6800GS is not.

I did a quick read on the GF6 wiki page and though I don't have the answer, perhaps it has something to do with the GS and the Ultra having different core revisions?

That might be a clue, but again, I simply don't know for sure. Could also be that Ultra was released before 9x lost driver support and GS after??

Gamecollector wrote:

Radeon X850 PE Agp is native. No bridge chip. Dunno about the X1xxx series, never had them. All Radeon HDxxxx Agp are bridged. P […]
Show full quote

Radeon X850 PE Agp is native. No bridge chip.
Dunno about the X1xxx series, never had them.
All Radeon HDxxxx Agp are bridged.
P.S. There was the reversed case. Some early PCIe videocards were Agp cards with a PCIe bridge.

Is the Barton 3200+ enough for it?

386SX wrote:

Gamecollector wrote:

Radeon X850 PE Agp is native. No bridge chip. Dunno about the X1xxx series, never had them. All Radeon HDxxxx Agp are bridged. P […]
Show full quote

Radeon X850 PE Agp is native. No bridge chip.
Dunno about the X1xxx series, never had them.
All Radeon HDxxxx Agp are bridged.
P.S. There was the reversed case. Some early PCIe videocards were Agp cards with a PCIe bridge.

Is the Barton 3200+ enough for it?

I got barely any improvements when I went from 7600GS to HD4670 (and 7600GS is quite similar in performance to the standard 6800) on my own Barton 3200+ rig, so I'd guess that it is.

edit:
Lol, just noticed that this was actually my 5000th reply on this forum! omg 🤣!

Tetrium wrote:

clueless1 wrote:

I also have a 6800GS AGP but sadly no official driver support for Win98. There is a hack but I've heard it is not worth it. Strangely, I believe the 6800 Ultra is supported in Win98. Not sure why the 6800GS is not.

That might be a clue, but again, I simply don't know for sure. Could also be that Ultra was released before 9x lost driver support and GS after??

Yes, 6800 Ultra is supported in Win 98 SE.
Proof : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T72GktGZvo

Not sure why "no PCI-e", tho...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGnQ8VBYIFA (hardware is shown from @40:25 😀).

386SX wrote:

Is the Barton 3200+ enough for it?

Dunno. I not use AMD CPUs.
For P4 3.0E the difference is big.
Radeon HD2600 Pro Agp - 14 FPS in the Furry Cube.
Radeon HD3850 Agp - 71 FPS in the Furry Cube.
Can't test my Radeon X850 PE Agp, it's almost dead because of *censored* leadless soldering.

Gamecollector wrote:

Dunno. I not use AMD CPUs. For P4 3.0E the difference is big. Radeon HD2600 Pro Agp - 14 FPS in the Furry Cube. Radeon HD3850 Ag […]
Show full quote

386SX wrote:

Is the Barton 3200+ enough for it?

Dunno. I not use AMD CPUs.
For P4 3.0E the difference is big.
Radeon HD2600 Pro Agp - 14 FPS in the Furry Cube.
Radeon HD3850 Agp - 71 FPS in the Furry Cube.
Can't test my Radeon X850 PE Agp, it's almost dead because of *censored* leadless soldering.

Great difference! As soon as I'll find a 5V heavy enough PSU I'm going to build it.

Tetrium wrote:

clueless1 wrote:

I also have a 6800GS AGP but sadly no official driver support for Win98. There is a hack but I've heard it is not worth it. Strangely, I believe the 6800 Ultra is supported in Win98. Not sure why the 6800GS is not.

I did a quick read on the GF6 wiki page and though I don't have the answer, perhaps it has something to do with the GS and the Ultra having different core revisions?

That might be a clue, but again, I simply don't know for sure. Could also be that Ultra was released before 9x lost driver support and GS after??

That would be a good explanation, according to the Nvidia GPUs wiki page the GS was released more than 1 1/2 years later then the Ultra.
But I don't understand why there should be no official driver support. http://www.nvidia.com/download/driverResults.aspx/11/en-us says
Version: 81.98
Release Date: 2005.12.21 (that's right after the official release date of the GS)
Operating System: Windows ME, Windows 98, Windows 95
Supported products
GeForce 6 Series:
[...] GeForce 6800, GeForce 6800 GS, GeForce 6800 GS/XT, GeForce 6800 GT, GeForce 6800 LE, GeForce 6800 Ultra, GeForce 6800 XE, GeForce 6800 XT

Now even if that driver doesn't work, I wouldn't call that "no official driver support", I'd say there is an official driver but it's broken.

idspispopd wrote:

That would be a good explanation, according to the Nvidia GPUs wiki page the GS was released more than 1 1/2 years later then th […]
Show full quote

Tetrium wrote:

I did a quick read on the GF6 wiki page and though I don't have the answer, perhaps it has something to do with the GS and the Ultra having different core revisions?

That might be a clue, but again, I simply don't know for sure. Could also be that Ultra was released before 9x lost driver support and GS after??

That would be a good explanation, according to the Nvidia GPUs wiki page the GS was released more than 1 1/2 years later then the Ultra.
But I don't understand why there should be no official driver support. http://www.nvidia.com/download/driverResults.aspx/11/en-us says
Version: 81.98
Release Date: 2005.12.21 (that's right after the official release date of the GS)
Operating System: Windows ME, Windows 98, Windows 95
Supported products
GeForce 6 Series:
[...] GeForce 6800, GeForce 6800 GS, GeForce 6800 GS/XT, GeForce 6800 GT, GeForce 6800 LE, GeForce 6800 Ultra, GeForce 6800 XE, GeForce 6800 XT

Now even if that driver doesn't work, I wouldn't call that "no official driver support", I'd say there is an official driver but it's broken.

I had a quick look, and it does seem to mention 9x is supported. True, perhaps there is something wrong with the driver. After all, it appears to have been released only weeks after the release of 6800GS and it might not have been thoroughly tested in 9x.

I did some more googling and found this page http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=276813
It's supposed to be a modded driver which may work with your graphics card. I'd say read carefully, maybe this will help you go in the right direction?

edit: Forgot to mention the links are somewhere at the bottom of the page I linked to, it's an MDGX page

Gamecollector wrote:

Radeon X850 PE Agp is native. No bridge chip. Dunno about the X1xxx series, never had them. All Radeon HDxxxx Agp are bridged. P […]
Show full quote

Radeon X850 PE Agp is native. No bridge chip.
Dunno about the X1xxx series, never had them.
All Radeon HDxxxx Agp are bridged.
P.S. There was the reversed case. Some early PCIe videocards were Agp cards with a PCIe bridge.

The Radeon X1xxx AGP cards are bridged , some late X8xx AGP cards like the X800 XL AGP also use a bridge chip.

I can not say I have ever experienced any issues with the bridge chips, I have used AGP X1950 Pro cards alot and they always seem to just work. I guess it makes sense to cool the bridge chip, I have heard hot running bridge chips are the main reason AGP X1950 Pro cards wont overclock much at all.

Tetrium wrote:

clueless1 wrote:

I also have a 6800GS AGP but sadly no official driver support for Win98. There is a hack but I've heard it is not worth it. Strangely, I believe the 6800 Ultra is supported in Win98. Not sure why the 6800GS is not.

I did a quick read on the GF6 wiki page and though I don't have the answer, perhaps it has something to do with the GS and the Ultra having different core revisions?

That might be a clue, but again, I simply don't know for sure. Could also be that Ultra was released before 9x lost driver support and GS after??

According to nvidia's driver download page, the 6800GS is supported in the last version of the Windows 98 drivers.

http://www.nvidia.com/download/driverResults.aspx/11/en-us

Under the products supported tab

GeForce 6 Series:
GeForce 6100, GeForce 6100 nForce 400, GeForce 6100 nForce 405, GeForce 6100 nForce 420, GeForce 6150, GeForce 6150 LE, GeForce 6150LE / Quadro NVS 210S , GeForce 6150SE nForce 430, GeForce 6200, GeForce 6200 A-LE, GeForce 6200 LE, GeForce 6200 TurboCache(TM), GeForce 6200SE TurboCache(TM), GeForce 6250, GeForce 6500, GeForce 6600, GeForce 6600 GT, GeForce 6600 LE, GeForce 6600 VE, GeForce 6610 XL, GeForce 6700 XL, GeForce 6800, GeForce 6800 GS, GeForce 6800 GS/XT, GeForce 6800 GT, GeForce 6800 LE, GeForce 6800 Ultra, GeForce 6800 XE, GeForce 6800 XT

The AGP and PCIe versions, use different cores so if it's the PCIe version that's giving trouble, that might be the reason. Otherwise, the AGP version uses the same NV40 core as the AGP versions of the 6800 vanilla, LE, XT, GT and Ultra.

for my main old gaming PC (440BX) I currently have 3 usable video cards, a diamond stealth64 2001 4mb, which seems to be fine on DOS, but no win98 support (also it's 2d only), a 9500PRO, which seems to be good on windows, but not good for DOS, also I tend to think it's worse than average when it comes to CPU limited scenarios (I'm running a PII 400 but I will probably use a P3 soon)? maybe it's just placebo (caused in part because it's a reality these days when it comes to AMD vs Nvidia with DX11), or unfair to compare due to use of Glide with my Voodoo in some games vs D3D, but it seems to be the case.
and the voodoo 4 4500 pci, which is good on windows and supports glide which is great, but it's also bad on lower res dos games (gives me some horizontal line artifacts), I also have 2 Voodoo 2 8mb, but one is not stable and the vram limitation makes me unhappy with some games, so I kind of don't know what to use, most of the time I'm running the Voodoo.

but I'm thinking of getting a cheap FX 5200 and give it a go, the FXs are poor performers for DX9, but for older stuff they are fine, and I think it will be better at compatibility with dos compared to the V4 and 9500PRO I have, ideally I would get something like a 5600,5700,5900 but those are not as cheap and easy to find over here, and I don't intend to use anything faster than a coppermine P3 around 1GHz, so it's kind of pointless I guess.

I also don't see much point in going for Geforce 6 for windows 98, and specially not x800 series,

so while the FX series were not great back in the day due to poor DX9 performance, for older games they are looking like the best option considering availability, compatibility and performance.

but it depends on what you are targeting, I'm happy with 1024x768 and little AA/AF, also not running games newer than let's say 2001 (and if you are going for newer stuff I think XP is the way) and very few DOS games older than 93.

sliderider wrote:

According to nvidia's driver download page, the 6800GS is supported in the last version of the Windows 98 drivers. […]
Show full quote

Tetrium wrote:

clueless1 wrote:

I also have a 6800GS AGP but sadly no official driver support for Win98. There is a hack but I've heard it is not worth it. Strangely, I believe the 6800 Ultra is supported in Win98. Not sure why the 6800GS is not.

I did a quick read on the GF6 wiki page and though I don't have the answer, perhaps it has something to do with the GS and the Ultra having different core revisions?

That might be a clue, but again, I simply don't know for sure. Could also be that Ultra was released before 9x lost driver support and GS after??

According to nvidia's driver download page, the 6800GS is supported in the last version of the Windows 98 drivers.

http://www.nvidia.com/download/driverResults.aspx/11/en-us

Under the products supported tab

GeForce 6 Series:
GeForce 6100, GeForce 6100 nForce 400, GeForce 6100 nForce 405, GeForce 6100 nForce 420, GeForce 6150, GeForce 6150 LE, GeForce 6150LE / Quadro NVS 210S , GeForce 6150SE nForce 430, GeForce 6200, GeForce 6200 A-LE, GeForce 6200 LE, GeForce 6200 TurboCache(TM), GeForce 6200SE TurboCache(TM), GeForce 6250, GeForce 6500, GeForce 6600, GeForce 6600 GT, GeForce 6600 LE, GeForce 6600 VE, GeForce 6610 XL, GeForce 6700 XL, GeForce 6800, GeForce 6800 GS, GeForce 6800 GS/XT, GeForce 6800 GT, GeForce 6800 LE, GeForce 6800 Ultra, GeForce 6800 XE, GeForce 6800 XT

I know, see this reply Native AGP 8X card

Skyscraper wrote:

Gamecollector wrote:

Radeon X850 PE Agp is native. No bridge chip. Dunno about the X1xxx series, never had them. All Radeon HDxxxx Agp are bridged. P […]
Show full quote

Radeon X850 PE Agp is native. No bridge chip.
Dunno about the X1xxx series, never had them.
All Radeon HDxxxx Agp are bridged.
P.S. There was the reversed case. Some early PCIe videocards were Agp cards with a PCIe bridge.

The Radeon X1xxx AGP cards are bridged , some late X8xx AGP cards like the X800 XL AGP also use a bridge chip.

I can not say I have ever experienced any issues with the bridge chips, I have used AGP X1950 Pro cards alot and they always seem to just work. I guess it makes sense to cool the bridge chip, I have heard hot running bridge chips are the main reason AGP X1950 Pro cards wont overclock much at all.

Till yesterday or so I didn't even know some X800s weren't bridged, I always assumed they were, but then again I never bothered to go dig out the facts as I never actually used any X800s to begin with.

Still interesting bit of knowledge, I wonder if my ASUS X800/X850 card is bridged. It seemed some kind of hybrid thingy, but I never looked into it in more detail as ASUS (and especially Asrock) has a long history of doing stuff in their own special way

SPBHM wrote:

for my main old gaming PC (440BX) I currently have 3 usable video cards, a diamond stealth64 2001 4mb, which seems to be fine on […]
Show full quote

for my main old gaming PC (440BX) I currently have 3 usable video cards, a diamond stealth64 2001 4mb, which seems to be fine on DOS, but no win98 support (also it's 2d only), a 9500PRO, which seems to be good on windows, but not good for DOS, also I tend to think it's worse than average when it comes to CPU limited scenarios (I'm running a PII 400 but I will probably use a P3 soon)? maybe it's just placebo (caused in part because it's a reality these days when it comes to AMD vs Nvidia with DX11), or unfair to compare due to use of Glide with my Voodoo in some games vs D3D, but it seems to be the case.
and the voodoo 4 4500 pci, which is good on windows and supports glide which is great, but it's also bad on lower res dos games (gives me some horizontal line artifacts), I also have 2 Voodoo 2 8mb, but one is not stable and the vram limitation makes me unhappy with some games, so I kind of don't know what to use, most of the time I'm running the Voodoo.

but I'm thinking of getting a cheap FX 5200 and give it a go, the FXs are poor performers for DX9, but for older stuff they are fine, and I think it will be better at compatibility with dos compared to the V4 and 9500PRO I have, ideally I would get something like a 5600,5700,5900 but those are not as cheap and easy to find over here, and I don't intend to use anything faster than a coppermine P3 around 1GHz, so it's kind of pointless I guess.

I also don't see much point in going for Geforce 6 for windows 98, and specially not x800 series,

so while the FX series were not great back in the day due to poor DX9 performance, for older games they are looking like the best option considering availability, compatibility and performance.

but it depends on what you are targeting, I'm happy with 1024x768 and little AA/AF, also not running games newer than let's say 2001 (and if you are going for newer stuff I think XP is the way) and very few DOS games older than 93.

Since you're intent is to get a graphics card for a Slot 1 rig, might I suggest you could also give one of the GF MX cards a try? (GF2MX or GF4MX doesn't seem to matter much, except for overall better performance of the GF4MX cards mostly because these were newer). They even have passive cooling most of the time and are available in large quantities, so you could get a couple of those for cheaps 😀