VOGONS


First post, by Ozzuneoj

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I'm toying with the idea of running a 440BX board I recently acquired for a few different things but I can't seem to find much information about what graphics cards are known to handle the 89Mhz AGP clock which results from using a 133Mhz FSB on these boards.

I've read that "older Geforces" can work, but I don't know what that means exactly. I saw another thread here where someone had problems with a several Geforce 4 Ti cards, but a Ti 4800 worked fine.

I'm sure there are lots of people here who have tested or used similar setups, so... what video cards did you guys use, and with what result?

My last resort is to simply use my Geforce 6200 256MB PCI card, since it'll likely work fine for most things, but I'd prefer to use the AGP slot for a bit more speed and to free up PCI slots.

I have several cards available, just not a lot of time to test them all. I have an AGP FX 5950 Ultra and a 6800 GT, a bunch of Geforce 4 Ti cards, Geforce 3 Ti 200, lots of Geforce 2\4 MX series... strange as it is, I have nothing from the Geforce 256 or 2 (non-MX) lines, but I have several cards older than that as well. I also have a Voodoo 5 5500 AGP (and PCI for that matter) but I'd rather not do anything weird with that. My ideal card would be something that would offer great compatibility for anything I might want to throw at it (from late DOS to early 2000s games). Windows 98SE is the most likely operating system, though I'll probably dual boot XP at some point.

Now for some blitting from the back buffer.

Reply 1 of 19, by HighTreason

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I have a 440GX board which seems to run a Quadro 2 Pro (Essentially a GeForce 2 GTS/Ultra) with the FSB at 133MHz just fine, also ran a Radeon VE before that. XP won't boot though (Stays on the splash screen infinitely) but I have a suspicion this is the onboard SCSI crapping out when HAL kicks in and not down to the GPU as 9X starts fine along with other things - Linux for example. XP never liked the system anyway and as I now don't need it for serious Vegas work anymore I plan to go back to 98SE/2K instead of 98SE/XP eventually.

FYI, the 440GX is essentially an SMP capable 440BX, so the AGP implementation should be about the same.

My Youtube - My Let's Plays - SoundCloud - My FTP (Drivers and more)

Reply 2 of 19, by Tetrium

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

I'm kinda interested in learning which graphics cards (or at least which graphics card families) will probably work fine at 89MHz AGP. Only thing I can kinda remember is that newer cards had an overall better chance of having no problems with the overclocked AGP port.

Whats missing in your collections?
My retro rigs (old topic)
Interesting Vogons threads (links to Vogonswiki)
Report spammers here!

Reply 5 of 19, by Tetrium

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Tertz wrote:

GF3, GF4 - worked
I switched off sideband by RivaTurner

How about the MX's?

Whats missing in your collections?
My retro rigs (old topic)
Interesting Vogons threads (links to Vogonswiki)
Report spammers here!

Reply 8 of 19, by Tetrium

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Tertz wrote:
Tetrium wrote:

How about the MX's?

I did not try them. Most probably will work.

That would be good news, as I think the MX's are more performance correct.

Whats missing in your collections?
My retro rigs (old topic)
Interesting Vogons threads (links to Vogonswiki)
Report spammers here!

Reply 9 of 19, by Rhuwyn

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Tetrium wrote:
Tertz wrote:
Tetrium wrote:

How about the MX's?

I did not try them. Most probably will work.

That would be good news, as I think the MX's are more performance correct.

The MX's are the low end Geforce 4s. The Ti's are higher end.

Reply 10 of 19, by Tetrium

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Rhuwyn wrote:

The MX's are the low end Geforce 4s. The Ti's are higher end.

The GF4MX's were filling the budget spots in the market when the GF4 (and GF3 kinda too) was for the more performance oriented segment.
The GF4MX's weren't actually just cut-down GF4 cards though.

And I was also referring to the GF2MX's, which are somewhat slower.

The reason I asked specifically about the MX's (both the GF4MX and GF2MX variants), is because I have tons of those, they produce little heat compared to their higher-end counterparts and are much less likely to be running at their (thermal) limits. It's why I often prefer mid-range over high-end in certain builds.

Whats missing in your collections?
My retro rigs (old topic)
Interesting Vogons threads (links to Vogonswiki)
Report spammers here!

Reply 11 of 19, by Tertz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Tetrium wrote:

That would be good news, as I think the MX's are more performance correct.

This needs facts is GF4 MX compatibility close to real GF2 or GF3. Also there were several MX models. One of things to try is unpatched UT99, where normal GF4 have some issues (at least on some of drivers), which GF3 and earlier have not.

DOSBox CPU Benchmark
Yamaha YMF7x4 Guide

Reply 12 of 19, by Tetrium

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Tertz wrote:
Tetrium wrote:

That would be good news, as I think the MX's are more performance correct.

This needs facts is GF4 MX compatibility close to real GF2 or GF3. Also there were several MX models. One of things to try is unpatched UT99, where normal GF4 have some issues (at least on some of drivers), which GF3 and earlier have not.

I don't know how compatible the GF4MX is compared to the GF3 and GF4. The GF2MX is of course quite a bit slower and older.
There were actually quite a few different varieties of both cards, but this mostly impacted performance.
From what I've read, GF4MX was actually more closely related to GF2 than the GF3 and GF4.

Whats missing in your collections?
My retro rigs (old topic)
Interesting Vogons threads (links to Vogonswiki)
Report spammers here!

Reply 13 of 19, by Tertz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Tetrium wrote:

From what I've read, GF4MX was actually more closely related to GF2 than the GF3 and GF4.

In theory. If UT99 test will give no issue specific to GF4 on 45.23, this will be a proof. If you want to do the testing - pm me.

DOSBox CPU Benchmark
Yamaha YMF7x4 Guide

Reply 14 of 19, by DonutKing

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

My Voodoo 5 5500 seemed to work at 89MHz AGP; although sometimes it wouldn't POST. I turned it back down to stock as I think the card is too valuable to risk like that.

If you are squeamish, don't prod the beach rubble.

Reply 15 of 19, by Tetrium

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Tertz wrote:
Tetrium wrote:

From what I've read, GF4MX was actually more closely related to GF2 than the GF3 and GF4.

In theory. If UT99 test will give no issue specific to GF4 on 45.23, this will be a proof. If you want to do the testing - pm me.

I'm not sure where you're trying to go here?

Whats missing in your collections?
My retro rigs (old topic)
Interesting Vogons threads (links to Vogonswiki)
Report spammers here!

Reply 16 of 19, by candle_86

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

The Geforce4 MX was NV17, it was a Geforce 2 MX die shrunk with the memory controller from the Geforce 4 Ti ported over. An MX440 is neck and Neck with a Geforce 2 Ultra, while an MX420 will compete with a GTS

Reply 17 of 19, by Tertz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Tetrium wrote:
Tertz wrote:
Tetrium wrote:

From what I've read, GF4MX was actually more closely related to GF2 than the GF3 and GF4.

In theory. If UT99 test will give no issue specific to GF4 on 45.23, this will be a proof. If you want to do the testing - pm me.

I'm not sure where you're trying to go here?

You may say about your doubts more concretely.

DOSBox CPU Benchmark
Yamaha YMF7x4 Guide

Reply 18 of 19, by Tetrium

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Tertz wrote:

You may say about your doubts more concretely.

Which doubts?

candle_86 wrote:

The Geforce4 MX was NV17, it was a Geforce 2 MX die shrunk with the memory controller from the Geforce 4 Ti ported over. An MX440 is neck and Neck with a Geforce 2 Ultra, while an MX420 will compete with a GTS

And this with less power consumption 😁

Whats missing in your collections?
My retro rigs (old topic)
Interesting Vogons threads (links to Vogonswiki)
Report spammers here!

Reply 19 of 19, by Tertz

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Tetrium wrote:
Tertz wrote:

You may say about your doubts more concretely.

Which doubts?

You said "I'm not sure". If that was what PM, - I may help to get the game for testing, to check is GF4 MX behavior there is same as normal GF4 and hence to conclude about possibly higher MX compatibility.
Would be useful to get GF2 compatibility level, its max performance and DVI connector (missing mostly on GF2).

DOSBox CPU Benchmark
Yamaha YMF7x4 Guide