VOGONS


Craziest socket 7 build on a 430tx chipset

Topic actions

Reply 103 of 120, by Sphere478

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Warlord wrote on 2021-03-24, 03:42:
Bro can you run 3dmark 99 and post your score. This was my score on my socket 7 build. […]
Show full quote

Bro can you run 3dmark 99 and post your score.
This was my score on my socket 7 build.

800x600 16bit
file.php?id=88849&mode=view

yep! workin on it :p gimme a sec.

btw, it's confirmed. disabling L2 did increase the score. I'm setting it to disabled again and leaving it.

🖥Craziest socket 7 build on a 430tx chipset
🖥Dual socket 7 build

Reply 104 of 120, by Warlord

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Thanks, I'm probably trashing that socket 7 build anyways but since this is the only sceenshot I have when I made it it could be interesting to see.. Once I recap and fix my Soyo. I'll rebuild with that board instead.

Reply 107 of 120, by Sphere478

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

3dmark 2000 results

Next up 99

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    Filename
    image.jpg
    File size
    1.98 MiB
    Views
    317 views
    File license
    Public domain

🖥Craziest socket 7 build on a 430tx chipset
🖥Dual socket 7 build

Reply 109 of 120, by Sphere478

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Warlord wrote on 2021-03-24, 04:12:

I couldn't get my 450mhz K6 III+ to go more than 500mhz so I expect spheres to be a lot better. Also thats a faster chip-set I think.

I am running at 450

Here is 99

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    Filename
    image.jpg
    File size
    1.97 MiB
    Views
    302 views
    File license
    Public domain

🖥Craziest socket 7 build on a 430tx chipset
🖥Dual socket 7 build

Reply 110 of 120, by Warlord

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Ah this was my socket 7 build I cobbled together last year. My final build will use a Soyo SY5EMA+ if I can fix the board. Looking back maybe I did get it stable at 550 but I can't remember correctly. I think it was 500 but it could of been 550mhz.

It was pretty basic. No USB 2.0 or high power video cards. It did have a decent SATA 150 controller which made it a lot faster.

The typical Vogons user build.

Reply 111 of 120, by Sphere478

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Any tips for next thing to try to bump that score? I’m thinkin different video card. I need to find a radeon 9100 or better 🤔

Maybe a pci to agp adapter.

I could try edo ram? Instead of sd ram?

Think that would do any better?

🖥Craziest socket 7 build on a 430tx chipset
🖥Dual socket 7 build

Reply 112 of 120, by Repo Man11

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

My Super Seven build scores significantly higher in 99 and 2000 with a GeForce 2MX than it does with the GeForce 3 Ti200 I normally have in it. I believe the reason for that is driver overhead because you can use older Nvidia drivers with the MX. If I edit the 7.76 Detonators to install with the GeForce 3, the 99 and 2000 scores go up noticeably, but the 2001 score drops like a rock.

Reply 113 of 120, by Warlord

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Things I would try
OS Down grade to 98se with the shell swapped using 98 LITE to 95 OSR 2.1 B Explorer for less software overhead. At leas when you are playing games and not trying to web surf. Might yield more FPS. Significantly less overhead.

Other than that my 1 of original suggestions was to use NTLITE and strip a 2000 install of all of its components that were unnecessary to run the desktop so it was super light weight. Get it down to like less than 10 services, you can probably get it to like 6 services running and everything else gone or something. Id probably experiment with this on a VM till I got it right. Then run Black wing cat kernel on it so you can get some modern apps running.

PCI really limits your choice in graphics cards. While I have seen faster GPUs on slower CPUs preform better than older GPUs. I'm not totally certain that a fast GPU with less driver overhead would hurt your scores when the bottle neck in your system isn't the GPU its everything else. I mean if the GPU was the bottle neck than a faster GPU would help. But its like putting a larger nozzle on the same size garden hose doesn't make more water come out.

You could try to tighten your ram timings, idk if your board will let you or that even if it does would let you tighten them more.

Outside that I can't think of much.
Most my thinking is based on this. If running the system and drivers consumes CPU cycles and you have a finite amount of those cycles than reducing the cycles to run the system yields more CPU power to run programs.

Reply 114 of 120, by Sphere478

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I'm thinking of trying the pci pcie adapter with a pci boot card and using the adapter for a x600 and see if I can get that working for science!

edit, won't boot windows with it installed.

tightened one timing I missed lets see if that helps

Edit:
2515
6444

helped a little on 99 not much though

Edit 2:

Disabled assign irq to usb in bios and got
2632
6752

What other bios tweaks might help?

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    Filename
    image.jpg
    File size
    1.95 MiB
    Views
    212 views
    File license
    Public domain

🖥Craziest socket 7 build on a 430tx chipset
🖥Dual socket 7 build

Reply 115 of 120, by Sphere478

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I’m looking around at fire gl and quadro cards.

I could pick up a quadro 280 and give it a go. It’s basically a fx 5500

What other workstation cards came in pci? Was there a radeon x000 series? Fire gl or a geforce 6 series I could try?

🖥Craziest socket 7 build on a 430tx chipset
🖥Dual socket 7 build

Reply 116 of 120, by marxveix

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I have not looked what parts are available for PCI, at least Rage128Pro should have PCI and Geforce2 also, but with Rage128Pro you are limited to DX6 and 3DMark99 (it works with 3DMark2000, but it gets less score than Geforce2). In AGP form i have these or similar result also with Rage128Pro and 16MB cards and any Win9x OS, One of the fastest OpenGL for Rage128Pro should be version 1238. Not all ATi drivers work that well if you are after more 3DMark99. Older drivers are more opitimized to older and weaker CPUs, with newer videocards it is harder to get more out of these CPUs

3DMark99
Aopen AX59PRO-AMDK6-II+ 400MHz - 128MB - Rage128 Pro 32MB
No overclock, bios@turbo settings, W95 OSR2, DX8a, Via4in1419
3DNow! Special Purpose Driver Rage128/Rage128Pro - 630CDH37
3DMarks: 3433
CPU: 6185

K6-II+ and K6-III+ likes Gerforce 2 MX400 64MB or Geforce2 GTS 64MB or Geforce3 TI200 with older driver, like inf edited 7.76 to make it fly i think, at least for Win9x it should be like that. Directx6 and 3dmark99 someone can try Rage Fury or Rage Fury Maxx, some drivers give similar results to Geforec2 MX cards at least with single Rage128Pro GPU and up to DX6. These 3Dnow CPUs work well with Voodoo cards and Glide.

Reply 117 of 120, by Sphere478

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

That’s just weird that your rage 128 is scoring that much compared to my radeon 7500.... crazy.

Where can I get that 3d now driver?

🖥Craziest socket 7 build on a 430tx chipset
🖥Dual socket 7 build

Reply 118 of 120, by marxveix

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
Sphere478 wrote on 2021-03-24, 19:36:

That’s just weird that your rage 128 is scoring that much compared to my radeon 7500.... crazy.

Where can I get that 3d now driver?

37e should be english only and maybe i have changed in my driver setup OpenGL to version 1238, cant remember at the moment.
Right now i have in this same PC older ATi cards, Rage Pro or XL 4-8MB ones and 3DMark99 did get 1301 points (most times 129x).

RAGE128 Windows 95b/98 Display Driver
Size: 5.9MB (English only) Optimized Direct3D/OpenGL Special Purpose Driver
(K6/K7 3DNow!, Pentium III SSE, Quake3 Test) Version: 6.30CDH37B

Many available drivers are here, possible that other cdh versions are similar:
Rage128 drivers at the bottom of that page
Rage128-4.11.6713-win9x_630cdh37e.zip
https://disk.yandex.ee/d/eV600jDAliJ_3w?w=1

Lightspeed2000 tweaked driver for rage128 (have not tested this driver)
https://disk.yandex.ee/d/eV600jDAliJ_3w/Tweak … htspeed2000?w=1

ATi-Scope tweaked drivers for Rage128 and first Radeon DDR, maybe possible to add R7500 (have not tested this driver)
http://atiscope.online.fr/bin/drivers/drivers.htm
Rage128
http://atiscope.online.fr/downloads/drivers/640CD20c9x.zip
Radeon
http://atiscope.online.fr/downloads/drivers/720Win9x.zip

Some other radeon tweaked driver for Win9x probably (have not tested this driver)
https://disk.yandex.ee/d/eV600jDAliJ_3w/Tweak … Ti%20Radeon?w=1

Reply 119 of 120, by Repo Man11

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I ended up with another PCI 9200, and this one does work in my TXP4! Like the NVS 280, it's crippled by only having a 64 bit memory interface. But it still outscored the NVS 280.
I have an FX5200 128 megabyte on the way; curious to see if that will work, and if it does, if it will be the best of the lot.

Attachments