I will preface this by saying I don't 100% get the idea of limiting CPU performance unless it actually prevents compatibility issues or keeps the system on a unique platform (386, 486, ISA-only, PCI-only, AGP, etc.), but if you're shooting for something less than Core 2 Duo performance but can't go AMD, then a Pentium Dual Core is probably the best option? Even the slowest E2140 will compete well with a mid range 939 Athlon X2.

This review has some numbers:
https://www.goldfries.com/hardware-reviews/in … ual-core-e2140/

Alternatively, you could get the best Pentium D you can find for a good price. Trying to game with the best that Netburst had to offer would at least be something different.

Does your 775 board support Pentium D (e.g Pentium D 820) rather than just the more modern Conroe based Pentium Dual-Core (E2140 era)?

If so, you might as well just go straight for an actual 2005/2006 CPU.

No it doesn't I tried my PentiumD 820 and 935 neither posted

Original Core 2 Duo E4xxx with 2Mb cache.

e6300, e4300 stuff like that will be slower than the faster a64s in a bunch of things, but probably use less power.
if you want to be even slower there are things like Pentium E2140, Celeron e1400 and so on, I'm running a Celeron 450 (with a VIA chipset with single channel ram) and it feels pretty similar to an A64 of around the same clock,

well looking at the chips i have

E2160, E2200, E6750, E7600, E8400 for dual cores.

I could run the E6750 at 1066FSB and it would be a dead ringer for an E6420, or either the E2160 or E2200

Ozzuneoj wrote on 2022-11-20, 19:12:

I will preface this by saying I don't 100% get the idea of limiting CPU performance unless it actually prevents compatibility is […]
Show full quote

I will preface this by saying I don't 100% get the idea of limiting CPU performance unless it actually prevents compatibility issues or keeps the system on a unique platform (386, 486, ISA-only, PCI-only, AGP, etc.), but if you're shooting for something less than Core 2 Duo performance but can't go AMD, then a Pentium Dual Core is probably the best option? Even the slowest E2140 will compete well with a mid range 939 Athlon X2.

This review has some numbers:
https://www.goldfries.com/hardware-reviews/in … ual-core-e2140/

Alternatively, you could get the best Pentium D you can find for a good price. Trying to game with the best that Netburst had to offer would at least be something different.

I get what your saying, but if i give it to fast of a cpu i feel the need to give it a better gpu because otherwise its just wasted

candle_86 wrote on 2022-11-21, 04:01:

Ozzuneoj wrote on 2022-11-20, 19:12:

I will preface this by saying I don't 100% get the idea of limiting CPU performance unless it actually prevents compatibility is […]
Show full quote

I will preface this by saying I don't 100% get the idea of limiting CPU performance unless it actually prevents compatibility issues or keeps the system on a unique platform (386, 486, ISA-only, PCI-only, AGP, etc.), but if you're shooting for something less than Core 2 Duo performance but can't go AMD, then a Pentium Dual Core is probably the best option? Even the slowest E2140 will compete well with a mid range 939 Athlon X2.

This review has some numbers:
https://www.goldfries.com/hardware-reviews/in … ual-core-e2140/

Alternatively, you could get the best Pentium D you can find for a good price. Trying to game with the best that Netburst had to offer would at least be something different.

I get what your saying, but if i give it to fast of a cpu i feel the need to give it a better gpu because otherwise its just wasted

I guess it's just a matter of what the goal of the project is. If it's having games from 2005 run exactly as slowly as they did in 2005, with all the frame rate fluctuations caused by different bottlenecks (CPU, GPU, memory) in different situations, then you'd pretty much need a CPU from 2005. If you can't get a CPU from 2005 working, then just use any low\mid range Pentium Dual Core or Core 2 Duo you have. There will be no discernible difference unless you're comparing it side by side to a system that is actually from 2005 and keeping track of the instances where your 2007 machine is slightly faster.

Realistically, I don't think you're really wasting anything with a faster chip since nearly all of the CPUs we're talking about sell for $5-$9 on ebay. You'll get less significant CPU bottlenecks in situations that are CPU heavy.

But in that same vein, you could just drop the 7800GT into a Sandy Bridge system to totally eliminate CPU bottlenecks in most games while still having the same graphical capabilities of the 7800GT and generally the same OS and software compatibility. An old Lenovo Thinkcenter M72e board can be had for like $18 and an i5 2500 for around $9.

If it was me and I was trying to find a home for a 7800GT, I would either feel compelled to keep it 100% period correct and go with a CPU from 2005, or I would just make is fast as I could with what I had on hand. I wouldn't personally expend extra effort to make it slower. If the E8400 fits the board, I'd just use that unless you have another system planned. It's cooler and much faster than some of the others. In most cases, all of the CPUs you have will feel nearly the same, except in very CPU heavy situations the faster ones will perform much better than the Pentium Dual Core models.

Ozzuneoj wrote on 2022-11-21, 05:06:

I guess it's just a matter of what the goal of the project is. If it's having games from 2005 run exactly as slowly as they did […]
Show full quote

candle_86 wrote on 2022-11-21, 04:01:

Ozzuneoj wrote on 2022-11-20, 19:12:

I will preface this by saying I don't 100% get the idea of limiting CPU performance unless it actually prevents compatibility is […]
Show full quote

I will preface this by saying I don't 100% get the idea of limiting CPU performance unless it actually prevents compatibility issues or keeps the system on a unique platform (386, 486, ISA-only, PCI-only, AGP, etc.), but if you're shooting for something less than Core 2 Duo performance but can't go AMD, then a Pentium Dual Core is probably the best option? Even the slowest E2140 will compete well with a mid range 939 Athlon X2.

This review has some numbers:
https://www.goldfries.com/hardware-reviews/in … ual-core-e2140/

Alternatively, you could get the best Pentium D you can find for a good price. Trying to game with the best that Netburst had to offer would at least be something different.

I get what your saying, but if i give it to fast of a cpu i feel the need to give it a better gpu because otherwise its just wasted

I guess it's just a matter of what the goal of the project is. If it's having games from 2005 run exactly as slowly as they did in 2005, with all the frame rate fluctuations caused by different bottlenecks (CPU, GPU, memory) in different situations, then you'd pretty much need a CPU from 2005. If you can't get a CPU from 2005 working, then just use any low\mid range Pentium Dual Core or Core 2 Duo you have. There will be no discernible difference unless you're comparing it side by side to a system that is actually from 2005 and keeping track of the instances where your 2007 machine is slightly faster.

Realistically, I don't think you're really wasting anything with a faster chip since nearly all of the CPUs we're talking about sell for $5-$9 on ebay. You'll get less significant CPU bottlenecks in situations that are CPU heavy.

But in that same vein, you could just drop the 7800GT into a Sandy Bridge system to totally eliminate CPU bottlenecks in most games while still having the same graphical capabilities of the 7800GT and generally the same OS and software compatibility. An old Lenovo Thinkcenter M72e board can be had for like $18 and an i5 2500 for around $9.

If it was me and I was trying to find a home for a 7800GT, I would either feel compelled to keep it 100% period correct and go with a CPU from 2005, or I would just make is fast as I could with what I had on hand. I wouldn't personally expend extra effort to make it slower. If the E8400 fits the board, I'd just use that unless you have another system planned. It's cooler and much faster than some of the others. In most cases, all of the CPUs you have will feel nearly the same, except in very CPU heavy situations the faster ones will perform much better than the Pentium Dual Core models.

So the issue i have had so far

A8N-E worked for 3 days then dead, post card says no 12v on the board suddenly, not sure what happened
A8N-SLI Worked for 2 weeks then just stopped posting, post card doesn't show clk anymore
HP OEM 939 board - Worked for a month, then just won't power up anymore, it acts like its got a short to ground as the PSU has to be reset.

I could try recapping each board and see if that helps, but that's beyond my current skill level. So I tried
HP OEM AM2 system, its unstable for reasons I can't even explain, it works for a bit then just doesn't, its not heat related, its not power related
HP OEM AM2 board 2, worked for a bit then blew a voltage cap, it still posts but again unstable
M2N-E SLI memory channel 2 is dead somehow

And before you ask, I tested the PSU with a PSU tester and my voltmeter, PSU tester says fine and I'm getting

12v = 12.06 V
5v= 4.98V
3.3V = 3.27

All within spec.

the goal at this point is to have it feel like a 2005 computer.

the Irony is I have zero issue with my 462 boards or my AM3 boards, and I don't have any 754 boards, but 939 and AM2 seem to hate me for some reason. I wish they didnt because for 939 I have

939 3200, 3500, 3800, 4000, x2 3800, x2 4600

AM2 3500, 4000, x2 4400, x2 5000, x2 5600, x2 6400, x4 9650, x4 9950BE (of course the last 4 chips are to fast for a 2005 rig but you get my point)

candle_86 wrote on 2022-11-21, 07:50:

So the issue i have had so far […]
Show full quote

Ozzuneoj wrote on 2022-11-21, 05:06:

I guess it's just a matter of what the goal of the project is. If it's having games from 2005 run exactly as slowly as they did […]
Show full quote

candle_86 wrote on 2022-11-21, 04:01:

I get what your saying, but if i give it to fast of a cpu i feel the need to give it a better gpu because otherwise its just wasted

I guess it's just a matter of what the goal of the project is. If it's having games from 2005 run exactly as slowly as they did in 2005, with all the frame rate fluctuations caused by different bottlenecks (CPU, GPU, memory) in different situations, then you'd pretty much need a CPU from 2005. If you can't get a CPU from 2005 working, then just use any low\mid range Pentium Dual Core or Core 2 Duo you have. There will be no discernible difference unless you're comparing it side by side to a system that is actually from 2005 and keeping track of the instances where your 2007 machine is slightly faster.

Realistically, I don't think you're really wasting anything with a faster chip since nearly all of the CPUs we're talking about sell for $5-$9 on ebay. You'll get less significant CPU bottlenecks in situations that are CPU heavy.

But in that same vein, you could just drop the 7800GT into a Sandy Bridge system to totally eliminate CPU bottlenecks in most games while still having the same graphical capabilities of the 7800GT and generally the same OS and software compatibility. An old Lenovo Thinkcenter M72e board can be had for like $18 and an i5 2500 for around $9.

If it was me and I was trying to find a home for a 7800GT, I would either feel compelled to keep it 100% period correct and go with a CPU from 2005, or I would just make is fast as I could with what I had on hand. I wouldn't personally expend extra effort to make it slower. If the E8400 fits the board, I'd just use that unless you have another system planned. It's cooler and much faster than some of the others. In most cases, all of the CPUs you have will feel nearly the same, except in very CPU heavy situations the faster ones will perform much better than the Pentium Dual Core models.

So the issue i have had so far

A8N-E worked for 3 days then dead, post card says no 12v on the board suddenly, not sure what happened
A8N-SLI Worked for 2 weeks then just stopped posting, post card doesn't show clk anymore
HP OEM 939 board - Worked for a month, then just won't power up anymore, it acts like its got a short to ground as the PSU has to be reset.

I could try recapping each board and see if that helps, but that's beyond my current skill level. So I tried
HP OEM AM2 system, its unstable for reasons I can't even explain, it works for a bit then just doesn't, its not heat related, its not power related
HP OEM AM2 board 2, worked for a bit then blew a voltage cap, it still posts but again unstable
M2N-E SLI memory channel 2 is dead somehow

And before you ask, I tested the PSU with a PSU tester and my voltmeter, PSU tester says fine and I'm getting

12v = 12.06 V
5v= 4.98V
3.3V = 3.27

All within spec.

the goal at this point is to have it feel like a 2005 computer.

the Irony is I have zero issue with my 462 boards or my AM3 boards, and I don't have any 754 boards, but 939 and AM2 seem to hate me for some reason. I wish they didnt because for 939 I have

939 3200, 3500, 3800, 4000, x2 3800, x2 4600

AM2 3500, 4000, x2 4400, x2 5000, x2 5600, x2 6400, x4 9650, x4 9950BE (of course the last 4 chips are to fast for a 2005 rig but you get my point)

Ah, yeah that's quite a frustrating chain of events. I know you've tested the PSU, but has it been the same one throughout all of those builds? If so, I'd replace it anyway. Voltage readings on a tester don't tell the whole story. I would switch to some other modern name brand CPU just to be sure.

I can understand wanting to get a 939 system running. I had an EPoX nforce 3 Ultra AGP board back in the day (managed to get it back like 10 years after selling it to a guy!) and for a little while I had a DFI Lanparty nforce 4 Ultra, which was my first PCI-E system. They were solid systems, but neither really blew me away because games were really starting to get CPU heavy at that time, and those chips just didn't overclock well at all (compared to the Athlon XP I had before that). Going from an XP 4200+ to a Core 2 Duo E6750 a couple years later was a pretty huge leap in performance from what I remember, especially after overclocking. Much more noticeable at the time than ~2Ghz Athlon XP to Athlon 64 3000+ (1.8Ghz 939).

If you have pretty much given up on keeping it all from 2005, I would just go with the 775 board and drop whichever middle of the road Core 2 Duo you want in there and call it a day. If you ever come across a good, reliable 939 board for CHEAP you can take another stab at it then. You'll drive yourself crazy trying to chase after reliable socket 939 parts... that was peak capacitor plague era as far as I'm concerned. Lots of unreliable boards out there for that and other reasons. I'm very happy that my EPoX 9NDA3J still works so well, even with a modded Beta BIOS that allows Athlon X2 CPUs, but even that super solid board suffers from nvidia's nForce 3 AGP GART driver limitations so it's impossible to use certain combinations GPUs, operating systems and processors. I had it all ready to run the X2 4200+, 4GB of DDR and an AGP HD3850 to see how a beastly AGP system would handle more modern software but it just isn't possible to use that combination under anything newer than Windows XP without dropping to PCI compatibility mode. I think I made a thread about that around here a while back... it was a major bummer to realize that.

That is just kind of an irritating time to revisit in this hobby IMO. The end of 3dfx, start of the pixel-shader era, 1Ghz CPU barrier, P4 vs Athlon XP, and release of 6800 Series from 2000-2004 was a really really interesting time. And the time of Core 2 Duo, DX10 (8800GTX) from late 2006-2008 started a pretty huge leap in computing performance... but trying to dabble in retro computing specifically in the 2005-2006 period just ends up filled with odd compatibility issues, OS\driver limitations (XP\Vista+; loss of hardware sound), capacitor plagued hardware, unreliable components that are getting way too complex to repair, etc. All my opinion of course. A lot of neat stuff happened then... I've just had several bad experiences dealing with hardware from that time period.

yes i tested with other PSU's and this one is brand new, its an EVGA Supernova 550W, I've had it an entire 8 months, I'm positive its not the PSU.

And I agree, it was my peak, I was just out of high school and had alot of time but no money, but I remember playing the gems back then.

Half Life 2, FarCry, F.E.A.R, Oblivion, COD2, BF2, Road to Hill 30, Splinter Cell Chaos Theroy, Medal of Honor Pacific Assault but I did it all with a Sempron 2200 and a 6200. I was so jealous of my best friend and his X2 4200 and 7800GT and how his games looked compared to mine. Of course he had a job but no rent, stayed at home with the folks for the first 2 years out of school, while I had rent and bills all on a Fastfood paycheck.

the only part I don't want to replicate is Limewire 🤣

candle_86 wrote on 2022-11-21, 09:16:

yes i tested with other PSU's and this one is brand new, its an EVGA Supernova 550W, I've had it an entire 8 months, I'm positive its not the PSU.

Probably not that then.

Just a bad bunch of parts I guess. Aside from the capacitor plague, these random failures and unreliability seem to be more common with AMD stuff from 939 and on though AM3. I really don't know why.

Ozzuneoj wrote on 2022-11-21, 09:21:

candle_86 wrote on 2022-11-21, 09:16:

yes i tested with other PSU's and this one is brand new, its an EVGA Supernova 550W, I've had it an entire 8 months, I'm positive its not the PSU.

Probably not that then.

Just a bad bunch of parts I guess. Aside from the capacitor plague, these random failures and unreliability seem to be more common with AMD stuff from 939 and on though AM3. I really don't know why.

Oh I agree, even early AM3 stuff I've noticed is iffy, I try to stick to later 800/900 series boards, the issues seemed to go away with those. I've got two broken MSI 770-G45 boards, but my ASUS 990FX R2.0 is rock solid and has been for 4 years. Does great with my Phenom II X4 955, now irony I do have a 970 board with an FX4150, thats a dead ringer preformance wise to a Phenom 9650 in the benchmarks I've ran, and just slightly slower than a Q6600, its funny its supposed to be newer but its just bad.

candle_86 wrote on 2022-11-21, 09:24:

Ozzuneoj wrote on 2022-11-21, 09:21:

candle_86 wrote on 2022-11-21, 09:16:

yes i tested with other PSU's and this one is brand new, its an EVGA Supernova 550W, I've had it an entire 8 months, I'm positive its not the PSU.

Probably not that then.

Just a bad bunch of parts I guess. Aside from the capacitor plague, these random failures and unreliability seem to be more common with AMD stuff from 939 and on though AM3. I really don't know why.

Oh I agree, even early AM3 stuff I've noticed is iffy, I try to stick to later 800/900 series boards, the issues seemed to go away with those. I've got two broken MSI 770-G45 boards, but my ASUS 990FX R2.0 is rock solid and has been for 4 years. Does great with my Phenom II X4 955, now irony I do have a 970 board with an FX4150, thats a dead ringer preformance wise to a Phenom 9650 in the benchmarks I've ran, and just slightly slower than a Q6600, its funny its supposed to be newer but its just bad.

Sent you a PM. 😀

(Just in case you don't get notifications for those)

candle_86 wrote on 2022-11-21, 07:50:

So the issue i have had so far […]
Show full quote

So the issue i have had so far

A8N-E worked for 3 days then dead,
...
A8N-SLI Worked for 2 weeks then just stopped posting,
...
HP OEM 939 board - Worked for a month, then just won't power up anymore,
...
HP OEM AM2 system, its unstable for reasons I can't even explain, it works for a bit then just doesn't, its not heat related, its not power related
HP OEM AM2 board 2, worked for a bit then blew a voltage cap, it still posts but again unstable
M2N-E SLI memory channel 2 is dead somehow

All those ASUS mainboards are based on crappy Nvidia NForce chipsets. Maybe it's about the HP boards too. For diagnostic matter, hot air 200-300°C for a half of minute applied to the die revives chip temporary. VIA chipsets (for all those platforms) are much more reliable.

Roman555 wrote on 2022-11-21, 11:28:

candle_86 wrote on 2022-11-21, 07:50:

So the issue i have had so far […]
Show full quote

So the issue i have had so far

A8N-E worked for 3 days then dead,
...
A8N-SLI Worked for 2 weeks then just stopped posting,
...
HP OEM 939 board - Worked for a month, then just won't power up anymore,
...
HP OEM AM2 system, its unstable for reasons I can't even explain, it works for a bit then just doesn't, its not heat related, its not power related
HP OEM AM2 board 2, worked for a bit then blew a voltage cap, it still posts but again unstable
M2N-E SLI memory channel 2 is dead somehow

All those ASUS mainboards are based on crappy Nvidia NForce chipsets. Maybe it's about the HP boards too. For diagnostic matter, hot air 200-300°C for a half of minute applied to the die revives chip temporary. VIA chipsets (for all those platforms) are much more reliable.

Yea they are all based on the 6150 SE for the HP OEM boards, I do have an ASUS A8S-X based on the SIS Chipset but it's also got blown caps, came that way

What I might do is keep an eye out for the ASROCK 939 based on the 785G or 790GX, they where made later in 2008/2009 so might be more reliable if i can find one.

I'm an epic sense of irony I now have an emachined board based on the K8M890. Oddly the pcie 16x slot is only wired 8x but I don't think it hurts performance to bad as far cry 1600x1200 with 16af and hdr 7 got me 38fps with an am2 4000 and 7800gt