My "Ultimate" Windows XP build started out as a Dual Core system (E8400 then E8600). But I replaced it with an i7-3770k, because the dual core system architecture was acting as a bottleneck for performance.

Quad Core CPU probably not needed unless you are specifically using software written for it. Most gaming in Windows XP is going to benefit from raw speed rather than multi-core.

Quad core for XP is not necessary. Though there are fixes, some games really don't like multi-core CPUs (for example Need for Speed: Underground 2, Fallout 3), but there are fixes, otherwise the C2D E8xxx series have plenty of power for XP era games.

The Q/P/G35 and Q/P/G45 chipsets are good.

Graphics card compatibility is overall good over the XP era, you can go with late-era cards for performance. Some early era games have issues with late-era graphics cards (for example Doom III not detecting VRAM correctly, Republic Commando crashes past GF7000 series cards), but there are fixes. As for speed, there are certain games that need a lot (Mass Effect, World in Conflict, Crysis). I wouldn't go below a GTX650 Ti or equivalent. This one also offers ShadowPlay support if you want to record gameplay footage without other equipment, but negligible performance loss. Also, a lot of games past 2008 support PhysX which tanks performance on ATI/AMD cards.

You probably also want an EAX compatible sound card.

Speed sensitivity is no longer a serious issue in the XP era, pretty much everything can be solved with simply turning VSync on.

Just a further note on performance, it will also depend on the type of display / resolution and frame rates you are targeting.

I started with a 4:3 CRT (1024x768 @ 85Hz) then switched to a 4:3 LCD (1600x1200 @ 60 Hz), and finally a 16:10 LCD (1920 x 1200 @ 75Hz).

The latter is pushing a lot more pixels than a 4:3 display, so performance is impacted accordingly.

My 775 system is a P5Q Pro Turbo with a Xeon X5460 and an HD6800 running WinXP. It scores around 68,000 points in 3D Mark 03.

doublebuffer wrote on 2023-07-21, 13:28:

blazingly fast eXPrience

Imo its like buying a "fast" sport car from the nineties. Other than looks/branding its worse in every way from average modern alternative. There is maybe 0.1% of things that strictly require XP and wont work otherwise, everything else can be soft patched to work just fine in contemporary Win10 with much faster and cheaper modern components.

rasz_pl wrote on 2023-07-22, 20:46:

Imo its like buying a "fast" sport car from the nineties. Other than looks/branding its worse in every way from average modern alternative. There is maybe 0.1% of things that strictly require XP and wont work otherwise, everything else can be soft patched to work just fine in contemporary Win10 with much faster and cheaper modern components.

We'll have to agree to disagree. The loss of EAX with the transition to Vista was a biggie. Get a Core 2 or Ivybridge or lower core system paired with a real X-Fi soundcard and there are things you can't get with a modern version of Windows. Ya, the games run fine with modern systems, but they don't sound right.

SScorpio wrote on 2023-07-22, 21:00:

The loss of EAX

Re: Getting EAX working on Win10 without a Creative Labs Sound Card

I have three lga775 builds, it’s a fast fun platform. See if you can get an x48 chipset, failing that x38 is good too

SScorpio wrote on 2023-07-22, 21:00:

We'll have to agree to disagree. The loss of EAX with the transition to Vista was a biggie. Get a Core 2 or Ivybridge or lower core system paired with a real X-Fi soundcard and there are things you can't get with a modern version of Windows. Ya, the games run fine with modern systems, but they don't sound right.

The i3 3250 is good for this. Dual core, but 3.5ghz Turbo. So a lot of single threaded performance for your XP gaming and the chip is cheap to get because no 'normal person' wants a dual core Ivy Bridge even if they are running Socket 1155 board for some reason.

Though last month I just got an i5-3570 for $20 CDN and that boosts to 3.8 ... that seemed to be the sweet spot of performance per dollar before the curve went parabolic for the "best possibles"

But anyhoo core 2... if you want to push insane FSB then research what chipset lets you do that. I was going though the reports for my boards and it seemed the g45 maxed out lower than 790i... 450 or a little under, vs 500. Also Xeons... basically get Extreme Edition C2Qs for cheap... 771 to 775 mod.

BitWrangler wrote on 2023-07-23, 05:43:

790i

Well, I've built one recently and whatever you do... stay away from the nVIDIA chipsets for these. In theory, they overclock better, in practice... d*mn thing is unstable. The Intel x48 is the chipset to get if you can find one at a good price. It is stable and compatible with everything. You won't get random issues like your Ethernet dropping off. It will run beautifully and allow you the true and authentic Core 2 experience. It also does the 1,600MHz FSB if that's your thing.

rasz_pl wrote on 2023-07-22, 20:46:

doublebuffer wrote on 2023-07-21, 13:28:

blazingly fast eXPrience

Imo its like buying a "fast" sport car from the nineties. Other than looks/branding its worse in every way from average modern alternative. There is maybe 0.1% of things that strictly require XP and wont work otherwise, everything else can be soft patched to work just fine in contemporary Win10 with much faster and cheaper modern components.

If you go that far, it's pretty much true for this entire hobby. You can pretty much use DosBox and PCem for everything and skip buying those expensive and unreliable old 486-VLB systems.

At the same time, XP-era/XP-compatible hardware IS cheap. Much cheaper than modern stuff. At the low-end you can get a HP, Dell or Fujitsu office PC ready to go for 20€ or less, a Radeon HD6770 for another 10€ and a Sound Blaster Audigy or X-fi for which you might have to go up as high as 20€ if you want it right away. That's 50€ and you pretty much covered everything.

If you're going for quadcores couple suggestions:
P45 motherboard with xeon mod X5460 is probably the best option. Cheap and overclocks easily to 4.0 - 4.5ghz.

X38 / X48 often requires QX9xxx cpu to overclock to the max. Too expensive to make any sense unless you already have the parts.

DDR3 boards are more rare but good DDR3 ~1600mhz cl6 has small performance benefit vs 1066mhz CL5 DDR2.

Repo Man11 wrote on 2023-07-21, 21:18:

My 775 system is a P5Q Pro Turbo with a Xeon X5460 and an HD6800 running WinXP. It scores around 68,000 points in 3D Mark 03.

If you buy a video card paired with a xeon, you can look in the direction of FirePro.
The same Radeon, only performed "for business".
An interesting option for the stylization of "workstation".

Mahigan wrote on 2023-07-23, 05:48:

BitWrangler wrote on 2023-07-23, 05:43:

790i

Well, I've built one recently and whatever you do... stay away from the nVIDIA chipsets for these. In theory, they overclock better, in practice... d*mn thing is unstable. The Intel x48 is the chipset to get if you can find one at a good price. It is stable and compatible with everything. You won't get random issues like your Ethernet dropping off. It will run beautifully and allow you the true and authentic Core 2 experience. It also does the 1,600MHz FSB if that's your thing.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but nVidia chipsets aren't made for OC at all. They have FSB holes from what I remember reading.

timsdf wrote on 2023-07-23, 09:13:

X5460 is probably the best option. Cheap and overclocks easily to 4.0 - 4.5ghz.

Is it necessary though? A top Core2 at around 3.0-3.3GHz is plenty powerful for all of the XP era already.

RandomStranger wrote on 2023-07-23, 14:14:

Is it necessary though? A top Core2 at around 3.0-3.3GHz is plenty powerful for all of the XP era already.

I wish I had tested Neverwinter Nights 2 with E8600 while I still had it installed, I honestly wouldn't be too surprised if it can't keep stable 60fps. That game seems to be the Crysis of RPG's. I also remember getting some occasional stuttering with Supreme Commander with Q9550 when things got hectic back in the day, but that could have been caused by the GPU for all I know.

Not that there are lots of games Core 2 couldn't run great, just saying.

I guess I can imagine Supreme Commander being a CPU killer. Battles with thousands of units on huge maps sounds CPU heavy. NWN2 however, I'd be surprised if it's issues, if there are any, would be on the CPU.

RandomStranger wrote on 2023-07-23, 14:14:

timsdf wrote on 2023-07-23, 09:13:

X5460 is probably the best option. Cheap and overclocks easily to 4.0 - 4.5ghz.

Is it necessary though?

Overclocking may not be necessary, but Xeon is strongly recommended.
Xeon has much more cache and all sorts of SSE command extensions. L versions are also quite cold.

From a practical point of view, you need to choose a chipset with 4 DDR2 RAM slots or with a pair of DDR3. So that there is no limit in 4GB of RAM. Although for XP 4GB is more than enough.
And its good would be the chipset with PCI-e version 2, for example, G45 instead of G41.
Again, the G41 was often liked to be linked with the ICH7.
ICH7 mobile can do AHCI, but it has SATA2 disabled.
ICH 7 base - SATA2 but without AHCI.
Raid - able to SATA 2 and Ahci.

You can choose for a long time.