98SE. And it was on Core 2 Duo with P965 board, where everything else including GeForce 7000 series worked reasonably well.

havli wrote on 2023-07-24, 16:43:

98SE. And it was on Core 2 Duo with P965 board, where everything else including GeForce 7000 series worked reasonably well.

ok due it seems everyone tested this long time ago I will test this again on a pc similar to yours, asus p5kpl-am mobo + core 2 duo 8500+ geforce 8600gt
wait 24-48hs for my test I need to free up some hardisk ,prepare a pendrive with drivers and programs, install winme etc

The last supported GPU is 6xxx or prior to that for 98SE and most compatible. Anything later than that, not possible due to compatibility issues especially driver versions vs games.
The many older games also dictates the driver versions too. If you need to use 43.52 for some games, then that dictates Geforce4 or older.

Cheers,

hi guys again

to test the drivers i have been trying to install winme and win98se in this old asus motherboard and a sata hardrive, but it doesn't work
both winme or win98 start to install but then reboot and crash
it seems there is a problem with the sata drivers , I changed the sata settings in the bios to compatible but also it crash or do not recognizes the sata hardrive

there is a rare problem with sata hardrives and win9x versions? wtf

in this computer I have installed winxp and everything works fine but winme and win98 refuse to install there

I need to purchase an ide hardisk to install winme? what do you think guys?

Laser wrote on 2023-07-26, 20:49:

hi guys again […]
Show full quote

hi guys again

to test the drivers i have been trying to install winme and win98se in this old asus motherboard and a sata hardrive, but it doesn't work
both winme or win98 start to install but then reboot and crash
it seems there is a problem with the sata drivers , I changed the sata settings in the bios to compatible but also it crash or do not recognizes the sata hardrive

there is a rare problem with sata hardrives and win9x versions? wtf

in this computer I have installed winxp and everything works fine but winme and win98 refuse to install there

I need to purchase an ide hardisk to install winme? what do you think guys?

You need rloew's SATA patch. This must be done right before you actually boot into the newly installed Windows (for hardware detection and system configuration).

Note that rloew's SATA patch does not conflict with PATCHATA (aka HCDP). If your disks or partitions are going to be larger than 128GiB, you need to apply both patches.

Unified Shader cards don't work under 9x except as basic 2d accelerators (using the default SVGA driver), no 3d functions work regardless of what the "tweaked" drivers report, this includes any card from the Geforce 8000/9000 series of cards. The drivers will detect the card correctly due to the inf tweaks but the system will usually crash at boot with a Nvcore.VXD error if you get any error reporting at all.

The last Nvidia card known working for 9x was the 7900GT(S) or 7950GT (Same card really, just a die shrink) - Conflicting reports here but there are 9x drivers for the 7950GT AGP that are known to work, that said the 7000 series isn't terribly compatible with 9x games usually being worse than the 6000 series.

AFAIK the 7900GTX and 7950 GX2 do not work under 9x either.

If by some miracle you manage to get 3d working then you must share your black magic voodoo with us all.

AFAIK the 7900GTX and 7950 GX2 do not work under 9x either.

Not sure about 7950GX2, but any basic G70/G71 card, regardless of configuration, will work.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2023-07-27, 10:15:

AFAIK the 7900GTX and 7950 GX2 do not work under 9x either.

Not sure about 7950GX2, but any basic G70/G71 card, regardless of configuration, will work.

Thats what I thought but the 7900 GTX only ever released as native PCIe, in theory it shouldn't have any issues working under 9x but I can find no evidence of anyone having done that, perhaps someone here has gotten it working as a 9x GPU.

The 7950GX2 is a different issue due to it being both a SLI and PCIe card, now in theory that shouldn't be a problem since SLI is done on the card itself but again like the 7900GTX there are no reports of anyone having got it working under 9x.

7900 GTX works in 98. https://hwbot.org/submission/3228042_zafiropo … gtx_69807_marks

LSS10999 wrote on 2023-07-27, 00:07:

You need rloew's SATA patch. This must be done right before you actually boot into the newly installed Windows (for hardware detection and system configuration).

Note that rloew's SATA patch does not conflict with PATCHATA (aka HCDP). If your disks or partitions are going to be larger than 128GiB, you need to apply both patches.

ok I have downloaded this
https://retrosystemsrevival.blogspot.com/2020 … hes-bundle.html

I will check if this work , I will read docs etc otherwise I will purchase some old ide hardisk around 80gb, these ones works in winme and win98 Im sure

I can corroborate your results of very low performance with a PCIe 6800 variant on Windows 98. With the standard Quake3 benchmark (version 1.32c, map demo001, 1024x768, everything maxxed out), I get between 120fps and 130fps whereas with an equivalent AGP system, the results are in the several hundreds of fps.

System specs are very similar. The PCIe system is ICH7 with DDR2 and a 3Ghz Wolfdale and the AGP system is an 865G with same CPU and DDR memory. The only thing different on the PCIe system is PATCHMEM used in default mode which restricts memory to 512mb by modifying some Windows files. Swap is also disabled on the PCIe system (SSD).

I'll test with an ATI card next.

Laser wrote on 2023-07-27, 12:38:

ok I have downloaded this https://retrosystemsrevival.blogspot.com/2020 … hes-bundle.html […]
Show full quote

LSS10999 wrote on 2023-07-27, 00:07:

You need rloew's SATA patch. This must be done right before you actually boot into the newly installed Windows (for hardware detection and system configuration).

Note that rloew's SATA patch does not conflict with PATCHATA (aka HCDP). If your disks or partitions are going to be larger than 128GiB, you need to apply both patches.

ok I have downloaded this
https://retrosystemsrevival.blogspot.com/2020 … hes-bundle.html

I will check if this work , I will read docs etc otherwise I will purchase some old ide hardisk around 80gb, these ones works in winme and win98 Im sure

So what does it look like? Do we see a working Tesla under W98 or does the myth remain a myth?

Alright, I just tested with an ATI X800XT PCIe, I got about 515 FPS. So something is wrong with the 6800 drivers for Windows 9x. I also want to make a correction to my previous post where I stated that RLOEW's patchmem limited the memory to 512mb. In fact, I had inserted two lines in system.ini which caused that. I removed those lines, and Windows now shows 2047MB (2gb) of ram. This did not help the 6800.

Another thing to note is that Quake3 would not start with driver 77.72. It would get past the blue loading Window and go full screen, but then show black and white strips which constituted gibberish on the screen and then the system would hang. Driver 81.98 worked fine, if not for the slowdown.

I have requested that someone test Quake3 on this thread to see if they can replicate the anomaly with their Windows 98 PCIe systems.

I will also attempt to acquire and re-test with a PCIe 6800GS as was advised earlier in this thread (it was stated that it is native PCIe without a bridge)... But the truth is that the 6800GS has newer (read: not as good) silicon as the 6800 and 6800GT.

If it help, here is result on Sempron64 2800+ @2GHz, AMD 780 (aka 760G) and GeForce 7600GS (but TOP edition from Asus, so over GT - 600/1400):

mockingbird wrote on 2023-08-18, 15:19:

Alright, I just tested with an ATI X800XT PCIe, I got about 515 FPS. So something is wrong with the 6800 drivers for Windows 9x […]
Show full quote

Alright, I just tested with an ATI X800XT PCIe, I got about 515 FPS. So something is wrong with the 6800 drivers for Windows 9x. I also want to make a correction to my previous post where I stated that RLOEW's patchmem limited the memory to 512mb. In fact, I had inserted two lines in system.ini which caused that. I removed those lines, and Windows now shows 2047MB (2gb) of ram. This did not help the 6800.

Another thing to note is that Quake3 would not start with driver 77.72. It would get past the blue loading Window and go full screen, but then show black and white strips which constituted gibberish on the screen and then the system would hang. Driver 81.98 worked fine, if not for the slowdown.

I have requested that someone test Quake3 on this thread to see if they can replicate the anomaly with their Windows 98 PCIe systems.

I will also attempt to acquire and re-test with a PCIe 6800GS as was advised earlier in this thread (it was stated that it is native PCIe without a bridge)... But the truth is that the 6800GS has newer (read: not as good) silicon as the 6800 and 6800GT.

I obtained a 6800GS (NV42) PCIe today and tested again. Indeed, the bridge chip on the 6800GT/Ultra (NV45) was the issue, but this card performs like a bat out of hell. With 77.72, I get 647.2 FPS, 100 fps more than the X800XT PCIe.

Compatibility-wise, this has to be among the best cards for Win98. You get pretty good (read: not as good as GeForce FX) compatibility, table fog, and it can chew up and spit out anything you can throw at it. It runs far cooler than the Radeon X800 (thanks to a much better cooling system which also cools the RAM) and should last much longer, not to mention the lack of (decent) table fog in Win98 with the Radeon.

mockingbird wrote on 2023-09-29, 00:47:

I obtained a 6800GS (NV42) PCIe today and tested again. Indeed, the bridge chip on the 6800GT/Ultra (NV45) was the issue, but this card performs like a bat out of hell. With 77.72, I get 647.2 FPS, 100 fps more than the X800XT PCIe.

Compatibility-wise, this has to be among the best cards for Win98. You get pretty good (read: not as good as GeForce FX) compatibility, table fog, and it can chew up and spit out anything you can throw at it. It runs far cooler than the Radeon X800 (thanks to a much better cooling system which also cools the RAM) and should last much longer, not to mention the lack of (decent) table fog in Win98 with the Radeon.

The PCIe 7800GTX is an absolute beast. 825FPS on DEMO001, almost 200fps more than the 6800GT. If we ignore the reliability problems of this generation, this would be the absolute fastest/best card for Win9x. In theory, it should be as reliable as the 6800GS (which isn't saying much)... Both NV42 and G70 are TSMC 110nm, according to Wikipedia. But the reliability of the 6800GS isn't that great either... It's a bit confusing, because the Wikipedia chart claims NV42 was produced both by IBM 130nm and TSMC 110nm... Either way, IBM 130nm parts (again, PCIe, not AGP) should be considered reliable but unfortunately not a good option for Windows 98 because of the issues with the slowdown caused by the bridge logic.

I obtained a 6800GS (NV42) PCIe today and tested again. Indeed, the bridge chip on the 6800GT/Ultra (NV45) was the issue, but this card performs like a bat out of hell. With 77.72, I get 647.2 FPS, 100 fps more than the X800XT PCIe.

Compatibility-wise, this has to be among the best cards for Win98.

You say that because you only play OpenGL or DX8+ games. I also have an nvidia 6800 AGP (Asus V9999) and with DX7 or less just sucks. Try to play original Unreal with default DirectX engine. On my config the intro flyby nali castle runs at 1FPS or crash. I have problems with other games such missing menù, textures, and severe glitches. Furthermore, nvidia drivers that are too new break shutdown and standby as well as giving an error if you try to uninstall them.

usermame wrote on 2023-10-19, 18:31:

You say that because you only play OpenGL or DX8+ games. I also have an nvidia 6800 AGP (Asus V9999) and with DX7 or less just sucks. Try to play original Unreal with default DirectX engine. On my config the intro flyby nali castle runs at 1FPS or crash. I have problems with other games such missing menù, textures, and severe glitches. Furthermore, nvidia drivers that are too new break shutdown and standby as well as giving an error if you try to uninstall them.

Yup, you're right. That's why I have a seperate "slow" Win98 machine with a TNT2 and some ancient Detonator driver, because even "safe" detonator drivers like 28.32 or or 45.23 don't work properly with many DX6/DX7 titles. When I say ancient, I mean ancient, like Detonator 2.08.

For DX8/DX9 titles, nVidia 6800/7800 is king. You retain table fog in Windows 98, and the cards do not run nearly as warm as ATI from that era.

mockingbird wrote on 2023-10-19, 21:14:

Yup, you're right. That's why I have a seperate "slow" Win98 machine with a TNT2 and some ancient Detonator driver, because even "safe" detonator drivers like 28.32 or or 45.23 don't work properly with many DX6/DX7 titles.

Do you have specific games which don't work with those driver versions? For example, I know Need for Speed: High Stakes won't run with 45.23 and needs 30.82 or lower.

BTW, the TNT2 doesn't support paletted textures, so your compatibility is slightly impaired even on that slower system.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2023-10-19, 21:21:

mockingbird wrote on 2023-10-19, 21:14:

Yup, you're right. That's why I have a seperate "slow" Win98 machine with a TNT2 and some ancient Detonator driver, because even "safe" detonator drivers like 28.32 or or 45.23 don't work properly with many DX6/DX7 titles.

Do you have specific games which don't work with those driver versions? For example, I know Need for Speed: High Stakes won't run with 45.23 and needs 30.82 or lower.

BTW, the TNT2 doesn't support paletted textures, so your compatibility is slightly impaired even on that slower system.

Off the top of my head, Trickstyle would go bananas with newer Detonators... I took 8-bit paletted textures into consideration... It's overstated. Table fog OTOH I think is quite necessary.

You agreed with me on this point in the past.

I do take back what I said however about Radeons and the very limited table fog support on 9x... In my opinion it's too limited to be satisfactory, and sometimes doesn't even work at all with the tweak. So I think newer Radeons and Windows 98 are a no go.