VOGONS

Search

Common searches

Ti4200 in AGP4x on AOpen MX64 / Acer S61 (VIA 133A)

Topic actions

First post, by tenyuhuang

Posted on 
User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

They said VIA Apollo 133A is a bad idea - it is.

I know this might be discussed over a million times, my apology in advance - but I think I've got this last resort since everything I've read and tried doesn't work. 😵

Got myself an Acer S61 motherboard, which is almost an AOpen MX64 with a few differences in jumpers.
It's a VIA Apollo 133A-powered motherboard, with AGP 4x available as an advantage over ASUS P3V133.

The biggest problem I'm having is to get GeForce FX5700/Ti4200 to work in AGP 4x, since they had unusually terrible performances in 2x (3900~4200 in 3DMark 2001SE @ Pentium 3 1GHz).
At first I failed a million times trying to make FX5700 happy with 4x, but with all attempts failed - black screens, system crash, no games running, maybe that card was just too much.
So I decided to get myself a GF4 Ti4200 since I've saw people having a good score on other 133A systems with it (even in AGP2x !); but once again, with no good results whatsoever.

Things I've tried:
1) Installing a hundred versions of VIA 4in1 - 4.35, 4,43, 5.10a;
(Aida DID report the system as AGP4x capable; so I suppose I didn't get the driver wrong.)
2) Installing maybe half a thousand versions of Nvidia drivers from 28.xx to the last Win9x Forceware;
(...and told the system to trespass the border with EnableVia4x=1.)
3) Flashing the motherboard with the BIOSes from its cousins - namely, AX64 and AX64Pro; (Yes they DO boot.)
4) Tuning the super infamous AGP Driving Value with all popular choices: CC, B9, BA, EA, DA, FF;
5) Installing Windows ME instead of 98SE;
6) Installing an overkill power supply rated at 350W max;
7) Changing my ram sticks.

So far, nothing has got me near a playable AGP4x status.
That said, I'm curious if anyone have ever got a card like Ti4200 running in AGP4x on this motherboard?
Or did I just got a faulty mobo instead?

For reference, here is the rig:
AOpen MX64 (VIA Apollo 133A)
Pentium 3 Slot 1 1000/256/133 SL4BS @ 1 GHz (133x7.5)
Ramaxel SDRAM PC133 256MB x 2
Leadtek Winfast A280 (GeForce 4 Ti4200)

Thanks in advance! 😊

Reply 1 of 6, by swaaye

Posted on 
User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

It's probably a combination of inadequate AGP power delivery and buggy chipset. Cheaply built motherboard with a flaky chipset. Cards that use external power are usually the least unstable. Seems unlikely that you'll get that generation of VIA stable at 4X.

Reply 2 of 6, by ODwilly

Posted on 
User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I have noticed on my Asus VIA Apollo 133 board that ATI card's are much much easier to get going at AGP 4x. If I could find the motherboard manual, the previous owner dedicated an entire page on what bios settings and 4in1 drivers to use to get his ti4200 to work at 4x speed on it.

Main pc: Asus ROG 17. R9 5900HX, RTX 3070m, 16gb ddr4 3200, 1tb NVME.
Retro PC: Soyo P4S Dragon, 3gb ddr 266, 120gb Maxtor, Geforce Fx 5950 Ultra, SB Live! 5.1

Reply 3 of 6, by tenyuhuang

Posted on 
User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
swaaye wrote:

It's probably a combination of inadequate AGP power delivery and buggy chipset. Cheaply built motherboard with a flaky chipset. Cards that use external power are usually the least unstable. Seems unlikely that you'll get that generation of VIA stable at 4X.

I've almost gave up 4x since it seems that I should be able to get a nice score with 2x.
But instead, the best 3DMark I've got with this set was 5000, most of the time it only gives a 4000 - pretty underperformed if I'm to say.

ODwilly wrote:

I have noticed on my Asus VIA Apollo 133 board that ATI card's are much much easier to get going at AGP 4x. If I could find the motherboard manual, the previous owner dedicated an entire page on what bios settings and 4in1 drivers to use to get his ti4200 to work at 4x speed on it.

I originally considered to get myself an ATI since I dreamed to have one back in the days, but I've heard they're not too friendly with DX 3~7 games. Is it true?

Reply 4 of 6, by swaaye

Posted on 
User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

I have had freezing problems with Radeon 8500 on KT266/KT333. I'm not sure if there could be problems on Apollo Pro 133A. Seems possible.

Radeons don't officially support some things old D3D 3-5 games sometimes use. There's another thread about it. Table fog, 8-bit textures, etc. Games that use D3D 6 and newer should work ok.

Reply 5 of 6, by tenyuhuang

Posted on 
User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
swaaye wrote:

I have had freezing problems with Radeon 8500 on KT266/KT333. I'm not sure if there could be problems on Apollo Pro 133A. Seems possible.

Radeons don't officially support some things old D3D 3-5 games sometimes use. There's another thread about it. Table fog, 8-bit textures, etc. Games that use D3D 6 and newer should work ok.

I actually gave up the idea of going 4x since it seems my Pentium III will bottleneck it anyway.
I was finally able to score 6300 in 3DMark 2001 SE with that hardware 😊

Reply 6 of 6, by _StIwY_

Posted on 
User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Just for the record, I have an Acer S61 aswell, and i successfully flashed the BIOS (latest version is R1.04T) for the AOpen MX64. So the Acer S61 is just a re-branded AOpen MX64

That also removed the "Acer Aspire" logo at the boot. Very nice motherboard, i've used that as bench test since years, but eventually i will use that on a regular vintage PC soon. Never gave me stability problems.

Go to top of page Go to top of page
Back to Video
Close window
Close window