The best I was able to come up with in my testing was the EDID Extension 126. The Nvidia driver likely sees that and thinks it is a TV. NVIDIA handles this with driver updates but when you have newer monitors released and no updated drivers then this happens. Likely modifying the EDID on the monitor or in transit (EDID emulation) or possibly using a Quadro card (that has the issue...) would work but other than that you'll need to use older drivers. If someone knew what they were doing they could likely modify the driver.....

I simply use VGA to DVI active adapter (VC 160A), and bypass all "digital limitation" BS NV does in later drivers.
Alternative would be to use GCN1 GPU (which also doesn't have limitations on DP speed under XP).

Was there any particular reason for choosing a 750w PSU? I'm considering buying a 650w for my build.

Killermac wrote on 2023-08-04, 13:39:

Was there any particular reason for choosing a 750w PSU? I'm considering buying a 650w for my build.

No specific reason. It just happened to be a spare PSU I had on hand.

Just wanted to make a suggestion. Why not go with XP x64? I know it gets a bad rap for some driver incompatibility back in actual XP days but I've found it to work perfectly fine in my own build.

You could upgrade to a server motherboard and run dual xeons with tons of memory and max out the potential of that 980ti.

I guess to be fair, Server 2003 wouldn't be "XP".

I like what you have so far.

SureSh0t wrote on 2023-08-18, 23:35:

Just wanted to make a suggestion. Why not go with XP x64?

For 16-bit Windows compatibility. When I originally started this system one of my goals was to have compatibility for older 16-bit windows games, mainly Civilization 2.

Even though I've since upgraded the system a lot from what I started with, I've found that Civ 2 has scaled nicely, as it fully supports native 1920x1200 resolution which is awesome.

So I'm keeping 32-bit XP for that reason. 😀

You could upgrade to a server motherboard and run dual xeons with tons of memory and max out the potential of that 980ti.

Yeah, the 980Ti is a bit wasted in this build. I've thought about downgrading to an early GPU and maybe doing a Windows 7 build and reallocating the 980Ti there. Though since Steam is discontinuing Win 7 support, I'm also not sure how much mileage I'd get out of a Win 7 build...

I like what you have so far.

Thank you! I'm quite happy with it as it runs basically everything I want it to. 😁

Nice I've upgraded my xp build with x-fi titanium and silent frozr msi gtx 970 from my daily use build as I've upgraded to silent Asus 3060ti tuf. It's not had much use but hasa large hard drive with a tonne of good games of olde courtesy of mercs123
😀
I may install xp on an iMac 2011 27" that I bought recently but don't have time..

Shponglefan wrote on 2023-07-21, 02:06:

mrzmaster wrote on 2023-07-20, 19:50:

How's the Asus PA248QV for XP gaming doing? I was thinking of getting a 16:10 for my upcoming more powerful XP build (currently have an EIZO S2133BK) to stretch its legs into 1920x1200. I started looking at used 16:10 displays but then saw the PA248QV new is pretty reasonable.

For slightly older games at 1024x768 or 800x600, I generally prefer a CRT.

I don't want to be annoying or bother you, but if you have, could you show me a photo of the 1024x768 resolution? I'm not sure whether to get the PA248QV or the EIZO S1233. It's a machine with triple boot between XP, Windows 7 and Windows 10, and although I will enjoy 16:10 a lot, a specific online game that I want to start playing has this resolution as the sharpest.

Killermac wrote on 2023-12-29, 00:11:

I don't want to be annoying or bother you, but if you have, could you show me a photo of the 1024x768 resolution? I'm not sure whether to get the PA248QV or the EIZO S1233. It's a machine with triple boot between XP, Windows 7 and Windows 10, and although I will enjoy 16:10 a lot, a specific online game that I want to start playing has this resolution as the sharpest.

Sure thing. I took a wide shot of 1024x768 and a couple close-ups with different sharpness settings on the monitor (zero and 80 respectively).

Unfortunately the message board software seems to shrink the images upon upload, so these are not the original raw images. This makes it more difficult to see the difference between sharpness levels. In person, there is more of an obvious difference.

Shponglefan wrote on 2023-12-29, 16:49:

Sure thing. I took a wide shot of 1024x768 and a couple close-ups with different sharpness settings on the monitor (zero and 80 respectively).

Just a quick note on gaming in non-native resolutions (i.e. anything below 1600x1200) on the ProArt.

I found that using a VGA connection in such cases can improve the sharpness a bit further than what's possible over DisplayPort or HDMI. This is even noticeable on my GTX 970 when using a passive DVI-I to VGA adapter, and hooking it up to the ProArt's VGA input. I'm mentioning this because I remembered us discussing sharpness of non-native resolutions in the past, but I don't know if you ever tried using VGA.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-07-28, 08:28:

Shponglefan wrote on 2023-12-29, 16:49:

Sure thing. I took a wide shot of 1024x768 and a couple close-ups with different sharpness settings on the monitor (zero and 80 respectively).

Just a quick note on gaming in non-native resolutions (i.e. anything below 1600x1200) on the ProArt.

I found that using a VGA connection in such cases can improve the sharpness a bit further than what's possible over DisplayPort or HDMI. This is even noticeable on my GTX 970 when using a passive DVI-I to VGA adapter, and hooking it up to the ProArt's VGA input. I'm mentioning this because I remembered us discussing sharpness of non-native resolutions in the past, but I don't know if you ever tried using VGA.

Hadn't tried a basic VGA cable, mainly because my GPU lacks a VGA port. I'm not even sure if I have an adapter for one on hand.

But it's good to know that the sharpness is improved over other cable. I'd be curious as to why that's the case. Just an artifact of using an analog signal versus digital?

You are using a gen2 (sandy) MB with a gen3 (ivy) cpu. Your gpu is pcie 3 capable, so is your cpu. Does the board handle pcie 3 if used with an ivy cpu?

ux-3 wrote on 2024-08-05, 05:53:

You are using a gen2 (sandy) MB with a gen3 (ivy) cpu. Your gpu is pcie 3 capable, so is your cpu. Does the board handle pcie 3 if used with an ivy cpu?

Yes, the Asus P8Z68-V Pro/Gen 3 supports PCIe 3.0.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-08-05, 05:34:

Hadn't tried a basic VGA cable, mainly because my GPU lacks a VGA port. I'm not even sure if I have an adapter for one on hand.

Are you sure? My MSI GTX 970 has one DVI-I port, while the other one is DVI-D only. The former happily accepts a passive DVI to VGA adapter. Those things used to come with older GPUs, which is where I got mine, but you can buy one separately for very little money. It looks like this:

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-08-05, 05:34:

But it's good to know that the sharpness is improved over other cable. I'd be curious as to why that's the case. Just an artifact of using an analog signal versus digital?

Honestly, I don't know, but it's plainly visible once you try both. BTW, this goes for older GPUs as well. So if you have a GeForce FX 5200 or something, which has both a DVI and a VGA port, try a comparison between the two outputs on the ProArt. For any non-native resolution, VGA should be sharper.