What software do you want to run on this? XP or 98SE?

VivienM wrote on 2023-09-09, 21:17:

What software do you want to run on this? XP or 98SE?

Both.

Here is my view: if you want to do this with a brand name machine, look for an old-fashioned Dell, Gateway, etc. (Not sure when Gateway got out of the old-fashioned custom PC business)

I had a Dell PIII from 2000, it had nothing on the motherboard, not even sound, video, network, etc. Just lots of PCI slots and lots of good modular parts. Motherboards are generic Intel with generic Intel chipsets. Other than a proprietary PSU, those Dells from the peak of the built-to-order era will give you a perfectly good platform to start on something.

I would not recommend a "store PC" as a base for a retro project, or really anything else. Store PCs are full of little catch 22s. Lots won't have AGP/PCI-E x16 slots. Motherboards less likely to have a full complement of storage ports. Lots of soldered junk on the board. If you start with junk audio, junk networking, and junk video on board, trying to fix that will take you three expansion slots... which will be tight when those machines, certainly starting at the era you're talking about, often switched to microATX board factors. That being said, it's certainly possible to get lucky, e.g. get some unusual chipset with better retro-friendliness than the more high-end/common parts from the same era.

That being said, it seems more likely for store PCs to have survived to this day, and more likely that they'll be affordable. Good Win98SE-capable parts are not exactly cheap these days, at least not on eBay.

ChrisNonyminus wrote on 2023-09-09, 21:23:

VivienM wrote on 2023-09-09, 21:17:

What software do you want to run on this? XP or 98SE?

Both.

There's another recent thread about this where I think we convinced the OP to build a separate/newer system for XP. There's plenty of cheap C2D/C2Qs, Sandy Bridges, Ivy Bridges, AMD 7970s, etc floating around that will make a dramatically better XP system than one of the obvious 98SE-friendly early 2000s platforms. And at dramatically lower cost too.

And the nice thing is, because of the stagnation in desktop PCs in most of the past decade, there are a lot of people only upgrading from their enthusiast sandy/ivy bridge systems now and selling those parts cheap. Whereas, well, good luck finding a cheap socket 462 enthusiast motherboard today, especially after bad caps would have also significantly reduced the supply. And... well, the Intel side is messier - PIIIs are good but expensive and slow for XP, P4s don't have the best reputation, and anything i915 and newer is... substantially more complicated... for 98SE.

(Also, if you want to go AMD... that's another argument against pre-builts... in the early 2000s, it was only the bottom of the barrel retail systems that used AMD...)

I dont know I have been given a lot of prebuilts and most of them are trash, the older they are they better components they seem to have but most things after 2000s went under severe cost cutting methods. (I'm looking at you Dell and some Gateway) While some of the smaller prebuilts from lesser brands have actually have 3rd party motherboards that are much better as they were not sold in mass quantity to big brands where every penny matters.

I know this will very from person to person but anything after Pentium III I would personally go AMD up to maybe 1st gen Intel i generation but thats just me. I was a late adopter to XP (maybe 2004) as Win2k was working just fine for me and by that time I didnt need a space heater so I was on AMD.

My favorite system for 98/XP is my Athlon XP system, a socket 462 board but need a good 5+ volt psu. Price wise I dont know anymore .... simple things like that have gone crazy in the last few years, you dont happen to have access to a time machine do you? If you do send me a pm...

Grem Five wrote on 2023-09-09, 22:15:

I dont know I have been given a lot of prebuilts and most of them are trash, the older they are they better components they seem to have but most things after 2000s went under severe cost cutting methods. (I'm looking at you Dell and some Gateway) While some of the smaller prebuilts from lesser brands have actually have 3rd party motherboards that are much better as they were not sold in mass quantity to big brands where every penny matters.

Part of the problem, I think, is that building your own computer became a lot more accessible. People became older (I don't know how many 12 year olds can convince their parents to buy $2500+, or even $1500+, of parts that they would assemble themselves... probably not many. And many parents would be skeptical of Joe Schmoe's Clone Shop with the aisles overflowing with boxes of parts that some 17 year old kid in the back would assemble for $50.). Widespread Internet access made it much easier to learn how to build a system and to get help if one got in trouble. And to research parts, order parts, etc.

So that gradually eroded the higher end of the prebuilt market. And the middle end...

And frankly, the low end started to be a lot better. You could get your elderly aunt a Dell 2400/3000 with a Celeron for dirt cheap, ram it up a little, and that would be a nice machine for casual web browsing.

Grem Five wrote on 2023-09-09, 22:15:

I know this will very from person to person but anything after Pentium III I would personally go AMD up to maybe 1st gen Intel i generation but thats just me. I was a late adopter to XP (maybe 2004) as Win2k was working just fine for me and by that time I didnt need a space heater so I was on AMD.

Intel fanboy here, so I would probably say that (for an XP system) one should definitely include the C2D/C2Q, both in the original 65nm flavours and the dramatically less power hungry 45nm flavour. I continue to believe that the 45nm C2Q/C2Q LGA775 lineup will go down as one of the greatest processor families of all times, and I say this as someone who has had multiple systems on it, along with all my family members on 45nm C2Ds/C2Qs at various times. (And honestly, if you have 8+ gigs of RAM, unofficially install Windows 11 today on one of those and you have a perfectly competent productivity system fifteen years later. If you somehow have a DDR3 board, you can easily go to 16GB. The longevity of the C2D/C2Q is, in my view, one of the main reasons Microsoft is doing what they're doing with the Windows 11 requirements - they can't believe that those C2Ds/C2Qs that last paid for a Windows licence in 2009-10 are still happily in use running Windows 10. In some ways the C2D/C2Q is like... the end of history... for Windows desktop computing outside of gaming.).

But otherwise, I have difficulty defending most of Intel's 2001-2005 lineup, and I say this as someone who had a Willamette P4 with RDRAM back in the day (and a Prescott Deleron... does that establish me as the ultimate Intel fanboy, or would I have needed an 8xx Pentium D for that?).

So as suggested, I'm going to build a retro 98/XP PC from scratch and avoid any of that era's store PCs.
I'm looking at either an LGA775 (Core 2 Duo, later P4s and Celerons, etc) machine or a Socket 754 (Athlon 64 single core) machine.
I was told that, because I want to run 9x, multi-core CPUs such as the Core 2 Duo would make no sense for this build, thus if I were to use an LGA775, I should use a Celeron with it. Thus, I have my sights set on a Celeron 420 (mostly because of the number...) should I decide on LGA775 over 754.
As for the motherboard, I'm looking at a Super Micro C2SBA+ which I could get for roughly $60 with a Core 2 Duo and a cooler+RAM bundled in by the seller. Is this a good mobo?

ChrisNonyminus wrote on 2023-09-10, 00:00:

So as suggested, I'm going to build a retro 98/XP PC from scratch and avoid any of that era's store PCs. I'm looking at either a […]
Show full quote

So as suggested, I'm going to build a retro 98/XP PC from scratch and avoid any of that era's store PCs.
I'm looking at either an LGA775 (Core 2 Duo, later P4s and Celerons, etc) machine or a Socket 754 (Athlon 64 single core) machine.
I was told that, because I want to run 9x, multi-core CPUs such as the Core 2 Duo would make no sense for this build, thus if I were to use an LGA775, I should use a Celeron with it. Thus, I have my sights set on a Celeron 420 (mostly because of the number...) should I decide on LGA775 over 754.
As for the motherboard, I'm looking at a Super Micro C2SBA+ which I could get for roughly $60 with a Core 2 Duo and a cooler+RAM bundled in by the seller. Is this a good mobo?

I would not look at it that way. Here is what I would say:
1) faster CPU is unlikely to hurt you, and will help on the XP side. 1.6GHz Celeron single-core is probably the slowest Conroe-era chip available. That's going to be... less than half the single-core speed of a Q9650, probably 1/8th the speed if you wanted to run something multicore on the XP side. And I think I bought my Q9650 a few months ago for like $40CAD; a Q8400 is probably $15 on eBay.
2) you need to look very closely at your motherboard/chipset/etc, and video card. Unless you manage to get your hands on the rare Conroe-capable i865 boards, this is pushing you towards PCI-E, SATA, etc. I've been researching the same thing and... well, my sense is that getting Win98 SE on anything newer than i865 chipsets is a lot more challenging. Not impossible, but not straightforward. Not to mention that you're overwhelmingly likely to find that your motherboard network/sound/etc don't support 98 SE on a Conroe-era board.

My advice - get the 754 on an AGP board for Win98 after confirming that board's manufacturer has available 98 drivers. Phil on YouTube, at least, seems to really like the 754 platform for Win98. Get a nice AGP video card if you can find/afford one and a nice SB Audigy-type sound card.

Then get a LGA775 C2D/C2Q on PCI-E, ideally with DDR3 RAM (pricing of DDR3 RAM is dirt cheap now, and if you want to dual boot a 64-bit OS, you might as well have more RAM), or even a Sandy/Ivy Bridge, with a nice GPU for XP.

I just think trying to do 98SE on a ~2009 system is going to be a lot of work, a lot of hunting rare/expensive parts (e.g. the very few supported PCI-E GPUs for Win98 SE.. which will run XP-era games dreadfully compared to a 5-7 year newer GPU with no 98 SE support), etc. And trying to run XP on a single-core 754 system with a GeForce 4 or ATI 9800 or whatever Win98-friendly graphics card is... going to perform really, really badly.

VivienM wrote on 2023-09-10, 00:59:

I would not look at it that way. Here is what I would say: 1) faster CPU is unlikely to hurt you, and will help on the XP side. […]
Show full quote

ChrisNonyminus wrote on 2023-09-10, 00:00:

So as suggested, I'm going to build a retro 98/XP PC from scratch and avoid any of that era's store PCs. I'm looking at either a […]
Show full quote

So as suggested, I'm going to build a retro 98/XP PC from scratch and avoid any of that era's store PCs.
I'm looking at either an LGA775 (Core 2 Duo, later P4s and Celerons, etc) machine or a Socket 754 (Athlon 64 single core) machine.
I was told that, because I want to run 9x, multi-core CPUs such as the Core 2 Duo would make no sense for this build, thus if I were to use an LGA775, I should use a Celeron with it. Thus, I have my sights set on a Celeron 420 (mostly because of the number...) should I decide on LGA775 over 754.
As for the motherboard, I'm looking at a Super Micro C2SBA+ which I could get for roughly $60 with a Core 2 Duo and a cooler+RAM bundled in by the seller. Is this a good mobo?

I would not look at it that way. Here is what I would say:
1) faster CPU is unlikely to hurt you, and will help on the XP side. 1.6GHz Celeron single-core is probably the slowest Conroe-era chip available. That's going to be... less than half the single-core speed of a Q9650, probably 1/8th the speed if you wanted to run something multicore on the XP side. And I think I bought my Q9650 a few months ago for like $40CAD; a Q8400 is probably $15 on eBay.
2) you need to look very closely at your motherboard/chipset/etc, and video card. Unless you manage to get your hands on the rare Conroe-capable i865 boards, this is pushing you towards PCI-E, SATA, etc. I've been researching the same thing and... well, my sense is that getting Win98 SE on anything newer than i865 chipsets is a lot more challenging. Not impossible, but not straightforward. Not to mention that you're overwhelmingly likely to find that your motherboard network/sound/etc don't support 98 SE on a Conroe-era board.

My advice - get the 754 on an AGP board for Win98 after confirming that board's manufacturer has available 98 drivers. Phil on YouTube, at least, seems to really like the 754 platform for Win98. Get a nice AGP video card if you can find/afford one and a nice SB Audigy-type sound card.

Then get a LGA775 C2D/C2Q on PCI-E, ideally with DDR3 RAM (pricing of DDR3 RAM is dirt cheap now, and if you want to dual boot a 64-bit OS, you might as well have more RAM), or even a Sandy/Ivy Bridge, with a nice GPU for XP.

I just think trying to do 98SE on a ~2009 system is going to be a lot of work, a lot of hunting rare/expensive parts (e.g. the very few supported PCI-E GPUs for Win98 SE.. which will run XP-era games dreadfully compared to a 5-7 year newer GPU with no 98 SE support), etc. And trying to run XP on a single-core 754 system with a GeForce 4 or ATI 9800 or whatever Win98-friendly graphics card is... going to perform really, really badly.

Ok.
For 98SE, would a K8V-MX be a good motherboard?

ChrisNonyminus wrote on 2023-09-10, 01:18:

For 98SE, would a K8V-MX be a good motherboard?

Let's see what others more knowledgeable than me have to say, but at first glance, seems reasonable - VIA chipset, Asus has 98SE drivers for it on their web site, AGP, 2 PATA channels (and SATA).

VivienM wrote on 2023-09-10, 01:26:

ChrisNonyminus wrote on 2023-09-10, 01:18:

For 98SE, would a K8V-MX be a good motherboard?

Let's see what others more knowledgeable than me have to say, but at first glance, seems reasonable - VIA chipset, Asus has 98SE drivers for it on their web site, AGP, 2 PATA channels (and SATA).

I was going to say the same thing. It's newer than anything I associate with 98SE but it looks like it's a go. Be on the lookout for issues with 98SE and too much RAM, or too large a hard drive, etc.and be ready to look through msfn.org, install R. Loew patches, etc.

jakethompson1 wrote on 2023-09-10, 01:29:

VivienM wrote on 2023-09-10, 01:26:

ChrisNonyminus wrote on 2023-09-10, 01:18:

For 98SE, would a K8V-MX be a good motherboard?

Let's see what others more knowledgeable than me have to say, but at first glance, seems reasonable - VIA chipset, Asus has 98SE drivers for it on their web site, AGP, 2 PATA channels (and SATA).

I was going to say the same thing. It's newer than anything I associate with 98SE but it looks like it's a go. Be on the lookout for issues with 98SE and too much RAM, or too large a hard drive, etc.and be ready to look through msfn.org, install R. Loew patches, etc.

If this is a single-boot 98SE, I'd like to think too much RAM-type issues can be avoided - just put 256 or 512 megs on that board and you're done...

ChrisNonyminus wrote on 2023-09-09, 21:23:

VivienM wrote on 2023-09-09, 21:17:

What software do you want to run on this? XP or 98SE?

Both.

I agree with most of VivienM's points of view so I'll ask from another perspective: Must you build a dual-boot hybrid, or the space you have allows two or even three systems?

Note that I mention space instead of price/budget as the price of one decent hybrid system can be equivalent to multiple decent -- if not excellent -- systems that each focuses on one OS/era. The more eras you want to squeeze into one system, the more compromises you have to make.

ChrisNonyminus wrote on 2023-09-09, 21:23:

I was told that, because I want to run 9x, multi-core CPUs such as the Core 2 Duo would make no sense for this build, thus if I were to use an LGA775, I should use a Celeron with it. Thus, I have my sights set on a Celeron 420 (mostly because of the number...) should I decide on LGA775 over 754.

A multi-core CPU would not benefit Win9x but would not harm either. If you want a hybrid running XP or later NT-based system then multi-core CPU is a MUST. If you want a system dedicated to running Win9x or earlier then the number of CPU cores would not be your primary concern; just pick the best combination of your MB + CPU that fits your need and/or budget. For the record, in contrast to those now dirt-cheap Core 2 Duo or Quad, Core Solo CPU are very rare on used market and are meant more for collectability than practicality.

ChrisNonyminus wrote on 2023-09-09, 21:23:

As for the motherboard, I'm looking at a Super Micro C2SBA+ which I could get for roughly $60 with a Core 2 Duo and a cooler+RAM bundled in by the seller. Is this a good mobo?

A similar question to VivienM's thread: GA-G41M-ES2H - decent idea for Win98 SE?

In short, it's a MoBo built with XP in mind instead of 98SE, with only its IDE controller has Win9x driver. Independent graphics and sound cards are needed, and the selection of the latter might be limited (PCIe editions of GF6000/R300/R400). I'm a bit surprised to see this industrial-oriented company has a well-maintained driver database for archived products like C2SBA+.

I would start by asking friends/family to ask their friends/family about old computers laying around they need to scrap. Additionally hang around recycling centers and sooner or later you will pick something running XP. Nothing beats free.

jakethompson1 wrote on 2023-09-10, 01:29:

VivienM wrote on 2023-09-10, 01:26:

ChrisNonyminus wrote on 2023-09-10, 01:18:

For 98SE, would a K8V-MX be a good motherboard?

Let's see what others more knowledgeable than me have to say, but at first glance, seems reasonable - VIA chipset, Asus has 98SE drivers for it on their web site, AGP, 2 PATA channels (and SATA).

I was going to say the same thing. It's newer than anything I associate with 98SE but it looks like it's a go. Be on the lookout for issues with 98SE and too much RAM, or too large a hard drive, etc.and be ready to look through msfn.org, install R. Loew patches, etc.

As an owner of Asus K8V-MX I'd say it's a well-made MB for Win98SE. Very similar to Phil's favorite Gigabyte GA-K8VM800M (which I had owned for a time) often appeared in his videos.

dormcat wrote on 2023-09-10, 02:34:

ChrisNonyminus wrote on 2023-09-09, 21:23:

As for the motherboard, I'm looking at a Super Micro C2SBA+ which I could get for roughly $60 with a Core 2 Duo and a cooler+RAM bundled in by the seller. Is this a good mobo?

A similar question to VivienM's thread: GA-G41M-ES2H - decent idea for Win98 SE?

In short, it's a MoBo built with XP in mind instead of 98SE, with only its IDE controller has Win9x driver. Independent graphics and sound cards are needed, and the selection of the latter might be limited (PCIe editions of GF6000/R300/R400). I'm a bit surprised to see this industrial-oriented company has a well-maintained driver database for archived products like C2SBA+.

If anything, this board seems riskier than my abandoned idea - the C2SBA+ is ICH9 on the south bridge. The board I was asking about was an ICH7, so at least had one PATA channel on the south bridge.

Here are my plans so far for the separate 98 and XP PCs. The prices are just my surface level observations from seeing ebay listings (or in the case of new components such as PSUs, on retail sites).

98SE PC: -Motherboard: K8V-MX/S (~$60 with cpu and cooler) -CPU: any Athlon 64 -Cooler: any -GPU: Geforce FX 5200 PCI or Geforce […]
Show full quote

98SE PC:
-Motherboard: K8V-MX/S (~$60 with cpu and cooler)
-CPU: any Athlon 64
-Cooler: any
-GPU: Geforce FX 5200 PCI or Geforce 6200 PCI (latter is cheaper...) (~$20 for the 6200)
-Storage: IBM Deskstar 80GB HDD I already have, or an SD card with an IDE adapter I already have (yes, I heard that the IBM Deskstar has a bad reputation and that SD Cards aren't exactly ideal, but these are the IDE storage devices I have.)
-Sound Card: Sound Blaster Live or Ensoniq AudioPCI (~$20)
-Optical Drive: ???
-Case: Existing ~2005 ATX case I already have, forgot what it is
-PSU: existing 200W molex-compatible PSU I already have, might be too few of a wattage

XP PC:
-Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-G41MT-D3? | (~$50)
-CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400? | (~$10)
-Cooler: StarTech FAN775E? | (~$30)
-RAM: Samsung M378B5173DB0-CK0 (4GB DDR3)? (~$9)
-Storage: Kingston A400 120GB SSD (~$20)
-GPU: EVGA 512-P2-N430-LR (GeForce 7200 GS)? (~$20)
-Sound Card: Sound Blaster Audigy SE? (~$14)
-Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24F1ST? (IDE DVD-RW drive) (~$25)
-PSU: CoolMax V-400? (~$32)
-Case: ???

Please provide feedback.

ChrisNonyminus wrote on 2023-09-10, 03:24:

Here are my plans so far for the separate 98 and XP PCs. The prices are just my surface level observations from seeing ebay listings (or in the case of new components such as PSUs, on retail sites).

XP PC: -Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-G41MT-D3? | (~$50) -CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400? | (~$10) -Cooler: StarTech FAN775E? | (~$30) - […]
Show full quote

XP PC:
-Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-G41MT-D3? | (~$50)
-CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400? | (~$10)
-Cooler: StarTech FAN775E? | (~$30)
-RAM: Samsung M378B5173DB0-CK0 (4GB DDR3)? (~$9)
-Storage: Kingston A400 120GB SSD (~$20)
-GPU: EVGA 512-P2-N430-LR (GeForce 7200 GS)? (~$20)
-Sound Card: Sound Blaster Audigy SE? (~$14)
-Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24F1ST? (IDE DVD-RW drive) (~$25)
-PSU: CoolMax V-400? (~$32)
-Case: ???

Please provide feedback.

Okay, I'm going to focus on the XP machine:
1) Unless you're looking at NOS motherboards, I would say to look for something higher-end. That board is an ICH7 south bridge, that doesn't even have AHCI. If you want a Core 2 system, get a P43/P45 system with an ICH10R.
I've had a P5QL-E from Asus for 15 years now, I like it, XP likes it, but it's DDR2.
2) CPU. Is there a reason to go for the dual-core rather than the quad-core? I like the Q9650 but realistically, you can probably get something one or two speed grades slower for half the price. Like a Q9450...
3) CPU coolers are starting to get hard to find for LGA775. May want to see if you can pick up an Intel one used cheap somewhere (e.g. if there's a free geek in your town that has coolers for $5).
4) I don't understand why you'd want a low-end GPU. A x200 GPU basically is barely better than onboard graphics of the same vintage. And, frankly, even the 7900GT, which was the high end card of ~2006, is not that fast in the modern scheme of things. You can pick up, say, an AMD 7970 for <$100USD. That's a serious GPU. Not sure what the equivalent in Nvidia land is.
5) Case/PSU - just get a full ATX with lots of room for GPUs. And a beefier PSU.
6) I've used the A400 in my current C2Q retro system and like it, but why not go bigger? The 480 gig model is like $35CAD around here, 960 gigs is like $60CAD.
Make sure to use something other than XP to make your partition so it is aligned properly.
7) I am not sure if I would bother with the Audigy SE; isn't that a CA0106 card? I'm not sure if one of those is worth it over the onboard; I'd probably look at an Audigy 2 ZS or an X-Fi of some sort. Note that my X-Fi Fatal1ty died after 6 years in the closet, seems the capacitor on those can go bad.

VivienM wrote on 2023-09-10, 03:41:

Okay, I'm going to focus on the XP machine: 1) Unless you're looking at NOS motherboards, I would say to look for something high […]
Show full quote

ChrisNonyminus wrote on 2023-09-10, 03:24:

Here are my plans so far for the separate 98 and XP PCs. The prices are just my surface level observations from seeing ebay listings (or in the case of new components such as PSUs, on retail sites).

XP PC: -Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-G41MT-D3? | (~$50) -CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400? | (~$10) -Cooler: StarTech FAN775E? | (~$30) - […]
Show full quote

XP PC:
-Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-G41MT-D3? | (~$50)
-CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400? | (~$10)
-Cooler: StarTech FAN775E? | (~$30)
-RAM: Samsung M378B5173DB0-CK0 (4GB DDR3)? (~$9)
-Storage: Kingston A400 120GB SSD (~$20)
-GPU: EVGA 512-P2-N430-LR (GeForce 7200 GS)? (~$20)
-Sound Card: Sound Blaster Audigy SE? (~$14)
-Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24F1ST? (IDE DVD-RW drive) (~$25)
-PSU: CoolMax V-400? (~$32)
-Case: ???

Please provide feedback.

Okay, I'm going to focus on the XP machine:
1) Unless you're looking at NOS motherboards, I would say to look for something higher-end. That board is an ICH7 south bridge, that doesn't even have AHCI. If you want a Core 2 system, get a P43/P45 system with an ICH10R.
I've had a P5QL-E from Asus for 15 years now, I like it, XP likes it, but it's DDR2.
2) CPU. Is there a reason to go for the dual-core rather than the quad-core? I like the Q9650 but realistically, you can probably get something one or two speed grades slower for half the price. Like a Q9450...
3) CPU coolers are starting to get hard to find for LGA775. May want to see if you can pick up an Intel one used cheap somewhere (e.g. if there's a free geek in your town that has coolers for $5).
4) I don't understand why you'd want a low-end GPU. A x200 GPU basically is barely better than onboard graphics of the same vintage. And, frankly, even the 7900GT, which was the high end card of ~2006, is not that fast in the modern scheme of things. You can pick up, say, an AMD 7970 for <$100USD. That's a serious GPU. Not sure what the equivalent in Nvidia land is.
5) Case/PSU - just get a full ATX with lots of room for GPUs. And a beefier PSU.
6) I've used the A400 in my current C2Q retro system and like it, but why not go bigger? The 480 gig model is like $35CAD around here, 960 gigs is like $60CAD.
Make sure to use something other than XP to make your partition so it is aligned properly.
7) I am not sure if I would bother with the Audigy SE; isn't that a CA0106 card? I'm not sure if one of those is worth it over the onboard; I'd probably look at an Audigy 2 ZS or an X-Fi of some sort. Note that my X-Fi Fatal1ty died after 6 years in the closet, seems the capacitor on those can go bad.

1) What boards would you recommend?
2) I think quad-core might be a bit too new for my tastes. For reference, the CPU on my main gaming PC is an i7-8700K with 6 dual threaded cores. 4 (single threaded albeit) cores is closer to that than 2 cores or 1 core.