Hello!

We Aim To Please wrote on 2024-05-18, 21:39:

So how many ISA connectors do I need and what kind of motherboard would work best with what I am trying to do within the confines of socket 370?

At least one ISA slot would work with what you currently have, but I suggest getting a motherboard that has at least two just in case. ASUS has 440BX based Socket 370 motherboards under the name of CUBX, with three variants.

Furthermore, I looked into the Intel B440BX chipset but on vogonswiki most of them say they require SDRAM ECC variants. What is that? Standard sdram won't work? How do I get ecc sdram? When I went on ebay, All I found was ddr4 ecc.

ECC isn't mandatory on 440BX based motherboards, you can run regular SDR SDRAM sticks without problems.

Finally, what kind of power supply on the market right now would you recommend for me to buy that I could go into my local Micro Center to pick up for this build? I've read about this 5 volt rail and needing power for the cpu but I cannot find on the back of power supplies what exactly I am looking for. Most just say +5 volt.

A regular ATX power supply works, just make sure that it is from a reputable brand and has at least around 20A on the +5V. The 24-pin connector found on modern power supplies is fully backwards compatible with the 20-pin one.

Don't worry about the -5V rail, it is blown out of proportion and used by very few ISA cards. AWE64 doesn't use it at all.

So... here's the thing. Socket 370 in late 1999/early 2000 was the 'low-end' CPU option, used primarily for Celerons at 66MHz FSB, while Slot 1 remained the standard for the 100MHz PIIIs.

Then you had the whole debacle with the i820, the recalled chip that was supposed to allow for SDRAM instead of pricy RDRAM on the i820, etc.

By the time the dust settled with the launch of the i815 in summer 2000, the later PIIIs were on socket 370 with 133MHz FSB. And i815 boards generally dropped ISA.

Lots and lots of weird boards, adapters to use socket 370 processors in slot 1 systems, etc also existed.

But generally speaking, the most common configurations were
- 66MHz Socket 370 Celerons with i810 and maybe the low-end chipset before that
- 100MHz Slot 1 PIIIs with 440BX (with one last ISA slot)
- 133MHz Socket 370 PIIIs with i815
(and then you had weird things, e.g. 133MHz Slot 1 or Socket 370 PIIIs on i820, 133MHz FSB Socket 370 motherboards using Via chipsets, etc.)

Your processor is a 133MHz FSB processor, so if you want to use that processor and have ISA... I guess you're looking for one of those 'factory-overclocked' 133MHz FSB socket 370 440BX boards. Some of those existed in spring 2000. My guess is that if you go looking on eBay in 2024, you'll find those are very, very hard to find.

(I would note that ECC RAM on 440BX sounds strange to me...)

Gmlb256 wrote on 2024-05-18, 22:05:

Hello! […]
Show full quote

Hello!

We Aim To Please wrote on 2024-05-18, 21:39:

So how many ISA connectors do I need and what kind of motherboard would work best with what I am trying to do within the confines of socket 370?

At least one ISA slot would work with what you currently have, but I suggest getting a motherboard that has at least two just in case. ASUS has 440BX based Socket 370 motherboards under the name of CUBX, with three variants.

Furthermore, I looked into the Intel B440BX chipset but on vogonswiki most of them say they require SDRAM ECC variants. What is that? Standard sdram won't work? How do I get ecc sdram? When I went on ebay, All I found was ddr4 ecc.

ECC isn't mandatory on 440BX based motherboards, you can run regular SDR SDRAM sticks without problems.

Finally, what kind of power supply on the market right now would you recommend for me to buy that I could go into my local Micro Center to pick up for this build? I've read about this 5 volt rail and needing power for the cpu but I cannot find on the back of power supplies what exactly I am looking for. Most just say +5 volt.

A regular ATX power supply works, just make sure that it is from a reputable brand and has at least around 20A on the +5V. The 24-pin connector found on modern power supplies is fully backwards compatible with the 20-pin one.

Don't worry about the -5V rail, it is blown out of proportion and used by very few ISA cards. AWE64 doesn't use it at all.

Thanks soo much for the in-depth reply. This is wonderful and helps me a ton!!!! Of the three CUBX, is there one in particular you would recommend over the other? I know I am going to have more questions but that is the one that stood out at first. I hope you don't mind if I send you more questions if I think of them.

VivienM wrote on 2024-05-18, 22:08:

So... here's the thing. Socket 370 in late 1999/early 2000 was the 'low-end' CPU option, used primarily for Celerons at 66MHz FS […]
Show full quote

So... here's the thing. Socket 370 in late 1999/early 2000 was the 'low-end' CPU option, used primarily for Celerons at 66MHz FSB, while Slot 1 remained the standard for the 100MHz PIIIs.

Then you had the whole debacle with the i820, the recalled chip that was supposed to allow for SDRAM instead of pricy RDRAM on the i820, etc.

By the time the dust settled with the launch of the i815 in summer 2000, the later PIIIs were on socket 370 with 133MHz FSB. And i815 boards generally dropped ISA.

Lots and lots of weird boards, adapters to use socket 370 processors in slot 1 systems, etc also existed.

But generally speaking, the most common configurations were
- 66MHz Socket 370 Celerons with i810 and maybe the low-end chipset before that
- 100MHz Slot 1 PIIIs with 440BX (with one last ISA slot)
- 133MHz Socket 370 PIIIs with i815
(and then you had weird things, e.g. 133MHz Slot 1 or Socket 370 PIIIs on i820, 133MHz FSB Socket 370 motherboards using Via chipsets, etc.)

Your processor is a 133MHz FSB processor, so if you want to use that processor and have ISA... I guess you're looking for one of those 'factory-overclocked' 133MHz FSB socket 370 440BX boards. Some of those existed in spring 2000. My guess is that if you go looking on eBay in 2024, you'll find those are very, very hard to find.

(I would note that ECC RAM on 440BX sounds strange to me...)

Of what you have said so far that stood out to me the most is that I cannot use the 133fsb which would limit my gaming performance on windows 98 as I have seen comparisons between 100 and 133fsb speeds. Do you suggest I just scrap the pentium 3 socket 370 version and try to get a different one on slot 1? If so, what do you recommend?

Oh and check out the vogonswiki on socket 370 about types of ram used. It confused me. I wasn't sure if you believed me or not.

Gmlb256 wrote on 2024-05-18, 22:05:

At least one ISA slot would work with what you currently have, but I suggest getting a motherboard that has at least two just in case. ASUS has 440BX based Socket 370 motherboards under the name of CUBX, with three variants.

The CUBX boards on eBay are... insane money.

Do any of them support 133FSB chips? That is what the OP has, I believe...

VivienM wrote on 2024-05-18, 22:43:

Gmlb256 wrote on 2024-05-18, 22:05:

At least one ISA slot would work with what you currently have, but I suggest getting a motherboard that has at least two just in case. ASUS has 440BX based Socket 370 motherboards under the name of CUBX, with three variants.

The CUBX boards on eBay are... insane money.

Do any of them support 133FSB chips? That is what the OP has, I believe...

I do have a 133FSB and according to the manuals on them I read they only support 100.

We Aim To Please wrote on 2024-05-18, 22:37:

Thanks soo much for the in-depth reply. This is wonderful and helps me a ton!!!! Of the three CUBX, is there one in particular you would recommend over the other? I know I am going to have more questions but that is the one that stood out at first. I hope you don't mind if I send you more questions if I think of them.

CUBX-E, more chances that it has two ISA slots.

I don't mind if you need more questions from me. 😉

VivienM wrote on 2024-05-18, 22:43:

The CUBX boards on eBay are... insane money.

Well, it depends if the OP can afford one of these or has a local store nearby.

Do any of them support 133FSB chips? That is what the OP has, I believe...

No without overclocking the chipset, I didn't take account of the 133 MHz FSB CPU. 😜

The other option would be using a Coppermine CPU that requires 100 MHz FSB to reach the rated clock frequency.

Gmlb256 wrote on 2024-05-18, 23:05:

Do any of them support 133FSB chips? That is what the OP has, I believe...

No without overclocking the chipset, I didn't take account of the 133 MHz FSB CPU. 😜

The other option would be using a Coppermine CPU that operates at 100 MHz FSB.

Weren't there some late 440BX boards that 'officially' supported overclocked operation for 133MHz FSB processors?

VivienM wrote on 2024-05-18, 23:08:

Gmlb256 wrote on 2024-05-18, 23:05:

Do any of them support 133FSB chips? That is what the OP has, I believe...

No without overclocking the chipset, I didn't take account of the 133 MHz FSB CPU. 😜

The other option would be using a Coppermine CPU that operates at 100 MHz FSB.

Weren't there some late 440BX boards that 'officially' supported overclocked operation for 133MHz FSB processors?

Yes, those late 440BX based motherboards can easily handle 133 MHz FSB.

The only issues would be the AGP @ 89 MHz (most nVidia GeForce cards can tolerate it) and the quality of the PC133 SDRAM sticks.

We Aim To Please wrote on 2024-05-18, 22:40:

Of what you have said so far that stood out to me the most is that I cannot use the 133fsb which would limit my gaming performance on windows 98 as I have seen comparisons between 100 and 133fsb speeds. Do you suggest I just scrap the pentium 3 socket 370 version and try to get a different one on slot 1? If so, what do you recommend?

I think you have to look at what's easily available on the market too...

What I would probably suggest you do - find a whole system from a large OEM that built rather modular systems. e.g. the Dell Dimension XPS Txxxr is a slot 1 440BX with ISA slots, AGP, nothing onboard, etc. Then replace whatever components you don't like, e.g. it probably would have come with a PCI sound card while you want an ISA one. (Disclaimer: I loved my T700r, and if it had ever occurred to me that Win98 retro systems would become a thing, I would never have e-wasted it back in 2013 or 2014... probably the only computer that I've ever gotten rid of that I regret e-wasting)

But unless you get absurdly lucky buying locally, I think all the 'good' PIII components from that era are going to be super-rare/expensive.

A couple of thoughts

1. (This won't be popular on Vogons) Via Apolla Pro 133A boards are fine and you shouldn't be afraid to build with one of them if it meets your needs. Something like an ASUS CUV4X might be fun to work with.
2. While you have rightly pointed out that the 133MHz FSB variants of the Pentium 3 outperform the 100MHz variants, don't get too hung up on this. If you need to use an E version to fit your need, you aren't giving up too much performance (certainly not enough to break your experience). I'm running a 1000/100 (SL4KL) Pentium 3 and it's more than enough for all of my 9x era games.

VivienM wrote on 2024-05-18, 23:19:

I think you have to look at what's easily available on the market too... […]
Show full quote

We Aim To Please wrote on 2024-05-18, 22:40:

Of what you have said so far that stood out to me the most is that I cannot use the 133fsb which would limit my gaming performance on windows 98 as I have seen comparisons between 100 and 133fsb speeds. Do you suggest I just scrap the pentium 3 socket 370 version and try to get a different one on slot 1? If so, what do you recommend?

I think you have to look at what's easily available on the market too...

What I would probably suggest you do - find a whole system from a large OEM that built rather modular systems. e.g. the Dell Dimension XPS Txxxr is a slot 1 440BX with ISA slots, AGP, nothing onboard, etc. Then replace whatever components you don't like, e.g. it probably would have come with a PCI sound card while you want an ISA one. (Disclaimer: I loved my T700r, and if it had ever occurred to me that Win98 retro systems would become a thing, I would never have e-wasted it back in 2013 or 2014... probably the only computer that I've ever gotten rid of that I regret e-wasting)

But unless you get absurdly lucky buying locally, I think all the 'good' PIII components from that era are going to be super-rare/expensive.

Alright. I will look into this and compare some windows 98 era pc's like the one you listed and see what I can find. I saw the CUBX model the other guy recommended and with it being in the range of several hundred dollars, that is too much. I'll look around on ebay and see what I can find. If it was cheaper it would be doable but that is insanely priced.

smtkr wrote on 2024-05-19, 00:12:

A couple of thoughts

1. (This won't be popular on Vogons) Via Apolla Pro 133A boards are fine and you shouldn't be afraid to build with one of them if it meets your needs. Something like an ASUS CUV4X might be fun to work with.
2. While you have rightly pointed out that the 133MHz FSB variants of the Pentium 3 outperform the 100MHz variants, don't get too hung up on this. If you need to use an E version to fit your need, you aren't giving up too much performance (certainly not enough to break your experience). I'm running a 1000/100 (SL4KL) Pentium 3 and it's more than enough for all of my 9x era games.

I'll look into these and the prices and see what I can find out. Will these chipsets be fine with dos games too? Or are chipsets not as big of a deal for dos gaming? What do you mean by E version? My intentions are to game from around 1995 to 2000. What resolution could I run on, on these old games and still be stable? Cause I am gonna buy one of those LCD 5:4 monitors as they are cheap and serve my purpose.

We Aim To Please wrote on 2024-05-19, 00:31:

[...]

I'll look into these and the prices and see what I can find out. Will these chipsets be fine with dos games too? Or are chipsets not as big of a deal for dos gaming?

Chipset determines compatibility and things like memory and I/O performance. The latter are hardly an issue under DOS with a system this powerful. So long as it's stable and the cards you want work in it, it will be fine.

What do you mean by E version?

Pentium 3 Coppermine chips had a letter code after the speed. "E" indicated Coppermine core at 100MHz FSB, "EB" Coppermine core at 133MHz FSB. The message is not to get hung up on the speed difference. Yes, EB will be faster at the same clock speed than E, but the difference isn't huge, particularly not with 25 years of hindsight - compared to a Core i9 the difference is negligible.

My intentions are to game from around 1995 to 2000. What resolution could I run on, on these old games and still be stable? Cause I am gonna buy one of those LCD 5:4 monitors as they are cheap and serve my purpose.

5:4 wasn't a thing until after the period you mention, everything was firmly 4:3 between 1995 and 2000. Most 5:4 monitors will accept 4:3 input, but will tend to stretch it. The better ones will let you choose to letterbox instead.

Also not sure what you mean with 'stable' - stability isn't dependent on resolution.

We Aim To Please wrote on 2024-05-19, 00:31:

Will these chipsets be fine with dos games too? Or are chipsets not as big of a deal for dos gaming?

Chipsets aren't much of a big deal on DOS as long as the motherboard has one ISA slot, except if you want to use real mode UMB drivers such UMBPCI.

What do you mean by E version?

What smtkr meant about the "E version" is that some Pentium III CPUs comes with suffixes: B, E and EB. The E suffix only applies to Coppermine models that have the same clock frequency as the Katmai model, B means that it needs 133 MHz to reach the rated clock frequency and it is only found on Katmai and EB means Coppermine CPUs with what I described about the B suffix.

As others mentioned, don't get hung up with the FSB speed. The major difference is that you only get higher memory bandwidth with 133 MHz FSB, which is less relevant for Windows 9x games.

We Aim To Please wrote on 2024-05-19, 00:26:

Alright. I will look into this and compare some windows 98 era pc's like the one you listed and see what I can find. I saw the CUBX model the other guy recommended and with it being in the range of several hundred dollars, that is too much. I'll look around on ebay and see what I can find. If it was cheaper it would be doable but that is insanely priced.

Just make sure you're looking at decent systems, i.e. systems with AGP slots, no soldered video, etc.

At that time, there were a lot of retail systems (Compaqs, IBM-nee-Acer Aptivas, etc) that were very unmodular. And that had lousy, lousy parts soldered... and then in late 1999, you get the introduction of the i810 chipset with its on-chipset graphics and no AGP, and the retail OEMs sold a lot of systems with nice high-clockrate PIII CPUs with those. (Then again, those systems don't typically have ISA so that's another reason you don't want them)

You don't want one of those.

dionb wrote on 2024-05-19, 00:41:

5:4 wasn't a thing until after the period you mention, everything was firmly 4:3 between 1995 and 2000. Most 5:4 monitors will accept 4:3 input, but will tend to stretch it. The better ones will let you choose to letterbox instead.

I would note that a number of people were running 19" CRTs at 1280x1024 around 1999-2000. Somehow, that seemed to be the next standard resolution above 1024x768, even though it's 5:4 and not 4:3. 1280x960 would have been the correct 4:3 resolution but I don't think I've ever heard of that resolution being widely used; the other option would have been 1152x864.

I've long presumed that that was why the first-gen LCDs 17"-19" often were 1280x1024 - they were replacing 1280x1024 CRTs. And the 15" LCDs were 1024x768 just like the smaller CRTs they were replacing.

That being said, I certainly didn't have the GPU horsepower for 3D games at 1280x1024 in 2000, so... games would have been run at lower resolutions which would have been 4:3. And actually, even games without 3D hardware acceleration (I'm looking at you, Civ III and AoE2) were limited to a very narrow range of resolutions, at least without some... unofficial trickery. Back in the CRT era, it was... uncommon... to use the same resolution for productivity and gaming.

dionb wrote on 2024-05-19, 00:41:

Chipset determines compatibility and things like memory and I/O performance. The latter are hardly an issue under DOS with a sys […]
Show full quote

We Aim To Please wrote on 2024-05-19, 00:31:

[...]

I'll look into these and the prices and see what I can find out. Will these chipsets be fine with dos games too? Or are chipsets not as big of a deal for dos gaming?

Chipset determines compatibility and things like memory and I/O performance. The latter are hardly an issue under DOS with a system this powerful. So long as it's stable and the cards you want work in it, it will be fine.

What do you mean by E version?

Pentium 3 Coppermine chips had a letter code after the speed. "E" indicated Coppermine core at 100MHz FSB, "EB" Coppermine core at 133MHz FSB. The message is not to get hung up on the speed difference. Yes, EB will be faster at the same clock speed than E, but the difference isn't huge, particularly not with 25 years of hindsight - compared to a Core i9 the difference is negligible.

My intentions are to game from around 1995 to 2000. What resolution could I run on, on these old games and still be stable? Cause I am gonna buy one of those LCD 5:4 monitors as they are cheap and serve my purpose.

5:4 wasn't a thing until after the period you mention, everything was firmly 4:3 between 1995 and 2000. Most 5:4 monitors will accept 4:3 input, but will tend to stretch it. The better ones will let you choose to letterbox instead.

Also not sure what you mean with 'stable' - stability isn't dependent on resolution.

When I said stable, I meant a stable framerate. I should have clarified on that.

I'm okay with 5:4. I watched a video from philscomputerlab and he showed three different styles of monitors from that era and the 5:4 was good enough for me.