RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2024-12-17, 23:16:

DOS / Late Win98 EAX 3DFX (1998-2000) Slot 1 Pentium III @700Mhz (Oct 1999) 256Mb PC100 RAM Voodoo 3500 (April 1999) Soundblaste […]
Show full quote

DOS / Late Win98 EAX 3DFX (1998-2000)
Slot 1 Pentium III @700Mhz (Oct 1999)
256Mb PC100 RAM
Voodoo 3500 (April 1999)
Soundblaster Live
Micro ATX Tower

That's a nice build-- I hope you got a nice shiny case for it.

Not sure the April 1999 date is correct for the Voodoo3 3500. It was announced in along side the other Voodoo3 models, but it wasn't available until Late July / August.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/272/33 ( April 3, 1999)
the availability of the 3500's delayed for at least another month

https://www.anandtech.com/show/351 ( August 3, 1999)
3dfx finally started shipping the 3500 around 7 months after the first announcement for the Voodoo 3.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-12-18, 08:09:

Possibly replace the GeForce 4 with a Radeon X800 series card in this system. That would allow you to fully max out Win9x games at 1600x1200 with 4xAA and 16xAF. The missing table fog and paletted textures legacy features won't matter since you already have a bunch of Voodoo systems and a GeForce 2 to take care of that.

Alternatively, go for a GeForce FX 5900 Ultra. It isn't as powerful as the Radeon X800, so you may not be able to fully max out everything, but it still supports the aforementioned legacy features and can run the original Splinter Cell with Shadow Buffers enabled. See this video by Phil for more details on the latter.

I have an X850XT PE and a 5900 Ultra.

The 5900 ultra is currently in my "Ultimate" win98 PC with X6800 Core 2 Duo (Outside of this cupboard with 1024x768 LCD monitor). The 5900 Ultra won't fit in my slim Micro-ATX case in this cupboard, as the cooler is a large third-party one.

The x850XT is currently on one of my test benches. I don't recall which games, but I recall that I had quite a few compatibility issues with it.

I do have a PCI 5500 card also that could be used. Is the 4600 not already overkill for Win98 though?

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-12-18, 08:09:

Maybe go for a GeForce 7900 GTX here. It's one of the last DirectX 9.0c only cards, before Nvidia started using unified shaders. This is relevant for a few games like Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow which have problems on newer cards and later drivers. As a bonus, the GeForce 7 series is the last offering from Nvidia that still supports 16-bit dithering. This can be nice if you decide to play some older 16-bit color only games like Thief 2 on that system.

It is true that I have a gap for end of era directx 9. I don't have a 7900 GTX currently, or any 7000 really apart from a really low-end one that came in a bulk lot of cards.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-12-18, 08:09:

I'd also consider using a single core CPU, as certain games from this transitional period have issues with multi-core systems. This can be solved by either setting affinity in Task Manager, using a utility like RunFirst or possibly even by disabling the extra cores in the BIOS, if the option exists. But sometimes, it's just easier not to worry about that stuff. Also, maybe go for a PCI based X-Fi card here, since you already have an Audigy 2 ZS in another system.

Yes, I think I will have most systems on one core and no hyperthreading. Probably only the quad core one will have all cores enabled.

douglar wrote on 2024-12-18, 15:53:

That's a nice build-- I hope you got a nice shiny case for it. […]
Show full quote

That's a nice build-- I hope you got a nice shiny case for it.

Not sure the April 1999 date is correct for the Voodoo3 3500. It was announced in along side the other Voodoo3 models, but it wasn't available until Late July / August.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/272/33 ( April 3, 1999)
the availability of the 3500's delayed for at least another month

https://www.anandtech.com/show/351 ( August 3, 1999)
3dfx finally started shipping the 3500 around 7 months after the first announcement for the Voodoo 3.

Well spotted. I got the date from the AI suggestion on a Google search. So doesn't surprise me that it got it wrong.

The MicroATX cases I have are the beige versions of this case:

http://www.evercase.co.uk/index.php?route=pro … &product_id=119

They are quite nice looking, compact, and cheap. Kinda retro but with a modern twist

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2024-12-18, 17:56:

The x850XT is currently on one of my test benches. I don't recall which games, but I recall that I had quite a few compatibility issues with it.

Aside from the missing table fog and paletted texture support (non-issue as I have a Voodoo 3 rig for that), I've had a great time with my X800 GTO. It's a real powerhouse for Win9x games, even if you turn everything up to the max. Compatibility wise, I actually found that it worked better than my 6600 GT, but of course, that may depend on which games one plays.

I do have a PCI 5500 card also that could be used. Is the 4600 not already overkill for Win98 though?

The FX 5500 is basically an overclocked FX 5200, meaning it's not exactly a great performer. As for the Ti 4600, it depends on which resolution and settings you're using for your games. At 1600x1200, the GeForce 4 Ti cards start to struggle in more demanding titles, especially if you also crank up AA and AF.

For example, fire up Quake 3 maxed at 1600x1200 with 4xAA and 8xAF forced in the Nvidia driver panel. Might also want to run Fraps beforehand, so that you can monitor your frame rate in real time. Now, start Q3DM0 (the very first tutorial map). Then, approach a portal or a mirror, look directly into them and watch how your frame rate tanks. Other games using the Quake 3 engine may have similar issues.

I also vaguely remember experiencing low frame rates in Tomb Raider 3 on the first jungle level, when running the game at 1600x1200 32-bit color with 4xAA and 8xAF. Been a while since I've tested that, so I can't remember the exact details. Drakan is also quite demanding at 1600x1200 with all in-game settings maxed + AA/AF. That's just off the top off my head. There are likely a few other games that behave similarly at that resolution and those AA/AF settings on GeForce 4 Ti cards.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-12-18, 18:49:

Aside from the missing table fog and paletted texture support, I've had a great time with my X800 GTO. It's a real powerhouse for Win9x games, even if you turn everything up to the max. Compatibility wise, I actually found that it worked better than my 6600 GT, but of course, that may depend on which games one plays.

I will have to check my notes on what games I tried. Should be in a text file on the SSD. I have tried 6000 series on Win98 and, yeah, it's trash. Pretty much the only things that worked were benchmarks and quake/unreal engine games.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-12-18, 18:49:

The FX 5500 is basically an overclocked FX 5200, meaning it's not exactly a great performer. As for the Ti 4600, it depends on which resolution and settings you're using for your games. At 1600x1200, the GeForce 4 Ti cards start to struggle in more demanding titles, especially if you also crank up AA and AF.

For example, fire up Quake 3 maxed at 1600x1200 with 4xAA and 8xAF forced in the Nvidia driver panel. Might also want to run Fraps beforehand, so that you can monitor your frame rate in real time. Now, start Q3DM0 (the very first tutorial map). Then, approach a portal or a mirror, look directly into them and watch how your frame rate tanks. Other games using the Quake 3 engine may have similar issues.

I also vaguely remember experiencing low frame rates in Tomb Raider 3 on the first jungle level, when running the game at 1600x1200 32-bit color with 4xAA and 8xAF. Been a while since I tested that, so I can't remember the exact details. But there are likely a few other games that behave similarly at that resolution and those AA/AF settings on GeForce 4 Ti cards.

Ah, OK. Honestly I am not sure if I will be playing at such resolutions on these machines, and I think AA is needed less on a CRT as it naturally blends the pixels. Whilst my CRT can do 1600x1200 I think text is rather small. 1024x768 looks OK to me and is more period-correct.

That's not to say that I don't see the appeal, but I think I would use my 20" 1600x1200 DELL IPS LCD for that. I don't currently have that screen set up anywhere.

I am gutted. My 16 port KVM has a bug.

If you are using the arrow keys and press two down at the same time then release one, the KVM doesn't send the message to the computer that you released it until you release both. For example if playing a driving game with the arrow keys and pressing up for accelerate, you will find on the first turn that you do you will smash into the wall even if you only tapped the side arrow quickly.

It doesn't affect all keys. Like if playing an FPS game with WASD keys, that works fine.

There don't appear to be any firmware updates for this KVM on the Belkin site. So I think I am out of luck. I have put back my 8 port KVM and all is well again. Apart from the fact the cable management is much worse with the 8 port kvm due to having 3 cables per PC rather than 1.

Also that now means my dreams of having over 8 PCs becomes more complicated. I will either have to find a way to fix this 16 Port KVM, find one that works better, or daisy chain my 8 port KVM with another

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-12-18, 08:09:

Early WinXP (2001-2005) Core 2 Duo E6600 (Jul 2006) 2Gb DDR RAM Geforce 6800 128Mb (April 2004) Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS Micro […]
Show full quote

Early WinXP (2001-2005)
Core 2 Duo E6600 (Jul 2006)
2Gb DDR RAM
Geforce 6800 128Mb (April 2004)
Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS
Micro ATX Desktop PC

Maybe go for a GeForce 7900 GTX here. It's one of the last DirectX 9.0c only cards, before Nvidia started using unified shaders. This is relevant for a few games like Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow which have problems on newer cards and later drivers. As a bonus, the GeForce 7 series is the last offering from Nvidia that still supports 16-bit dithering. This can be nice if you decide to play some older 16-bit color only games like Thief 2 on that system.

I have an A8N32-SLI Deluxe motherboard with Athlon 64 3700+. Would that be a good alternative system when combined with dual GTX 7900 in SLI? For a top-end DirectX 9 system? Alternatively I have an nVidia nForce i780 motherboard. Could use that with a Core 2 Duo E8600 @3.33Ghz. But that is the motherboard I was going to use with my 8800 GTS 512 SLI with the QX9650. But if I went for a single GTX 285 instead, or a GTX 580, then I can use my non-SLI capable 775 Motherboard for the QX9650. The ASUS P5Q3 with DDR3.

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2024-12-27, 12:55:

I have an A8N32-SLI Deluxe motherboard with Athlon 64 3700+. Would that be a good alternative system when combined with dual GTX 7900 in SLI? For a top-end DirectX 9 system?

Yes.

Most games that have issues with unified shaders were released before 2006, so they should run well on that Athlon 64. To be honest, I don't know of that many, aside from Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow and possibly Star Wars: Republic Commando, though I haven't personally tested the latter. Per this PC Gaming Wiki article, it has issues with bump mapping on newer GPUs.

There's also this micro stutter issue with Unreal Engine 2 games when using GeForce 8 and later cards under WinXP.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-12-27, 13:25:

Yes.

Most games that have issues with unified shaders were released before 2006, so they should run well on that Athlon 64. To be honest, I don't know of that many, aside from Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow and possibly Star Wars: Republic Commando, though I haven't personally tested the latter. Per this PC Gaming Wiki article, it has issues with bump mapping on newer GPUs.

OK. Sounds good. I will have to try Metal Gear Solid 2 Substance on this system when I build it. I know I have found that game hard to get working on newer GPUs. Pretty sure it worked on my Geforce Ti 4600. I don't recall if it worked on the 6800

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-12-27, 13:25:

There's also this micro stutter issue with Unreal Engine 2 games when using GeForce 8 and later cards.

Interesting. I hadn't noticed this on my 750 Ti i7 3770k WinXP PC. I will have to check it out.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-12-27, 13:25:

There's also this micro stutter issue with Unreal Engine 2 games when using GeForce 8 and later cards under WinXP.

Not sure if this is just unreal 2 engine games and XP actually. Just tried Deus Ex (unreal engine 1 I think) under Windows 7 with 8800 GTS 512 with my QX9650 CPU. It stuttered. Swapped the GPU for a 7900 GTX and the stutter is gone. Same drivers.

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2024-12-30, 09:09:

Not sure if this is just unreal 2 engine games and XP actually. Just tried Deus Ex (unreal engine 1 I think) under Windows 7 with 8800 GTS 512 with my QX9650 CPU. It stuttered. Swapped the GPU for a 7900 GTX and the stutter is gone. Same drivers.

You may want to ask @Sombrero about this issue. He investigated it much more thoroughly.

For me, using Win7 actually got rid of the stutter in affected games on my GTX 970. This worked out well, since Unreal Engine 2 games usually implement EAX via OpenAL, which tends to work fine under Win7.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2024-12-30, 09:17:

You may want to ask @Sombrero about this issue. He investigated it much more thoroughly.

For me, using Win7 actually got rid of the stutter in affected games on my GTX 970. This worked out well, since Unreal Engine 2 games usually implement EAX via OpenAL, which tends to work fine under Win7.

Not sure if it's related, but this is the GOG version of the game which seems to use a glide wrapper by default.

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2024-12-30, 09:33:

Not sure if it's related, but this is the GOG version of the game which seems to use a glide wrapper by default.

Sounds like a separate issue to me, I've never seen anything pointing UE1 having the same WinXP + GeForce 8 -> problem as UE2.

Is the GOG version using nGlide? If it is that's where I'd start, I've seen nGlide causing stuttering with Diablo 2 and Need For Speed 4 on systems that should have more than enough power to run them with a wrapper while both run perfectly with another wrapper on the same system. No idea why, nGlide might just be a little picky about hardware in a way or another.

Sombrero wrote on 2024-12-30, 10:50:

Sounds like a separate issue to me, I've never seen anything pointing UE1 having the same WinXP + GeForce 8 -> problem as UE2.

Is the GOG version using nGlide? If it is that's where I'd start, I've seen nGlide causing stuttering with Diablo 2 and Need For Speed 4 on systems that should have more than enough power to run them with a wrapper while both run perfectly with another wrapper on the same system. No idea why, nGlide might just be a little picky about hardware in a way or another.

Yeah, it uses nglide. I will try without it and use OpenGL or D3D.

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2024-12-30, 22:14:

Yeah, it uses nglide. I will try without it and use OpenGL or D3D.

UE1 games have their share of other renderer related problems too, I had to use a community made renderer with Unreal Tournament even with a Pentium 4 6800 GT system. Deus Ex is less prone to have issues than UT99 though.

If the original renderers are also giving trouble have a look here: https://www.cwdohnal.com/utglr/

Sombrero wrote on 2024-12-31, 05:11:

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2024-12-30, 22:14:

Yeah, it uses nglide. I will try without it and use OpenGL or D3D.

UE1 games have their share of other renderer related problems too, I had to use a community made renderer with Unreal Tournament even with a Pentium 4 6800 GT system. Deus Ex is less prone to have issues than UT99 though.

If the original renderers are also giving trouble have a look here: https://www.cwdohnal.com/utglr/

It looks like even though there are nglide files in the folder, it was configured to use D3D. Neither the glide or OpenGL renderer work. I have not tried the more modern renderer though, as it plays well enough on the 7900 GTX. So I will just play it on that.

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2024-12-17, 23:16:

DOS / Late Win98 A3D nVidia (1999-2001) Socket 370 Pentium III – 1000Mhz (March 2000) 256Mb PC133 RAM Geforce 2 GTS 32Mb (April […]
Show full quote

DOS / Late Win98 A3D nVidia (1999-2001)
Socket 370 Pentium III – 1000Mhz (March 2000)
256Mb PC133 RAM
Geforce 2 GTS 32Mb (April 2000)
Sound Blaster 32 CT3670 (in DOS only) + Aureal Vortex 2 (In Windows Only)
Large Tower ATX Desktop PC

Slight problem with this build. I have been testing the Geforce 2 GTS and it turns out that it's a 64-bit variant rather than the better 128 bit version. I don't have any other Geforce 2 cards.

I benchmarked the card and got 5017 in 3DMark 99. In Unreal I got 43 FPS at 1024x768. This was using driver 5.32

Just for comparison I have put in a Geforce 4 440SE. It scores 4504 in 3DMark . Unreal scores the same 43 FPS, which I assume means CPU ia the limitation. I had to install a newer driver for this card. I used 40.71. This seemingly is also a 64-bit card. I am not surprised it is slower than the Geforce 2 GTS due to the newer drivers having more overhead.

I have a radeon 8500, so I tried putting that in. Expectations were low given that my CPU is rather slow for this GPU and I was using Catalyst 6.2 drivers from 2004. It got 36fps in Unreal and in 3D Mark only 4186. Disappointing.

So I am unsure what to do now. Do I stick with this cripled Geforce 2 GTS, buy a non-cripled one or use something else? Is there anything in particular that the Geforce 2 can do, that the 4600 can't? If not, then maybe I can just use this platform for a Voodoo 3500 build

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2025-01-01, 00:16:

Is there anything in particular that the Geforce 2 can do, that the 4600 can't?

You can make texel origin adjustments on GeForce 2 cards, while that's not possible on GeForce 3 and up. Maybe GeForce 4 MX440/460 cards can do this as well (not sure), since they are based on the GeForce 2 architecture. From my experience this is rarely a problem, but you asked for specifics, so there it is.

And yeah, avoid crippled cards with a 64-bit memory bus like the plague. Those were very much on the low end back in the day.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2025-01-01, 08:46:

You can make texel origin adjustments on GeForce 2 cards, while that's not possible on GeForce 3 and up. Maybe GeForce 4 MX440/460 cards can do this as well (not sure), since they are based on the GeForce 2 architecture. From my experience this is rarely a problem, but you asked for specifics, so there it is.

And yeah, avoid crippled cards with a 64-bit memory bus like the plague. Those were very much on the low end back in the day.

Interesting... So, I have weighed up my options. I think I want to keep a Geforce 2 machine in the mix, but not happy with my 64 bit one. So I have just bought an Asus GeForce 2 GTS 64MB - V7700TI PURE.

Also I think this Via Chipset may be holding me back, so think I will swap for an Intel 815 Chipset.
Also need to change the form factor from ATX to Micro ATX to make room for the SLI 7900 GTX build that's replacing the Geforce 6800 build.

New list of machines to build:

DOS 6.22/ Win3.0 (1981-1990) -Psuedo XT / Turbo XT
8088 @4.77 or 10Mhz
640k RAM
Trident VGA Graphics
OPL3 Sound
Pocket 8086 Laptop

DOS 6.22/ Win3.11 (1990-1993) - Psuedo 386/25mhz-486/25mhz
(L2 Cache disabled. SETMUL to add further scaling options)
Pentium MMX – 166Mhz @100Mhz
Baby AT motherboard
8mb EDO RAM
ISA Trident 8900C 512mb
Sound Blaster Pro 2.0
Micro ATX Tower

DOS 7 / Early Win95 (1993-1996)
(Can slow to the speed of a 486 by disabling caches and using SETMUL)
Pentium MMX – 200-300Mhz (Jan 1997) with Front panel switch to control FSB between 66Mhz and 100Mhz
Gigabyte GA-5AX Super Socket 7
64Mb PC100 SDRAM
S3 Virge 2mb (1996) + Voodoo 1 4mb (Oct 1996)
Soundblaster 16 CT2230 and Diamond Monster Wavetable 2Mb
Horizontal ATX Desktop PC (OPUS)

DOS 7 / Late Win95 (1996-1998)
Pentium II – 300Mhz (May 1997)
64Mb PC100 SDRAM
AGP Riva 128 4mb (April 1997) + Voodoo 2 (Feb 1998)
Sound Blaster 16 CT2290 + Dream Blaster X2 Wavetable
Horizontal Desktop PC (Gateway)

DOS 7 / Early Win98 A3D(1997-1999)
Slot 1 Pentium III – 550Mhz (Apr 1998)
128Mb PC100 RAM
TNT 2 (Oct 1999) + Voodoo 2 SLI (Feb 1998)
Aureal Vortex 2
Horizontal ATX Desktop PC (Viglen)

DOS / Late Win98 EAX 3DFX (1998-2000)
Slot 1 Pentium III @700Mhz (Oct 1999)
Intel 440BX Chipset
256Mb PC100 RAM
Voodoo 3500 (August 1999)
Soundblaster Live (in Windows Only)
Sound Blaster 32 CT3670 (in DOS only)
Micro ATX Tower

DOS / Late Win98 A3D nVidia (1999-2001)
Socket 370 Pentium III – 933Mhz (May 2000)
Compaq motherboard. Intel 815 Chipset
256Mb PC133 RAM
Asus GeForce 2 GTS 64MB - V7700TI PURE (April 2000)
Aureal Vortex 2
Micro ATX Tower

High End Win98 (2001-2003) / Very Early XP (2001-2003)
Pentium 4 – 3.4Ghz Cedarmill (Jan 2006)
Intel 865 Chipset
512mb DDR RAM
Geforce 4600 (Feb 2002)
Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS
Micro ATX Tower

Early WinXP (2003-2006)
Core 2 Duo E8600 3.33Ghz (August 2008)
nVidia nForce 780i Chipset
2Gb DDR RAM
2x Geforce 7900 512Mb in SLI (March 2006)
Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS
Large Tower ATX Desktop PC

Late WinXP (2006-2010), Windows Vista
4Gb DDR3 RAM
ASUS P8H61-M with i5 3570 @3.8Ghz (April 2012)
Geforce 285 GTX 1024Mb (January 2009)
Auzentech Prelude 7.1 Sound Blaster X-FI
Large Tower ATX Desktop PC

Other PCs to be hooked up to my standing desk Retro area with 1600x1200 IPS LCD:

Ultimate Win98
Core 2 Duo X6800 @2.93Ghz
Intel 865 Chipset
512mb DDR RAM
Geforce 5900 Ultra
Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS
10k RPM HDD

Ultimate Win XP / Linux Web Browsing
16Gb DDR3 RAM
ASUS P8H61-M with i7 3770k @3.9Ghz (April 2012)
Geforce GTX 980 Ti 6Gb (June 2015)
Creative Sound Blaster X-FI

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2025-01-01, 16:51:

Ultimate Win XP / Linux Web Browsing 16Gb DDR3 RAM ASUS P8H61-M with i7 3770k @3.9Ghz (April 2012) Geforce GTX 980 Ti 6Gb (June […]
Show full quote

Ultimate Win XP / Linux Web Browsing
16Gb DDR3 RAM
ASUS P8H61-M with i7 3770k @3.9Ghz (April 2012)
Geforce GTX 980 Ti 6Gb (June 2015)
Creative Sound Blaster X-FI

That's a Sandy Bridge motherboard, so PCIe 2.0 and DDR3 1333MHz. Ivy Bridge motherboard would give you PCIe 3.0 and DDR3 1600MHz.

Not that of a big deal, but since it's intended to be a ultimate build why not go the extra mile. If you just haven't seen an Ivy micro atx motherboard with WinXP drivers straight from the manufacturer Asus P8Z77-M would be one option.

Sombrero wrote on 2025-01-01, 17:20:

That's a Sandy Bridge motherboard, so PCIe 2.0 and DDR3 1333MHz. Ivy Bridge motherboard would give you PCIe 3.0 and DDR3 1600MHz.

Not that of a big deal, but since it's intended to be a ultimate build why not go the extra mile. If you just haven't seen an Ivy micro atx motherboard with WinXP drivers straight from the manufacturer Asus P8Z77-M would be one option.

Funny you should say that. I was looking at getting the ASUS TUF Sabertooth Z77 to go in the machine that will have the 285 in, as originally I was thinking of using two 250s in SLI. But I changed my mind, as the Z77 boards supporting SLI are rather expensive. So I decided to use a single GPU that I already have along with a motherboard I already have. I didn't want to go above 1Gb VRAM for this build and I wanted Direct X 10. Not 11. The ultimate XP PC can handle DX11.

The motherboard listed above is one I currently am using in my XP/Linux PC. Though currently with 750 Ti, as its in a small form factor low-profile case, and that's the highest spec GPU I could find that's compatible with XP and fits. I am looking to get a high end 900 series GPU, perhaps the 980 Ti but not decided. If I do that then I will need to use a normal depth case. I have this micro atx in storage that I am considering using:

https://www.silverstonetek.com/en/product/inf … r-chassis/SG12/

But it's Micro ATX, so would need to find a Z77 board that's Micro ATX. The one you mentioned seems to fit that description. Though I think I have read somewhere that some features of Z77 don't work under XP. Maybe the USB 3 ports?

RetroPCCupboard wrote on 2025-01-01, 17:45:

Though I think I have read somewhere that some features of Z77 don't work under XP. Maybe the USB 3 ports?

Yeah no USB 3.0 with WinXP, but the ports will work just fine as USB 2.0 of course.

There are Ivy Bridge USB 3.0 drivers for Windows 7 but at least for me they have caused all kinds of issues like lock ups. Maybe the motherboard has been the culprit and the drivers are fine, but unless I see someone saying USB 3 works fine on their Ivy motherboard I'm going to assume USB 3 is only stable starting with Haswell.