It depends on the games you want to play. But while there's driver overhead, the fastest is normally better if there aren't compatibility issues. I generally stick with Direct3D 9 games on XP so the GPU generally isn't the compatibility problem. It's game having issues with multiple cores which an normally be resolved by locking them to a single thread. So I recommend the GTX750 or 950.

There's no reason to go beyond the 2GB of RAM you have now. 32-bit XP had a limit of 4GB, and with IO mapping you normally max out at 3.25GB usable. But XP itself only takes 100-200MB if you aren't loading up on a bunch of random programs. That gives games way more than enough available memory.

You might also want to skip the HDD. You can get 1TB SATA SSDs for ~$45, while 512GB are about $26. XP games were much smaller back then, not anywhere close to the 100GB+ of modern games. If you can have over 100+ games loaded, is that enough?

Thanks for the reply.
I get the sentiment that the fastest is always better.
I do care a little about being some what period correct, but not too the letter.
I figure that if it were a reasonable choice at the time, then it still makes sense.

C2Q is already not a purist choice for WinXP, but plenty of people skipped Vista so there is precedent.
No real point in a Windows 7 build as my modern 11 machine can handle that era fine.
But I'm still a bit torn between the HD5870 and the newer cards, a bit of a last hurrah for the old ATi I guess.

Fair point as well about the SSD, but it's also down to using what I have already. I have the Samsung 128GB, and a pile of mechanical drives already.
I might upgrade to a larger SSD later on, who knows.
If I'm being honest I'll never likely use this thing anyway.

Similar point on the RAM. I've got an entire box of DDR1 & DDR2, around a hundred sticks. Might as well use the best I've got.
I was actually going to use an E5400 until I looked and found the Q6600.

Whenever I contemplate builds like this for videocard - I usually consider the equivalent Quadro or FireGL/FirePro versions too since most of them feature more Vram and usually arent much more expensive nowadays.

In the end it's your call. But "period accurate" means those games that were challenging to run at the time will still have performance issues. While the faster cards that still had official XP drivers released for them will let you crank up the settings without breaking a sweat.

With how fast things change, budget level equipment from 3-4 years later will outperform what was the best of the best. The budget stuff also generally uses less power and isn't redlining which might keep them running longer.

BinaryDemon wrote on 2025-01-23, 16:20:

Whenever I contemplate builds like this for videocard - I usually consider the equivalent Quadro or FireGL/FirePro versions too since most of them feature more Vram and usually arent much more expensive nowadays.

This is a fair point. I did used to have a few old Quadro cards somewhere.
The only FireGL card I've got is a 8800, that one has been in and out of my P3 rig a few times as an 8500 fill in.

I flirted with the idea of finding a cheap Titan card, but that honestly seems a bit silly. They are still selling for crazy prices for what they actually are.

SScorpio wrote on 2025-01-23, 16:46:

In the end it's your call. But "period accurate" means those games that were challenging to run at the time will still have performance issues. While the faster cards that still had official XP drivers released for them will let you crank up the settings without breaking a sweat.

With how fast things change, budget level equipment from 3-4 years later will outperform what was the best of the best. The budget stuff also generally uses less power and isn't redlining which might keep them running longer.

True. I don't much care about power draw, I would like to find the time to use this PC when it's done but if I'm honest I doubt I will have the time, at least not for some time.
But it would be nice to put it together while this stuff is still cheap and readily available.
I'm in the US and situated right between two large hydroelectric dams, so power is quite cheap so that's less a concern.

Jasin Natael wrote on 2025-01-23, 17:27:

True. I don't much care about power draw, I would like to find the time to use this PC when it's done but if I'm honest I doubt I will have the time, at least not for some time.
But it would be nice to put it together while this stuff is still cheap and readily available.
I'm in the US and situated right between two large hydroelectric dams, so power is quite cheap so that's less a concern.

Unless it's left on all the time, the cost of the power isn't a big issue. It's that the high end cards use more power which generates more heat and puts more stress on their components. The low or mid range card a few years newer that sips power could have a much longer life ahead of it. So I was just recommending something to bring enjoyment for years to come.

The very first Titan was actually from the GTX 700 series. I still have two from when I was sli'ing them. I have a 750ti in my XP machine and am more than happy with it. One of the Titan cards also started getting some weird artifacting before I was planning to retire it. I'm pretty sure it was down to the power/heat/stress stuff I was talking about.

SScorpio wrote on 2025-01-23, 18:46:

Jasin Natael wrote on 2025-01-23, 17:27:

True. I don't much care about power draw, I would like to find the time to use this PC when it's done but if I'm honest I doubt I will have the time, at least not for some time.
But it would be nice to put it together while this stuff is still cheap and readily available.
I'm in the US and situated right between two large hydroelectric dams, so power is quite cheap so that's less a concern.

Unless it's left on all the time, the cost of the power isn't a big issue. It's that the high end cards use more power which generates more heat and puts more stress on their components. The low or mid range card a few years newer that sips power could have a much longer life ahead of it. So I was just recommending something to bring enjoyment for years to come.

The very first Titan was actually from the GTX 700 series. I still have two from when I was sli'ing them. I have a 750ti in my XP machine and am more than happy with it. One of the Titan cards also started getting some weird artifacting before I was planning to retire it. I'm pretty sure it was down to the power/heat/stress stuff I was talking about.

Yes without a doubt on the power and heat. I wouldn't really leave it running though so it's less of a concern with me, longevity is something to bear in mind however. I've got a ton of old hardware though so unless it's rare or very spendy I'm not too stressed about it dying. Just like it to be as nice of a build as it can be. Not necessarily as fast as possible, just something that makes sense.

I don't do period correct builds; I prefer either maxing out a system as much as possible or raiding the parts bin before going out to spend my hard-earned money.

So I would also use the fastest hardware you already have, see if it can run the games, you want and only go and purchase better hardware if needed.
This is why I'm still using spinning rust on everything, I've a large stockpile and load times don't bother me that much.

I just tested a HD 4850 on my EP45-DS3L with a Core 2 Duo E8400. It's CPU limited in DX7 and below in XP. GPU limited in latter titles. It barely manages 60 FPS in Crysis at 1024x768.

If you plan to run games like Crysis at high-res, you'll want to use a card faster than your HD 5770.

My current xp setup is e8500 c2d @4 ghz with hd6850 it gives me hundreds of fps in dx8 titles with aa and af enabled. It gives great performance in dx9 games also. Only troubles I got was mafia and doom 3 first one has around 20 fps , second stuck at 6fps because of driver issue . Before I ended up with 6850 I used 8800gt which is very good card, but image quality wasn't good enough to keep it. Then I used hd 4890 it was better overall except huge heating and very loud. Then I tried hd 6850 and has only 100 watts power draw better image quality comparing to nvidia and sufficient performance for xp build.

Late '06 I bought a Dell XPS420 with a Q6600 and 8800 in it, which was pretty great at the time. It came with Vista, but I ran XP until windows 7 came around.
It's only around 2015 that the 8800 really started getting unusable, and I swapped it for I think a 660. But I suppose if being period correct is not the goal, just go for whatever is fastest and still has XP support.

Thanks everyone.

I'm still gathering parts, but got most of the bases covered. MB/CPU/RAM/PSU/SSD & HDD.
Still a bit torn on the GPU but I will probably start with the HD5870, and see if any games that I want to run won't run to suit me. And just go from there.
Still have to pick a case and cooler, probably will just use what old case I have that will allow fitment.
I loathe the crappy Intel stock coolers but I might have to use one for a short amount of time because of my case options.