Nice rig!

Just for understanding - in XP you use one Titan as renderer and one for PhysX?

You might want to upgrade to GeForce GTX 980 Ti if you want the most powerful rig. I see this more of a Windows XP / 7 dual boot rig. I got a Phenom II X6 1100T BE and it got a nice modern case (aircooling only as it is quieter). I'm thinking about buying a GeForce 1080 Ti or 2080 Ti for it as it will primarily be Windows 7. My GeForce GTX 980 will remain as a spare.

Unfortunately early Windows XP game compatibility is reduced with anything newer than 7xxx series cards.

H3nrik V! wrote on 2025-02-10, 17:38:

Nice rig!

Just for understanding - in XP you use one Titan as renderer and one for PhysX?

This is correct! 😀

AlexZ wrote on 2025-02-10, 18:48:

You might want to upgrade to GeForce GTX 980 Ti if you want the most powerful rig. I see this more of a Windows XP / 7 dual boot rig. I got a Phenom II X6 1100T BE and it got a nice modern case (aircooling only as it is quieter). I'm thinking about buying a GeForce 1080 Ti or 2080 Ti for it as it will primarily be Windows 7. My GeForce GTX 980 will remain as a spare.

Unfortunately early Windows XP game compatibility is reduced with anything newer than 7xxx series cards.

GTX 980 Ti would actually be a downgrade. As I wrote in the post, they are Maxwell architecture Titan X GPU's, meaning they are the absolute best you can have, with a few more shaders and double the VRAM of a 980 Ti (Not so important for XP, but nice for a 64-bit OS).

Alexraptor wrote on 2025-02-10, 19:35:

GTX 980 Ti would actually be a downgrade. As I wrote in the post, they are Maxwell architecture Titan X GPU's, meaning they are the absolute best you can have, with a few more shaders and double the VRAM of a 980 Ti (Not so important for XP, but nice for a 64-bit OS).

My GTX 980Ti is actually OC version, those are slightly faster according to techpowerup than Titan X.

Does SLI of Titan X actually work properly in Windows XP?

Very nice build! I also like using an overpowered system for WinXP gaming. Among other things, this allows you to apply fancy stuff like SGSSAA at high resolutions for that super clean look. No more jaggies or shimmering when moving toward chainlink fences, grass, tree leaves and other semi-transparent surfaces.

Back in the day, my WinXP system wasn't the greatest, so I played many demanding titles at 800x600 without any extra stuff. That's why I like to replay such games now at 1600x1200 with 8xSGSSAA and 16xAF on top. For me, I t improves the experience quite a bit.

AlexZ wrote on 2025-02-10, 20:46:

Alexraptor wrote on 2025-02-10, 19:35:

GTX 980 Ti would actually be a downgrade. As I wrote in the post, they are Maxwell architecture Titan X GPU's, meaning they are the absolute best you can have, with a few more shaders and double the VRAM of a 980 Ti (Not so important for XP, but nice for a 64-bit OS).

My GTX 980Ti is actually OC version, those are slightly faster according to techpowerup than Titan X.

Does SLI of Titan X actually work properly in Windows XP?

I mean its kind of give and take, 980 Ti's come in higher clocked flavors, but Titan X has more shading units and TMU's, outside of the VRAM they are pretty much in the same ballpark. 😀

And unfortunately no, SLI does not work in Windows XP, but it runs fine as a dedicated PhysX processor. So it does see some use in Windows XP. 😉

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2025-02-10, 20:54:

Very nice build! I also like using an overpowered system for WinXP gaming. Among other things, this allows you to apply fancy stuff like SGSSAA at high resolutions for that super clean look. No more jaggies or shimmering when moving toward chainlink fences, grass, tree leaves and other semi-transparent surfaces.

Back in the day, my WinXP system wasn't the greatest, so I played many demanding titles at 800x600 without any extra stuff. That's why I like to replay such games now at 1600x1200 with 8xSGSSAA and 16xAF on top. For me, I t improves the experience quite a bit.

Thanks! I've seen SGSSAA mentioned here and there, but I don't know how one actually goes about enabling it?

Alexraptor wrote on 2025-02-10, 21:05:

Thanks! I've seen SGSSAA mentioned here and there, but I don't know how one actually goes about enabling it?

It depends on the game. In most cases, you just need to use the Nvidia Profile Inspector and configure anti aliasing to something like this. However, some games also need a special compatibility flag to be set. You can find a list of those here.

There's more info on SGSSAA on the overclockers.net forum. Additionally, it's always good to check the PC Gaming Wiki entry of the game that you're playing. It usually contains the SGSSAA flag (if needed) and some other stuff that might be relevant for running the game smoothly.

Alexraptor wrote on 2025-02-10, 21:05:

I mean its kind of give and take, 980 Ti's come in higher clocked flavors, but Titan X has more shading units and TMU's, outside […]
Show full quote

AlexZ wrote on 2025-02-10, 20:46:

Alexraptor wrote on 2025-02-10, 19:35:

GTX 980 Ti would actually be a downgrade. As I wrote in the post, they are Maxwell architecture Titan X GPU's, meaning they are the absolute best you can have, with a few more shaders and double the VRAM of a 980 Ti (Not so important for XP, but nice for a 64-bit OS).

My GTX 980Ti is actually OC version, those are slightly faster according to techpowerup than Titan X.

Does SLI of Titan X actually work properly in Windows XP?

I mean its kind of give and take, 980 Ti's come in higher clocked flavors, but Titan X has more shading units and TMU's, outside of the VRAM they are pretty much in the same ballpark. 😀

And unfortunately no, SLI does not work in Windows XP, but it runs fine as a dedicated PhysX processor. So it does see some use in Windows XP. 😉

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2025-02-10, 20:54:

Very nice build! I also like using an overpowered system for WinXP gaming. Among other things, this allows you to apply fancy stuff like SGSSAA at high resolutions for that super clean look. No more jaggies or shimmering when moving toward chainlink fences, grass, tree leaves and other semi-transparent surfaces.

Back in the day, my WinXP system wasn't the greatest, so I played many demanding titles at 800x600 without any extra stuff. That's why I like to replay such games now at 1600x1200 with 8xSGSSAA and 16xAF on top. For me, I t improves the experience quite a bit.

Thanks! I've seen SGSSAA mentioned here and there, but I don't know how one actually goes about enabling it?

Perhaps you may be interested in this Win XP Onecore, just recently got a new update.

https://github.com/shorthorn-project/One-Core … Binaries-Canary

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0bKkXYx4aM&t=80s

It essentially allows XP to run some modern windows software, Im curious if itll allow steam to run under XP again. Its a cool project that even if its not perfect its certainly an interesting way to get XP access to some more modern browsers which is always good for security.

I should state im not affiliated with this project, I do think it has a lot of potential to be very useful for retro machines.

Wow, there's 12GB of VRAM on that Titan! In Windows XP, would games be able to use more than 4GB of VRAM, or does the 4GB limitation not apply to VRAM?
It is more of a theoretical question, since XP games probably won't need more than 4GB of VRAM even at 4K resolution, and you're also dual booting Windows 10.

Very Nice! I've actually got a build in the works that will be using a Titan X for Windows XP and probably dual boot with a newer OS as well.

Will most likely run XP x64, XP (if I have issues with certain things on x64), maybe Vista, and possibly 7.

65C02 wrote on 2025-02-10, 23:57:

Wow, there's 12GB of VRAM on that Titan! In Windows XP, would games be able to use more than 4GB of VRAM, or does the 4GB limitation not apply to VRAM?
It is more of a theoretical question, since XP games probably won't need more than 4GB of VRAM even at 4K resolution, and you're also dual booting Windows 10.

Doesnt apply, that limit is pretty much restricted to system ram.

That much VRam can cause other issues mostly related to older games not expecting that much Vram and bugging out due to that.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2025-02-10, 21:12:

Alexraptor wrote on 2025-02-10, 21:05:

Thanks! I've seen SGSSAA mentioned here and there, but I don't know how one actually goes about enabling it?

It depends on the game. In most cases, you just need to use the Nvidia Profile Inspector and configure anti aliasing to something like this. However, some games also need a special compatibility flag to be set. You can find a list of those here.

There's more info on SGSSAA on the overclockers.net forum. Additionally, it's always good to check the PC Gaming Wiki entry of the game that you're playing. It usually contains the SGSSAA flag (if needed) and some other stuff that might be relevant for running the game smoothly.

Cheers! I'll have to look into that. 😀

Trashbytes wrote on 2025-02-11, 05:20:

65C02 wrote on 2025-02-10, 23:57:

Wow, there's 12GB of VRAM on that Titan! In Windows XP, would games be able to use more than 4GB of VRAM, or does the 4GB limitation not apply to VRAM?
It is more of a theoretical question, since XP games probably won't need more than 4GB of VRAM even at 4K resolution, and you're also dual booting Windows 10.

Doesnt apply, that limit is pretty much restricted to system ram.

That much VRam can cause other issues mostly related to older games not expecting that much Vram and bugging out due to that.

Yeah, Id Tech 4 games get pretty cranky with anything over 1gb VRAM. At least that's fixable with config tweaks.

Fortunately I haven't run into any issues with XP games yet, but I do actually keep a pair of 780 Ti's on hand, just in case I ever run into issues with the Titans. But so far so good!

I find it also interesting that you run that SLI setup with Corsair AX860i 860W.

I have a Fortron EVEREST 800W (semi-modular) and found out it is not stable with GeForce GTX 980 Ti oc when the provided PCIE 1-2 connectors are used (same V12 rail, max 25A). It becomes stable with any combination of PCIE 1-2 and 3-4 (tested with about one hour Furmark). It seems it doesn't like unbalanced load. It would shut off either immediately or sometimes after 10 minutes of Furmark and refuse to start. It probably degraded over years a bit and no longer meets the original specs.

My experience shows 800W PSUs should not be used for SLI anymore. It also means used 600W PSUs are of limited use for single GPU rigs.

AlexZ wrote on 2025-02-14, 17:31:

I find it also interesting that you run that SLI setup with Corsair AX860i 860W.

I have a Fortron EVEREST 800W (semi-modular) and found out it is not stable with GeForce GTX 980 Ti oc when the provided PCIE 1-2 connectors are used (same V12 rail, max 25A). It becomes stable with any combination of PCIE 1-2 and 3-4 (tested with about one hour Furmark). It seems it doesn't like unbalanced load. It would shut off either immediately or sometimes after 10 minutes of Furmark and refuse to start. It probably degraded over years a bit and no longer meets the original specs.

My experience shows 800W PSUs should not be used for SLI anymore. It also means used 600W PSUs are of limited use for single GPU rigs.

The top end Corsair AX/AXi-series and even HX-series PSU's are in an entirely different league. The AX860i is rated for max 71.6A on it's +12V rail (The full 860W of the PSU).

Under full load with both GPU's taxed at 100%, the system pulls around 550-600 Watts total, from the wall.

Fortron EVEREST 800W has four +12v rails, each rated 20A-25A, max total load 775W. The +12V2 rail I originally used is dedicated to PCIe only, rated 25A. For this reason I'm very skeptical about buying a PSU with just two 8pin PCIe connectors in the future.

Have you tested both cards using Furmark simultaneously?

AlexZ wrote on 2025-02-15, 20:14:

Fortron EVEREST 800W has four +12v rails, each rated 20A-25A, max total load 775W. The +12V2 rail I originally used is dedicated to PCIe only, rated 25A. For this reason I'm very skeptical about buying a PSU with just two 8pin PCIe connectors in the future.

Have you tested both cards using Furmark simultaneously?

No I haven't, never had a reason to, since Furmark does not represent a normal use case. Nor do i have any desire to deliberatly and artificially overtax decade old hardware

As for the PSU, the AX860i is a modular PSU with a total of six connectors that can be used for either "6+2 PCI-E" or "4+4 CPU". My Titan's both have two separate PCI-E cables each to draw power from.

Alexraptor wrote on 2025-02-15, 21:15:

AlexZ wrote on 2025-02-15, 20:14:

Fortron EVEREST 800W has four +12v rails, each rated 20A-25A, max total load 775W. The +12V2 rail I originally used is dedicated to PCIe only, rated 25A. For this reason I'm very skeptical about buying a PSU with just two 8pin PCIe connectors in the future.

Have you tested both cards using Furmark simultaneously?

No I haven't, never had a reason to, since Furmark does not represent a normal use case. Nor do i have any desire to deliberatly and artificially overtax decade old hardware

As for the PSU, the AX860i is a modular PSU with a total of six connectors that can be used for either "6+2 PCI-E" or "4+4 CPU". My Titan's both have two separate PCI-E cables each to draw power from.

Im using a EVGA Supernova 850 P2 Platinum, it handles dual 1080ti and dual Titan XP class GPUs just fine, people tend to forget that higher grade PSUs cant be compared to the lower tier ones ...4 12v rails is worse than dual rails or the single rail high end PSUs. The EVGA PSU is a single 12v rail with 70amps and 850watts available on that rail, the AX860i is also a single rail PSU with 71 amps and 859watts on the 12v rail both are designed for Tri-SLI setups so can handle dual cards with little to no issues.

PSU aint PSUs and you cant compare lower end ones to higher end ones and the only time you need to worry with high end ones is if your total system draw will exceed the rated supply for extended periods, I know my 850 will supply 1000 just fine for short periods and the 860 shouldn't be any different.

Just had a quick look at that Fortron EVEREST 800W and yeah it wasn't high end back in the day so im not at all surprised it cant handle the 800W its rated for, many PSU from back in the day simply had bogus rated wattages and couldn't ever actually supply that wattage or could only supply it for very short periods.

@AlexZ I wouldn't have subjected an old PSU to Furmark ...that was just asking for the PSU to burn itself out and to degrade its components further or it to fail totally and take other valuable components with it. (have had this happen)

Not sure about Titan X, but I found GeForce 980 Ti to be quite noisy when under very high load. Max Furmark temperatures were up to 65'C, but usually about 55'C when gaming. Manual fan control was used to keep typical use temperatures below 60'C for longer life.

Then I got a GeForce 2080 Ti and it's so much quieter with the same manual fan control. Maximum Furmark temperature is 55'C. I have never seen a card before that Furmark cannot put under high thermal stress. Typical use temperature is below 50'C.

Both cards are second-hand. The case has 7x 140mm fans + 2 CPU fans and everything is air cooled.

AlexZ wrote on 2025-02-18, 16:03:

Not sure about Titan X, but I found GeForce 980 Ti to be quite noisy when under very high load.

It's unlikely that a GTX 980 Ti will ever get to full load while playing WinXP era games (2001-2009) when using contemporary resolutions such as 1600x1200 or its widescreen counterpart 1920x1200.

I can maybe see it happening with higher resolutions or (more likely) when using SGSSAA. That said, my second hand GTX 970 with recently changed thermal paste is still fairly quiet at 86% load. Haven't really pushed it higher than that under WinXP, but it does rev up at 100% utilization while playing some Win7 games like Tomb Raider (2013).