I never tested boards with this chipset, but seems that the SiS 530 can only cache up to 64MB of memory (with a 512KB L2 cache, which most boards will be equiped with).
Since you have a regular K6-2 CPU (which doesn't have an on-die L2 cache) with 192MB of memory, you can expect a pretty large performance penalty (at least a 30% performance hit).
Try and decrease the memory size to 64MB and see how it goes, or upgrade to a K6-2/3+ CPU.

Also, that GPU will never work properly with a (Super) socket 7 system, the newer driver overhead is just too much for such a slow platform... so don't expect any miracles even if you decrease the memory size.

I only bring commiserations. I had an SiS 630 based Aptiva and went through this same journey, attempting to boost performance with an MX440 and FX5200. I couldn't squeeze any more out of those than I could out of the IGP, and @bloodem's post probably sums up why. In the end I just had to accept what it was.

I remember a similar situation where I did a bunch of testing on an IBM K6-2 / PCI-only system - and anything beyond a PCI 16mb TNT2 Vanta card was pointless. I cant remember if I tried anything like an FX-5500, I do remember trying stuff like Geforce2MX / Radeon 9250.

bloodem wrote on 2025-03-01, 09:45:

Also, that GPU will never work properly with a (Super) socket 7 system, the newer driver overhead is just too much for such a slow platform... so don't expect any miracles even if you decrease the memory size.

BinaryDemon wrote on 2025-03-01, 14:05:

I remember a similar situation where I did a bunch of testing on an IBM K6-2 / PCI-only system - and anything beyond a PCI 16mb TNT2 Vanta card was pointless. I cant remember if I tried anything like an FX-5500, I do remember trying stuff like Geforce2MX / Radeon 9250.

I believe this is likely the reason. The GeForce FX is a 2003 card while the K6-2 is a 1998 CPU. I was on a P3 800 when I got my original GeForce 256 in 1999. Later cards have increasingly more driver overhead to handle all of the additional features of Direct3D. I'd pair a GPU that's within a year of release with a CPU... maybe stretching it out to two years.

All that said, hoping for a K6-2 to play 2003 games is beyond optimistic. You're reaching into the XP era than, and Pentium 4 and Athlon 64 X2 CPUs can struggle with some of those games.

IMO, the best use of the FX PCI cards is in one of the later PCIe motherboards. So maybe try out a very cheap Core2 system. The PCI card still won't have as good of performance as an AGP FX card though.

I recommend setting periods to target for your build. The a 500ish MHZ K6-2 is more of a late Win95 machine, pair it with a TNT or TNT2 and run games up to 98/99. Though you will struggle with the more demanding releases. There were always games that didn't play well on even the fastest hardware when they were released.

Thanks for all the responses.

Regarding what I want to run on the computer, looking at my games I think they moreso top out around 2002, and even then I don't play a lot of the crazy demanding games from that era. I know it's weird, but I like squeezing as much performance as possible out of old hardware, which is why I hoped the fx5500 would essentially give me the max performance I could get out of the k6-2. Obviously it didn't, 🤣.

So I've now tried removing ram sticks and tried both the 64mb and 128mb on their own, and both provide better results than before, not to a wild degree but definitely an improvement.
Harry Potter gets a 4-5fps boost, tonic trouble is almost always full speed now, and spongebob is about 15fps. Definitely an improvement, but not amazing.

Apparently, my acer v75m doesn't even have any L2 cache, so i'm beginning to think that's the biggest problem. I'd like to keep with socket 7 and 98SE as much as possible, so i'm eyeing a MVP3 motherboard on fb marketplace that has 2mb onboard L2 Cache. Curious if that would fix some of my issues.

RetroLord12p wrote on 2025-03-01, 18:55:

i'm eyeing a MVP3 motherboard on fb marketplace that has 2mb onboard L2 Cache. Curious if that would fix some of my issues.

If you really want to stick to a Super Socket 7 system, then a combo such as Asus P5A rev 1.04 / AMD K6-3+@ 600+ MHz / 128 MB RAM / 3dfx Voodoo 3 3000 AGP, will give you the best performance & compatibility that you can possibly achieve with this platform (it's not gonna be cheap, though). 😁
No need for a large L2 cache, especially if you go with a mobile K6-2/3+ CPU (even without a CPU with on-die cache, having 2MB of external cache will maybe give you an extra 5- 10% performance increase).

RetroLord12p wrote on 2025-03-01, 18:55:

Apparently, my acer v75m doesn't even have any L2 cache, so i'm beginning to think that's the biggest problem.

Hard to believe. If your board has this SRAM chip, then it does have an external (L2) cache:

The k6-2 has a weak fpu.
At 400 its half the speed of a celeron 300a@450.

AMD K6-2 equivalent to pentium......

Sorry, but you can't polish a turd.
The sis chipset only makes it worse

I've had some success with these cards in a Socket 7 system, but it's very different from yours.

After further testing, this pairing just makes performance all over the place 🤣.

Halo ce literally runs better than chamber of Secrets somehow, running sometimes at 4fps and other times up to 20ish.

Also a game called Shadow or Destiny (2002) has moments where it runs pretty decently too. It baffles me how these run but then there are some simpler gsmes which struggle more 🤣. I suppose it depends which games are more cpu or gpu intensive.

Meanwhile, I tried Rayman 2 and it works incredible, much better than Tonic Trouble. Ubisoft probably put extra work into the engine between those 2 games releases.

Meh, I'll probably figure out something or upgrade if I run into a PIII machine at a thrift store, but for now I'm going to test some more games and see what it can do 😅

In some cases PCI GeForce FX series are heavily limited by the bus. That's not PCI issue by itself, but mostly how the driver operates.

bloodem wrote on 2025-03-01, 09:45:

I never tested boards with this chipset, but seems that the SiS 530 can only cache up to 64MB of memory (with a 512KB L2 cache, […]
Show full quote

I never tested boards with this chipset, but seems that the SiS 530 can only cache up to 64MB of memory (with a 512KB L2 cache, which most boards will be equiped with).
Since you have a regular K6-2 CPU (which doesn't have an on-die L2 cache) with 192MB of memory, you can expect a pretty large performance penalty (at least a 30% performance hit).
Try and decrease the memory size to 64MB and see how it goes, or upgrade to a K6-2/3+ CPU.

Also, that GPU will never work properly with a (Super) socket 7 system, the newer driver overhead is just too much for such a slow platform... so don't expect any miracles even if you decrease the memory size.

Yes true, I belived the fx card gives performance on a well fitted AGP scenario. But thats my thought and all configurations are different and perform different from others.

The FX 5500 has programmable shaders, which require greater CPU overhead than older cards with a fixed-function pipeline, like the GeForce4 MX series. So, the best video card for a PCI-only Socket 7 system is likely the GeForce4 MX 440 or MX 4000. Keep in mind the bus width.