One use for dual core, even for old stuff, is that background tasks like monitoring or something stop affecting performance. This actually was the biggest (and very significant) benefit from dual core CPUs initially, software capable of utilizing more than one core arrived way later.

Other than that 4000+ is probably a good choice. Probably with 2GB of RAM, just to be safe, though 1GB is practically more than enough.

FWIW, here is my Asus K8V-XE with an X800 Pro, a 3400+ @ 2,531 MHz and Win98SE. You would have the advantages of dual channel memory and a larger cache.

With X800XL, that points to XP, so I'd go 2GB RAM and use the dual core Opteron 180 if it has nothing better to do. XP is multithread, though not the "throw more cores at it" that exists with modern games, and even if the software isn't explicitly multithreaded, a second core lets the background stuff slip by without taking away from the foreground.
Also, looks like both the 180 and the 4000+ actually clock at 2.4GHz, so you aren't losing single thread performance

Matth79 wrote on 2025-09-24, 18:48:

With X800XL, that points to XP, so I'd go 2GB RAM and use the dual core Opteron 180 if it has nothing better to do.

That's pretty close to what I ran back in late 2005. It lasted as my main system for a couple years after that upgrade. Still works today.

Matth79 wrote on 2025-09-24, 18:48:

With X800XL, that points to XP, so I'd go 2GB RAM and use the dual core Opteron 180 if it has nothing better to do. XP is multithread, though not the "throw more cores at it" that exists with modern games, and even if the software isn't explicitly multithreaded, a second core lets the background stuff slip by without taking away from the foreground.
Also, looks like both the 180 and the 4000+ actually clock at 2.4GHz, so you aren't losing single thread performance

Win XP, correct.

May very well just run the Opteron. Would love to pair an X850 with it... wish I hadn't sold the one I had.

Definitely Opteron 180. Since you have also Athlon 64 4000+ (single core) you could run some benchmarks for us in a dedicated topic. It would be interesting to see the difference between single and dual core 2.4Ghz.

Single core is only good until 2005, dual core perhaps up to 2007 games.

ATI Radeon X800 XL is hopelessly outclassed. It would benefit from GeForce 9800 GT, GTX 260 or more modern alternatives with the same performance. All those GPUs are super cheap.

I have an X800XL but its in a Win98 system.
I wouldnt consider that card for use in WinXP. It was ok back in the day but these days the early gen dual core CPUs aint something I would consider to build a system from.

ElectroSoldier wrote on Yesterday, 19:18:

I have an X800XL but its in a Win98 system.
I wouldnt consider that card for use in WinXP. It was ok back in the day but these days the early gen dual core CPUs aint something I would consider to build a system from.

Yea.. I like the Opterons, but I feel it would be better served if I was building it as a "stretching its life" system. Which I have considered, throwing in a 5670 or 4830 would work well.

I remember the Opteron solutions being popular back then because they were cheaper than the Intel equivalent system but I never had any use experience of them, I went along the Gulftown route.
Powerful systems back in the day, but in my mind I cant see a place for them because XP can run on much later i7 systems like the i7 3770k with a 980Ti. (or a lp 750Ti)...

Win2k I can see them being interesting as it pushes it out longer, which I like because I still love Win2k but for gaming its more meh!

If everyone was building i7 3770k with 980Ti for Windows XP then this would be a very sad place. I hope people will be interested in other platforms as well.

ElectroSoldier wrote on Yesterday, 19:18:

I have an X800XL but its in a Win98 system.
I wouldnt consider that card for use in WinXP. It was ok back in the day but these days the early gen dual core CPUs aint something I would consider to build a system from.

I liked the X800XL because it was relatively quiet compared to the alternatives. Do you have an AGP version? Running win98 without AGP always seemed a little anachronistic to me.

douglar wrote on Today, 12:33:

ElectroSoldier wrote on Yesterday, 19:18:

I have an X800XL but its in a Win98 system.
I wouldnt consider that card for use in WinXP. It was ok back in the day but these days the early gen dual core CPUs aint something I would consider to build a system from.

I liked the X800XL because it was relatively quiet compared to the alternatives. Do you have an AGP version? Running win98 without AGP always seemed a little anachronistic to me.

Yeah mine is AGP, Its on an ASRock 775i65G.
Its a great card on Win98, there isnt a single game it cant play. Which is what you would expect.

The X800 is compatible with Windows 98 and devices from that era.
Not long ago, I had G41+E8400 in my signature. And its Windows 2000.
Yep. It doesn't work with A3D Vortex2 drivers at all – it's multithreading.
The X800 is absolutely necessary with a single-core solution.