DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-06, 11:24:

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-06, 07:34:

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-06, 07:14:

Well that’s what I thought. But then I wondered if they were different models, that didn’t come with the CPU, released by Intel.

While I said that a full aluminium cooler is okay for a Northwood, if you have a chance to get a copper contact one then as Fish3r said I would choose that over the full aluminium one. Even if it doesn't come with the proper mounting equipment for Socket 478, those mounting parts can often be still found in online shops.

Yeah, I’ll wait until I find a copper one. I’m not sure if I’m just seeing different results my end, or not typing something a certain way, but practically every result is aluminium or some unknown brand. 😕 I’m also a bit miffed that the seller I asked regarding the brackets for the Shuriken hasn’t replied. But the images don’t show them, so I’m guessing not.

At any rate, my P4 has been delivered. Just a shame I can’t do anything with it for the moment. 😅

The best options I can see atm are...

Arctic Cooling super silent 4 ultra TC (alu only)

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/397813011165 or

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/255267937531

Akasa AK-687 (copper base)

https://www.pcupgrade.co.uk/legacy-equipment/ … ott-socket-478/ (bought from them before / says 'in Stock' but I'd check anyway)

Personally, I'd just get the Scythe Shuriken B...even if it doesn't come with the 478 brackets I'm sure I have a few spare sets somewhere.

PC Hoarder Patrol wrote on 2026-06-06, 12:50:

Personally, I'd just get the Scythe Shuriken B...even if it doesn't come with the 478 brackets I'm sure I have a few spare sets somewhere.

Worth keeping in mind that you need a lot of clearance around the CPU for this as the heatpipes stick out quite far. Capacitors & the chipset heatsink can get in the way on some boards.

Fish3r wrote on 2026-06-06, 13:04:

PC Hoarder Patrol wrote on 2026-06-06, 12:50:

Personally, I'd just get the Scythe Shuriken B...even if it doesn't come with the 478 brackets I'm sure I have a few spare sets somewhere.

Worth keeping in mind that you need a lot of clearance around the CPU for this as the heatpipes stick out quite far. Capacitors & the chipset heatsink can get in the way on some boards.

Not my first rodeo 😀 ... Re: Future Upgrading Suggestions

PC Hoarder Patrol wrote on 2026-06-06, 12:50:

The best options I can see atm are... […]
Show full quote

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-06, 11:24:

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-06, 07:34:

While I said that a full aluminium cooler is okay for a Northwood, if you have a chance to get a copper contact one then as Fish3r said I would choose that over the full aluminium one. Even if it doesn't come with the proper mounting equipment for Socket 478, those mounting parts can often be still found in online shops.

Yeah, I’ll wait until I find a copper one. I’m not sure if I’m just seeing different results my end, or not typing something a certain way, but practically every result is aluminium or some unknown brand. 😕 I’m also a bit miffed that the seller I asked regarding the brackets for the Shuriken hasn’t replied. But the images don’t show them, so I’m guessing not.

At any rate, my P4 has been delivered. Just a shame I can’t do anything with it for the moment. 😅

The best options I can see atm are...

Arctic Cooling super silent 4 ultra TC (alu only)

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/397813011165 or

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/255267937531

Akasa AK-687 (copper base)

https://www.pcupgrade.co.uk/legacy-equipment/ … ott-socket-478/ (bought from them before / says 'in Stock' but I'd check anyway)

The attachment installation_manual_ak_687bl.pdf is no longer available

Personally, I'd just get the Scythe Shuriken B...even if it doesn't come with the 478 brackets I'm sure I have a few spare sets somewhere.

Ooh, thanks for the links. I wasn’t aware of that site - PC Upgrade. Do they specialise in retro stuff or everything? I’ll try ordering one and see. If not, I guess I’ll just have to settle for aluminium until I find something better.

EDIT: D'oh. Was at work so couldn't really see, but I now realise that the site says it deals with legacy and new hardware 🤣.

PC Hoarder Patrol wrote on 2026-06-06, 12:50:

The best options I can see atm are... […]
Show full quote

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-06, 11:24:

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-06, 07:34:

While I said that a full aluminium cooler is okay for a Northwood, if you have a chance to get a copper contact one then as Fish3r said I would choose that over the full aluminium one. Even if it doesn't come with the proper mounting equipment for Socket 478, those mounting parts can often be still found in online shops.

Yeah, I’ll wait until I find a copper one. I’m not sure if I’m just seeing different results my end, or not typing something a certain way, but practically every result is aluminium or some unknown brand. 😕 I’m also a bit miffed that the seller I asked regarding the brackets for the Shuriken hasn’t replied. But the images don’t show them, so I’m guessing not.

At any rate, my P4 has been delivered. Just a shame I can’t do anything with it for the moment. 😅

The best options I can see atm are...

Arctic Cooling super silent 4 ultra TC (alu only)

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/397813011165 or

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/255267937531

Akasa AK-687 (copper base)

https://www.pcupgrade.co.uk/legacy-equipment/ … ott-socket-478/ (bought from them before / says 'in Stock' but I'd check anyway)

The attachment installation_manual_ak_687bl.pdf is no longer available

Personally, I'd just get the Scythe Shuriken B...even if it doesn't come with the 478 brackets I'm sure I have a few spare sets somewhere.

Hmm. I am a bit disappointed that PC Upgrade slapped, not only VAT on top, but £20 shipping, taking it up to £38. I have stumbled on an Intel stock cooler with a copper bottom, like in the image shared earlier, on eBay for about £30. Though £36 with postage. It's only £2 cheaper, though £6 shipping is more reasonable than 20. But then on the flipside, I suppose the Akasa one is going to be better than the stock cooler...? Hmm...

Just read in another thread from here that the Geforce 6600 GT isn't a good card for Windows 98...? That drivers are a bit buggy? Would like some clarification on this as there's a model I've found on eBay I was going to try and win.

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 12:24:

Just read in another thread from here that the Geforce 6600 GT isn't a good card for Windows 98...? That drivers are a bit buggy? Would like some clarification on this as there's a model I've found on eBay I was going to try and win.

Hmm when you mentioned Doom 3 I though you wished to use Win XP as the primary OS for the computer as Doom 3 needs a fan made patch to run on Win9X, it needs at least Windows XP (Or Windows 2000, but that is more of a workstation/server OS) to run by default.

If you want this rig to be specifically a Win98 one and would not or rarely use Win XP I say the FX series are the better fit, if the ratio is 50/50 or in favour of WinXP then I would choose the 6600 GT, IIRC it still functions OK on Win9x.

EDIT: When you listed the cards that you were looking at they were all NVIDIA ones like 5600FX 5700FX or the 6600GT, but have you considered an ATI card? ATI Radeon 9800s have generally better performance than the FX-es and they have drivers which are stable on both Win98s and WinXP (I have used ATI Radeon 9600-9800s on both OS-es without issues). If you can get your hands on one of these particular beasts: https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-9800-xt.c4 then you would have a card that is both capable of running stable on Win98s and WinXP AND capable of running Doom 3 smoothly on high, however don't expect them to be cheap even if you find one, they were top category cards back then.

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-07, 13:10:

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 12:24:

Just read in another thread from here that the Geforce 6600 GT isn't a good card for Windows 98...? That drivers are a bit buggy? Would like some clarification on this as there's a model I've found on eBay I was going to try and win.

Hmm when you mentioned Doom 3 I though you wished to use Win XP as the primary OS for the computer as Doom 3 needs a fan made patch to run on Win9X, it needs at least Windows XP (Or Windows 2000, but that is more of a workstation/server OS) to run by default.

If you want this rig to be specifically a Win98 one and would not or rarely use Win XP I say the FX series are the better fit, if the ratio is 50/50 or in favour of WinXP then I would choose the 6600 GT, IIRC it still functions OK on Win9x.

Hmm. Okay, thanks for clarifying. An FX would seem like the best choice then, although the only models I'm seeing on eBay UK are for the 5200 and 5500. I've seen one 5600XT and one ASUS FX 5700.

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 13:42:

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-07, 13:10:

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 12:24:

Just read in another thread from here that the Geforce 6600 GT isn't a good card for Windows 98...? That drivers are a bit buggy? Would like some clarification on this as there's a model I've found on eBay I was going to try and win.

Hmm when you mentioned Doom 3 I though you wished to use Win XP as the primary OS for the computer as Doom 3 needs a fan made patch to run on Win9X, it needs at least Windows XP (Or Windows 2000, but that is more of a workstation/server OS) to run by default.

If you want this rig to be specifically a Win98 one and would not or rarely use Win XP I say the FX series are the better fit, if the ratio is 50/50 or in favour of WinXP then I would choose the 6600 GT, IIRC it still functions OK on Win9x.

Hmm. Okay, thanks for clarifying. An FX would seem like the best choice then, although the only models I'm seeing on eBay UK are for the 5200 and 5500. I've seen one 5600XT and one ASUS FX 5700.

My personal advice is to stay away from the FX5200 that was a card with horrible performance even for a low-end card, the FX5500 is also kinda not good but for Win98 gaming it might work out.

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-07, 13:48:

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 13:42:

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-07, 13:10:

Hmm when you mentioned Doom 3 I though you wished to use Win XP as the primary OS for the computer as Doom 3 needs a fan made patch to run on Win9X, it needs at least Windows XP (Or Windows 2000, but that is more of a workstation/server OS) to run by default.

If you want this rig to be specifically a Win98 one and would not or rarely use Win XP I say the FX series are the better fit, if the ratio is 50/50 or in favour of WinXP then I would choose the 6600 GT, IIRC it still functions OK on Win9x.

Hmm. Okay, thanks for clarifying. An FX would seem like the best choice then, although the only models I'm seeing on eBay UK are for the 5200 and 5500. I've seen one 5600XT and one ASUS FX 5700.

My personal advice is to stay away from the FX5200 that was a card with horrible performance even for a low-end card, the FX5500 is also kinda not good but for Win98 gaming it might work out.

I also remember having the 5200, but it was PCI, so it was even worse. Yeah, performance was not great. But I've also read the FX 5700 is on par with the Geforce 4 Ti 4200...? That's what I have in my current 98 setup, so it wouldn't be much of an improvement in those few late 90s/early 00s games.

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 14:01:

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-07, 13:48:

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 13:42:

Hmm. Okay, thanks for clarifying. An FX would seem like the best choice then, although the only models I'm seeing on eBay UK are for the 5200 and 5500. I've seen one 5600XT and one ASUS FX 5700.

My personal advice is to stay away from the FX5200 that was a card with horrible performance even for a low-end card, the FX5500 is also kinda not good but for Win98 gaming it might work out.

I also remember having the 5200, but it was PCI, so it was even worse. Yeah, performance was not great. But I've also read the FX 5700 is on par with the Geforce 4 Ti 4200...? That's what I have in my current 98 setup, so it wouldn't be much of an improvement in those few late 90s/early 00s games.

If you already have a Geforce 4 TI 4200 then the FX5700 wouldn't be too much of an improvement, its primary advantage is support for later DirectX and OpenGL features, but those will be mostly unused on Win9X, for Win9x gaming I would stay with the Geforce 4 Ti 4200, it is a generation older, but it was a really good performer for the time(In some raw texture throughput benchmarks even better than the base FX5700), only outclassed by its 4600 and 4800 siblings from the same era.

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-07, 14:05:

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 14:01:

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-07, 13:48:

My personal advice is to stay away from the FX5200 that was a card with horrible performance even for a low-end card, the FX5500 is also kinda not good but for Win98 gaming it might work out.

I also remember having the 5200, but it was PCI, so it was even worse. Yeah, performance was not great. But I've also read the FX 5700 is on par with the Geforce 4 Ti 4200...? That's what I have in my current 98 setup, so it wouldn't be much of an improvement in those few late 90s/early 00s games.

If you already have a Geforce 4 TI 4200 then the FX5700 wouldn't be too much of an improvement, its primary advantage is support for later DirectX and OpenGL features, but those will be mostly unused on Win9X, for Win9x gaming I would stay with the Geforce 4 Ti 4200, it is a generation older, but it was a really good performer for the time(In some raw texture throughput benchmarks even better than the base FX5700), only outclassed by its 4600 and 4800 siblings from the same era.

Not sure if there's going to be an improvement in some of those later 90s/early 00s games with a Geforce 4 Ti 4200 and the P4 or not...? It would be nice to max out and get rock solid frame rates in games like American McGee's Alice, Thief, Thief 2, System Shock 2, Half-Life, and Unreal. The last late 90s game that runs solid is Quake 2. Plus, I have a few other early 00s games that are unplayable on my current 98 setup. PS2-era games specifically. Games like Silent Hill 2, Silent Hill 3, Silent Hill 4, and Shadow of Destiny/Memories.

I'll still try and get the Geforce 6600 GT I'm currently watching. If I can snag that for £30+ with its original box and contents, then I think that'll make any headaches getting it to work somewhat worth it.

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 14:16:

American McGee's Alice, Thief, Thief 2, System Shock 2, Half-Life, and Unreal

The only game on that list that would get an improvement with the FX5700 is "American McGee's Alice", the others weren't really using shaders(Some mods of Half-Life did hacked shaders into HLs renderer as HL mods can contain DLLs for extra code, but the base game doesn't), so the improved performance in that regard will not surface and it would mostly perform as the Ti 4200, with the Silent Hill games I cannot tell, I have only played those on console, not on PC.

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-07, 14:26:

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 14:16:

American McGee's Alice, Thief, Thief 2, System Shock 2, Half-Life, and Unreal

The only game on that list that would get an improvement with the FX5700 is "American McGee's Alice", the others weren't really using shaders(Some mods of Half-Life did hacked shaders into HLs renderer as HL mods can contain DLLs for extra code, but the base game doesn't), so the improved performance in that regard will not surface and it would mostly perform as the Ti 4200, with the Silent Hill games I cannot tell, I have only played those on console, not on PC.

As to the other games, are they more CPU-bound? Surely there will be some performance improvement coming from my plucky Pentium 3 933MHz to a Pentium 4 3.2GHz, no? 😀 I will likely do a dual-boot with XP. I still have my XP disc(s), so it'll be a good excuse to use them. So again, if I manage to snag this Geforce 6600, I can always save it for that OS. For 98, I'll try getting either an FX 5600 or 5700. I've read I need to stay clear of the 64-bit versions though; try getting 128-bit.

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 14:37:

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-07, 14:26:

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 14:16:

American McGee's Alice, Thief, Thief 2, System Shock 2, Half-Life, and Unreal

The only game on that list that would get an improvement with the FX5700 is "American McGee's Alice", the others weren't really using shaders(Some mods of Half-Life did hacked shaders into HLs renderer as HL mods can contain DLLs for extra code, but the base game doesn't), so the improved performance in that regard will not surface and it would mostly perform as the Ti 4200, with the Silent Hill games I cannot tell, I have only played those on console, not on PC.

As to the other games, are they more CPU-bound? Surely there will be some performance improvement coming from my plucky Pentium 3 933MHz to a Pentium 4 3.2GHz, no? 😀 I will likely do a dual-boot with XP. I still have my XP disc(s), so it'll be a good excuse to use them. So again, if I manage to snag this Geforce 6600, I can always save it for that OS. For 98, I'll try getting either an FX 5600 or 5700. I've read I need to stay clear of the 64-bit versions though; try getting 128-bit.

Well the game most likely to be CPU bound is also "American McGee's Alice", For example Half-Life had the minimum requirement of the original Pentium 😁, later engine updates made it have a slightly larger CPU footprint, but a Pentium 3 would still be more than enough for that game. (again except for the very few mods that stretch the engine with their DLLs) There will be some improvements, but I would actually consider checking that P3 for bottlenecks if it performs bad with the other games than Alice on that list.

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-07, 14:45:

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 14:37:

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-07, 14:26:

The only game on that list that would get an improvement with the FX5700 is "American McGee's Alice", the others weren't really using shaders(Some mods of Half-Life did hacked shaders into HLs renderer as HL mods can contain DLLs for extra code, but the base game doesn't), so the improved performance in that regard will not surface and it would mostly perform as the Ti 4200, with the Silent Hill games I cannot tell, I have only played those on console, not on PC.

As to the other games, are they more CPU-bound? Surely there will be some performance improvement coming from my plucky Pentium 3 933MHz to a Pentium 4 3.2GHz, no? 😀 I will likely do a dual-boot with XP. I still have my XP disc(s), so it'll be a good excuse to use them. So again, if I manage to snag this Geforce 6600, I can always save it for that OS. For 98, I'll try getting either an FX 5600 or 5700. I've read I need to stay clear of the 64-bit versions though; try getting 128-bit.

Well the game most likely to be CPU bound is also "American McGee's Alice", For example Half-Life had the minimum requirement of the original Pentium 😁, later engine updates made it have a slightly larger CPU footprint, but a Pentium 3 would still be more than enough for that game. (again except for the very few mods that stretch the engine with their DLLs) There will be some improvements, but I would actually consider checking that P3 for bottlenecks if it performs bad with the other games than Alice on that list.

Oh. I forgot about Return to Castle Wolfenstein, too.

So I'm guessing the Geforce 4 Ti isn't the best card to pair with a Pentium 3 then? So possibly a Geforce 3...?

I've not tested much of Thief 1 and 2. Thief 1 isn't rock-solid 60fps from what little I've tested. And the beginning area of Thief 2 dips as low as 25fps...? And SS2 fluctuates as it's the same engine, so that's not surprising. But yeah, late 90s to early 00s games aren't as smooth as I'd like.

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 15:09:

Oh. I forgot about Return to Castle Wolfenstein, too. […]
Show full quote

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-07, 14:45:

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 14:37:

As to the other games, are they more CPU-bound? Surely there will be some performance improvement coming from my plucky Pentium 3 933MHz to a Pentium 4 3.2GHz, no? 😀 I will likely do a dual-boot with XP. I still have my XP disc(s), so it'll be a good excuse to use them. So again, if I manage to snag this Geforce 6600, I can always save it for that OS. For 98, I'll try getting either an FX 5600 or 5700. I've read I need to stay clear of the 64-bit versions though; try getting 128-bit.

Well the game most likely to be CPU bound is also "American McGee's Alice", For example Half-Life had the minimum requirement of the original Pentium 😁, later engine updates made it have a slightly larger CPU footprint, but a Pentium 3 would still be more than enough for that game. (again except for the very few mods that stretch the engine with their DLLs) There will be some improvements, but I would actually consider checking that P3 for bottlenecks if it performs bad with the other games than Alice on that list.

Oh. I forgot about Return to Castle Wolfenstein, too.

So I'm guessing the Geforce 4 Ti isn't the best card to pair with a Pentium 3 then? So possibly a Geforce 3...?

I've not tested much of Thief 1 and 2. Thief 1 isn't rock-solid 60fps from what little I've tested. And the beginning area of Thief 2 dips as low as 25fps...? And SS2 fluctuates as it's the same engine, so that's not surprising. But yeah, late 90s to early 00s games aren't as smooth as I'd like.

Hmm I don't think that Geforce 4 Ti is holding the system back, but trying a different graphics card wouldn't hurt, what I'm really getting at is that the original (non-steam) Half-Life should give you butter smooth performance on a P3+Geforce 4 Ti combo, if vsync is enabled it should either sync to the monitor frequency (for example 70Hz/FPS for a typical CRT monitor of its time) or half of it: 35 FPS if vsync enabled on the same monitor and the driver decides to sync to half of it.
Maybe it is only a vsync issue, try disabling vsync in the NVIDIA driver.

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-07, 15:18:

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 15:09:

Oh. I forgot about Return to Castle Wolfenstein, too. […]
Show full quote

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-07, 14:45:

Well the game most likely to be CPU bound is also "American McGee's Alice", For example Half-Life had the minimum requirement of the original Pentium 😁, later engine updates made it have a slightly larger CPU footprint, but a Pentium 3 would still be more than enough for that game. (again except for the very few mods that stretch the engine with their DLLs) There will be some improvements, but I would actually consider checking that P3 for bottlenecks if it performs bad with the other games than Alice on that list.

Oh. I forgot about Return to Castle Wolfenstein, too.

So I'm guessing the Geforce 4 Ti isn't the best card to pair with a Pentium 3 then? So possibly a Geforce 3...?

I've not tested much of Thief 1 and 2. Thief 1 isn't rock-solid 60fps from what little I've tested. And the beginning area of Thief 2 dips as low as 25fps...? And SS2 fluctuates as it's the same engine, so that's not surprising. But yeah, late 90s to early 00s games aren't as smooth as I'd like.

Hmm I don't think that Geforce 4 Ti is holding the system back, but trying a different graphics card wouldn't hurt, what I'm really getting at is that the original (non-steam) Half-Life should give you butter smooth performance on a P3+Geforce 4 Ti combo, if vsync is enabled it should either sync to the monitor frequency (for example 70Hz/FPS for a typical CRT monitor of its time) or half of it: 35 FPS if vsync enabled on the same monitor and the driver decides to sync to half of it.
Maybe it is only a vsync issue, try disabling vsync in the NVIDIA driver.

Funnily enough, I have had weird issues with v-sync on this system. No matter where I turn it on - in-game, the Nvidia Profile/control panel etc - it's never really worked. I still get noticeable screen tearing. But I think since enabling it in Riva Tuner, it's working...? But I'm not 100%. In fact, I'm sure some games like Half-Life, Thief, and one that escapes my memory now, were still showing me frame rates beyond the refresh rate. Even enabling v-sync in a game's config files hasn't always been working. I think the default refresh rate of 60Hz is set, though I'm using PS/2 Rate, which is set to 100Hz. Not sure if that's overriding anything...? I'll have to boot up the machine and double check.

EDIT: The other game was Soldier of Fortune. I believe it's based on the Quake 2 engine...? And Quake 2 has got a frame limiter, which works. Haven't been able to get it to work in SoF.

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 15:28:

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-07, 15:18:

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 15:09:

Oh. I forgot about Return to Castle Wolfenstein, too.

So I'm guessing the Geforce 4 Ti isn't the best card to pair with a Pentium 3 then? So possibly a Geforce 3...?

I've not tested much of Thief 1 and 2. Thief 1 isn't rock-solid 60fps from what little I've tested. And the beginning area of Thief 2 dips as low as 25fps...? And SS2 fluctuates as it's the same engine, so that's not surprising. But yeah, late 90s to early 00s games aren't as smooth as I'd like.

Hmm I don't think that Geforce 4 Ti is holding the system back, but trying a different graphics card wouldn't hurt, what I'm really getting at is that the original (non-steam) Half-Life should give you butter smooth performance on a P3+Geforce 4 Ti combo, if vsync is enabled it should either sync to the monitor frequency (for example 70Hz/FPS for a typical CRT monitor of its time) or half of it: 35 FPS if vsync enabled on the same monitor and the driver decides to sync to half of it.
Maybe it is only a vsync issue, try disabling vsync in the NVIDIA driver.

Funnily enough, I have had weird issues with v-sync on this system. No matter where I turn it on - in-game, the Nvidia Profile/control panel etc - it's never really worked. I still get noticeable screen tearing. But I think since enabling it in Riva Tuner, it's working...? But I'm not 100%. In fact, I'm sure some games like Half-Life, Thief, and one that escapes my memory now, were still showing me frame rates beyond the refresh rate. Even enabling v-sync in a game's config files hasn't always been working. I think the default refresh rate of 60Hz is set, though I'm using PS/2 Rate, which is set to 100Hz. Not sure if that's overriding anything...? I'll have to boot up the machine and double check.

EDIT: The other game was Soldier of Fortune. I believe it's based on the Quake 2 engine...? And Quake 2 has got a frame limiter, which works. Haven't been able to get it to work in SoF.

If the frame rates were so high that it was over the monitors refresh rate with VSync off then the low framerates with VSync on is not caused by general CPU/GPU performance issues, but with VSync-ing having issues with the system. VSyncing depends on the NVIDIA Driver-Video Card-Monitor path, so I would start with adjusting the NVIDIA Driver than swapping the monitor or GPU, somewhere in the chain the VSync rate is broken and instead of vsyncing to the full frequency of the monitor it doesn't VSync properly.

DustyShinigami wrote on 2026-06-07, 15:09:

I think the default refresh rate of 60Hz is set, though I'm using PS/2 Rate, which is set to 100Hz. Not sure if that's overriding anything...?

I have a bit of trouble understanding this part of your post, PS/2 rate should adjust the mouse refresh rate and shouldn't adjust the refresh rate of the display system.

Okay, after a bit of testing, it's all dependant on my refresh rate and the game in question. My refresh rate was set to Adapter Default, whatever that was. So I set it to 60Hz and it doesn't exceed that. V-sync is enabled for both Direct3D and OpenGL via RivaTuner. However, if I play Half-Life in Direct3D mode, the FRAPS counter doesn't show and I get screen tearing. If I play in OpenGL mode, I get no screen tearing and the FRAPS counter shows. In Unreal, OpenGL is knackered and causes the game to crash. And yet in Direct3D mode - no screen tearing and the FRAPS counter.

It's a pity there doesn't appear to be a way of setting up a profile (I've checked the Nvidia Profile/control panel's options) so you can set the refresh rate to a certain frequency per game. Having the desktop set to 60Hz causes too much flicker/glare, which won't do my eyes any good. Whereas at 80Hz, it's more comfortable.