Hi,

If your Pentium 4 is Socket 478 and between 2.4 and 2.8 GHz, it is most likely a Northwood, although there is a slight chance of it being a Prescott(The 2.8 GHz version was produced for the 478 socket). (You can run for example CPU-Z to determine its exact type)

The 185W PSU is on the lower side of what I expect a P4 class machine to have, I generally like at least a 200W or above PSU for them, although if it hasn't aged badly it is possible to live with it, but careful consideration needs for the power usage of the video card as high-end cards with a P4 on that PSU will put the system over the power limit.

Without knowing more about the system and having a possible small power margin by the PSU, I would recommend a Radeon 9600(The one without the Pro or XT postfix as those might put the wattage of the system above the PSU limit especially considering the possible ageing of the PSU), but better recommendation can be made if you check the exact CPU type, the amount of RAM in the system and whether you consider upgrading the PSU or not, as anything more powerful than a Radeon 9600 paired with a P4 will most likely overstress a 185W PSU.

AlessandroB wrote on 2026-06-12, 13:54:

Star Wars: Empire at War on WinXP

If this game absolutely won't run on Windows 10/11 with DirectX 12 graphics cards, then you won't like these recommendations at all (price-wise).
X800/FX5950 – with some room to spare.
Radeon 9600/FX5700 – a bit of a struggle.

Honestly, it’s better to try running it on modern hardware. It’s a 2006 game.
Of course, you could go for a Radeon HD 2600/3600 AGP (but that’s a dead end), or an HD 3850/4670 (which makes even less sense).
Games of this sort run better and are more enjoyable on modern systems.

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-12, 14:17:

Hi, […]
Show full quote

Hi,

If your Pentium 4 is Socket 478 and between 2.4 and 2.8 GHz, it is most likely a Northwood, although there is a slight chance of it being a Prescott(The 2.8 GHz version was produced for the 478 socket). (You can run for example CPU-Z to determine its exact type)

The 185W PSU is on the lower side of what I expect a P4 class machine to have, I generally like at least a 200W or above PSU for them, although if it hasn't aged badly it is possible to live with it, but careful consideration needs for the power usage of the video card as high-end cards with a P4 on that PSU will put the system over the power limit.

Without knowing more about the system and having a possible small power margin by the PSU, I would recommend a Radeon 9600(The one without the Pro or XT postfix as those might put the wattage of the system above the PSU limit especially considering the possible ageing of the PSU), but better recommendation can be made if you check the exact CPU type, the amount of RAM in the system and whether you consider upgrading the PSU or not, as anything more powerful than a Radeon 9600 paired with a P4 will most likely overstress a 185W PSU.

Unfortunately, the power supply is the original IBM one for its case and cannot be replaced, but it is of excellent quality and could hold up well even over the years.

Doing some research myself, I found either the Radeon 9600 or the NVIDIA 6600.

But the NVIDIA is incredibly expensive; for that price, I'd buy a 3060 8GB!

The Radeon 9600, on the other hand, is available for a fraction of the price on eBay or local sites.

Which Radeon 9600 variant would you recommend? And why?

shevalier wrote on 2026-06-12, 15:06:

If this game absolutely won't run on Windows 10/11 with DirectX 12 graphics cards, then you won't like these recommendations at […]
Show full quote

AlessandroB wrote on 2026-06-12, 13:54:

Star Wars: Empire at War on WinXP

If this game absolutely won't run on Windows 10/11 with DirectX 12 graphics cards, then you won't like these recommendations at all (price-wise).
X800/FX5950 – with some room to spare.
Radeon 9600/FX5700 – a bit of a struggle.

Honestly, it’s better to try running it on modern hardware. It’s a 2006 game.
Of course, you could go for a Radeon HD 2600/3600 AGP (but that’s a dead end), or an HD 3850/4670 (which makes even less sense).
Games of this sort run better and are more enjoyable on modern systems.

I have several systems, including modern and very powerful ones. The challenge/pleasure is also getting the games to run (well, though) on more advanced hardware. Currently, to test the game, I'm trying it on a Compaq 6715b notebook with a Turion x2 at 1.8 GHz (but I don't think the game uses both CPUs) and a Radeon x1250 (which I assume is much less powerful than the Radeon 9600). It doesn't run too badly. I imagine the game on the Radeon 9600 and P4 will run better.

The X1250 is more or less a chipset integrated form of 9600. Probably a bit slower than a 9600 Pro or XT but none of this is even close to ideal for this game. Pentium 4 is also going to be a bottleneck for game simulation.

9600XT

swaaye wrote on 2026-06-12, 15:40:

The X1250 is more or less a chipset integrated form of 9600. Probably a bit slower than a 9600 Pro or XT but none of this is even close to ideal for this game. Pentium 4 is also going to be a bottleneck for game simulation.

Ok i will try with a 9600 (the best one is a xt version?) if the performance is that terrible I will install it in the i7 to my great regret

AlessandroB wrote on 2026-06-12, 18:27:

Ok i will try with a 9600 (the best one is a xt version?) if the performance is that terrible I will install it in the i7 to my great regret

ATi 9600XT is the fastest, usually it comes with fast memory, but not always. You can look card with faster memory and sometimes older drivers are better.

I've got a pentium 4 3.4 ghz Northwood on Abit IS7 E ver:1.2 Socket 478 AGP.
My GPU is Pixelview Nvidia GeForce 4 MX440 with 128MB.
Nice 1gb DDR1 ram.
I run windows Millennium for USB 2.0 support as I want a win9x machine but I can run windows XP or 2000 no problem.
Can hardware support up to Direct X 7 but still runs newer Direct X versions.
I recommend this GPU as it doesn't use much power and all pentium 4's use similar amount of power anyhow.
Your stated PSU watt rating is somewhat underwhelming to me its a rating I’d use in a motherboard that has integrated graphics for work/internet use only
(light duty)
I run a brand new 440 watt PSU for more quality and stability than classic ones offer. (and no radio interference.)
Its important to note the Power Supply watt output is the "peak" value and can be 25% less than stated depending on power distribution quality and distance to power station.

AlessandroB wrote on 2026-06-12, 15:27:

Unfortunately, the power supply is the original IBM one for its case and cannot be replaced, but it is of excellent quality and […]
Show full quote

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-12, 14:17:

Hi, […]
Show full quote

Hi,

If your Pentium 4 is Socket 478 and between 2.4 and 2.8 GHz, it is most likely a Northwood, although there is a slight chance of it being a Prescott(The 2.8 GHz version was produced for the 478 socket). (You can run for example CPU-Z to determine its exact type)

The 185W PSU is on the lower side of what I expect a P4 class machine to have, I generally like at least a 200W or above PSU for them, although if it hasn't aged badly it is possible to live with it, but careful consideration needs for the power usage of the video card as high-end cards with a P4 on that PSU will put the system over the power limit.

Without knowing more about the system and having a possible small power margin by the PSU, I would recommend a Radeon 9600(The one without the Pro or XT postfix as those might put the wattage of the system above the PSU limit especially considering the possible ageing of the PSU), but better recommendation can be made if you check the exact CPU type, the amount of RAM in the system and whether you consider upgrading the PSU or not, as anything more powerful than a Radeon 9600 paired with a P4 will most likely overstress a 185W PSU.

Unfortunately, the power supply is the original IBM one for its case and cannot be replaced, but it is of excellent quality and could hold up well even over the years.

Doing some research myself, I found either the Radeon 9600 or the NVIDIA 6600.

But the NVIDIA is incredibly expensive; for that price, I'd buy a 3060 8GB!

The Radeon 9600, on the other hand, is available for a fraction of the price on eBay or local sites.

Which Radeon 9600 variant would you recommend? And why?

Sorry for answering a bit late, but IRL issues have kept me away from this forum for a while.

Just to not overstress the PSU I would recommend the base variant or maybe the one with the PRO suffix, while the XT version is more powerful I think it might put the system over the PSUs limit at full load especially the 256 MB version. The only one that I don't recommend is the 9600 SE, it is basically the same as the base version, but they have reduced the memory bus width to half 128->64 bits and only slightly increased the memory frequency, it is not as good of a performer as the other 9600 cards.
An interesting one is the TX variant(Not a typo, it is called like that, so don't accidentally mix this and the XT 😁), this is, in my experience more rare than the others, and unlike the other 9600s it is based on the R300 chip not the RV350 or RV360, it has more cores but a bit older and it also has lower clocks, so it has a different "performance profile" than the others.

For the manufacturer, as this is a mid-range (Or in the 256 MB XT version case a mid-high tier one), I don't think that the manufacturer is that important as long as it is not some no-name unreliable one, I had 9600s of various editions from multiple manufacturers and they all performed without problems. One thing to note is that these cards are available in both active cooling and passive cooling variants, and sometimes the passive cooled ones are under-clocked a bit, generally not by that much that you feel the performance difference however.

The 9600XT puts around 32W of load onto the system (the one with BGA memory).
The 9600Pro around 22W.
You can check the exact stats here: https://tehsiggi.github.io/agp-power-monitor/

The 9600TX mentioned by MagefromAntares is basically a Radeon 9500Pro with TSOP memory. Even MSI called it that internally.
Beware that there are differences in 9600XT variants as well. Some have higher performing memory (BGA), some of them use 3.3ns TSOP and some even 4.0ns TSOP.

I did test EaW on my Athlon 64 X2 3800 with a Radeon 9800Pro - it runs, but don't expect wonders.

tehsiggi wrote on 2026-06-15, 13:14:

The 9600XT puts around 32W of load onto the system (the one with BGA memory). The 9600Pro around 22W. You can check the exact st […]
Show full quote

The 9600XT puts around 32W of load onto the system (the one with BGA memory).
The 9600Pro around 22W.
You can check the exact stats here: https://tehsiggi.github.io/agp-power-monitor/

The 9600TX mentioned by MagefromAntares is basically a Radeon 9500Pro with TSOP memory. Even MSI called it that internally.
Beware that there are differences in 9600XT variants as well. Some have higher performing memory (BGA), some of them use 33ns TSOP and some even 40ns TSOP.

Real and better 9600 pro and xt have 2.8ns /3.0ns / 3.3ns ram.

marxveix wrote on 2026-06-15, 13:28:

tehsiggi wrote on 2026-06-15, 13:14:

The 9600XT puts around 32W of load onto the system (the one with BGA memory). The 9600Pro around 22W. You can check the exact st […]
Show full quote

The 9600XT puts around 32W of load onto the system (the one with BGA memory).
The 9600Pro around 22W.
You can check the exact stats here: https://tehsiggi.github.io/agp-power-monitor/

The 9600TX mentioned by MagefromAntares is basically a Radeon 9500Pro with TSOP memory. Even MSI called it that internally.
Beware that there are differences in 9600XT variants as well. Some have higher performing memory (BGA), some of them use 33ns TSOP and some even 40ns TSOP.

Real and better 9600 pro and xt have 2.8ns /3.0ns / 3.3ns ram.

Well.. there was no "real" unfortunately back in the day. ATI allowed for all sorts of models. They even stated in their official doc for Radeon 9800Pro with 128Bit, for additional confusion.

But yes, for a good 9600XT watch out for one with BGA memory or TSOP with 2.8, 3.3ns or 3.6ns. That would give you best out of the 9600 series. If it'll make you happy in EaW, i'd not be sure..

My P4 is pretty nice , and the specs are
CPU: Intel Pentium 4 Prescott 3.4 GHz
RAM: 2 GB
Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce 9800
Power Supply: 650W PSU
Purpose: Your late Windows XP-era gaming machine

Runs games amazingly well for games from and around 2007.

Someone can try this game with a P4 2,8 + 9600? ... out of curiosity

For a system like that, I'll have to go with the common consensus of a Radeon 9600 - either a Pro or XT.
I don't have a P4 system I can test Empire at War on, the closest I can do is test it on my Pentium E5800 AGP system and see how the GPU fares. The board can take LGA775 NetBurst CPU's at least, but I don't have one to throw in that system.
Also, what resolution are you looking to play at?

If Empire at War was written in the CRYSIS coding style, i.e. at the time of release, top-of-the-range hardware could handle the settings at medium to high levels.
It wasn’t until two generations of CPUs and GPUs later that it was possible to play the game reasonably well on Ultra settings.
This is because of the very late DirectX 9C, its fundamental single-threaded nature, and the assumption of linear growth in computing power across future generations.

In that case, a Pentium 4 or 9600XT is out of the question, even though the game will technically run on them.
Buying a Radeon HD2600 AGP or GF7600GS AGP just for one game – well, I don’t know, these cards aren’t the most compatible with non-DirectX 9 titles.
And they don’t offer the best performance in demanding DirectX 9 games.
And a Pentium 4 isn’t exactly the best CPU for them either.
Unless it’s the very latest, high-frequency, dual-core model.

I did a test. Not on a P4 because there is no one available for me.

Athlon XP-M 2500 @ 2424MHz (242x10)
2x256MB 484MHz DDR Dual Channel
Radeon 9600 Pro (325MHz GPU, 220MHz (440MHz DDR) RAM)
Asus A7N8X + SATA SSD

Everything on low@1024x768, the first mission at least is playable. I am using the retail DVD version. The GOG version on my Athlon 64 appears to run way worse, for whatever reason (patches?)

Given the high clock of the Athlon XP, expect lower performance on your P4 I assume.

tehsiggi wrote on 2026-06-15, 13:36:

Well.. there was no "real" unfortunately back in the day. ATI allowed for all sorts of models. They even stated in their official doc for Radeon 9800Pro with 128Bit, for additional confusion.

download/file.php?id=244160&mode=view

Its not madness, just a lot of options. Rage4 had 2x onboad chips and Radeon had 2x and 4x. This is bit crazy, 4xRadeon9700 card back in the day (SimFusion6000)