There are three options :
1) Higher end FX series (Ultra stuff, regular ones usually don't come with external power).
2) GeForce 6 with universal AGP (not exactly easy to find, however those cards have lower compatibility with DOS/Win98 than FX series)
3) Radeon 9500/9700/9800 that are based on R300 or R350/R360 core (again, lower compatibility with early Win98 stuff, but way faster than FX series)

Get GF4 MX if you that worried about power - won't be fastest thing out there (+lacks DX8 support), however it's HIGHLY unlikely to blow up your motherboard.

agent_x007 wrote on 2026-08-17, 21:28:

There are three options : 1) Higher end FX series (Ultra stuff, regular ones usually don't come with external power). 2) GeForce […]
Show full quote

There are three options :
1) Higher end FX series (Ultra stuff, regular ones usually don't come with external power).
2) GeForce 6 with universal AGP (not exactly easy to find, however those cards have lower compatibility with DOS/Win98 than FX series)
3) Radeon 9500/9700/9800 that are based on R300 or R350/R360 core (again, lower compatibility with early Win98 stuff, but way faster than FX series)

Get GF4 MX if you that worried about power - won't be fastest thing out there (+lacks DX8 support), however it's HIGHLY unlikely to blow up your motherboard.

GF4 MX series are VERY reliable DX7 cards and lower power draw, I like using them too.

That said I mostly use FX5900 series cards in my "high end" retro systems.

If you want more performance I would look at a Radeon 9600 non-Pro. They don't have external power but they are extremely power efficient and consume something like 12 watts... which is probably less than most AGP cards made after 2000. They are a bit more common as an OEM card (Dell, etc.) and are significantly faster than a Geforce4 MX or FX 5200\5500. This video shows some good examples of how much faster they are for early 2000s games:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJezgtPubBs

If you are strictly playing pre-2000 games though, a Geforce4 MX of some kind is probably fast enough and likely more compatible with some titles that are more touchy. I would do some research first regarding any specific games you intend to play.

Some quadro models seem to have their power tuned to less than equivalent home desktop models. However, some of the later ones might have weird omissions in DOS modes.

agent_x007 wrote on 2026-08-17, 21:28:

There are three options :
1) Higher end FX series (Ultra stuff, regular ones usually don't come with external power).

3) Radeon 9500/9700/9800 that are based on R300 or R350/R360 core (again, lower compatibility with early Win98 stuff, but way faster than FX series)

Having an additional power connector changes nothing. One of the core phases gets powered from this connector (+5V), and the other from the AGP slot (+3.3V). The schematics are available online, so you can easily verify this.

Get GF4 MX if you that worried about power - won't be fastest thing out there (+lacks DX8 support), however it's HIGHLY unlikely to blow up your motherboard.

Yeah. Especially the cheap variants with a linear regulator, which dissipates more heat itself than the core it powers. An energy-efficient MX440 is only possible on Nvidia's reference design.
It looks just like the image in the TechPowerUp database.

agent_x007 wrote on 2026-08-17, 21:28:

There are three options : 1) Higher end FX series (Ultra stuff, regular ones usually don't come with external power). 2) GeForce […]
Show full quote

There are three options :
1) Higher end FX series (Ultra stuff, regular ones usually don't come with external power).
2) GeForce 6 with universal AGP (not exactly easy to find, however those cards have lower compatibility with DOS/Win98 than FX series)
3) Radeon 9500/9700/9800 that are based on R300 or R350/R360 core (again, lower compatibility with early Win98 stuff, but way faster than FX series)

Get GF4 MX if you that worried about power - won't be fastest thing out there (+lacks DX8 support), however it's HIGHLY unlikely to blow up your motherboard.

There are high end Geforce 4 cards that take Molex power IIRC.

Lylat1an wrote on 2026-08-17, 21:21:

I've become paranoid about a graphics card drawing too much power from my new-to-me motherboard.

What would be a good candidate for DOS/Windows98 games that gets power from the PSU instead of the AGP 3.3v slot?

Not really something you need to worry about, the AGP slot itself can only supply so much and there are no AGP GPUs that would ever exceed this limit that don't also have an external power connector.

But if you want one and have the cash .. and AGP Voodoo 5 5500 or high end GF4 or high end FX series cards all have power connectors, also ATI 9600, 9700, 9800 and x700, X800 and X850 cards all have Molex power.

My choice for you would be a good MX440 that has excellent DOS and Win98 compatibility or if you want a little more grunt a GF4 TI card which also has amazingly good DOS compatibility.

If you see a MX460 in your hunt grab that over the MX440, the 460 is a beefed up MX440.

GeForce2 GTS or Ti are also good in this regard. They get power from 5V rail and 3.3V rail. Shouldn't bee too hard on your board.
Check this article - https://hw-museum.cz/article/15/graphics-card … r-consumption/2 I measured many AGP cards.

havli wrote on Yesterday, 06:07:

... Check this article - https://hw-museum.cz/article/15/graphics-card … r-consumption/2 I measured many AGP cards.

^ Wow, that chart is just awesome! Thank you very much for sharing. 👍 👍 👍

Voodoo 5500 AGP has a molex too. It is, however, not agp4x (1.5V) compatible.

TELVM wrote on Yesterday, 08:02:

havli wrote on Yesterday, 06:07:

... Check this article - https://hw-museum.cz/article/15/graphics-card … r-consumption/2 I measured many AGP cards.

^ Wow, that chart is just awesome! Thank you very much for sharing. 👍 👍 👍

https://www2.vgamuseum.info/images/zaatharen/ … xle-128_fhq.jpg
Now, an FX5500 on linear regulators — that’s impressive.It probably draws around 50 watts. 😀
Like I said, 99% of people don't even know what a proper MX440 looks like.
And it looks identical to an FX5200

I can only support the previous statements. Having an external connector doesn't change much. Many cards then pull power from both the port and external connector.

If you look for low power consumption cards, check my list or the one from havli. I designed the AGP Power Monitor to answer exactly that question.

Thanks tehsiggi, your chart is also very informative. Kudos to you gentlemen! 👍

tehsiggi wrote on Yesterday, 14:06:

I can only support the previous statements. Having an external connector doesn't change much. Many cards then pull power from both the port and external connector.

If you look for low power consumption cards, check my list or the one from havli. I designed the AGP Power Monitor to answer exactly that question.

That is an awesome chart!
https://tehsiggi.github.io/agp-power-monitor/

The Radeon 9600 256MB is one of the most efficient cards on the list and uses less than 9 watts on average (2.7W min to 16.6W max). The only two cards that consume less power are the MX 4000 with a horrible 32bit memory bus and the Geforce 6200 which is newer but also slower than the 9600 and less compatible for older titles.

Please note that the OP askes specifically about AGP 2x, which has the notch towards the PC case in the AGP slots. Most 9600s I know will not go in there, since they have their AGP port keyed for 4x/8x and will simply not fit. A shame, as there are even some 9600 models which you could modify easily to take external power and thus not use the boards 5V for example nearly at all.

So if 3.3V rail consumption are your concern, from the cards that I tested the Radeon 9000 Pro and 9200 (full 128bit) are fairly low (3A max) while not breaking the bank. Depending on what you wanna play, they might be a good bet. There are a few GeForce 6600s which at least have the slot keyed correctly and use external power, haven't measured them though.

The 6200 on the other hand already goes up to 4A on the 3.3V rail.

tehsiggi wrote on Today, 05:22:

Please note that the OP askes specifically about AGP 2x, which has the notch towards the PC case in the AGP slots. Most 9600s I know will not go in there, since they have their AGP port keyed for 4x/8x and will simply not fit. A shame, as there are even some 9600 models which you could modify easily to take external power and thus not use the boards 5V for example nearly at all.

So if 3.3V rail consumption are your concern, from the cards that I tested the Radeon 9000 Pro and 9200 (full 128bit) are fairly low (3A max) while not breaking the bank. Depending on what you wanna play, they might be a good bet. There are a few GeForce 6600s which at least have the slot keyed correctly and use external power, haven't measured them though.

The 6200 on the other hand already goes up to 4A on the 3.3V rail.

Oh, whoops, I totally missed that.

Actually, if this AT Super Socket 7 board is the one the OP is trying to find a card for then everything in this thread is total overkill:

Re: Ideal AGP 1.0 cards for VIA MVP3 board with AMD K6-2 CPU?

He also mentions that he doesn't even have any 3D accelerated games to play on it yet at the time of posting.

Sorry OP, I think we got a bit ahead of ourselves here. 🤣

Ozzuneoj wrote on Today, 05:56:

Oh, whoops, I totally missed that. […]
Show full quote

Oh, whoops, I totally missed that.

Actually, if this AT Super Socket 7 board is the one the OP is trying to find a card for then everything in this thread is total overkill:

Re: Ideal AGP 1.0 cards for VIA MVP3 board with AMD K6-2 CPU?

He also mentions that he doesn't even have any 3D accelerated games to play on it yet at the time of posting.

Sorry OP, I think we got a bit ahead of ourselves here. :lol:

Forgiven. :P

I'd like to try some 3D accelerated games, but I don't think I had any back in the day that weren't on consoles.

The goal of this build is to play games that came out before Windows XP. My modern gaming PC can probably handle the ones from 2005 forward.

Lylat1an wrote on Today, 08:17:

Forgiven. 😜

I'd like to try some 3D accelerated games, but I don't think I had any back in the day that weren't on consoles.

The goal of this build is to play games that came out before Windows XP. My modern gaming PC can probably handle the ones from 2005 forward.

There are a lot of games that came out after Windows XP, which came out in 2001, but before 2005. 😀

But maybe something like Geforce 2 MX 400 would be a good match for a super socket 7 board? It doesn't consume too much power, it's cheap, and it should be good enough for pre-2000 and probably some 2000 games.

Mike_ wrote on Today, 08:34:

There are a lot of games that came out after Windows XP, which came out in 2001, but before 2005. 😀

Yes, but I imagine those games were also compatible with 98 in that time, rather than requiring XP.

(I haven't verified that yet.)