I know its possible but, I've never been able to get Need for Speed 3, 4, Porsche working in XP or above the way I like. Works fine on a P3 600 though. P2 400 struggled at higher resolutions.

Comes down you your own games library though.
Try out the more recent of your 9x games and see how they behave in XP.
It may not be CPU that's the reason either. Some old games are more compatible with older graphics cards or Direct X versions so maybe preferable to keep then on the 98 machine as well.

But for the most part you should be able to get away with the setup you suggest.

Running build engine games at high resolutions can be killer.
I would check what CPUs your board supports and their TDPs, a P2-233 has the same TDP as a ~GHz Coppermine. Whether you can run any of that passively depends on the case/heatsink etc. Some faster P2's are on a smaller process and consume less power.

Velociraptor wrote on 2020-08-24, 13:39:

So really this is a sanity check - is there anything that would need more than a low power P2 - 233 for example - that would not run in Windows XP and would require to be run in Win98SE or DOS?

Turn of the century A3D 2.0 games come to mind. Stuff like Deus Ex and Voyager Elite Force. This is only an issue if you care about A3D since Aureal Vortex cards don't work correctly under anything newer than Win9x.

That said, most of these games also support EAX which works just fine under WinXP.

Thanks for the replies.

Sadly the board revision doesn't support any coppermines so I'm limited to the 250nm Katmai ones - 600, 550, 500, 450. TDPs are roughly 25 to 35. Presumably I could run the 600 at a lower multiplier and have it at the TDP of the 450, if I was to go P3, giving me some flexibility should I ever need it. I'm not sure how low that could be set.

If I avoid the 350nm Klamath P2s then TDPs are broadly in line with the P3s based on clock speed. This would allow a P2 450 down to a P2 266 (the 233 is a Klamath part).

So I guess that leaves me with the following questions, which I don't know can be answered without testing.

Will P2s work at whatever downclocked multiplier and FSB they are set to, or do they need to match?
Will P3s work at whatever downclocked multiplier and FSB they are set to, or do they need to match?
And if downclocking works does it need to be a valid CPU speed that I match, or could I get a P2/P3 working at 66x3=200mhz, which is the lowest combination the motherboard DIP switches allow.

It would be perfect if that were the case, I could put a 600Mhz P3 in and have it run at a much lower wattage forever, knowing that if I do encounter a game that I just have to get running in Win98 or DOS and not XP I have some extra performance I can use.

Edit : Some searching seems to indicate that Klamath is the last one that can be changed. I knew P3s onwards could not be overclocked, but it seems they cannot be underclocked either.

This means that I get a Klamath which defeats the whole purpose, or I am limited to underclocking them by reducing the FSB only.

More edits : Further checking on the power consumption shows that it scales more or less uniform based in relation to CPU speed, so a 600mhz operating at 66FSB instead of 100 should operate mostly as a Celeron 400 (cache aside) and power consumption should be the same.

A 550mhz or 600mhz katmai is more than enough for windows 98 games. It will also run xp fine if you have 512mb of RAM, although most games after about 2002 or so are going to be hard on your CPU.

Some slot 1 boards can be accommodating of slotket adapters, which can allow you to run copper mine or even tualtin CPUs. I have a via nehemiah in mine. That's a rabbit hole though.

A voodoo 3 or a geforce 4 would be a good pairing.

Velociraptor wrote on 2020-08-24, 15:26:

Thanks for the replies.

To downclock you could always run the P3 at 66MHz FSB. The CPU will work at that speed, no matter if matches another actually existing CPU.

As for power linearly scaling, I was under the impression that lowering voltage had more effect that lowering clockspeed.

Oetker wrote on 2020-08-24, 16:16:

Velociraptor wrote on 2020-08-24, 15:26:

Thanks for the replies.

To downclock you could always run the P3 at 66MHz FSB. The CPU will work at that speed, no matter if matches another actually existing CPU.

As for power linearly scaling, I was under the impression that lowering voltage had more effect that lowering clockspeed.

These tend tot go together.
Lowering FSB and whole CPU speed with it, de-stresses the CPU, allowing lower voltages.
An extreme example of this, are k6 based CPU's. The 200 ram a slightly higher voltage and the 233 even more. These went totally good with 166 speed and voltage used on the 166. But to acquire 233MHz they were " factory overclocked" and had to have higher voltages (3,2v vs 2,8v).

mothergoose729 wrote on 2020-08-24, 16:05:

A 550mhz or 600mhz katmai is more than enough for windows 98 games. It will also run xp fine if you have 512mb of RAM, although most games after about 2002 or so are going to be hard on your CPU.

Some slot 1 boards can be accommodating of slotket adapters, which can allow you to run copper mine or even tualtin CPUs. I have a via nehemiah in mine. That's a rabbit hole though.

A voodoo 3 or a geforce 4 would be a good pairing.

I've got a Voodoo 1 for it, as well as an FX5500 and an S3 Trio. I'm not sure which of the graphics cards I'll use, I expect it'll be the S3.

The intention for this machine is DOS and Win98SE and I have another machine I'll use for XP.

I think it will be the 550/600 Katmai and I think I'll turn down the FSB on it, unless I find a need to put it back up.

Oetker wrote on 2020-08-24, 16:16:

To downclock you could always run the P3 at 66MHz FSB. The CPU will work at that speed, no matter if matches another actually existing CPU.

As for power linearly scaling, I was under the impression that lowering voltage had more effect that lowering clockspeed.

Yeah, a 533B or 600B should be able to run 266-400-533 and 300-450-600 respectively.

With no lowering of voltage, yes the clockspeed lowering is close to linear powervise. Changing voltage changes power consumption exponentially (since lower voltage also results in lower current - and power is the multiple of current and voltage).

So downclocked to 50% and at the same time probably being able to lower voltage, there's a lot of power consumption to save ..

Velociraptor wrote on 2020-08-24, 15:26:

Edit : Some searching seems to indicate that Klamath is the last one that can be changed. I knew P3s onwards could not be overclocked, but it seems they cannot be underclocked either.

Not entirely correct: http://www.cpu-world.com/forum/viewtopic.php? … 2356&highlight= it seems that locking of multipliers of Deschutes didn't begin until some time in 1998. So a 333 Deschutes actually is able to run 133-500Edit: 333 of course! 🤣 , all though I think I've read that at the lowest speeds, L2 cache is disabled ..

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2020-08-24, 14:28:

Turn of the century A3D 2.0 games come to mind. Stuff like Deus Ex and Voyager Elite Force. This is only an issue if you care about A3D since Aureal Vortex cards don't work correctly under anything newer than Win9x.

That said, most of these games also support EAX which works just fine under WinXP.

EAX is not an equivalent alternative to A3D.

awgamer wrote on 2020-08-24, 19:10:

EAX is not an equivalent alternative to A3D.

Never said that it was, just that most games support it as an option which does work under XP.

Directly, no, but per the English language inferred, "..only an issue if you care about a3d.. that said, most of these games also support eax." At least how I read it more so than a separate statement.

The EAX vs A3D debate is not worth having. Get an EAX card if you care about windows games.

There hasn't been a what's better EAX vs A3D debate(A3D BTW,) a "they aren't equivalent, I didn't mean that, given the way it was written that's how it was taken" interaction is what transpired.

awgamer wrote on 2020-08-25, 01:56:

There hasn't been a what's better EAX vs A3D debate(A3D BTW,) a "they aren't equivalent, I didn't mean that, given the way it was written that's how it was taken" interaction is what transpired.

Nothing, except maybe price and availability, is stopping you from getting both (i.e. Creative and Aureal) in the same system .

EDIT : As for CPU speed, I see no reason (except again maybe price and availability) to settle for less than the fastest CPU a motherboard can handle, officially or otherwise and, if desired, use adapters like the Tualatin one from the guy in Korea .

Life is short, socket 370 CPUs are relatively inexpensive for now, why not max things out and avoid regrets?. Oh, and socket 370 CPU fans are rather quiet, so IMHO, noise is a non-issue .

darry wrote on 2020-08-25, 03:00:

awgamer wrote on 2020-08-25, 01:56:

There hasn't been a what's better EAX vs A3D debate(A3D BTW,) a "they aren't equivalent, I didn't mean that, given the way it was written that's how it was taken" interaction is what transpired.

Nothing, except maybe price and availability, is stopping you from getting both (i.e. Creative and Aureal) in the same system .

Joseph_Joestar made a comment that I responded to, the contention over eax being equivalent to a3d and then intent vs expressed, wasn't a debate about which is better, wasn't a defense of one over the other, wasn't about choosing one over the other.

awgamer wrote on 2020-08-25, 03:41:

darry wrote on 2020-08-25, 03:00:

awgamer wrote on 2020-08-25, 01:56:

There hasn't been a what's better EAX vs A3D debate(A3D BTW,) a "they aren't equivalent, I didn't mean that, given the way it was written that's how it was taken" interaction is what transpired.

Nothing, except maybe price and availability, is stopping you from getting both (i.e. Creative and Aureal) in the same system .

Joseph_Joestar made a comment that I responded to, the contention over eax being equivalent to a3d and then intent vs expressed, wasn't a debate about which is better, wasn't a defense of one over the other, wasn't about choosing one over the other.

I did not mean to infer that any debate, attack/defense or statement regarding having to choose had taken place . My admittedly ill phrased and improperly addressed statement (I blame the cabernet) was simply meant to convey the fact that two sound cards each supporting different APIs could co-exist in a given system . This is likely obvious to you and possibly many (most?) people reading this thread, but this is not the case for everyone . My apologies if this has offended you in any way as it was not my intent to do so .

Re: Coppermine support
Despite what the manufacturer might say, the board revision isn't the critical issue. The BIOS and voltage regulator are.
If this board uses the same BIOS that supports Coppermine on some other revision, then the BIOS issue is covered.

You might have a Coppermine compatible voltage regulator on a board revision that wasn't guaranteed to have one. Only way to find out is to check what regulator IC you have and look up it's specs.
Once the boardmakers started stocking Coppermine regulators, they appeared on everything, even boards that didn't need them.

If Coppermine voltage isn't supported, then using a slocket with VID jumpers is a good workaround. In that case you just set it for 1.8V which is the minimum supported by non-Coppermine boards.

Since you're looking for low power/noise, a lower end Coppermine would be a good option. Even at 1.8V those CPUs will use less power than a Katmai, and if the board supports lower voltages then it will be even better. You might have to fiddle with a slocket though instead of using a native slot1 version.

--
There are some SECC1 P2s with big passive heatsinks that extend higher than the CPU cartridge. Those heatsinks would be awesome on a Coppermine, but I've never seen that combo.
One example where I've seen such a heatsink is on a P2-333 (Deschutes). Mine is unlocked, but I don't know if they all are. Such a CPU should run 350/100 without complaint and no fan. They're a little toasty but okay IMO.
I also have the same heatsink on a P2-300, but that one is a Klamath and runs 10C hotter, too hot for my comfort.