DustyShinigami wrote on 2024-11-19, 21:21:

Ahh, okay. Fair enough. I'm not sure if/where the option is; I'd have to take another look. I think I have the original DOS version, so I don't think it has a Windows one. So I'm guessing it's in software mode...?

If it's the DOS version of Quake then yes, it's running in software mode. GL Quake was only available for Windows.

I have the Intel 440BX - https://theretroweb.com/motherboards/s/msi-ms-6156-bx11

Looking at the manual, it looks like it can do 100 FSB and up to 8x multiplier. It seems like it might be able to support Coppermine CPUs (according to this thread, these motherboards would indicate with a "C" sticker if they did: MS-6156 OEM Motherboard - Opinions on capacitors). That said, if you did try a Coppermine CPU you'd want to check the voltage with a multimeter just to be sure.

In absence of doing that, then a 600 MHz Katmai Pentium III is the safer bet.

As for GPUs, I'd consider a TNT2 Ultra or GeForce 256 as an upgrade. Both a faster CPU and GPU upgrade would give you a really solid rig for games from 1999-2000.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-11-19, 22:06:

If it's the DOS version of Quake then yes, it's running in software mode. GL Quake was only available for Windows. […]
Show full quote

DustyShinigami wrote on 2024-11-19, 21:21:

Ahh, okay. Fair enough. I'm not sure if/where the option is; I'd have to take another look. I think I have the original DOS version, so I don't think it has a Windows one. So I'm guessing it's in software mode...?

If it's the DOS version of Quake then yes, it's running in software mode. GL Quake was only available for Windows.

I have the Intel 440BX - https://theretroweb.com/motherboards/s/msi-ms-6156-bx11

Looking at the manual, it looks like it can do 100 FSB and up to 8x multiplier. It seems like it might be able to support Coppermine CPUs (according to this thread, these motherboards would indicate with a "C" sticker if they did: MS-6156 OEM Motherboard - Opinions on capacitors). That said, if you did try a Coppermine CPU you'd want to check the voltage with a multimeter just to be sure.

In absence of doing that, then a 600 MHz Katmai Pentium III is the safer bet.

As for GPUs, I'd consider a TNT2 Ultra or GeForce 256 as an upgrade. Both a faster CPU and GPU upgrade would give you a really solid rig for games from 1999-2000.

As usual, thanks again. 😄 I've not had a lot of luck overclocking CPUs. I presume that's what you're referring to with my current chip...? Even with newer CPUs, I've not had much luck, and I'm not quite sure I understand how I'd do it with a much older one such as my PIII Katmai. Or do you just mean to change the voltages? Can't say I've done that much or at all either. ^^; I noticed someone in that thread said they usually set that automatically with the Coppermine CPUs. I'll have to take a look for that blue 'C' sticker. And look into a multimeter. Haven't used one of those before, so I'll have to check out some videos.

The GPU should be much easier. If I can find either of them for an affordable price.

I wasn't talking about overclocking. I was talking about replacing the CPU with a different one.

Pentium III (Katmai) CPUs range from 450 MHz to 600 MHz. These use 2V as nominal operating power.

After the Katmai Pentium III CPUs came the Coppermine Pentium III processors. These ranged from 500MHz all the way to 1133 MHz. Coppermine Pentium III CPUs use a lower volage, typically 1.7V.

In order to properly support a Coppermine based Pentium III, the motherboard needs to be able to output that lower voltage. Otherwise, you'll be overvolting the CPU which isn't good for it.

A way to verify what the motherboard can support is to try a Coppermine CPU and then measure the voltage on the VRM mosfet. If you don't have experience with this or don't have a multimeter, then I probably wouldn't worry too much about it. Using a Katmai CPU will still be fine for games from about 1998 to 2000 or so.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-11-20, 00:07:

I wasn't talking about overclocking. I was talking about replacing the CPU with a different one. […]
Show full quote

I wasn't talking about overclocking. I was talking about replacing the CPU with a different one.

Pentium III (Katmai) CPUs range from 450 MHz to 600 MHz. These use 2V as nominal operating power.

After the Katmai Pentium III CPUs came the Coppermine Pentium III processors. These ranged from 500MHz all the way to 1133 MHz. Coppermine Pentium III CPUs use a lower volage, typically 1.7V.

In order to properly support a Coppermine based Pentium III, the motherboard needs to be able to output that lower voltage. Otherwise, you'll be overvolting the CPU which isn't good for it.

A way to verify what the motherboard can support is to try a Coppermine CPU and then measure the voltage on the VRM mosfet. If you don't have experience with this or don't have a multimeter, then I probably wouldn't worry too much about it. Using a Katmai CPU will still be fine for games from about 1998 to 2000 or so.

Okay. The Coppermine CPU does sound better though and especially with the lower voltage. So, how do you measure the voltage on the VRM mosfet? Is that with the multimeter? If so, I can always look into it for the time being. Again, it's not something I'd be doing any time soon anyway.

Those CPUs are a dime a dozen on eBay by the looks of it. But not so much those GPUs. I guess the GPU upgrade would make more of a difference though. Providing one of those cards you suggested don't bottleneck with a Katmai...? I presume they wouldn't though.

DustyShinigami wrote on 2024-11-20, 01:03:

Okay. The Coppermine CPU does sound better though and especially with the lower voltage. So, how do you measure the voltage on the VRM mosfet? Is that with the multimeter? If so, I can always look into it for the time being. Again, it's not something I'd be doing any time soon anyway.

If you've never done this sort of thing before, I wouldn't really worry about it. It's somewhat of a non-trivial thing for a beginner. Typically you'd want to set up the motherboard, CPU and power supply outside of the case. Trying to probe a motherboard while inside a case can be a bit tricky. There's also a non-zero risk of causing some sort of damage in the process, since you'd be probing while the system is powered on. Inadvertently touching the wrong thing could possibly short voltage through something it's not supposed to go through.

It's the kind of thing you'd want to practice with hardware you don't really care about it until you're confident enough that you won't accidentally break anything.

Those CPUs are a dime a dozen on eBay by the looks of it. But not so much those GPUs. I guess the GPU upgrade would make more of a difference though. Providing one of those cards you suggested don't bottleneck with a Katmai...? I presume they wouldn't though.

The GPU will still be CPU dependent in this case. Games at the time (late 90s) still relied on the CPU for some of the 3D processing.

This started to change when nVidia introduced the GeForce 256 which included a transform & lighting capabilities in the GPU itself. But from what I've read, it wasn't immediately adopted by many games, so it still took another year or two to really start to see the advantage of that feature.

Someone previously suggested I use the Nvidia 30.82 drivers for my GPU, however they don’t appear to work. My card seems to be listed for them on Phil’s Computer Lab though. I have the Nvidia RIVA TNT2. I keep getting error messages like:

Setup was unable to locate a detected device’s PCI ID in NVAML.INF.

Is there a workaround for this? Or are there other recent drivers for this card that are just as stable as 30.82? I decided to try some different and ‘recent’ stable drivers in case my current ones were causing weird issues.

You could try modding the inf but if it worked someone probably would have done it 20 years ago already.

Sure it's the driver?

DustyShinigami wrote on 2024-11-22, 19:59:

Someone previously suggested I use the Nvidia 30.82 drivers for my GPU, however they don’t appear to work. My card seems to be listed for them on Phil’s Computer Lab though. I have the Nvidia RIVA TNT2. I keep getting error messages like:

Setup was unable to locate a detected device’s PCI ID in NVAML.INF.

Is there a workaround for this? Or are there other recent drivers for this card that are just as stable as 30.82? I decided to try some different and ‘recent’ stable drivers in case my current ones were causing weird issues.

I would not personally use that late drivers for TNT2 as a starting point. Earlier drivers tend to be generally faster, but it also depends on the platform. I just recently tested one of my TNT2 cards with 7.76 on slot a. But the 2.08 is overall the fastest.

You are free to experiment yourself which works and which doesn’t.

Okay, turns out that it's just Riva TNT. Not sure where I got the 2 from. I settled on the Final Drivers that were posted here and they seem to have worked. 😀

Sorry, but the likelihood of me getting a Roland SC-55 keeps on increasing. ^^; Just seen another one pop up on eBay for around £100. If no one else bids on it, there's a possibility of winning it. Maybe.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-11-19, 22:06:

If it's the DOS version of Quake then yes, it's running in software mode. GL Quake was only available for Windows. […]
Show full quote

DustyShinigami wrote on 2024-11-19, 21:21:

Ahh, okay. Fair enough. I'm not sure if/where the option is; I'd have to take another look. I think I have the original DOS version, so I don't think it has a Windows one. So I'm guessing it's in software mode...?

If it's the DOS version of Quake then yes, it's running in software mode. GL Quake was only available for Windows.

I have the Intel 440BX - https://theretroweb.com/motherboards/s/msi-ms-6156-bx11

Looking at the manual, it looks like it can do 100 FSB and up to 8x multiplier. It seems like it might be able to support Coppermine CPUs (according to this thread, these motherboards would indicate with a "C" sticker if they did: MS-6156 OEM Motherboard - Opinions on capacitors). That said, if you did try a Coppermine CPU you'd want to check the voltage with a multimeter just to be sure.

In absence of doing that, then a 600 MHz Katmai Pentium III is the safer bet.

As for GPUs, I'd consider a TNT2 Ultra or GeForce 256 as an upgrade. Both a faster CPU and GPU upgrade would give you a really solid rig for games from 1999-2000.

Taken another look at the motherboard. Can’t see any blue stickers anywhere. I’m not sure where it should be found specifically, but I can’t see anything.

Just been browsing for different graphics cards. Sadly, I've been unable to find a Geforce 256, but Geforce 2 cards are very cheap and common. I'm thinking of getting one. Has anyone else got or used one? Particularly in early 00s games? I sampled American McGee's Alice earlier and it runs a bit... naff. Anything higher than 640x480 isn't advised, but it still struggles even at that resolution. And slows to a crawl in the menus to the point of being unresponsive if I set the colour depth to 32. But I'm guessing game engines from around that period, such as the Quake III engine, and possibly the Source engine for Half-Life (have yet to try it), are going to really struggle with my Riva TNT.

DustyShinigami wrote on 2024-12-25, 23:52:

Just been browsing for different graphics cards. Sadly, I've been unable to find a Geforce 256, but Geforce 2 cards are very cheap and common. I'm thinking of getting one. Has anyone else got or used one? Particularly in early 00s games? I sampled American McGee's Alice earlier and it runs a bit... naff. Anything higher than 640x480 isn't advised, but it still struggles even at that resolution. And slows to a crawl in the menus to the point of being unresponsive if I set the colour depth to 32. But I'm guessing game engines from around that period, such as the Quake III engine, and possibly the Source engine for Half-Life (have yet to try it), are going to really struggle with my Riva TNT.

Alice requires DX7 hardware, the TNT is DX6, if those are the cards you're looking at i definitely think you should just get an fx5200, i wouldnt bother with a geforce 2, aside from its DX7 and 2 extra TMU's, looking at everything else it doesnt seems like a massive impovement over the TNT,
compare the specs here

TNT
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/riva-tnt.c1308
GEFORCE 2
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce2-mx.c792

the 256 is a bigger improvement, it also has the same pixel shaders/TMU's/ROP's as the fx5200, though the 5200 also has the benefit of vertex shaders,

GEFORCE 256
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-256-ddr.c734
FX5200
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-fx-5200.c60

id say just get a 5200 and be done with it 😀 you shouldnt have any problems as it has good dos compatibility and it should handle any games your cpu can throw at it, even a 128mb 64bit version will out perform these cards and even score higher in 3dmark99 than a voodoo3 and even a V5 5500, you'll have support for DX9, OpenGL1.5/2.0, and shader model 2.0, so should cover you for games upto 2005 or later, most importantly having directX9 means you can make use of nGlide for running 3DFX games.

DudeFace wrote on 2024-12-26, 12:17:

Alice requires DX7 hardware, the TNT is DX6, if those are the cards you're looking at i definitely think you should just get an […]
Show full quote

DustyShinigami wrote on 2024-12-25, 23:52:

Just been browsing for different graphics cards. Sadly, I've been unable to find a Geforce 256, but Geforce 2 cards are very cheap and common. I'm thinking of getting one. Has anyone else got or used one? Particularly in early 00s games? I sampled American McGee's Alice earlier and it runs a bit... naff. Anything higher than 640x480 isn't advised, but it still struggles even at that resolution. And slows to a crawl in the menus to the point of being unresponsive if I set the colour depth to 32. But I'm guessing game engines from around that period, such as the Quake III engine, and possibly the Source engine for Half-Life (have yet to try it), are going to really struggle with my Riva TNT.

Alice requires DX7 hardware, the TNT is DX6, if those are the cards you're looking at i definitely think you should just get an fx5200, i wouldnt bother with a geforce 2, aside from its DX7 and 2 extra TMU's, looking at everything else it doesnt seems like a massive impovement over the TNT,
compare the specs here

TNT
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/riva-tnt.c1308
GEFORCE 2
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce2-mx.c792

the 256 is a bigger improvement, it also has the same pixel shaders/TMU's/ROP's as the fx5200, though the 5200 also has the benefit of vertex shaders,

GEFORCE 256
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-256-ddr.c734
FX5200
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-fx-5200.c60

id say just get a 5200 and be done with it 😀 you shouldnt have any problems as it has good dos compatibility and it should handle any games your cpu can throw at it, even a 128mb 64bit version will out perform these cards and even score higher in 3dmark99 than a voodoo3 and even a V5 5500, you'll have support for DX9, OpenGL1.5/2.0, and shader model 2.0, so should cover you for games upto 2005 or later, most importantly having directX9 means you can make use of nGlide for running 3DFX games.

Oh nice. Thanks for the suggestion. 😄 Although I was advised, and was sort of aiming, to avoid DirectX 9 and keep it around 8. Also, would there be any bottleneck with a 5200 and the Pentium III 450? I was looking at Coppermine CPUs, as that’s the next best thing my PC can support, but there aren’t any 1GHz chips available, and previous sales on eBay look to have been around £100-200.

I wouldn’t have thought the GeForce 2 would be weaker than a 256 what with being its successor. 😮

DudeFace wrote on 2024-12-26, 12:17:

Alice requires DX7 hardware, the TNT is DX6, if those are the cards you're looking at i definitely think you should just get an […]
Show full quote

Alice requires DX7 hardware, the TNT is DX6, if those are the cards you're looking at i definitely think you should just get an fx5200, i wouldnt bother with a geforce 2, aside from its DX7 and 2 extra TMU's, looking at everything else it doesnt seems like a massive impovement over the TNT,
compare the specs here

TNT
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/riva-tnt.c1308
GEFORCE 2
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce2-mx.c792

That's not a GeForce 2, that's a GeForce 2 MX which is the cut-down budget version of the GeForce 2.

DustyShinigami wrote on 2024-12-26, 12:33:

I wouldn’t have thought the GeForce 2 would be weaker than a 256 what with being its successor. 😮

It isn't. They linked to the GeForce 2 MX which is a cut-down budget version of the GeForce 2.

The 'proper' GeForce 2 cards include the GeForce 2 GTS, GeForce 2 Pro, GeForce 2 Ti and GeForce 2 Ultra.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_2_series#Models

That said, a lot of the cheap GeForce 2 cards you are likely seeing for sale are going to be the MX versions. If you want a proper GeForce 2 (as per one of the above models), those are likely to cost a lot more.

DudeFace wrote on 2024-12-26, 12:17:

the TNT is DX6, if those are the cards you're looking at i definitely think you should just get an fx5200,

I would expect greater driver overhead from the FX 5200.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-12-26, 13:01:

It isn't. They linked to the GeForce 2 MX which is a cut-down budget version of the GeForce 2. […]
Show full quote

DustyShinigami wrote on 2024-12-26, 12:33:

I wouldn’t have thought the GeForce 2 would be weaker than a 256 what with being its successor. 😮

It isn't. They linked to the GeForce 2 MX which is a cut-down budget version of the GeForce 2.

The 'proper' GeForce 2 cards include the GeForce 2 GTS, GeForce 2 Pro, GeForce 2 Ti and GeForce 2 Ultra.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_2_series#Models

Ahhh. I missed that detail. 😅

So I should go for something like the GeForce 2 Ultra or 5200.

Edit: Mind you, that’s a bit pricier

The GeForce 2 MX would be a significant improvement over the original Riva TNT. Heck, it even beats the TNT2 Ultra. Some period correct benchmarks: https://www.anandtech.com/show/570/9

Avoid MX200 cards though. Those have cut down memory bandwidth, as I recall.

DustyShinigami wrote on 2024-12-26, 12:33:

DudeFace wrote on 2024-12-26, 12:17:

Alice requires DX7 hardware, the TNT is DX6, if those are the cards you're looking at i definitely think you should just get an […]
Show full quote

DustyShinigami wrote on 2024-12-25, 23:52:

Just been browsing for different graphics cards. Sadly, I've been unable to find a Geforce 256, but Geforce 2 cards are very cheap and common. I'm thinking of getting one. Has anyone else got or used one? Particularly in early 00s games? I sampled American McGee's Alice earlier and it runs a bit... naff. Anything higher than 640x480 isn't advised, but it still struggles even at that resolution. And slows to a crawl in the menus to the point of being unresponsive if I set the colour depth to 32. But I'm guessing game engines from around that period, such as the Quake III engine, and possibly the Source engine for Half-Life (have yet to try it), are going to really struggle with my Riva TNT.

Alice requires DX7 hardware, the TNT is DX6, if those are the cards you're looking at i definitely think you should just get an fx5200, i wouldnt bother with a geforce 2, aside from its DX7 and 2 extra TMU's, looking at everything else it doesnt seems like a massive impovement over the TNT,
compare the specs here

TNT
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/riva-tnt.c1308
GEFORCE 2
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce2-mx.c792

the 256 is a bigger improvement, it also has the same pixel shaders/TMU's/ROP's as the fx5200, though the 5200 also has the benefit of vertex shaders,

GEFORCE 256
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-256-ddr.c734
FX5200
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-fx-5200.c60

id say just get a 5200 and be done with it 😀 you shouldnt have any problems as it has good dos compatibility and it should handle any games your cpu can throw at it, even a 128mb 64bit version will out perform these cards and even score higher in 3dmark99 than a voodoo3 and even a V5 5500, you'll have support for DX9, OpenGL1.5/2.0, and shader model 2.0, so should cover you for games upto 2005 or later, most importantly having directX9 means you can make use of nGlide for running 3DFX games.

Oh nice. Thanks for the suggestion. 😄 Although I was advised, and was sort of aiming, to avoid DirectX 9 and keep it around 8. Also, would there be any bottleneck with a 5200 and the Pentium III 450? I was looking at Coppermine CPUs, as that’s the next best thing my PC can support, but there aren’t any 1GHz chips available, and previous sales on eBay look to have been around £100-200.

I wouldn’t have thought the GeForce 2 would be weaker than a 256 what with being its successor. 😮

if your set on directx 8 you should be looking at a geforce 4/radeon8/9200, the GF2 and 256 are DX7, but really theres no reason to avoid DX9, maxxing out support for the latest features/games is always a good thing, you wont need to upgrade for a while, and it will probably do just fine when you upgrade to 1ghz,. also that GF2 is the base model, since you said they are cheap and common i assumed it was the base MX you were looking at, rather than the GTS/Pro...etc

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-12-26, 12:55:

That's not a GeForce 2, that's a GeForce 2 MX which is the cut-down budget version of the GeForce 2.

see above 😀

GemCookie wrote on 2024-12-26, 13:04:

I would expect greater driver overhead from the FX 5200.

ive not run one on a 500mhz cpu so cant say for sure, as long as its AGP rather than PCI he will at least see a massive improvement in performance, he'll only be limited by what games his cpu can run.