swaaye wrote on 2024-11-17, 06:40:

I think Radeon 9250 still has the nifty error diffusion dithering of 16-bit color that was not carried on with the DirectX 9 cards. So try playing some D3D games in 16-bit color depth for fun. (9250 is related to Radeon 8500)

Also, for Windows games that look best with Glide or are Glide-only, you can try Zeckensack's Glide Wrapper. It works with Win98 and a DirectX 8 class card is a good minimum for it.

I will swap it for 9600 Pro or XT once i find good offer. Asus 9250 GE 256mb that i use currently is not to stay as permanent decision. It would be good to find 9800 Pro or XT but those are very expensive and very hard to find.

dionb wrote on 2024-11-17, 09:16:

Note that for DOS there actually is such a thing as too much RAM. In particular some games do memory size detection that fails o […]
Show full quote

Studiostriver wrote on 2024-11-17, 02:04:

[...] […]
Show full quote

[...]

Nice, that is what i would do if i ever venture to there into getting another retro computer. 😀 So far i use Pentium 3 with Tualatin 1.4ghz and have wonderful experience with most 98 games, the only downfall was that my ATI 9600 XT card died literaly after month of usage, so you never know with these old computers when any component will fail. I revert back to Asus 9250 till i get proper replacement.

If i ever decide get me into Pentium 2 it would be to make it for older games from 95/DOS era i guess, and possible to experience Voodoo cards. This seller has pretty good configuration.

CPU Type Intel Pentium II, 266 MHz
Motherboard Name FIC VL-601
Motherboard Chipset Intel 82440LX/EX
System Memory 128 MB (SDRAM) 64x32x32
3D Accelerator nVIDIA RIVA TNT2 M64

Note that for DOS there actually is such a thing as too much RAM. In particular some games do memory size detection that fails of you have vastly too much. This can happen with over 16MB but really becomes a problem over 64MB. No DOS game sensibly uses over 16MB by the way.

You can usually work around it with settings but it's good to be aware of the possibility.

Now, if the system also has to run Win95 you need enough for that. But no need to go crazy. A high-end system in mid 1998 (i.e. at the very end of Win95 era) had 64MB, back in 1995 at launch, 16MB would have been a lot and I have suffered it installed on less capable machines (someone upgraded 486DX33 with 4MB to Win95 in uni computer rooms in 1996... That was pure suffering 😦 ). In the day the theoretical memory (and caching) limits of the hardware were utterly irrelevant - you couldn't possibly afford enough RAM to approach them and even if you did, no gaming software used it fully. 64MB us the sweet spot for a DOS+Win95 system and I challenge you to notice any difference at all vs 128 or even 256MB RAM.

Good points there.

dionb wrote on 2024-11-17, 09:16:

No DOS game sensibly uses over 16MB by the way.

Apparently the DOS version of Fallout requires 32MB of RAM. Though that does seem to be the exception.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-11-17, 18:43:

dionb wrote on 2024-11-17, 09:16:

No DOS game sensibly uses over 16MB by the way.

Apparently the DOS version of Fallout requires 32MB of RAM. Though that does seem to be the exception.

Just dug out the original disc to confirm that requirement in its README.TXT file. It was rare, if not weird, for a DOS game in 1997 requiring 32 MB of RAM. Heck, even Fallout 2 that released a year later required only 16 MB of RAM (Windows only).

Has anyone tried running the original Fallout under DOS with less RAM?

It might run with 24 or so, there were a lot of "8MB required" games that ran on 6MB, I think it was a case of "couldn't keep it under x MB so say it needs the next power of two up."

I almost always try to max out my ram, but there can be benefits to not doing that

Sometimes less ram can actually be faster.

Most pII systems would be more than happy with 256mb of ram. Maybe even less.

I seem to notice systems of that era are happiest with 256-384mb

Sphere478 wrote on 2024-11-17, 20:42:

I almost always try to max out my ram, but there can be benefits to not doing that […]
Show full quote

I almost always try to max out my ram, but there can be benefits to not doing that

Sometimes less ram can actually be faster.

Most pII systems would be more than happy with 256mb of ram. Maybe even less.

I seem to notice systems of that era are happiest with 256-384mb

Even my K6-II+ seems to likes 256mb tiny bit more than 128mb, but 128mb is good size for this system.

With SS7 you need to look the cache size if not K6-II+/III/III+ cpu.

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-11-17, 01:23:

To simplify the GPU situation, I'd go with a Riva TNT and Voodoo2 (or Voodoo2 SLI) combination. This would be era appropriate for a Pentium II / 440LX build.

I love suggesting 2-3 graphics processors as the simple solution!

Cyfrifiadur wrote on 2024-11-18, 11:07:

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-11-17, 01:23:

To simplify the GPU situation, I'd go with a Riva TNT and Voodoo2 (or Voodoo2 SLI) combination. This would be era appropriate for a Pentium II / 440LX build.

I love suggesting 2-3 graphics processors as the simple solution!

It is the simple solution. The complicated solution would have at least 4 GPUs. 😉

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-11-18, 11:27:

Cyfrifiadur wrote on 2024-11-18, 11:07:

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-11-17, 01:23:

To simplify the GPU situation, I'd go with a Riva TNT and Voodoo2 (or Voodoo2 SLI) combination. This would be era appropriate for a Pentium II / 440LX build.

I love suggesting 2-3 graphics processors as the simple solution!

It is the simple solution. The complicated solution would have at least 4 GPUs. 😉

It's also not so period correct - i440LX is a 1997 platform, TNT and Voodoo 2 are 1998 cards. For period correctness, a Riva128 and Voodoo1 would be more appropriate, although your average 1997 P2 would have had an ATi Rage Pro AGP instead. The TNT and Voodoo2 would match with an i440BX - all released in early 1998.

Of course, it's not compulsory to stick to period correctness; certainly the amounts of RAM discussed here are anything but period correct.

While the 440LX chipset did come out in 1997, it was used in systems well into the first half of 1998.

There is overlap between the release of the TNT & Voodoo2, and use of the 440LX chipset.

That said, if one is targeting a 1997 era build specifically, a Riva 128 + Voodoo1 would be an appropriate combo.

i440LX was still used after release of i440BX for less high-end systems, but would not have been paired with the latest, greatest 3D cards - if you could afford a Voodoo2 within a couple of months of release, you could also afford a BX and 100MHz FSB Pentium 2.

Again, I'm not saying TNT and V2 would be a bad pairing, just one unlikely to have been seen in the wild.

Just to check I'm not talking out of my rear end, I took a look here:
https://vintageapple.org/pcworld/pdf/PC_World … 7_July_1998.pdf

Couple of months after release of Voodoo2, i440BX and Riva TNT. But as you say 66MHz FSB P2 systems are still being sold:

p16 Dell Dimension for home XPS D266: "STB nVidia 4MB 3D Video Card" (i.e. Riva128)
p39 ProGen Discover 3D Multimedia Value: "i440LX AGPset, AGP Video Graphics Card 4MB SGRAM" (could be anything Riva/Rage/S3 or similar - but not a TNT let alone Voodoo2)
p94 Quantex Power Multimedia series QP6/300 SM-2x "Toshiba MPACT2 3D Media Accelerator with 8MB RDRAM" :')
Etc...

Don't overestimate what people actually had in their PCs back in the day. Only a very, very select few bought the highest of high-end stuff.

And Voodoo2 and TNT? The Voodoo2 isn't sold in any complete system mentioned, just in a few component catalogs as separate card. And no mention of the Riva TNT at all, despite the STB Velocity 4400 already being on the market.

In fact I had to go to October 1998 to find any systems with Voodoo2. What kind of systems were they installed in?
p91 Gateway 'The Screamer' G6-450XL "Pentium II 450MHZ [...] 128MB SDRAM [...] 8MB AGP Graphics Accelerator <whatever> [...] 12MB 3Dfx Voodoo2 3-D Accelerator"
p116 Quantex Ultimate Gaming PCs QP6/400 GX-1 "Pentium II Processor 400MHz [...] 64MB PC100SDRAM [...] 3Dfx Voodoo2 based 3D Game Acceleration"

All 100MHz FSB i440BX-based systems.

Still no TNT though, just an announcement on page 57: "Blazing Graphics: STB's $199 Velocity 4400 will be the first graphics card to use Nvidia's new Riva TNT chip ."

So no, I wouldn't call TNT and Voodoo2 period correct with i440LX.

dionb wrote on 2024-11-18, 12:50:

And Voodoo2 and TNT? The Voodoo2 isn't sold in any complete system mentioned, just in a few component catalogs as separate card. And no mention of the Riva TNT at all, despite the STB Velocity 4400 already being on the market.

This is from Computer Gaming World May 1998. Alienware advertised 440LX chipsets in their systems in May and June of 1998, before starting to advertise the 440BX in July 1998.

They were including Voodoo2 cards at that time, including Voodoo2 SLI in their top-end system. TNT didn't start getting including in their systems until Sept (?) I think. They did advertise the ill-fated Intel 740 GPU in the interim.

As mentioned earlier, I tend to view "period correct" in terms of relative overlap of hardware releases. If someone was to purchase a Pentium II system in late 97 to early 98, it likely had an LX motherboard. If they later upgraded the GPU in mid-to-late 1998, they could very well end up with a TNT + 440LX combination.

On the other hand if someone was buying a new system in mid-to-late 1998, then a 440BX + TNT would be the more likely pairing.

dionb wrote on 2024-11-18, 12:50:

i440LX was still used after release of i440BX for less high-end systems, but would not have been paired with the latest, greatest 3D cards - if you could afford a Voodoo2 within a couple of months of release, you could also afford a BX and 100MHz FSB Pentium 2.

i'm seeing a $249 launch price for the 8 mb card, $299 for the 12 mb one. that's not even remotely close to the cost of an entire p2 system.

if someone had an expensive p2 system from 1997, or perhaps even early 1998 after the first price cuts, they would most likely try to get at least a year of use out of that instead of immediately buying a new 440BX system. so a voodoo2 is a valid upgrade option even for 440FX, with 440LX being the latest at the time the card launched. and given the lower driver overhead with glide it's the best option for these slower CPUs compared to something like a TNT anyway.

Great read i must say. 😀 Unfortunately this motherboard and computer that i have opportunity to buy has only 66mhz maximum CPU speed. Its model FIC VL-601. https://theretroweb.com/motherboards/s/fic-vl-601-rev-1-1

The vast majority of 440BX motherboards have date codes from 1999, not 1998.
Likewise for the 440LX - most LX boards I've seen were made in 1998, not 1997.
The same lagging effect is true for video cards, but I think it might be less pronounced because late 90s GPUs didn't have as long of a viable shelf life as motherboard chipsets did.

There's also a difference between prebuilt systems and home builds. I agree with previous comments that it's pretty likely for a homebuilt system to start with a 440LX motherboard, and then have a ~6-12mo newer video card installed at a later date. Personally I've never bought a video card at the same time as a motherboard.
But with prebuilt systems all the parts obviously are being bought at the same time. Brand name systems rarely use higher end video cards at all, they prefer commodity cards that they order by the ton and which have no special requirements or support headaches. So when prebuilts do use higher end cards, it's going to be a very expensive machine with the latest motherboards and CPUs.

So I think if you look at this as a "home built" type system, then a TNT/Voodoo2 fits my notion of "period correct". Maybe not for a prebuilt though. The Dell 440LX/EX prebuilts I've seen had Riva128ZXs in them, but if I was going to play 3D games I'd want at least a TNT.

==

As far as the RAM question, I'd probably just start with the 128MB PC100. That should be plenty for Win95.
If you later start expanding the system and want more RAM, expanding to 256-384MB should be easy because 128MB PC100 modules are very common and cheap.
Even though you're running at 66MHz bus, I'd buy PC100 modules just so they're more tolerant of overclocking and more useful for swapping into other systems. There's no difference in cost vs a PC66 module.
Don't buy PC133 unless you understand the issues of chip density and what chip types are compatible with the 440LX. Many of them will work but some of them won't. The speed itself isn't the problem, but lots of PC133 modules use newer (denser) RAM chips that the LX isn't compatible with.
Manufacturers of PC100 modules expected that many of their customers had the LX chipset, so PC100 modules are almost always LX compatible.

We used to feel those days that there are 2 things that are never enough - hard drive space and conventional memory. Fast forward a bit, then was still hard drive space and in addition, comes the RAM as a whole that was never enough.

For pure DOS, 64MB is the max usable. Windows 95 can actually run quite well in a Pentium system with just 32MB RAM, but not enough. For Windows 9x based system there's nothing wrong by adding RAM up to 512MB RAM if the motherboard supports it. Anything more can cause protection fault in these 9x systems, but there is a patch now to fix it, but there's no use adding more. Even 128MB RAM was considered a luxury back then for a Windows 9x based system. 256MB is to make you feel good and comfortable. Installing 512MB RAM is for telling yourself "why? because I can."

One use for installing maximized RAM, is to create RAM drives and point the Windows swap files into that.

Malik wrote on 2024-11-19, 04:34:

One use for installing maximized RAM, is to create RAM drives and point the Windows swap files into that.

Another use is just for dick waving. Like that one time I put 16GB of ram into a Quad Pentium 3?

And i'm trying to find a proper chassis for this big beautiful bastard, then i'll make a nice proper build video.

to put a cherry on top of this thread; here's a good general rule of thumb for every class of system with how much ram will be "comfortable". And comfortable means you have enough to do anything that cpu can do without having memory issues.

8088 - 640k
286 - 4mb
386 - 16mb
486 - 32mb
pentium 1 - 64mb
pentium 2 - 128mb
pentium 3 - 256mb
pentium 4 - 4gb

luckybob wrote on 2024-11-19, 05:52:

Another use is just for dick waving. Like that one time I put 16GB of ram into a Quad Pentium 3? https://i.imgur.com/YJPpzNQm.j […]
Show full quote

Malik wrote on 2024-11-19, 04:34:

One use for installing maximized RAM, is to create RAM drives and point the Windows swap files into that.

Another use is just for dick waving. Like that one time I put 16GB of ram into a Quad Pentium 3?

And i'm trying to find a proper chassis for this big beautiful bastard, then i'll make a nice proper build video.

to put a cherry on top of this thread; here's a good general rule of thumb for every class of system with how much ram will be "comfortable". And comfortable means you have enough to do anything that cpu can do without having memory issues.

8088 - 640k
286 - 4mb
386 - 16mb
486 - 32mb
pentium 1 - 64mb
pentium 2 - 128mb
pentium 3 - 256mb
pentium 4 - 4gb

At the time you're even building a quad P3, the waving has long begun 😎

Shponglefan wrote on 2024-11-18, 13:22:

dionb wrote on 2024-11-18, 12:50:

And Voodoo2 and TNT? The Voodoo2 isn't sold in any complete system mentioned, just in a few component catalogs as separate card. And no mention of the Riva TNT at all, despite the STB Velocity 4400 already being on the market.

The attachment CGW Alienware ad May 1998.PNG is no longer available

This is from Computer Gaming World May 1998. Alienware advertised 440LX chipsets in their systems in May and June of 1998, before starting to advertise the 440BX in July 1998.

Love the "Motherboard with 512K of Cache" 🤣 But probably most people didn't know back then, how it actually was ...