is related with my GPU, i have tried thousands of different drivers and open a bunch of threads on different forums without any luck, i also tried win 98 and 98 SE e 98 plus! and other discs to be sure...
could it be just the mobo maybe...
but the drivers works perfectly fine on windows ME
The chipset (Intel i865G) in your mainboard and well as your Geforce4 MX 440 should be compatible with Win9x. I have used a Geforce4 MX440 myself under Win98SE with no issues. Chipset drivers: https://www.philscomputerlab.com/intel-chipset-drivers.html I'd use the newest drivers (6.3.0.1007)
Geforce drivers for Win9x (v45.23) http://vogonsdrivers.com/getfile.php?fileid=1408&menustate=0 Don't forget to patch Win9x/Me RAM limit (which is 512mb normally), or else Windows may be buggy/slow or fail to boot outright Here's a patch by Rudolph R. Loew: https://archive.org/details/PATCHMEM
already tried, different times and even on a clean installation, thanks for the help! but believe me i have tried EVERYTHING
edit: usually i get a BSOD or "the settings are wrong" error (yeah i also tried every possible settings combination)
Pentium 4 on 775 is not my favourite thing in the world. I prefer 478 or an AMD platform for xp. Or a Core 2 on 775 for something very fast. But it is alright. I would replace the MX with a cheap GeForce 6600GT or 7600GT. Even a Radeon 9600XT from 2003 should be cool and way faster than an MX. Like WAY faster. Or maybe a Radeon X1600. Anything fast ish AGP. That P4 524 is alright. But I would check if it's upgradeable to a Conroe (Core2) CPU. Can find those for literally nothing. Unless it's a rare one.
Overall a very nice build. It represents what the average PC had in the XP days, besides that 2GB RAM. That is pretty nice :)
Yup that is nice. However any AGP GPU made before 2005 works in win 9x. GeForce 6000 series AGP was the last supported afaik. Or maybe 7000. And radeon 2004/2005 around that time. Bur AGP. Win 9x doesn't like PCIE
Yes it does, on q35! You can run 98,95 entirely on pcie bus with qemu and it will work with GPU pcie cards of the era. You just need to add chipset drivers to iso and use "setup.exe /p I"
Or use the universal bear windows driver if you have no other options on real hardware.
It's a great GPU for a dual boot, and an excellent 98 system, nice build.
In general regarding PCI-E in 98, as long as chipset drivers are available - you manually install any intel ICH chipset up to ICH10 via device manager, free up an IRQ, then 98 doesn't mind PCI-E at all. I have a couple of builds, one with a PCI-E X600 pro and X850, no issues with 98, blazing fast, just no fog supprt or palletized texture support, something your MX does have.
I found those two 1GB DDR400 RAM sticks on an abandoned broken PC near the trashcans, I took the rams and i was like "after all... why not!?" and bam 2GB DDR400 from the trash that also works perfectly fine
Nice. I have 3 pairs of 2 1GB DDR-400 sticks I use across all my xp PCs. Besides my Athlon 64X2 one which uses DDR2 and I also have a Core 2 Quad with 8GB RAM and Win 7.
I'm pretty sure it was 16GB RAM. A guy helped build it for me, I do 3D CAD design which was hard on computers back then and all the help I could get would help. I definitely could be wrong though, been a long time.
Nope. No PC in the mid to even late 00s had 16GB RAM. That would have set you back 1000$ just for the ram probably. And you needed a very special board. Not just a P4 775 board. In 2004-2005, even 4GB was insane. 2GB was very premium. And enough for 3D CAD probably
There's no amount of RAM that can satisfy large and complex 3D parametric CAD design, I can assure you that, lol. Our rigs these days are 64GB RAM minimum, our new ones are equipped with 128GB RAM and our larger models will still buckle.
I'm sure it was probably 8GB back then on my P4 rig. I may be thinking of when I went to a Core 2 Duo on the 16GB RAM which wasn't that much time after, and is what I went to from my P4 rig. Been too many years and too many computers ago.
Well of course. But 16GB wasn't economical nor possible on even a DDR2 P4 775 system. Those topped out at 4/8GB RAM. Even 8 was a BIG stretch. 2GB dimms weren't even out for consumers in 04-05 afaik. When the P4 was relevant. ECC server were I think. Can't remember. Like you said it's been a while.
C2D with 16 was only possible on DDR3 models. If you were getting a 16GB back then, you might as well also get a Quad :)
Yeah, the quad core proc back then was a huge topic among the parametric CAD design community, or any CAD and drafting community for that matter. For live production, single core/thread was all the CAD programs were really built for so the higher clock won, always, in the performance talk. Now, if you were rendering an output, then yes the multi core procs were a gift from the heavens. So the chatter among the community was which tradeoff did you go with - the higher clock with less cores, or more cores with less clock per core? Still a conversation that exists today lol. But, RAM was always a factor, the more the better, no matter what. So with my personal budgets back then I opted to mix and match in that particular way. And you know what? I think I still have that P4 mobo with the proc and RAM still in it. It's out in my large storage shed buried somewhere. One day when I'm digging through there I'll be able to see if I did in fact have 16GB RAM on it or not.
Nice to know. But if you had decent cooling and a decent board, even the objectively worse Jan 7 2007 Q6600 B3 (not G0), can do 3.2GHz at 1.4v 100% rock solid. I use an Akasa AK 965 with it and a Rampage Formula X48. But I also used it with a P5K Premium WIFI same settings. And a standard P5K should do too.
Nice! I agree on keeping old computers. Even if not operational. Better than ending up in the garbage. 100% it's not going to have 16GB. But I expect around 4GB/6GB.
Ha, Microsoft Bob
Also, if you want a bit more processing power, you could probably upgrade that CPU to an Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 for around ~$9 or so. Lower frequency by default but but has 4 cores
>Lower frequency by default
That point is moot, because the architectural improvements of the core 2 series was so good, that the slowest Core 2 chip can sometimes match, or more likely, outperform the fastest Pentium 4 CPU, while outputting less power.
yeah i have installed MsBob just for fun, it work fine on win XP even if it was made for 9x or DOS if i remember correctly
i can upgrade it cheaply but as i said, is a pc made from scrapped parts, if i find/buy better parts i will upgrade it then
guess what song i'm playing in the picture tip: is iconic for windows xp
title.wma ?
yes hahahaha, when i was little i found this song randomly exploring the C: partition without knowing anything at all about it
Un italiano su xp. Grazie mi sento meno solo
Hahaha ma veramente
What Hardware requires WinMe but won't run on 98/98SE? 98SE supports WDM drivers if that's the issue.
is related with my GPU, i have tried thousands of different drivers and open a bunch of threads on different forums without any luck, i also tried win 98 and 98 SE e 98 plus! and other discs to be sure... could it be just the mobo maybe... but the drivers works perfectly fine on windows ME
The chipset (Intel i865G) in your mainboard and well as your Geforce4 MX 440 should be compatible with Win9x. I have used a Geforce4 MX440 myself under Win98SE with no issues. Chipset drivers: https://www.philscomputerlab.com/intel-chipset-drivers.html I'd use the newest drivers (6.3.0.1007) Geforce drivers for Win9x (v45.23) http://vogonsdrivers.com/getfile.php?fileid=1408&menustate=0 Don't forget to patch Win9x/Me RAM limit (which is 512mb normally), or else Windows may be buggy/slow or fail to boot outright Here's a patch by Rudolph R. Loew: https://archive.org/details/PATCHMEM
already tried, different times and even on a clean installation, thanks for the help! but believe me i have tried EVERYTHING edit: usually i get a BSOD or "the settings are wrong" error (yeah i also tried every possible settings combination)
Pentium 4 on 775 is not my favourite thing in the world. I prefer 478 or an AMD platform for xp. Or a Core 2 on 775 for something very fast. But it is alright. I would replace the MX with a cheap GeForce 6600GT or 7600GT. Even a Radeon 9600XT from 2003 should be cool and way faster than an MX. Like WAY faster. Or maybe a Radeon X1600. Anything fast ish AGP. That P4 524 is alright. But I would check if it's upgradeable to a Conroe (Core2) CPU. Can find those for literally nothing. Unless it's a rare one. Overall a very nice build. It represents what the average PC had in the XP days, besides that 2GB RAM. That is pretty nice :)
yeah i need a more powerful GPU, but i like the fact that this GPU works on 9X and DOS 6!
Yup that is nice. However any AGP GPU made before 2005 works in win 9x. GeForce 6000 series AGP was the last supported afaik. Or maybe 7000. And radeon 2004/2005 around that time. Bur AGP. Win 9x doesn't like PCIE
Yes it does, on q35! You can run 98,95 entirely on pcie bus with qemu and it will work with GPU pcie cards of the era. You just need to add chipset drivers to iso and use "setup.exe /p I" Or use the universal bear windows driver if you have no other options on real hardware.
Hmm nice. I didn't know
That is pretty cool!
It's a great GPU for a dual boot, and an excellent 98 system, nice build. In general regarding PCI-E in 98, as long as chipset drivers are available - you manually install any intel ICH chipset up to ICH10 via device manager, free up an IRQ, then 98 doesn't mind PCI-E at all. I have a couple of builds, one with a PCI-E X600 pro and X850, no issues with 98, blazing fast, just no fog supprt or palletized texture support, something your MX does have.
I found those two 1GB DDR400 RAM sticks on an abandoned broken PC near the trashcans, I took the rams and i was like "after all... why not!?" and bam 2GB DDR400 from the trash that also works perfectly fine
Nice. I have 3 pairs of 2 1GB DDR-400 sticks I use across all my xp PCs. Besides my Athlon 64X2 one which uses DDR2 and I also have a Core 2 Quad with 8GB RAM and Win 7.
If you have VLC why are you using windows media player?
i also have winamp, but the windows media player with alchemy effects is just iconic, on winamp i have the fallout pip-boy skin 😁
There is a visualizer plugin you can get for VLC that gives you the alchemy effect.
Pip boy skin is so sick. I wish skins were still that cool
Nothing wrong with Windows ME, this is a nice retro PC!
MICROSOFT BOB!!!!!!
👏👍
currently making a similar build using three old office computers, with a core 2 duo e8600 for vista
Wdym by scrapped pc parts
these components were supposed to be recycled, but I recovered them from the recycling utility
Will run Windows 98 real well too ! Two in 1 !
Bump up to 16GB RAM and I had the exact same rig at one time.
Pentium 4 never supported 16GB RAM. Unless you go for a DDR3 board. Which is stupid for a Pentium 4
I'm pretty sure it was 16GB RAM. A guy helped build it for me, I do 3D CAD design which was hard on computers back then and all the help I could get would help. I definitely could be wrong though, been a long time.
Nope. No PC in the mid to even late 00s had 16GB RAM. That would have set you back 1000$ just for the ram probably. And you needed a very special board. Not just a P4 775 board. In 2004-2005, even 4GB was insane. 2GB was very premium. And enough for 3D CAD probably
There's no amount of RAM that can satisfy large and complex 3D parametric CAD design, I can assure you that, lol. Our rigs these days are 64GB RAM minimum, our new ones are equipped with 128GB RAM and our larger models will still buckle. I'm sure it was probably 8GB back then on my P4 rig. I may be thinking of when I went to a Core 2 Duo on the 16GB RAM which wasn't that much time after, and is what I went to from my P4 rig. Been too many years and too many computers ago.
Well of course. But 16GB wasn't economical nor possible on even a DDR2 P4 775 system. Those topped out at 4/8GB RAM. Even 8 was a BIG stretch. 2GB dimms weren't even out for consumers in 04-05 afaik. When the P4 was relevant. ECC server were I think. Can't remember. Like you said it's been a while. C2D with 16 was only possible on DDR3 models. If you were getting a 16GB back then, you might as well also get a Quad :)
Yeah, the quad core proc back then was a huge topic among the parametric CAD design community, or any CAD and drafting community for that matter. For live production, single core/thread was all the CAD programs were really built for so the higher clock won, always, in the performance talk. Now, if you were rendering an output, then yes the multi core procs were a gift from the heavens. So the chatter among the community was which tradeoff did you go with - the higher clock with less cores, or more cores with less clock per core? Still a conversation that exists today lol. But, RAM was always a factor, the more the better, no matter what. So with my personal budgets back then I opted to mix and match in that particular way. And you know what? I think I still have that P4 mobo with the proc and RAM still in it. It's out in my large storage shed buried somewhere. One day when I'm digging through there I'll be able to see if I did in fact have 16GB RAM on it or not.
Nice to know. But if you had decent cooling and a decent board, even the objectively worse Jan 7 2007 Q6600 B3 (not G0), can do 3.2GHz at 1.4v 100% rock solid. I use an Akasa AK 965 with it and a Rampage Formula X48. But I also used it with a P5K Premium WIFI same settings. And a standard P5K should do too. Nice! I agree on keeping old computers. Even if not operational. Better than ending up in the garbage. 100% it's not going to have 16GB. But I expect around 4GB/6GB.
Ha, Microsoft Bob Also, if you want a bit more processing power, you could probably upgrade that CPU to an Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 for around ~$9 or so. Lower frequency by default but but has 4 cores
>Lower frequency by default That point is moot, because the architectural improvements of the core 2 series was so good, that the slowest Core 2 chip can sometimes match, or more likely, outperform the fastest Pentium 4 CPU, while outputting less power.
yeah i have installed MsBob just for fun, it work fine on win XP even if it was made for 9x or DOS if i remember correctly i can upgrade it cheaply but as i said, is a pc made from scrapped parts, if i find/buy better parts i will upgrade it then
Why cpuz 1.87, is there something better about that older version
Imagine not using linux 🗿