WIN98 Project

[lnrrgb]

I decided to scratch an itch I've been ignoring (insert joke here). I'd like to build a new/old system, or perhaps just determine the specs of a rig, either desktop or laptop, with one definite goal. I'd like to have the fastest, bestest, leanest rig that can push the limits of the old Nvidia stereo driver (you know, the one which still supported OpenGL), and.... all that under Win98. I know going backwards doesn't seem useful, but we may never see OpenGL support again - which kinda gives us a benchmark to work around. If we go on this assumption, that no driver will ever conquer OpenGL again, then we can definitely determine the fastest processor, the most capable display adapter - in essence, the best possible configuration, bar none, for running those old games that are just going to be forgotten. I also wanted to limit the project to Win98 too (but I might be persuaded to reconsider), because in terms of the scope of the main goal, I feel there is still value in that OS for gaming - especially if it can be whittled down in itself, specifically for gaming (with networking an obvious option, but something I might personally eliminate).

I guess the main question I have, and don't know where to begin tackling, is that although W98 likely runs on any modern CPU, I suspect there is some sweet spot where W98 itself could be considered the biggest bottle neck itself. I'd suggest that at some point (around the time MS ended support) that CPU's became virtually crippled by being used under W98. There must be a CPU that defines the barrier where W98 becomes a burden somehow, at least in terms of the overall scope of the investigation - that being opengl stereo gaming.

The larger itch I want to scratch is that of determining this most capable system, and then the systematic tearing down of W98 (ala 98Lite fame). Maybe OpenGL will one day see a resurrection under some driver, but if not, then this project has some intrinsic value - and more importantly, some nearly perfectible definability.

So, in theory, I suspect most would say there is no limit on single core CPU's...and that makes sense, but the trouble comes with finding the fastest CPU, and pairing it with a MB that will itself not pose problems to W98(SE). Problematic parts a newer MB could be disabled (if possible), if they are not directly needed. So limited support under 98 of newer chipsets, and whatever, doesn't necessarily limit this - but is probably the biggest hurdle. And that I guess is where we jump off... finding the best MB/CPU combo, that has drivers for 98 for all the core components we need to run the older Nvidia driver w/o complications.

The issue of display type will also come into focus later, perhaps, so I think limiting the problem to accommodating standard CRT's is valuable, at first. Since this is geared toward gaming, I guess we limit the conversation to standard display adapters too (no fireGL/quad buffreing - unless we definitely find workarounds lingering for those cards).

And lastly, the issue of desktop/laptop. I guess I'd be leaning toward finding that ultimate laptop mostly - and maybe that is my ultimate goal, defining this solution, so I can snag a working unit before they are too hard to find, or disappear completely.

I know I'm kinda lazy around here, but I hope I've defined this well enough to garnish some interest. I know there are some people here who just hate that our group missed out on some earlier games because we waited to play them based on our hopes, or broken promises, or merely staggered driver development not keeping pace with hardware development. (grrrrrrrrr....)!!

[lnrrgb]

And to describe the itch a little more..... is anyone here a fan of the old, extinct TechTV? Well on some episode they had, Morgan Webb tossed off an idea about replacing the windows explorer shell with the core exe of any game, essentially eliminating windows "somewhat", I guess I want to focus all of a given system's resources to doing one specific thing - I dont care about multitasking on any level while I am gaming. I want the system to run the game, period, and pare down the superfluous as best I can.

[cybereality]

OpenGL 3D w/ Nvidia *does* work under WindowsXP, I distinctly remember playing DOOM 3 in full 3D when it was new. Not sure what advantage there would be to using Win98.

Multicore CPUs are not supported, I would think a a good Pentium 4 would do (ie Prescott, 3.8GHz).

For GPU I would suggest the Geforce 7900 GTX. I have heard conflicting reports about whether the dual GPU cards were supported back then. Not really sure if the 7950 GX2 would be an upgrade.

Using a CRT would be a safe and cheap bet, but you are not limited to only CRTs. The old Nvidia driver supported other stuff, even projectors (if you search for the right models).

Doubt you will find a laptop that will come close to a desktop solution (if it even works at all).

[WiredEarp]

Multicore CPUs are not supported, I would think a a good Pentium 4 would do (ie Prescott, 3.8GHz).

162.50 of the old nvidia drivers supports multicore. Generally speaking, I found 162.50 much better for almost every game than 91.x, with the exception of Battlefield 2.

7900 or 7950 is the best bet I believe. My memory is a bit hazy but I believe that dual GPU's only worked with some effort stuffing with drivers and configurations etc.

[lnrrgb]

The "restriction" of W98 comes from two angles. My real goal has to do with how I like to interact with computers, and life in general I guess. I understand the benefits of multitasking, and having a wonderful computing environment (ie: modern OS with endless abilities), but when I game, I don't want to do anything else but do that, to the best of my ability, and with a system devoted to doing just that, to the best of it's ability. Windows is great, but if I could eliminate it I would - I can't, so I have to be happy with gutting Windows around a games needs. Gutting W98 may not be more difficult that gutting XP, but I remember when XP was shunned by gamers - mostly because 98 was just getting good, and out of the box, XP was slow going on many levels. I just know that given a fresh install of 98, and XP, on the same hardware, and then doing some specific benchmarks - I would have took 98 in a heartbeat for some games, and some purposes... especially S3D gaming ...and S3D OpenGL gaming. This project is much like a classic car project, with a bit of Indy car thrown in the mix - set some limits, but feel free to make the best within that framework.

So I want to gut an OS around a specific game, fine toon it (sic), and then image that baby. That way, when I play the game, it will always be on the most freshest, pristine OS (whats left of it). I know we have HDD's where file size doesn't matter anymore, but I want these images to be lean themselves (the other reason for choosing W98). Maybe I could consider XP as the OS of choice, as that can be whittled down too, but most of those old games were designed to run under W98 from the get go. XP eventually grew to run them well too, and if we could find a definitive reason to choose XP over W98 for some gaming (speed? driver stability?) reason, well I'd be willing to re-focus.

I just know there is a line in the sand of hardware where W98 must be let go of, and it is very near the line where OpenGL GOT let go of, and since we may, or probably never will see OpenGL support again, what we have is two deaths very near in time. This project is kind of a spin on that christian idea of where two, or more, are gathered together in my name, there I am. I just think that given some specific hardware set (limitation), and running some specific games, that W98, and it's drivers from back then, compared with the same hardware, and XP - leaves me still voting for W98, from a gaming performance standpoint. Maybe XP regrouped, and caught back up (performance wise) but by then it's damn bloated, and probably more troublesome to gut - since by then it was more meshed together within itself as an OS.

Think of this project like a resurrection, or the real zombie apocalypse! (or the stem cells of the zombie apocalypse). Do you want slow, stumbling, buffoon zombies? or 29 Days, fast, determined zombies? I vote for the latter, and think W98 is the better choice for that.

I do agree that that the 7950 is bound to be the GFX chip limit, and there were some laptops that sported them. My Dell 9300 Inspirion has been begging me to grab one, but I have not researched the mobile CPU limits enough to justify it. Multicore CPU gets tossed out by default if I hold to the W98 restriction, and I'd be hard pressed to see value in it gaming wise, and especially stereo driver wise, for the older games this idea revolves around.

Another reason I bring up the laptop issue, because though their displays present problems, they can usually be used with external displays, and HMD's - anyway, the portability factor is valuable to me as well. They will be gone someday, if not in the hands of those keeping them for specific reasons - like playing OpenGL games in S3D. (and why not have the best?.... which is the whole point of my query)

[lnrrgb]

Just some simple research gives the obvious, Dell XPS, Alienware, and a handful of "no-name" (clevo/sager) knock-offs are really the only options for 7950gtx laptops, but most working units on eBay sport dual core CPU's. Some speedy P4's out there still, but finding them paired with the 7950 will be a lucky find. The dual core's are slower I'd think, under W98, since it lacks that support. Maybe XP would be an option I must consider more....dangit!

[cybereality]

Aren't the laptop GPUs always gimped versions of the desktop models (even if they sport the same number)?

[lnrrgb]

Perhaps, but you'd think those models touted as gaming laptops would have addressed that somehow....again, perhaps. I guess it might be balanced out by the fact that many of those games are much older as well, DX7&8 era by comparison, so maybe it comes out in the wash. I had gotten Doom3 running as well under XP, but whatever system I had at that time was less than spectacular, or not top notch due to cost. My next upgrade was right at that time, and by then, driver support disappeared, and newer games lured us away. I got caught up in the promises of CFx/SLi support, and began another long wait that eventually panned out. So now that I'm going back, and prices for that hardware are down, the only battle really is availability. Hence the project. My 9300 can only be upgraded to the 7800GTX, and that from the 6800 Ultra, so not much of a jump. The limit is also crimped by 2.0-2.4ghz CPU speeds (and that with overclocking), so I feel the cost might open the door for examination of other laptops entirely. You are right though, and the laptop option is the low priority restriction, especially as the $$ on those still in the wild are hovering around $500-1000 still - but they will be gone from the wild some day, so there is that. Lots of them parted out though, but the $$ still add up that way. I could get lucky though.

[lnrrgb]

My focus right now is researching reports of bugginess with the 7950 AGP cards, or if there were stable PCI(e) versions, and whether 98SE runs stable enough under a crippled Duo Core to run against a fast P4. The system I am typing from now is running a core solo celeron. I had to get it to flash another mobo with a modified bios, so that board could support an E8400. I built this current web machine around this extra celeron, and have been nothing but happy with it's performance - even though it's solo core, on a core duo capable mobo. So maybe the core duo architecture itself might lend W98 some benefit, even when one core can't be utilized, and under any memory restrictions demanded to allow W98 to function with a crippled core duo. This problem may be blossoming, but I think the solution will have some static boundaries which can be defined.

I'll be spending much time HERE -- I think

[cybereality]

Just wondering, what game is it that you want to play so bad?

[lnrrgb]

More or less, I just want to finish any I started, and never finished due to the reasons mentioned before (those beyond my control), or never finished due to my own idiosyncrasies (so...any I started). This is mostly about giving up. I bought into the iZ3d promises, and postponed a lot of gameplay waiting for CFx support. I'm not blaming them for that, and I could have played a lot, but chose not to because I had this hopped up system sporting dual cards that couldn't be truly used, and cost a lot, and I got caught up in my own stubborness. So my bad, but that occurred right when Nvidia pulled back, and dropped Opengl support, and etc... etc... etc.....

And so what? All those games are taboo now? Never to be played? No.... and if they are to be played, by anyone, or even just finished, well by definition, why not have the best system, and do it the way I was dreaming of doing it back then. Plus I've got the dusty z800's sitting around which love that old driver set, but cough and sputter under more recent drivers... etc.. etc.. etc..

And there will always be ppl fighting their way up $$$ wise, and availability wise, who find themselves looking at those games, whose only options hover around this area of research (unless, God forbid, driver support returns). More or less, I thought it was worthwhile, and something I could do around here. I guess I was feeling guilty, looking at your 7500+ posts, and Palmertech's efforts, and every other guys efforts here. Maybe no one else will ever want to play those games, but as I look around, and my eyes drift across my VirtualBoy flashcart (which ppl are still programming for, well I see value in going back, or not letting something die.

I gave up, and now I'm crawling from the grave. Maybe I'll see some light again.

[cybereality]

Please, don't take offense. I was just curious to know what kind of classic games you were into. I can totally understand wanting to go back and beat some games. One of those titles for me was DOOM 3. I played it back with the old Nvidia driver in 3D, and it was honestly so scary I had to stop playing. Never got to finish it. Always wanted to go back and beat it, but it seems like a lost cause at this point with so many newer games on my plate. But I can understand the feeling.

[lnrrgb]

Didn't mean to sound offended, and actually went back to edit that post, but got distracted, and never hit the submit button. I went back to say that I'd probably start with Prey, and then Doom3, and the Red Faction games. I know I can finagle some old games to use DX, but that seems almost as much work as just dedicating a system to it. My angst may have flared because I joined another forum created by a guy who feels sympathetic towards W98SE, but was met with quiet ridicule there. I did not mean to seem defensive.

[lnrrgb]

Well now I'm beginning to think that the GF 7 Series might be too much trouble really, if I stick to the W98 plan. I'm finding very little success (but some) getting the 7 Series cards to function well under W98. The real success came from BFG Tech drivers - which now are hard to spot in the wild. I didn't want to include overclocking, but since I still have a 6800 Ultra sitting around, that might be worth using for testing - until a 7900 pops up on ebay for the right price. Until I can definitely track down the modified BFGTech drivers, I may have to regrettably drop the hope for W98 resurrection. Funny thing is, while listening to a TWIT.TV broadcast recently, someone was reminiscing about LAN parties of old, where guys would argue the value of gaming under W98SE, over XP.... because CounterStrike ran so much faster under W98!!

[lnrrgb]

My guess....? El Salvidor Dali Lama at his best...... Just bummed that it hit a thread that I started....and came after a post of mine..... could this mean something... in the very big picture of life? I suspect it does, or not. Two sides of the same damn coin, only to disappear like dust in the wind.

[photios]

Sorry to resurrect an old thread.

I got a pretty hefty variety of Nvidia 3D solutions from old to new from Geforce 2 GTS to Geforce GTX 590 Quad SLI, and I can tell you right now that if you are running a Win 98 SE machine, that 6800 Ultra should plow through anything that older games under that OS will handle. I wouldn't waste your time with a 7900 GTX unless you are going to run Windows XP, in which case that card also screams. Nothing like playing Doom 3 in 1080p full 3D.

[lnrrgb]

It really isn't that old, I've just been dealing with a sciatic nerve flare up, and window shopping on eBay for more parts.

I have commited on a few parts though, so here is an update:

For a mobo, I went with an Asrock 4coredual-sata. It gives me the option to test out a few hardware configs, as well as a few OS solutions. Although I am most interested in W98, I also know that XP may be essentially more stable. I picked up a P4 670 to start things off, and I keep scanning for a Core 2 Extreme x6800. I may pick up a quad too, if one pops up for the right price. This mobo has a handful of transitional upgade pathways, so I can really test out W98's limits.

I have the GF 6800 Ultra (BFG agp), and now have GF 7950 (XFX pci-e), and may keep looking for another 7 series agp solution. So I will definitely be able to compare W98 against XP on a few levels. Had I sparked more interest, I may have sped up my investigation.

The Rift explosion kinda slowed things down a bit too, but I am going to continue my project. I have to get my RAM choices squared away, in light of W98 limitations. I figure that the Rift will try its best to keep me away from fulfilling this inquiry, and I say bring it on baby! (just my way of getting the Rift to ship sooner):)