cov3rt

for the desktops, the two i tested were nearly identical, for the cables, i used new 80 conductor ide cables so i guess that would be the high speed ones? the other system recently tested was a laptop, it was a gateway solo 9300 with windows 95 installed, 450mhz cpu, 256 MB ram, 8 GB ssd, chipset drivers were installed, although the access time was more or less accurate for an ssd in hd tach 2.61, about .3 ms, the mbps was only about 20 mbps compared to a desktop system that had the same speed processor at 450mhz, but used a western digital blue ide 160 GB hard drive formatted to 7.8 GB due to the board's limitation, this system did about 27 mbps from hd tach 2.61's reading. 440bx is limited to 33 MB/s for the ATA specs but i didn't even get a 1/4 of that, so i was wondering if hd tach 2.61 is just designed in a way to indicate lower numbers or if im not doing something right. the systems i used weren't slow, they were actually fairly quick, the one with the ssd actually played a mp4 using vlc player on windows 95 smoothly on the gateway solo 9300 laptop that only had a 4 MB gpu and the other specs i mentioned earlier, i actually tested other laptops before that weren't 440bx, but newer chipsets like 845pm, and i think some of them with old mechanical hard drives only indicated like 3 mbps in hd tach 2.61, but those like i said were old and worn out probably a lot, affecting their speeds and most were lower end drivers too. i guess im concerned in one way if it's worth it to buy ssd's in the future or just settle for mechanical hard drives and not worry about the hd tach 2.61 numbers that much. but yeh, i was kind of stunned to see that 20 mbps score on the laptop with ssd though, the ssd on the laptop was used though so there is a small chance that it slowed down a lot from previous use, it was a 8 GB super talent ssd which i can't find on supertalent's site so it probably had a lot of use perhaps, who knows. i guess one way to really find out is to test a new ssd on both a desktop and laptop, ( same ssd on both systems would be best ). oh and those two desktops i mentioned earlier were all built from new parts. i haven't tested in dos. do you mean where it gives you the option to boot into ms-dos mode from the shut down menu?

you shouldn't have to mess with anything for the ethernet assuming the driver is working. only thing that may need to be done is to run "winipcfg", release ip address and then renew the ip address for the ethernet adapter and it should work, these are just the basics though.

i tried atto disk benchmark 2.34, not really what i was looking for, apparently it only does sequential speeds according to one website and im mainly looking for random read / write, specifically queue depth 1 with access time.

honestly, although sisoft sandra has more features than everest, i like everest more, it seems more stable and also shows hard drive temperature. also i like hd tach 2.61 more than the hard drive benchmark of sisoft sandra 2001, sandra's benchmark result for the hard drive seem a little vague, i think it mentioned like 197 MB/s for the ssd which seems too high, but also none of the other areas scored around that 2.5 MB/s that hd tach gave, and i know they are two different utilities, but i just don't like sandra's that much. hd tach 2.61 did perform weird for me up to this point too but im gonna keep it still. however, i looked into the aida32 utility and the last version is almost exactly the same program as everest and everest basically replaced aida32 the same year i think, aida32 did not need to be installed through the windows setup, i placed the unzipped program in program files and was able to use it with sandra in the same system so now i have a utility specifically for information and hard drive temps, and the other (sandra) for cpu benchmarks or other information not specifically provided by aida32 with of course hd tach 2.61 and also speedfan 4.28 in the same windows 95 system.

it seems that everest and sisoft sandra software conflict, i had to uninstall everest 1.51 to install sisoft sandra 2001. im seeing which one is better to keep, this sisoft software is really neat, i dont know if i looked into everest completely but it seems that this sisoft software is better in features provided, except that with everest, you're able to have a broader view of specs in one window and it has support for newer hardware, im having a little problem too with the sisoft crashing too right now on drive benchmarks which was the basis of the thread.

update if you type SiSoft Sandra 2001 in filewatcher and download the SiSoft Sandra 2001.zip file, it gives you the appropriate utility i believe as i just installed it on my main system and it mentions it was for windows 95 and 98. i guess i'll test this on windows 95.

the oldest version of crystaldiskmark i found only works on windows 98SE and newer, i tested it before, i couldn't find any atto disk benchmark for windows 95, google did come up with one person saying to use SiSoft Sandra 2000, i went on the official site and used waybackmachine and found SiSoft Sandra 2001 se which was one of the last disk benchmark tools provided by them to work on windows 95, i couldn't download the links though, the name is "san750.zip" i believe, though san752.zip might work too, according to one person, san811.zip required w98 and newer so i could try to find san752.zip in the meantime.

i was wondering if anyone has experience with hd tach 2.61, the benchmark tool that does read testing in the free version. i feel like im getting very poor speeds. i tested recently some hard drives and even an ssd today, many of them were on 440bx chipsets, i looked into pio vs dma modes and the drives i used always had dma checked in device manager, with also the 64 KB option selected for direct memory access controller. i noticed that based on hd tach 2.61, i got no more than 27.9 mega BITS per second on any of the last tested drives, the 27.9 mbps came from the western digital blue 160 GB hard drive, one of the last and fastest pata hard drives too, but i got only about 3.5 MB/s max. i tested a supertalent 8 GB ssd today and got about 20 mbps, which is about 2.5 MB/s, slower than the western digital hard drive, which i find weird because there shouldn't be any reason that its slower in ANY way. i make sure to always apply the early 440bx patch in all builds which always helped with performance, i would get even slower numbers if i didn't apply this patch and just went straight to the newer chipset update which i apply later on.

does anyone know why the unofficial flash 7 spoof doesn't work anymore on windows 95, i tested several times in the past recently on different builds using opera 10.10 and firefox 2.0.0.20, and even the unofficial opera 10.63 version for windows 95, but it simply woudn't work, like before, it would bring up a big play button in the middle of the video and then you can play it, even though it was limited to 240p, it worked fine with sound. so i was wondering if anyone has tested this, i brought this up randomly in other posts but didn't really get a definite answer. could it have to do with something firefox / opera interally changed in ALL of their browsers which prevents it from working on windows 95? i also was wondering if anyone also had specific experience or problems with cardbus controllers / drivers conflicting with mini pci cards / drivers, because for instance on a dell inspiron 8200 that i used for windows 95, i was not able to get cardbus and mini pci cards working ( in terms of device manager reporting no problems ), at the same time. if i took away the mini pci card which was specifically the dell truemobile 1150 mini pci card, one of the few mini pci wifi cards to work on windows 95 btw, then i could then plug in cardbus cards, but i don't know the exact details on what worked or what didn't and how. so basically the hardware id "104C&DEV_AC42" conflicted with "104C&DEV_AC50" which is what the dell truemobile 1150 card uses before being detected, so you need to install the "104C&DEV_AC50" driver which then brings up the 1150 card and then you still the driver for that. in other words, you can't install the "104C&DEV_AC50" which is the laptop's pci cardbus bridge driver if you plan on using the 1150 card, you would have to remove and / or disable it in windows and / or the bios, then you can use the 1150 card. i was wondering if it's possible to remedy this, like somehow remapping addresses, etc, which i did try to do, i tried to allocate a free resource to the "104C&DEV_AC50" device, restarted the computer, but it wouldn't boot in windows, i had to go into safe mode to remove the pci cardbus bridge with the "104C&DEV_AC50" id so that the 1150 would work. there was an actiontec mini pci wif card that didn't pop up with that cardbus driver with it and that was supposed to work on windows 95 according to the instances of it mentioning windows 95 in the inf file but i couldn't get it work with the few selected drivers i tested, it did however work on windows nt 4.0. i have not found a mini pci wifi card that works on windows 95 that doesn't need an extra driver such as the "104C&DEV_AC50" to be installed beforehand. im not a fan of cardbus wifi cards because it doesn't really look nice in appearance and for security reasons, someone can just take remove it easily from the laptop.

this was exactly the information i was looking for in your last two sentences, so it does appear there is some picky BIOSes from 2002 and on / some 8xx / 9xx series intel chipsets that do no properly handle lba-48. rloew, i believe i read the information in your site to this specific patch, but when would i need to apply it? for instance, if i had that virtual memory becoming disabled problem and c: drive running in compatibility mode, would applying the full version of the patch after having this problem already there solve the issue so that i can have the higher capacity drive without having to scale down to that 384 MB ram limit i mentioned, is it a windows patch or something i would have to apply through a boot disk or other way like through dos command prompt?

interesting you brought this up because i always seem to have this weird issue with partition sizes larger than 32 GB in both windows 95 and 98 / 98SE systems that would make virtual memory disabled after a certain point of updating the system and couldn't really find any solutions to this other than limiting the setting in the notepad file "system.ini" to "maxphyspage=18000" which then would get rid of the virtual memory problem of being disabled or the c: drive not working properly, also "minfilecache=0"and "maxfilecache=0" under vcache in system.ini ( this step is probably not absolutely needed but i still do it ), i don't think the lba48 part was the problem because most of these systems should have supported these drives ( 2002-2006 laptops or hardware ) and most of the hard drives weren't even larger than like 120 GB, most of them were like 40 - 80 GB, yet i still had this weird problem. this wasn't so much of a problem in windows 95 since 384 MB of ram is still a pretty good amount for windows 95 and regardless of having a hard drive less than 32 GB, windows 95 still had problems with freezing / crashing or running weird if you tried to limit the ram to more than 384 MB ( in maxphyspage ), although what is more weird is on earlier builds, i had windows 95 running up to like 920 MB of ram or so with drives possibly more than 32 GB partitioned or lower, but for some reason, i couldn't get it to work like that anymore, makes me feel like there might be some uncessary update or updates that are were not needed that i may have added in my update archive list that messes up windows 95 osr 2.5? it would probably be too much work to find out why, but it was something to just point out. i do remember applying the unofficial service pack but still getting this messed up problem, virtual memory not working / disabled and c: drive would be running in ms dos compatibility mode. i wonder if ACPI may have to do with this too as i did have resource related / weird problems with ACPI enabled on some systems too. i know for the dell latitude d810, in order to run windows 98SE properly without it acting weird, at least the problem where if you try to go to safe mode, but don't do anything else, or even try to change anything through msconfig like preventing office 2000 from starting, upon restart it would just hang endlessly and going to safe mode and trying to change back the settings made no difference. you would need to run the dell latitude d810 with ACPI disabled by running "setup /p i" after format of hard drive and copying of files in dos prompt.

well i got vlc to work, at least partially on windows nt 4.0 server, it appears that you would need to select FULL setup for it to function properly, version 0.8.6h was able to play mp4 videos fine, although the quality wasn't the best, but that is a different issue where google should be able to care of possibly. i mentioned partially working because i was not able to get youtube videos to work using one of the url boxes supplied by the vlc settings, it gave an error of some sort. i tried to install klite, 3.45 wouldn't install, mentioning it needs directx 8.1 or later installed, so it's meant for 98SE, oldapps lists it for windows 95 too but the information i just mentioned would contradict that because windows 95 only supports up to directx 8.0a, anyways, the codec packages 2.97 and 2.87 wouldn't even load an mp4 file on nt 4.0 server, tested without vlc installed, since i wanted to see if windows media player or winamp would be able to play them but it mentioned errors having to do with ddraw.dll or dynamic entry point error, etc. it seems like the codec package might be more problematic than good, i'm gonna test vlc 0.8.6h on w95 without klite and see how well it does, im not sure if i should even install klite 3.45 on 98SE, perhaps just test vlc to see how well i can get it to work, i'm really more interested in getting a higher quality video playback on vlc than being able to play videos or music from the internet because youtube on 98SE works anyways, up to hd playback with firefox 3.5.19 with kernelex, adobe flash player 10.3, etc.

well i tested a dell latitude d810 with windows nt 4.0 server installed, applied all necessary updates, ( SP6a, individual updates, etc ), but it too did not allow playing of youtube videos in opera 10.63 with flash 8 installed, i did it through the registry hack way mentioned on a site and followed the instructions properly, interestingly, this method worked last time with a different laptop, so im beginning to think that maybe there is some sort of universal setting in these web browsers they changed to prevents users from using legacy systems such as 9x / NT 4.0, explaining why i couldn't get the flash 7 spoof to work on windows 95 not too long ago, i even tested the flash 7 spoof on windows nt 4.0 server, placing it in the program plugins folder and it still didn't work. opera turbo enabled vs disabled made no difference either in allowing youtube videos to play, also tested VLC on nt 4.0 server and i don't know how others were able to get vlc to work in 9x / nt systems with the same exact versions mentioned on several sites but when i try to put the url in the section needed, it says it can't open it..., but yeh, this youtube problem is just killing me .

well i started from a clean install again, tried both firefox 2.0.0.20 and opera 10.10 later on in the build after updating everything and youtube still wouldn't bring up and allow playing of videos. this was with the flash 7 spoof npswf32.dll files in the appropriate plugin folders. interestingly, i also still got fatal exception errors more or less the same way from before and even a invalid page fault as a new one. hopefully youtube not playing videoes is only a problem in this particular setup, i would like to test out a different windows 95 setup soon, most of my previous builds were laptops with newer hardware ( chipsets such as 845mp, mz, 855pm ).

^Thanks for the heads up, although i didn't need that dll file anymore, avast 4.8.1368 installed and worked fine when i used a different installer, for some reason the original installer or package wasn't the right one or somehow modified. im still bothered by the youtube videos not working though, from the thread mentioned below, sdfox7 mentioned that you would need to first install a version of flash 7 if you want to flash 7 spoof version to work, but i never had to do this with the other builds i had, i just had the flash 7 spoof dll file in the appropriate plugin folders of either firefox 2.0.0.20 or opera 10.10 / 10.63 and it worked fine. also i noticed opera 10.63 not working anymore, similar if not exactly the same problem that andrew T had with the opera crash logging message which im deciding to just revert back to using opera 10.10 through the classic setup version, i like to use both firefox 2.0.0.20 and opera 10.10 because firefox runs quicker on some sites but opera 10.10 seems to display pages more properly than firefox does, although i can't remember to be exact if i was comparing opera 10.63 and firefox 2.0.0.20 or opera 10.10 and firefox 2.0.0.20. im unsure on whether or not to include avast in my archived cd contents and builds because none of the builds i had acted weird like this system did, and i feel like the AV program just takes up resources and slows things down more than helping out with anything. i think i might also downgrade to java 1.3.1 which i think is the last officially supported version of java for windows 95, i've been using java 1.5.0.05 for a while now but somehow i feel like java 1.3.1 might work better? plus it takes up like half the space too ( the setup program ).

i was able to uninstall the old avast 4.8 and installed it again, though this time, i used a different installer, it seemed like the previous one wasn't specifically for windows 95 or it was modified somehow or maybe some other reason, regardless, the one i have installed now ( 4.8.1368 ) is apparently the last version supported for windows 95 and works, i have a 59 day license only but im trying to see if i can just type in one of those serial number key generators to see if it can make it unlimited or longer. i did a quick normal scan of the hard drive and it didn't detect any threats, i might do a thorough scan maybe sometime later though.

Well i received more strange results, i tried to install avast 4.8 first, was gonna test each AV program one at a time like you mentioned, it gave me an error of a missing .dll file MSVCP71.dll, in other words, the program wouldn't even run on the system, i then tried to uninstall it so i can test a different AV program but said an error as occurred while trying to remove avast antivirus, uninstallation has been cancelled. tried to uninstall from safe mode, no difference. I tried to install norton, but it said something that had to do with it being obsolete and that it can't be used anymore, weird huh? i then tried to install outpost firewall 2.1, and yes, i know i shouldn't have done this the same way with norton with multiple AV programs but at this point, it doesn't really matter, it installed but in a sort of weird way, like several times it gave an error of not being able to install, i don't have the exact errors, i think it had something to do with IRQ or something, i don't remember though. restarted the system and it also gave an error, and it too didn't run, when i clicked outpost firewall, it would just have the waiting cursor for a second and then nothing happening several seconds later. With all this said, the only thing that i feel like doing is just wiping the hard drive clean and starting fresh after gathering up enough info. The first signs i suspected that there may be a virus was when i noticed after restarting the system, the MyComputer folder name changed to the name of 133, and i don't know how that would happen, either windows 95 is weird like that and does things like that or it was specifically from a virus. not the system was fine before that, it still crashed randomly and gave fatal exception errors, but i suppose the virus might be responsible for now allowing programs to run properly or work? Do you know why youtube videos don't work though? Could it be related to this virus, or resource problems or some kind of hardware and software conflict or limitation? The last time i used youtube with working videos in 240p with windows 95 was with dell inspiron 8200 using opera 10.63 or firefox 2.0.0.20 with the flash 7 spoof dll file in the plugins folders, the videos played fine a few months ago.

Ha, i get what your saying, the system is using APM, i don't see any ACPI entries in device manager, power management was disabled by default by the bios, seeing that these setups don't really do well with power management settings, specifically for DOS games from what was made known from vogons.org. I'm not sure on why the old wifi card didn't work properly, but i suppose it was a mix of different factors, but i probably won't use that card again, the system isn't perfect, i have to resolve some matters still, i have a feeling the system is infected from a virus(s) and the resource problems / plug and pray relations aren't so nice with it , the system just runs erratically, it will work fine and then crash out of nowhere or freeze where i have no choice to keep restarting the computer, turning off the wifi radio / releasing ip addresses doesn't seem to make a difference really either. i have a few AV programs to test. This can include avast 4.8 which still seemed to get updates not too long ago in 2014 by sdfox who was using it on windows 95, outpost firewall pro 2.1, some norton antivirus program in 2001, etc.

now i swapped out the old tew-228pi wifi card with the cisco 350 wireless lan pci adapter, i changed the positioning of the pci slot too, the pci usb card is in the old wifi card slot and the new wifi card is in the old pci usb card slot now. i did get better results, i was able to get a working driver and also installed the cisco utility, although it doesn't have an option to scan for networks, it just connects to the nearest one with wep/wpa or open wifi which it did for mine. however, i still seem to have resource problems or which i believe have to do with resource problems. i received a blue screen error having to do with a general protection fault and fatal exception relating to some vxd file, what's interesting is at point of the system freezing and restarting the system, scandisk repaired some files, i checked device manager and noticed the wifi card decided to move to irq 5 from irq 3 which it originally was in. web browsing from any browsers was somewhat slow. also, not sure why but youtube the site itself would take extremely long to load with opera 10.63 or would freeze, firefox 2.0.0.20 seemed fine in loading youtube, however both browsers, even with the flash 7 spoof file in the plugin folders would still not bring up the play button or allow playing videos, just a black screen. could this be related to some bug or glitch or resource problem with windows 95 or perhaps this flash 7 spoof simply doesn't work anymore on opera 10.63 or firefox 2.0.0.20? the system is almost complete other than these resource problems and youtube not working. could any of this have to do with the ISA card slowing the system down incredibly, having limitations in software, etc? it is the ess1869 isa sound card. i don't have any flash players installed in add or remove programs, only the plugin files in the necessary folders of the web browser programs. also, is there any straightforward or simple way to free up resources in windows 95 that might help with these possible resource related issues that doesn't involve manually changing the settings in device manager? because i don't seem to have the best luck changing stuff there, it seems like the hardware is usually tied to a certain irq and just won't work when you try to change irqs ( system hangs at loading and requires going to safe mode to remove and redetect back to original settings ).

i gave up on trying to update the bios, im scared that i might corrupt the motherboard from a failed bios update, i couldn't find a bios update that was specifically for the m6tbd, although everest mentioned m6tbe, i wouldn't want to install the m6tbe bios update on this m6tbd board, i wanted to update the bios to see if maybe i could get the hdd to be detected at a higher size and maybe detect the cpu as p iii in post, but like they say, if the system is working fine, then you don't need to apply a bios update and the system has been working fine other than the wifi issue or some smaller stuff. i couldn't get the bios to update when trying to attempt so using the awdflash.exe or awd603.exe files, i don't remember the name but i used the m6tbe bios both ways, i tried to use awdflash or awd603 in 98SE boot disk but they just would say something like erase now! please wait. i turned off the system even though not recommended but nothing went wrong. i followed instructions exactly as mentioned on several sites with no success. anyways, to get back to the other issues, i am going to do a fresh install of w95 again, this time, i might assign the irq manually in the bios but i don't know for sure, the only problem i seemed to have was the wifi which somehow corrupted the tcp/ip protocol, this was going by the fatal error, cannot read ip configuration error that was given by winipcfg after a certain point of fiddling with irq settings, reinstalling the driver for the wifi. i still don't know if this is a windows 95 related problem of just having a hard time with resource configuration, the driver not supported properly on w95, or if the card doesn't work properly on pci 2.1 slots which the motherboard may be using? i might go ahead and order a cisco 350 wireless pci adapter or a card that is 5 volt keyed only to see if maybe it's because these newer pci 2.2 cards don't work properly on older motherboards, even if the card's driver itself is supported. i somehow fixed that resource conflict or error code 10 of the standard esdi controller in device manager by installing the driver again, the way where you say no, i will select the driver, and just selected the only one that popped up and it was dated like 2015-16 and then the error code went away. the isa sound card works fine, tested doom and wolf 3d and sound was fine, as well as windows sounds working good. i was trying to see if i could fine maybe an older version of the realtek wireless lan utility, i mean, the system freezed / gave an error and worked very slowly after i first installed the realtek 8180 wifi driver only, device manager did say it was working and winipcfg even had in the option box, but i don't know if it was when i installed the realtek wireless lan utility that the system was unable to tolerate to which caused the protection error or if the driver would have done the same, even if i didn't install that utility? the utility is called "RtWLanUI(v3.5.0.6)", i obtained it from the same page on realtek's site that had the driver mentioned for windows 95 and NT 4. i was thinking to maybe use a different wireless utility / third party utility that can work with the card as an another option, but that's with the assumption that the card will work right after installing the driver only and then restarting and not getting the protection error. btw, the system is pretty fast with just a pentium iii 450mhz, but i suppose its because of the 384 MB ram and fast hard drive, i used hd tach 2.61 and it gave me 27 mbps read speed for the hard drive! although limited by ata 33 standard, it still runs pretty quick.

well it seems that the dev 3104 usb pci card was actually detected as dev 3038 and installed by xusbsupp and it is working now detecting usb drives, so i didn't need to install a seperate driver :), however, i still have that irq problem with the hard disk controller after applying that patch and even the newer inf update, i basically did almost all official updates so far, also, after installing the wifi driver, it messed up the pc, ( protection error at one point ), due to possibly a resource conflict which i haven't been able to fix, or it could be that the card simply doesn't work on w95? the driver did install fine, gave a blue screen after installing though mentioning an error having to do with vxd or ndis i think, but was indicated as working in device manager, as soon as i installed the client manager though, it freezed the pc and that's where the protection error came up after restarting, i think it might be a irq problem mixed with driver / application issues, irq 11 is used by the isa card, network card, display adapter i think, and usb i think, but i don't think any of them allow me to even change their irq? there is the manual and auto setting in bios for irq but im scared to use that, i feel like it will make things really hard to fix? i do have an older realtek utility for the wifi but i don't even see an uninstaller option in add or remove programs section so i guess i'll just have to work around the problem for a bit, and if all else fails, i can reinstall the os again and start fresh and try different methods. also interestingly, everest home edition shows the motherboard name as m6tbe instead of m6tbd that is physically imprinted on the motherboard itself.

i used to have cox cable internet, when i switched to u verse, i couldn't connect automatically the same way, this is because i had a guest network with cox and when i went to browse the internet on windows 95 or 98 ( using the cisco 350 wireless pci adapter without the utility as an example ), it brought up the guest page and i just entered the guest password for that and it worked, i don't remember what exact settings the router used for cox, and i'm not sure which settings my u verse one uses now, and im not sure if u verse has this same feature that cox has with the guest network thing, you may be able to set the settings to use wep even if it's not recommended, but i think i tried that before and for some reason, it still wouldn't connect to w95 and 98 systems, it's like they put that feature there for no reason? i use a secondary router mostly for windows 95 systems, apparently wpa is not supported by any cards or utilities to work with windows 95, only wep, which is a bummer because wsc gaurd 4.0 works with windows 98SE which even if your router uses wpa2 settings, you don't need that to connect to it from the 98SE system, you can just select the network, set the settings to wpa and aes encrpytion, type password, and it will connect if your card supports wpa, it may not support wpa2 itself but at least it can connect to modern routers. however, this probably can't be done with w95, i'm in the midst of finding a utility that supports the same sort of functionality that wsc gaurd 4.0 does but one that can allow connecting wep based w95 setups to wpa2 routers by using some sort of setting that allows so.

lots of updates, first, the pentium iii 450mhz cpu worked, the model number is sl35d, no hanging issues and i didn't need to install a pentium ii and apply any bios updates to get it to work properly. the hard drive wd blue 160 GB im using is limited to just under 8 GB partition in fdisk but im fine with that, i suppose there may be settings in the bios that can or were able to bypass the 8 GB problem but thats enough space for me to work with. i initially couldn't get the system to work with the ss-401ht psu, it wouldn't even attempt to turn on, i luckily had the original psu that came with the case and it worked right away, not sure what the problem was, it may or may not be related to the psu, but that's a different matter that i want to solve later. im not sure if the via pci usb card is properly working or will work properly, regedit shows the pci ven as "PCI\VEN_1106&DEV_3104", i went ahead and looked at the inf files of xusbsupp and couldn't find the same id for the wdm file so i don't know if xusbsupp will install the drivers for the add on card, i looked at some drivers i found in 2002 and all of which mention windows 98 but not windows 95, although some driver packages had w95 in the initial download folder name, i'm not sure if i can trust that. i will try to find the oldest package or use one for later if xusbsupp doesn't install the driver. i just installed the operating system so i haven't installed any updates yet, just building the driver cd first and im just left with finding a driver for the pci usb card. i think i might use the "4.90.3000.2" driver version. also, in the manual it mentions to install the piix4 patch, from the package i found, it only lists up to windows 95 osr 2.1, some of the files are dated 1998 so i think the update still applies to osr 2.5, im gonna apply it probably. i do see a resource conflict in the device manager for the standard esdi hard disk controller with the isa sound card im using and when i tried to change it, it would only give me like 2-3 irq numbers and all of them were conflicts so i guess that piix4 patch is supposed to fix this?

well i ordered the rest of the parts now, there is some things that may not work in which i would need to spend more money, but if so, hopefully it's limited to only the optional stuff like the pci usb card for connecting to the front usb ports of the computer case which i don't need absolutely, the pci wireless adapter which either may not work because of it being in reality only a pci 2.2 card, even though it does mention pci 2.1 AND pci 2.2. also the processor may not work ( pentium iii 450mhz 100mhz fsb katmai, the model number is a costa rica model and i couldn't match it with the same stepping that someone else got working on a similar motherboard, there is no information for the model that the ebay user gave me ). also unsure of the cpu retention bracket as i never even used a slot 1 setup and if this would be compatible with the cpu or for the intended purpose i would need it for. also ordered a agp 4x/2x video card ( universal type ) which physically will fit but still unsure on whether or not it will work, and i couldn't find out if the motherboard supports agp 2x, only that it can operate in 66mhz and 133mhz but i couldn't find out what that means. so in other words, i think i would be putting on a agp 2.0 video card onto a agp 1.0 slot in other clarifications. the isa sound card i ordered is a "cheaper" design and i noticed that the length on the pins seems to be a little shorter compared to the other ones i compared, and i couldn't find out if there is different types of isa ports so im just gonna assume its compatible still with the isa slot im gonna use. also ordered a lower rpm quieter fan to be used in replacement for the original cpu fan but i heard also something to do with newer fans acting weird in older systems because the system gets confused with these lower voltage or lower rpm fans? and lastly, the (3) sticks of 128 MB memory is the last thing im worried about not working. when first turning on the computer and testing it out, i'm not gonna install the pci add on cards, because it would be easier to diagnosis any problems.

does anyone know if the universal agp 8x/4x listed graphics cards will work on a agp 3.3 volt slot ( original seattle 440bx motherboard with agp 1.0 specifications i believe, or to be more specific, the M6TBD motherboard i referenced to? ). i tried to google search agp compatibility but couldn't find enough liable information, i tried to look at 3.3 volt only cards or agp 1.0 cards (2x and 1x apparently) but im seeing that they are only like 8 MB - 16 MB of video memory which is too little for newer games like return to castle wolfenstein and other uses that i would like the computer to have enough performance for. i need the graphics card to have 64 MB of video memory, preferably a geforce3 ti 200 / 500, geforce2 or geforce4 440mx i suppose which apparently seem to have good dos compatibility and would have enough performance for other things too. also couldn't really get a clear answer on whether or not conventional pci 2.2 cards would work in pci 2.1 slots. so basically, i would like to use the motherboard below possibly ( although options may change quickly ), with the geforce4 440mx 64 MB agp card listed below, the wireless pci card, and the pci usb card adapter, otherwise, i guess i would have to use a newer chipset motherboard that possibly has isa slots that supports agp 2.0+, pci 2.2, etc, although there is ONE board in specific that i have under watch but i don't want to anyone to know lol - http://www.ebay.com/itm/M6TBD-Slot-1-A-Motherboard-NEW-w-Backplate-/201485858753?hash=item2ee97e37c1:g:NekAAOSwhkRWcIsw http://www.ebay.com/itm/Albatron-NVIDIA-GeForce4-MX-440-MX480E-64-MB-DDR-SDRAM-AGP-DVI-VGA-Svideo-/121110389634?hash=item1c32bde382:g:q-oAAMXQ-3NRjZkI http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833156130 https://www.bigboxlive.com/startech-com-7-port-pci-usb-card-adapter-pciusb7?language=en&currency=USD