cov3rt

i just checked now and there seems to be an official driver for the geforce 8400gs under windows 2000 basing off the inf file and readme of forceware 163.75 so i think your set for the graphics card.

just looking at the specs and not factoring much of other things, windows 2000 would be the best choice. being that the board you use is an ich7 chipset, it is supported for the chipset part, 4 GB of ram will WORK on windows 2000 ( but may be a little less though, like 3.5 GB or so ), geforce 8400gs might work, but im not sure, i know that the 7000 series are supported officially. even then, it would be easier to make newer hardware to work on windows 2000 than to do the same thing on windows 98SE so there may be a slight advantage of using windows 2000 in general. with all that said, even if you dont use the geforce 8400gs, the gma 950 is supported on windows 2000 which your motherboard uses. the older operating systems have too many limitations and modificiations needed to make it practical to work for your particular setup.

Sorry for the late reply, timezone's fault (and my cat's too). I'm afraid you misunderstood the utility of the tool. It does not search the web for drivers - it merely reads the registry and displays the information found in there. It's possible that Win95 behaves a little differently than 98 and later. When devices are detected and no drivers are found for them, those devices should appear as 'Unknown device' in their corresponding sections. Their VID & PID or VEN & DEV, if known, will be displayed below as a hint for the user so they know what drivers to look for. When an Internet connection already exists, the application tries to silently download the current vendor and device ID database from www.pcidatabase.com (may not be the most up-to-date list though and behavior may change in subsequent application versions) in order to be able to provide the aforementioned feedback. If there is no Internet connection, the application will use an internal database or - if previously downloaded - the database (VendorID_DB.txt) found in application's folder. The USB_devices.txt database is not updated currently. a lot has happened from the other day, i replaced windows 95 on the laptop with windows 98 to see if i could get more support which i couldn't get it to work properly, could not find a working sound driver still, for some reason java 1.5.22 that would work on previous builds wouldn't install completely, it would just freeze the pc at near of end of setup where only one bar was left i believe, i eventually got a older version of java to install, i believe 1.4.19 AFTER deleting all java linked files in the find option and uninstalling any of them in add or remove programs but net 2.0 didnt want to install and i just didnt want to work with the pc anymore so i decided to install windows 2000 SP4 to see how it would function and it didnt even fully install windows 2000, it got stuck on the starting up windows 2000 logo part with i think 10 bars where i tried to restart the system a few times with the same results so i just decided to install windows 7 and currently, its in the gui right now but the windows update is taking a long time, i did increase the ram to 1.5 GB ram before installing the os. it was 1 GB on windows 98 and 512 MB on windows 95. i find it interesting that it ran with less problems on windows 95, than on 98, and 2k. the good part is, at least i have the drivers that did work on windows 95 as i may plan on testing it out on the same laptop again sometime in the future, although windows 98 would be better because of the better support of wdm. i will have to see.

i found a ich3-s motherboard with sata ports lol, although it would be extremely expensive to buy - http://www.supermicro.com/products/motherboard/Xeon/E7501/X5DPL-TGM.cfm

wow, that is a nice Intel D845PEBT2 motherboard with sata ports with release information mentioning september 2002 and ich4, i thought 2003 was the earliest for sata ports in motherboards but i guess intel implemented them a little earlier, i also thought ich5 was the earliest for sata ports but that board uses them with ich4, btw, i checked those two chipset software utilities but basing off the devlist, it only mentions up to ich3, nowhere does it mention ich4 and no windows 95 folders within the package. the one i use does use windows 95 folders under the name of win95cur and win95old with the same devlist info, although i renamed the chipset inf package, so i dont know which version it is anymore. are you sure there are ich4 drivers specifically listed for windows 95 or maybe they are not listed specifically, but still work to internally suit ich4 builds?

Technically no. The last Intel chipset with official 95 support was the 845 ICH4 Pentium 4 chipset. I have several 845 chipset based boards that have working 95 drivers for every single device except the USB2.0 conrollers.If you're just looking for chipset support, it is simple enough to create INFs (or modify those for later OS'es) to properly name all of the devices. The problem comes when other devices on the board no longer get along well with Windows 9x, whether it be integrated Audio or Network cards, or more obscure non-configurable things like the ACPI controller. I have successfully used Windows 95 without any such problems on an Intel 875 chipset board. Not all drivers were available, but there were no resource conflicts or other such annoyances. thats interesting that you got up to ich4 chipset drivers working, i was only able to find up to ich3-s and ich3-m in the packages, but i guess i haven't looked enough up to this point . looking at the list of intel chipsets on wikipedia indicates ich4 was brought out in 2002 so it does make sense that windows 95 was still supported as i read somewhere that windows 95 still received updates till december 31, 2002, and not 2001, or at least, some of the hotfixes i have, link files to dates of 2002 and newer, the one im looking at right now links to 2004, q837209, with all this said, i do thank you for bringing up that ich4 is also supported on windows 95, although i work more on laptops now, i now a newer chipset to work with on w95 desktop builds, but would ich4-s and ich4 be the same in driver support? reason being is that the recent laptop i worked with, the dell inspiron 600m with 855gm or pm chipset, i was not able to find a driver for the smbus which is usually updated after installing the inf update on older chipsets, but i guess that answers my question on ich4-s vs ich4, ich4 IS supported, ich4-s is not? btw, did you use ide drives on that 875 chipset or sata in compatiblity mode / legacy mode? would be nice to to use a board like that and have sata drives in ide mode.

i ran the hddb exe file, it brought up a similar device id indentifier like the unknown devices i use but did not connect to the web for a update and gui. i did not find any unknown devices in the list, however, it does list more detailed device id's that i can possibly look up to see if i can find a working driver. does this hddb tool actually go on the web and find updates for windows 98SE though?

yes, i did download some of the official xp drivers to see if i can find instances to older drivers but with no luck so far. originally, i had a little hard time finding a lot of information for the laptop before obtaining it, i was unsure of the gpu portion for one, though i was sucessfully able to find a working w95 driver, under the name of m10 in device manager or mobility 9600 for the other name. i did check the ethernet driver and it had w95osr2 supported and i also have it working, one thing new is the laptop is apparently based on an ati chipset, which i rarely encountered when working with desktop or laptops, or at least, i always choose the intel based ones because they just seem to more common and wikipedia ( list of intel chipsets ) always helps me with the support info . basically ich3-s and m would be the last to support windows 95 ( as fas as the chipset portion goes ). what would be nice is to see if i can find if there are motherboard chipset drivers for this laptop as i also don't know where to look for this portion. one way would be to use an ati based chipset identifier so i can maybe get some other important updates. does anyone know if there is a chipset identifer under w95 that works with ati chipsets? im open to try out suggestions that can help with any of the issues i need help with. btw. thanks for the info drugwash.

i was wondering if anyone can help me find some working drivers for a few missing devices on a hp compaq presario r3001 laptop with windows 95 installed. the ones i have missing are listed below - PCI Multimedia Audio DeviceUnable to Detect, Hardware ID: VEN_1002&DEV_4341 PCI System PeripheralUnable to Detect, Hardware ID: VEN_104C&DEV_8201 Unknown DeviceUnable to Detect, Hardware ID: VID_049F&PID_0086 the audio on hp's site indicates ad1981b, though i could not find a vxd version / windows 95 one with the same hardware id. devid.info site has not worked all day so i couldn't check there as i usually check there for hardware id's. pci system peripheral links to some hp firmware loading device but from the few packages i downloaded, they were not detected in the device manager manual inf finder and i also tried two of them using the setup option but mentioned other devices that werent compatible and nothing changed after installing them. unknown device links to some bluetooth usb device, the earliest package i found had the inf of 2003 but still did not work after restart. although i did find a "working" driver for the pcmcia controllers, i still dont know how to get the pc cards to work. i have (2) texas 1620 controllers, a pcic to pcmcia controller ( which was there from when i first installed the operating system, the other 2 texas 1620 controllers were part of other devices that i found a working driver ), and just recently, a pcmcia card services with 2001 driver date working ( which came up when i plugged in the intel pro wireless 2011b pc card that im trying to get to work ). i downloaded the intel wireless drivers for the pro 2011b, ran setup but as i don't the card specifically listed in device manager, im lost on trying to install the driver and get it working.

Beats me. Mr. Loew, you got the floor. when you say win95, does that mean forceware 82.69 / 82.16 may work on windows 95, but may not support geforce 7000 series gpu? or is it meant to only correct shutdown problems with official driver releases such as the 81.98 forceware? not that you would need anything better than like a fx 5200 on windows 95 lol. the best games i have researched only recommend 32 MB graphics cards with dx8.0a, so a 64 MB video card on windows 95 would be good enough for most things. which brings up a question, does anyone know any games that recommend 64 MB of video memory on windows 95?

i found two files that you uploaded drugwash, from what i downloaded, the only thing that you would need to do is run the autopatcher from "shutdownpatcher1450" to fix the shutdown issues, so what is the other download for with the file "ShutdownPatcher1450_src"? and this is for the forceware 82.69 under windows 98SE right?

virtual memory shouldn't be disabled in any circumstance in win95 / 98, from what i gathered, every build i had that i disabled virtual memory to see if it would fix anything would actually mess up everything and crash almost anything i ran. if your using 2 GB of ram, regardless of limiting the maxphyspage and min/maxfilecache will probably still give you a malfunctioning computer or insufficient memory errors because for some reason, even though the extra ram is limited, it still seems to interfere within the operating system. try to see if you can run only one stick of ram if your using 2 sticks of 1 GB so you only have a max of 1 GB, although every windows 95 i worked with would not boot with more than 512 MB ram from the start, only windows 98SE would. all my recent windows 95 builds had the ram limited to 384 MB with one 512 MB stick of ram ( which is how much you would have to begin with in the first place ), any more than 384 MB, like 392 MB or higher would make the computer malfunction / give out of memory errors, and i think virtual memory even got disabled.

ok, i changed the driver to the detected inf of "VIAudOEM" with the date of 12/19/2003 and file version of 6.14.01.4000 and the audio is working again.

update! sorry to say but the driver is actually not working anymore, the issue appeared after the system crashed running dxdiag where upon reboot, the driver had a yellow marking in device manager with code 10. im gonna see if i can find a older driver as 2007 does seem pretty new and maybe an older one would work more properly / stable.

thank you very much, the link to that driver you gave me was accepted and the audio is now working .

so i thought i'd make a separate thread that's more appropriate for troubleshooting / experimenting. what i need is a working audio driver for the dell latitude d810 laptop with windows 98SE installed. dell lists the audio as sigmatel stac 975x ac97 and from my research, the name of the audio device could also be stac 9751? i have tried a few driver packages and none of them worked so far, i also tested a modified one from a forum that someone made for another person but neither way in device manager worked to install it them, either windows could not find a driver for the device or manually selecting it and rebooting would bring a yellow marking on the device. that being said, im still open to driver packages to test out in general because there may be a few i have not tried. the hardware id of the audio is listed below - Hardware ID: VEN_8086&DEV_266E&SUBSYS_01861028&REV_03 also not absoluted needed but i also have not found a working driver for the pci card which i believe is a modem, i did try two drivers that were detected but when installing, device manager would crash and give an illegal operation error in which i had to remove the device in safe mode, the id is below - Hardware ID: VEN_8086&DEV_266D&SUBSYS_542314F1&REV_03

good news! i was able to get a working driver for the mobility x600 graphics. i downloaded the catalyst 4.11 for windows 98, selected have disk option from device manager, clicked the c8_19079 inf file which gave me a list of display adapters, i selected the abit radeon x600xt 128 MB, it installed all files, i then rebooted back into the desktop and all i needed to do was manually change the resolution and currently i have it set at 1024x768 in 32 bit color, but it can go up to 1280x1024. dxdiag also shows it using approximately 126.5 MB of memory .

thats' what I do too...can watch a dvd....except DMA isn't enabled so burning a cd has to be done at 8x speed or less x600 should be in C5_30314.inf from ati catalyst 6.2 (6-2_wme_dd_cp_30314.exe) the closest i found was the radeon x600 series secondary with rv380, but no inf files mention the same hardware id im looking for or the name of the device which would be ati mobility radeon x600 ( from the C2_19748 inf ) driver version 6.14.10.6483. im hesitant on testing one of the drivers because i fear the system may get messed up and i wont know what to do, but i think i may give it a try.

new update, i selected only primary ide controller and was able to get the hard drive to be detected in device manager and working properly with virtual memory enabled but without the cd rom. then i tried adding new hardware and have windows find the hardware and to my surprise, it successfully installed the cd rom and a new standard esdi controller with no conflicts. so for now, my system is working fine with both cd rom and hdd detected.

i did not find any vxd format drivers in the mobility x600 package, however i did find some instances of vxd in the text document inf files of catalyst 6.2 which linked to VX as the type of files, are they the same? i also found one virtual device driver called atiicdxx.vxd. besides this, why is that there are multiple inf files? is it because notepad cant open more than a certain size? i did do a quick google search and it mentioned 54 KB on one of microsofts articles, but there is a 64 KB one in the catalyst 6.2 package, but i guess thats not too important. i noticed a sourcediskpath and mfg section which mentions the name of the display adapter and the hardware id, would i just copy and paste the info from the mobility x600 package into the mfg section and add the necessary files into the sourcediskpath and thats it? i did a quick search and it seems that the mobility x600 uses the rv380 architecture which is mentioned also in the catalyst 6.2 inf document as ati radeon x600 secondary but with just a different hardware id to be honest, i have no idea what to do with the driver issue and just right now, the computer got messed up after doing the inf update, the hard disk controller came up with a yellow marking in device manager with the cd rom and hdd not showing and trying to find a free resource just freezes the computer. so its unlikely it has anything to do with the size of the hdd or ram, but simply resource problems that windows 98 cant take care of and just other issues that have to do with assigning the right addresses to devices. im about ready to give up on this build and just put a newer os on it and sell it as is.

i did not find any vxd format drivers in the mobility x600 package, however i did find some instances of vxd in the text document inf files of catalyst 6.2 which linked to VX as the type of files, are they the same? i also found one virtual device driver called atiicdxx.vxd. besides this, why is that there are multiple inf files? is it because notepad cant open more than a certain size? i did do a quick google search and it mentioned 54 KB on one of microsofts articles, but there is a 64 KB one in the catalyst 6.2 package, but i guess thats not too important. i noticed a sourcediskpath and mfg section which mentions the name of the display adapter and the hardware id, would i just copy and paste the info from the mobility x600 package into the mfg section and add the necessary files into the sourcediskpath and thats it? i did a quick search and it seems that the mobility x600 uses the rv380 architecture which is mentioned also in the catalyst 6.2 inf document as ati radeon x600 secondary but with just a different hardware id

could i just modify an existing driver ( mobility x600 ) to support windows 98? how / where would i add the device id and inf file? i have access to both catalyst 6.2 and the mobility x600 driver for w2k and xp which happens to mention win9x in one the text documents, although i was not able to pick it up on my previous setup today, however, the reasons could vary for that, what can i do as far as modifying? this is what one of the mobility x600 inf files say - ;** General Install Requirements ALL OSs and ATI Cards [startup];** DirectX version LDXV=8OS=WIN_2KNoAskDxMessage=1 ;The second dialog message hide when installing display driver on OS that doesn't have DirectX;NoAskDXMessage=1;** Include the following line if want reboot Dlg after silent install (/K switch);ShowRebootDlg=1;**Asking to remove display driver before install Ati driver ;AskUninstall=1[bootResolution];DALDefaultModeBCD=HHhh,VVvv,CCcc,RRrr;DALRULE_NOFORCEBOOT=0;HH hh - Horizontal frequency in decimal, as an example 1024 will be written as 1024; VV vv - Vertical frequency in decimal, as an example 768 will be written as 0768; CCcc - Colour depth in decimal (0004, 0008, 0016, 0032 ); RR rr - Refresh Rate in decimal, as an example 100 Hz will be written as 0100;for example:;DALDefaultModeBCD=1280,1024, 0032, 0060;DALRULE_NOFORCEBOOT=0;** Install only on one of these OSs (WINXP, WIN2K, WINNT,WIN9X);OS=WIN2K;** Show Readme message before installing driver ;ShowReadme=ATIDrive\readme.txt;**Not ask dialog service pack message (only WinNT4);NoAskServicePack=1;**ListOnADDRemove "0" delete name "ATI Display Driver" from ADD/Remove Applet,otherwise ("1") it appears on ADD/RemoveListOnADDRemove=1 [WINXP64A] [WINXP64] [WINXP] [WIN2K]Label=R6R6=DriverPath_R6,0x5460:0x20061028DriverPath_R6=\2KXP_INF,C2_19746.INF [WINNT] [WIN9X] [ATISMART]

the laptops is one of the last few to use the older ide / pata interface so that part is good, however the part you mentioned that there may be resource conflicts that may or may not be fixable is not which probably is the main issue. all this frustration is beginning me to look towards rleows ram patch but it would seem that i would only need that for systems that have 64 GB hard drives or larger, because for some reason, the ram issues seem to cause conflict in correlation with the hard drive size, i could be wrong but im just saying that the recent systems i worked with in windows 95 had 384 MB ram with 31 GB hard drive and no issues, then again, that was windows 95 and not windows 98, but from what i remember, i actually had a temporarily good working windows 98se computer that i sold with 1 GB ram and geforce 7300gs but ending up producing resource conflicts to which i was unaware of that would happen. also, i read somewhere that you could just use the updated fdisk.exe file from the 263044 update on a working windows 98 system and recompile it to make a new updated windows 98 boot disk iso to format 64 GB or larger hard drives properly but i just did this few minutes ago and it made no difference, when i select NO for maximum size, and try to create a manual size, it still gives me a maximum of 10781 and even if i put down 1 MB or any number, it still comes out formatted as 74 GB within the operating system. i actually lied about the part of testing the updated fdisk within the os, yes, the size still was limited in the prompt screen but now within the os, i have a 6.82 GB partition, in fdisk i randomly selected about 7000 megabytes and to my belief, it came out as roughly that. now, the size is a bit small but im not too worried about that, i want to see if the os functions any better with the hard drive being at this size.

the laptops is one of the last few to use the older ide / pata interface so that part is good, however the part you mentioned that there may be resource conflicts that may or may not be fixable is not which probably is the main issue. all this frustration is beginning me to look towards rleows ram patch but it would seem that i would only need that for systems that have 64 GB hard drives or larger, because for some reason, the ram issues seem to cause conflict in correlation with the hard drive size, i could be wrong but im just saying that the recent systems i worked with in windows 95 had 384 MB ram with 31 GB hard drive and no issues, then again, that was windows 95 and not windows 98, but from what i remember, i actually had a temporarily good working windows 98se computer that i sold with 1 GB ram and geforce 7300gs but ending up producing resource conflicts to which i was unaware of that would happen. also, i read somewhere that you could just use the updated fdisk.exe file from the 263044 update on a working windows 98 system and recompile it to make a new updated windows 98 boot disk iso to format 64 GB or larger hard drives properly but i just did this few minutes ago and it made no difference, when i select NO for maximum size, and try to create a manual size, it still gives me a maximum of 10781 and even if i put down 1 MB or any number, it still comes out formatted as 74 GB within the operating system.

well i now tried the official dell driver but the setup did not detect the inf, same with the firegl v3100, i also tried to install the graphics as the ati 9600 because apparently it is near indentical to the ati x600 but that route did not work and now the laptop is really messed up lol. drive c and d are both using ms dos compatibility mode and regardless of going into safe mode to fix the resource conflict that the pci controller has, it makes no difference, it either will hang at the loading screen or if i dont touch the settings, remove the controller and go into windows, it will detect it and ask for reboot and still have the same problem. god windows 95 and 98 are a pain to work with . i did mess with the graphics settings when first installing windows 98 for this dell latitude d810 laptop because it detected two and since i wanted the ati x600 only, and not for the other display adapter to conflict, i made it so that the adapter does not show in all hardware profiles through device manager and disabled it and from there, there was some other things i fiddled with and made it so that only one display adapter showed which by the hardware id, it came up as the mobility x600. so could it be that fiddling with the adapters possibly created problems in installation of the video driver? but like i said, i did check the hardware id and it came up as the mobility x600 so whats up? my expertise and problem solving is limited so im most likely gonna have to reinstall the os as the easiest route at this point, but before then, is there anything i can know that could help me prevent the problems i've been having? also forget to mention, i limited the vcache to 0 for both min and maxfilecache and set maxphyspage=10000 for maximum compatibility, also installed chipset drivers and almost all official updates before the graphics driver problem. also recently in my builds, i checked the esdi_506.pdr file and noticed it mentioning a lot of errors like cylinder mismatch, something to do with irq conflict and other stuff, all of these builds had 80 GB hard drives or larger and possibly pheonix bit shift bios which from what i researched could bring about the problems i experienced. i never had any of these issues with virtual memory disabling out of nowhere or weird problems with hard drives 40 GB and under when formatted at 31.5 GB or lower through fdisk in win95 or 98 because fdisk wont format 64 GB or higher, and when you try to set a fixed amount and not the maximum size, it just gives you a max of like 10750 megabytes or something like that and then shows the max size within the operating system. also i had no luck applying the fdisk patch for 64 GB or higher drives or the other update 243450 for large ide drives in w98se, the updates made no difference in solving any problems in my recent windows 98 builds. the only easiest solution i would think of is to just buy or use computers with 60 GB hard drives or lower and format them to about 31 GB or lower in fdisk. and if necessary, apply the patches that i previously used and THEN put in secondary or other storage if needed, assuming there are no problems when doing that. i also forgot to mention that i tried to use an alternative to fdisk called freedos to create a fixed amount from the 80 GB hard drive i used and although it created a 31 GB partition, i was not able to get windows 98 to setup after formatting the drive, giving an error.