To build a high end Win98SE System

[galahs]

I have been asked by a Manufacturing firm to come up with a new computer spec to replace their old machines.

They need to machines to run Windows 98 SE and Win2000 (dual boot). They want a fast machine (both Graphics and Processor) for CAD work which runs on both Win9x. They stressed they want it to have the least amount of compatibility problems as they have tried running Win98 on new machines and have had lots of problems.

I was thinking along the lines of:

CPU: Pentium 4 650 - 3.40GHz (HyperThreading will have to be turned off in the BIOS settings)

MOTHERBOARD: ASUS P5PE-WM (865G Chipset, AGP 8)

http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&amp...amp;modelmenu=1

HARD DISKS: 2 x 120GB ATA130 Drives (I know there is a solution to the 137GB problem but I don't wont to risk it in a business environment)

GRAPHICS CARD: nVIDIA 6800 (Quadro doesn't support Win9x) or a ATI Raedon 9800

SOUND CARD: SoundBlaster Audigy 2Z or maybe just a SoundBlaster Live (then again the onboard sound is probably up to the task)

add a DL DVD Burner and a Floppy Disk drive and they should be set.

Thoughts?

[galahs]

Oosps I forgot another important part.

How much RAM should I use.

I know Windows98 can in theory support upto 1GB with a few system setting tweaks, but remember the prime importance of my mission is an enterprise stable system.

Would 768MB be a good compromise?

[BenoitRen]

Since these are to be enterprise machines, and the work doesn't involve any music, I would stick with the on-board sound card.

I don't know how much resources CAD programs need. You'll have to use your best judgment for that.

By the way, why a Pentium 4? AMD processors are cheaper, and are just as good. Word has it that for games, which are graphically intensive, they are even better. Since CAD is graphical work, maybe...

[Analada]

Since these are to be enterprise machines, and the work doesn't involve any music, I would stick with the on-board sound card.

I don't know how much resources CAD programs need. You'll have to use your best judgment for that.

By the way, why a Pentium 4? AMD processors are cheaper, and are just as good. Word has it that for games, which are graphically intensive, they are even better. Since CAD is graphical work, maybe...

Seconded. Use AMD. Great results here with a 3100+ Sempron, but you can go higher if you wish :-) But take plenty of time thinking about motherboard. Critical and key decision folks.

1GB memory used. No problems with various tips on this Group and mdgx.com.

Beware of /possible/ shutdown problems with Nvidia. Usually possible to fix, though; e.g. cut out nvcpl and services. I take issue with need for 6800 unless you really want high-end games. Hey, it's for office use, right? ;-) I use 6200 with passive heatsink (quiet). But don't use a "TC" or turbo charged one. A 6200 is more than adequate for office work, DVDs and a fair number of games, including Flight Simulator. And much lower price of course. ATI has gotten strong recommendations by this group, and has no shutdown problems AFAIK. See other postings by this group. HTH.

Edited February 7, 2007 by Analada

[kartel]

I was thinking along the lines of:

HyperThreading will have to be turned off in the BIOS settings

There goes the high performance part.

[galahs]

Well unfortunately Hyperthreading is not supported on Win9x.

2ndly, a good graphics accelerator is important as the CAD program uses OpenGL acceleration for rendering onscreen models.

I would consider AMD but have no idea of compatible motherboards, processors or chipsets. Any suggestions?

[kartel]

Well I use Nforce 2 which is ok even on Vista.

The only thing is, the videocards are only good till ATI 9800 then thats it, no X1950pro agp or x850xt pe either.

Also no games. I think Halo is where it ends. You cant run any new software on 98 anymore.

I would like to hang on to 98SE too but its hopeless.

Things like google maps and myspace players kill 98 in no time.

I'm also wondering what to do myself, I'm running Vista which is pretty good.

I would say via kt600 or kt880 or a nforce 2 board will do but you kickin a dead horse

[galahs]

Thanks for the Chipsets

Fortunately they don't want it to run the latest software, just existing legacy CAD programs they have.

And anyone familiar with 3D CAD will know you can never have enough CPU, RAM and Graphics Acceleration.

So building a top of the line Win9x system should see a nice jump in performance over the Pentium III, 256MB RAM systems they are using now.

[galahs]

This leads me to compile a list of compatible processors with Win9x

The basics are:

- Multiple CPU's are not supported.

- Hyperthreading isn't supported but can be turned off in the bios.

- Dual Core is not supported. Only one CPU core is detected making it a waste of money.

CPU's that are compatible with Windows 98

INTEL

486

Pentium

Pentium MMX

Pentium Pro

Pentium II

Pentium III

Pentium III processor Extreme Edition

Pentium 4

Pentium 4 supporting Hyper-Threading Technology - Must Disable Hyperthreading in the BIOS

Intel® Pentium® 4 processor Extreme Edition supporting Hyper-Threading Technology - Must Disable Hyperthreading in the BIOS

Celeron (Covington - PII)

Celeron (Mendocino - PII)

Celeron II (Coppermine-128 -PIII)

Celeron II (Tualatin-256 - PIII)

Celeron 4 (Willamette-128 -P4)

Celeron 4 (Northwood-128 - P4)

Celeron D (Prescott-256 - P4)

Celeron D (Cedar Mill-512 - P4)

Pentium II Xeon

Pentium III Xeon

Xeon

Xeon supporting Hyper-Threading Technology - Must Disable Hyperthreading in the BIOS

Xeon MP (32-bit) supporting Hyper-Threading Technology - Must Disable Hyperthreading in the BIOS

Xeon MP (64-bit) supporting Hyper-Threading Technology - Must Disable Hyperthreading in the BIOS

AMD

K5

NexGen K6

NexGen K6-II

Athlon (K7)

Athlon XP (K7)

Athlon 64 (K8)

Athlon 64 FX (K8) (MAX = FX-57 - 2800 MHz)

Duron "Spitfire" (Model 3, 180 nm)

Duron "Morgan" (Model 7, 180 nm)

Duron "Applebred" (Model 8, 130 nm)

Sempron - Thoroughbred B/Thorton (130 nm) Socket A

Sempron - Barton (130 nm) Socket A

Sempron - Paris (130 nm SOI) Socket 754

Sempron - Palermo (90 nm SOI) Socket 754

Sempron - Palermo (90 nm SOI) Socket 939

Sempron - Manila (90 nm SOI) Socket AM2

Operton K8

CYRIX

Cx5x86

6x86

6x86L

6x86MX

6x86MII

MediaGX

CPU's to avoid with Windows 98

Intel Pentium D - May work but one of the processor cores will not be available

Intel Core 2 Duo - May work but one of the processor cores will not be available

Intel Core 4 Duo - May work but three of the processor cores will not be available

Intel Xeon Dual Core - May work but one of the processor cores will not be available

Intel Xeon Quad Core - May work but three of the processor cores will not be available

AMD Athlon 64 FX - (FX-60 - 2600 MHz and above) May work but one of the processor cores will not be available

AMD Athlon 64 X2 - May work but one of the processor cores will not be available

Win98 COMPATIBLE MOTHERBOARDS

ASUS P5PE-WM (865G Chipset, AGP 8) Supports: Intel® Core2 Duo/65nm Pentium D/Pentium 4/Celeron CPU

Gigabyte GA-8I865PE775-G-RH (Northbridge: Intel® 865G/865PE Express Chipset) Supports: Intel® Pentium® 4 /Pentium® D Processor

Edited February 10, 2007 by galahs

[galahs]

What is the Fastest Win98 Processors?

Intel Pentium 4 660 3.6 GHz

Intel Pentium 4 3.73Ghz Extreme Edition

Intel Xeon 3.6 GHz

AMD Athlon 64 3800+ 2400 MHz L2 - 512 KiB

AMD Athlon 64 4000+ (E6) 2400 MHz L2 - 1024 KiB

The biggest problem I could foresee was that these chips might require a specific Chipset, that is not compatible with Windows 98 ?????

Based on Win98's shaky support of PCI-E, you would need a board that supports AGP 8

Edited February 8, 2007 by galahs

[galahs]

Alright I am basically going to recommend this system.

The 2nd Hard Disk will allow the Swap file to be placed on a separate drive than the Windows and Program installations increasing performance. With big renders there is often a lot of Swap file activity.

(Prices from http://www.centrecom.com.au. Links give further product details)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Asus P5PE-VM motherboard - $81.40

http://www.centrecom.com.au/catalog/produc...oducts_id=19619

Intel PENTIUM 4 651/ 3.4GHZ/ 2MB CACHE/ 800FSB/ LGA775 - $134.20

http://www.centrecom.com.au/catalog/produc...oducts_id=22182

Corsair DDR 1GB PC-3200 Value Select RAM (VS1GB400C3) - $128.70

Seagate Barracuda 80Gb 7200 rpm Hard Disk - $54.90

Seagate Barracuda 80Gb 7200 rpm Hard Disk - $54.90

ATI Radeon 9600 Pro 256Mb (AGP) - $90.20

LG GSA-H10NBB DVD Re-Writer (16x/Dual Layer Beige) - $43.00

1.44Mb Floppy Disk Drive (Beige) - $15

ATX Midi Case H306 (500W) - $40

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total: $643 (Australian $ incl GST = Aprox $480 US)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not a bad price or a top notch Windows98 system.

Basically I will just disable HyperThreading in the Bios and will enact option 2 & 3 (below) to be sure, to be sure!

1: For systems with more than 128 MB of RAM, setting a VCache maximum of about 70% of your total RAM is recommended as prophylaxis against run-away VCache growth in rare, specialized situations. (A tip of the hat to MS-MVPs Ron Martell, Ovidiu Popa, and Alex Nichol for months of experimentation and documentation of these details and recommendations.)

2: VCache increasing above 512 MB can create serious memory handling problems. If you have more than 512 MB of RAM, a VCache maximum of 524,288 KB (or a little less) is recommended. This is obtained by adding a MaxFileCache=524288 entry in the [vcache]section of SYSTEM.INI, where 524288 is the maximum value you wish to set. VCache is limited internally to a maximum cache size of 800 MB. The problem is that, on computers with large amounts of RAM, the maximum VCache size can be large enough that it consumes all of the available addresses in the system arena, leaving no virtual memory addresses available for other functions such as opening an MS-DOS prompt. This problem may occur more easily if you have an AGP video adapter: The AGP aperture is also mapped to addresses in the system arena, and if VCache is using its entire 800 MB allowance and an AGP video adapter has a 128 MB aperture mapped, there will be very little address space remaining for other system code and data that must occupy the available range of virtual addresses.

3: For systems with more than 1 GB of RAM, the defaults in Windows 98 or ME can cause continuous rebooting of the computer, or to hangs or serial reboots during the Windows upgrade process. To resolve this problem, add a MaxPhysPage=40000 entry in the [386enh] section of SYSTEM.INI. This effectively limits the amount of RAM Windows can access to 1 GB. (Microsoft limits this recommendation to systems having more than 1.5 GB of RAM, but the solution is to roll it back to 1 GB. See MSKB 304943.) Microsoft has now flatly stated that, “Windows Me and Windows 98 are not designed to handle more than 1 GB or RAM. More than 1 GB can lead to potential system instability.”

If it wasn't a 'business' computer I would have gone for 2GB of RAM and just carried out step 2 and given it a try as there have been a few people who have had success with more than 1GB.

But anyhows.....

Wow, I'm exited!

This Win98 beast should fly!!!

Edited February 8, 2007 by galahs

[hankjrfan00]

Just to be sure I would build one system first with those specs to test everything out on before buying the parts to build lots of them. Just one mans opinion.

[diskless]

Would you like the new system to really fly?

1GB is an enormous amount of RAM for Win98 and far more than it knows how to deal with properly, in my experience.

I suggest that you experiment with a monster RAM drive (768+MB) and use it for temp files, swap file, all of Win98 and as much of the CAD software as possible (the last two on compressed drives) and omit the second hard drive.

Running Win98 and apps entirely from RAM is amazing and you do not need anything like 1GB to give it a try.

Edited February 8, 2007 by diskless

[galahs]

Yep I'll indefinitely test the system before I fullfill the entire order.

2ndly, I just wonder if the power of a Xeon would be utilised enough on Win98 to be worth the extra expense. I know it they were using Win2000 or XP I'd be recommending one.

3rdly - RAM drive you say. As in allocating some of the system RAM to create a virtual drive, or buy a dedicated storage device that uses RAM chips instead of a hard disk? Can you tell me more or point me in the right direction to learn more about this.

[BenoitRen]

Where's the AMD Athlon XP on your list of processors?