Windows 95/98/ME PCI graphics card for Win98?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Paradoxdb3
  • Start date Start date
P

Paradoxdb3

Is it wise to install a PCI graphics card? The on-board graphics adaptor is
working fine. The highest setting is true color - 24 bit. I don't know if
32 bit is better to have. So, I've considered getting a graphics card that
will make true color 32 bit mode. But I think I heard somewhere that a
graphics card will slow down (or bottle neck) the system. Is this true? And
how about a graphics card that allows you to plug your television into
it....does something like this exist? Is it worthwhile?
 
"Paradoxdb3" . wrote in message
news:AD52708A-4CE0-40F5-901A-2E62795F3E9C@microsoft.com...
> Is it wise to install a PCI graphics card? The on-board graphics adaptor
is
> working fine. The highest setting is true color - 24 bit. I don't know
if
> 32 bit is better to have. So, I've considered getting a graphics card
that
> will make true color 32 bit mode. But I think I heard somewhere that a
> graphics card will slow down (or bottle neck) the system. Is this true?
And
> how about a graphics card that allows you to plug your television into
> it....does something like this exist? Is it worthwhile?


If your on-board graphics card works fine...then leave everything alone.

I doubt if your eyes could possibly tell the difference between 24bit and
32bit color.

Only if you were doing some very serious Photoshop work and you could see
the difference when printed...would i bother to change things
 
Last edited by a moderator:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 18:16:06 -0800, Paradoxdb3
. put finger to keyboard and
composed:

>Is it wise to install a PCI graphics card? The on-board graphics adaptor is
>working fine. The highest setting is true color - 24 bit. I don't know if
>32 bit is better to have. So, I've considered getting a graphics card that
>will make true color 32 bit mode. But I think I heard somewhere that a
>graphics card will slow down (or bottle neck) the system. Is this true?

To see just how much impact your onboard graphics has on system
performance, run a memory benchmark program at different graphics
resolutions and colour depths. Because your onboard graphics shares
(ie competes for) system RAM, you should notice significant
improvements at lower resolutions and colour depths. Whether this
statistic translates into a performance difference that you can detect
in normal operation is something for you to decide.

My Internet PC is based on an old M571 socket 7 motherboard with SiS
5597/5598 chipset, 128MB of SDRAM and an AMD K6-2 450MHz CPU. Until
recently I was using the onboard graphics.

I once attempted to crank more performance out of the system by
tweaking the chipset registers. My baseline benchmark result for
memory reads with Everest Home was 69MB/s. After tweaking, it rose to
77MB/s. Initially this low figure was a big surprise. However, after I
reduced my display resolution from 1024x768 and 16 bit colour to
640x480 and 256 colours, the board benched at ~150MB/s. So it's clear
that the onboard video, which in my case was configured to share only
2MB of system RAM, resulted in a significant performance hit, at least
during benchmarking.

>And how about a graphics card that allows you to plug your television into
>it....does something like this exist? Is it worthwhile?

They do exist but, by all accounts, the TV image quality is poor.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Paradoxdb3 wrote:

> Is it wise to install a PCI graphics card? The on-board graphics adaptor is
> working fine. The highest setting is true color - 24 bit. I don't know if
> 32 bit is better to have. So, I've considered getting a graphics card that
> will make true color 32 bit mode. But I think I heard somewhere that a
> graphics card will slow down (or bottle neck) the system. Is this true? And
> how about a graphics card that allows you to plug your television into
> it....does something like this exist? Is it worthwhile?
I have an All-in-Wonder Radeon 32Mb AGP NTSC board running in 32bit
color mode (nominlaay 800x600 resolution).
I can feed it TV type signals via coax, SPDIF or their strange
adaptor cable that allows SPDIF or video/right/left RCA cables.
I have connected VCR players and DVD players to it and recorded some
old movies from those sources.
It is a hoot if you minimize the viewing screen, as the video then
becomes wallpaper!

Would be nice if a board like that was available for PCI or PCIE.
 
Franc Zabkar wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 18:16:06 -0800, Paradoxdb3
> . put finger to keyboard and
> composed:
>
>
>>Is it wise to install a PCI graphics card? The on-board graphics adaptor is
>>working fine. The highest setting is true color - 24 bit. I don't know if
>>32 bit is better to have. So, I've considered getting a graphics card that
>>will make true color 32 bit mode. But I think I heard somewhere that a
>>graphics card will slow down (or bottle neck) the system. Is this true?
>
>
> To see just how much impact your onboard graphics has on system
> performance, run a memory benchmark program at different graphics
> resolutions and colour depths. Because your onboard graphics shares
> (ie competes for) system RAM, you should notice significant
> improvements at lower resolutions and colour depths. Whether this
> statistic translates into a performance difference that you can detect
> in normal operation is something for you to decide.
>
> My Internet PC is based on an old M571 socket 7 motherboard with SiS
> 5597/5598 chipset, 128MB of SDRAM and an AMD K6-2 450MHz CPU. Until
> recently I was using the onboard graphics.
>
> I once attempted to crank more performance out of the system by
> tweaking the chipset registers. My baseline benchmark result for
> memory reads with Everest Home was 69MB/s. After tweaking, it rose to
> 77MB/s. Initially this low figure was a big surprise. However, after I
> reduced my display resolution from 1024x768 and 16 bit colour to
> 640x480 and 256 colours, the board benched at ~150MB/s. So it's clear
> that the onboard video, which in my case was configured to share only
> 2MB of system RAM, resulted in a significant performance hit, at least
> during benchmarking.
>
>
>>And how about a graphics card that allows you to plug your television into
>>it....does something like this exist? Is it worthwhile?
>
>
> They do exist but, by all accounts, the TV image quality is poor.
>
> - Franc Zabkar
Poor?
Using hi-res capture, i cannot tell the difference between the
original and the captured file.
One can easily get DVD quality.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
AFAIK, I don't know any boards that are capable of running Windows 98 or 98
SE with PCI-Express.
 
I'll present this as just a potential, as I have never had the ability to
personally test...

SOME of the 9X/ME/2000 nVidia drivers had supposed support for PCI-e
[certain cards] included within the setup INFs [as noted within several
postings in this forum relating to nVidia drivers]. Whether this actually
provided such support is another matter. Reviewing various forums, one finds
that it may not have, then again not everyone enters discussion forums, and
when they do its generally to complain of a failure, which may or may not
indicate final statements therein related. Those who are successful may not
find a need or desire to post .... as is generally the case, it may have
been/may be related to specific motherboard chipsets, BIOS, or other, which
could be potentially over-ridden and/or supplied via some other means
[similar to modifications for large hard drive support/48bit, SATA,
non-manufacturer BIOS updates, and other non-supported devices/formats {such
as generic USB drivers}, or even applications].
If there were a generic PCI-e driver supplied or some modified file/files,
perhaps it can be achieved. Of course, these will not come from the
manufacturer of the motherboard, nor likely the video card manufacturer, as
most provide no support for 9X/ME as this device format came at the very end
of their supposed support cycle..

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
________


"Dan" <Dan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:01BF54E4-70AA-45CB-A790-B511C50F4C9D@microsoft.com...
| AFAIK, I don't know any boards that are capable of running Windows 98 or
98
| SE with PCI-Express.
 
On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 20:16:25 -0800, Robert Baer
<robertbaer@localnet.com> put finger to keyboard and composed:

>Franc Zabkar wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 18:16:06 -0800, Paradoxdb3
>> . put finger to keyboard and
>> composed:

>>>And how about a graphics card that allows you to plug your television into
>>>it....does something like this exist? Is it worthwhile?
>>
>>
>> They do exist but, by all accounts, the TV image quality is poor.
>>
>> - Franc Zabkar

> Poor?
> Using hi-res capture, i cannot tell the difference between the
>original and the captured file.
> One can easily get DVD quality.

I read the OP's question to mean using a TV as a monitor, ie an output
device. You appear to have interpreted the question to refer to using
a TV *signal* as an input to the card.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for your thoughts on this MEB. I would be interested to know if
anyone has had personal success in this newsgroup in attaching a PCI-e video
card and getting it to work well within 98 SE.

"MEB" wrote:

> I'll present this as just a potential, as I have never had the ability to
> personally test...
>
> SOME of the 9X/ME/2000 nVidia drivers had supposed support for PCI-e
> [certain cards] included within the setup INFs [as noted within several
> postings in this forum relating to nVidia drivers]. Whether this actually
> provided such support is another matter. Reviewing various forums, one finds
> that it may not have, then again not everyone enters discussion forums, and
> when they do its generally to complain of a failure, which may or may not
> indicate final statements therein related. Those who are successful may not
> find a need or desire to post .... as is generally the case, it may have
> been/may be related to specific motherboard chipsets, BIOS, or other, which
> could be potentially over-ridden and/or supplied via some other means
> [similar to modifications for large hard drive support/48bit, SATA,
> non-manufacturer BIOS updates, and other non-supported devices/formats {such
> as generic USB drivers}, or even applications].
> If there were a generic PCI-e driver supplied or some modified file/files,
> perhaps it can be achieved. Of course, these will not come from the
> manufacturer of the motherboard, nor likely the video card manufacturer, as
> most provide no support for 9X/ME as this device format came at the very end
> of their supposed support cycle..
>
> --
> MEB
> http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> ________
>
>
> "Dan" <Dan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:01BF54E4-70AA-45CB-A790-B511C50F4C9D@microsoft.com...
> | AFAIK, I don't know any boards that are capable of running Windows 98 or
> 98
> | SE with PCI-Express.
>
>
>
 
Franc Zabkar wrote:

> On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 20:16:25 -0800, Robert Baer
> <robertbaer@localnet.com> put finger to keyboard and composed:
>
>
>>Franc Zabkar wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 18:16:06 -0800, Paradoxdb3
>>>. put finger to keyboard and
>>>composed:
>
>
>
>>>>And how about a graphics card that allows you to plug your television into
>>>>it....does something like this exist? Is it worthwhile?
>>>
>>>
>>>They do exist but, by all accounts, the TV image quality is poor.
>>>
>>>- Franc Zabkar
>
>
>> Poor?
>> Using hi-res capture, i cannot tell the difference between the
>>original and the captured file.
>> One can easily get DVD quality.
>
>
> I read the OP's question to mean using a TV as a monitor, ie an output
> device. You appear to have interpreted the question to refer to using
> a TV *signal* as an input to the card.
>
> - Franc Zabkar
Check.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dan wrote:

> Thanks for your thoughts on this MEB. I would be interested to know if
> anyone has had personal success in this newsgroup in attaching a PCI-e video
> card and getting it to work well within 98 SE.
>
> "MEB" wrote:
>
>
>>I'll present this as just a potential, as I have never had the ability to
>>personally test...
>>
>> SOME of the 9X/ME/2000 nVidia drivers had supposed support for PCI-e
>>[certain cards] included within the setup INFs [as noted within several
>>postings in this forum relating to nVidia drivers]. Whether this actually
>>provided such support is another matter. Reviewing various forums, one finds
>>that it may not have, then again not everyone enters discussion forums, and
>>when they do its generally to complain of a failure, which may or may not
>>indicate final statements therein related. Those who are successful may not
>>find a need or desire to post .... as is generally the case, it may have
>>been/may be related to specific motherboard chipsets, BIOS, or other, which
>>could be potentially over-ridden and/or supplied via some other means
>>[similar to modifications for large hard drive support/48bit, SATA,
>>non-manufacturer BIOS updates, and other non-supported devices/formats {such
>>as generic USB drivers}, or even applications].
>> If there were a generic PCI-e driver supplied or some modified file/files,
>>perhaps it can be achieved. Of course, these will not come from the
>>manufacturer of the motherboard, nor likely the video card manufacturer, as
>>most provide no support for 9X/ME as this device format came at the very end
>>of their supposed support cycle..
>>
>>--
>>MEB
>>http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
>>________
>>
>>
>>"Dan" <Dan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>news:01BF54E4-70AA-45CB-A790-B511C50F4C9D@microsoft.com...
>>| AFAIK, I don't know any boards that are capable of running Windows 98 or
>>98
>>| SE with PCI-Express.
>>
>>
>>
There might be some "generic" PCIE video cards that could work maybe
with a "generic" driver that covers OSes from 9x/ME/2K etc.
If i had a computer that took such boads, i would not mind persuing
that route.
 
Back
Top