Just a blast from the past build (Windows XP Pro 32-bit, CRT Monitor)

[t1k]

Just thought I'd share this for the XP-era appreciators out there. I love this machine.

Specs:

Windows XP Pro 32-bit SP3
Asus P9X79 LE mobo
Intel i7-4820K
2x4GB DDR3-1600
Nvidia GT 730 2GB (soon to be replaced with a 780 Ti 3GB)
Nobrand 500GB SATA 3.0 10Krpm disk drive
Corsair AX850 PSU
17" NEC MultiSync FE770M-BK CRT Monitor (1152x864@75Hz most of the time, goes 1280x1024@60Hz max, shadow mask)
Corsair MS/KB, Creative Pebble speakers v2.0
Logitech F310 gamepad










Found this used PC with everything but a HDD. Installed a 500GB SATA drive and replaced the older Antec 500w PSU with a more modern Corsair AX850 I had on hand.

Installed a bunch of old XP-era games (see 2nd pic). Having a great time revisiting them. Lately it's been my primary entertainment system. Hard to beat the classics of that era.

There is a lot I want to do with the setup and many small hardware and software improvements planned, but I'm already enjoying it quite a lot. Takes me back to the past ). May post more updates in the future.

 

[pendragon1]

thats not an xp era pc though and i still dont get the appeal of going backwards...

 

[t1k]

thats not an xp era pc though and i still dont get the appeal of going backwards...

Understandable and to each his own. It's more like an apex XP system I guess, since it's fully compatible in terms of drivers. Ivy Bridge was the last gen to get official XP drivers from if I'm remembering correctly . Certainly not what someone would have typically owned in the XP era.

As for the appeal of going backwards...it's nice to be able to just pop in physical media (or disc images) from that era and not have to acquire a bunch of fixes and widescreen patches. It just works, and everything is formatted correctly. It's fun to me to run and experience some of those old game installers too. Physical media is something I've been collecting lately since many things from that era are dirt cheap right now, and I suspect that may not always be the case.

It's more of a nostalgic venture for me I suppose.

 

[schoolslave]

Sweet machine - especially the era-appropriate monitor "stand"!
I am currently tinkering with a WinXP virtual machine with passthru for the GPU, USB controllers, and DVD drive on a Linux host.

 

[Stugots]

Any reason you held back from putting in a SATA SSD? Seems silly to leave that performance on the table when you're running other hardware so way above XP's level of hardware.

Also, how are you using more than 4GB of RAM with 32bit Windows XP? I didn't think XP had PAE to support higher than 4GB on 32bit systems.

 

[pendragon1]

Any reason you held back from putting in a SATA SSD? Seems silly to leave that performance on the table when you're running other hardware so way above XP's level of hardware.

Also, how are you using more than 4GB of RAM with 32bit Windows XP? I didn't think XP had PAE to support higher than 4GB on 32bit systems.

might as well.
you cant, iirc it will only use 3gb(if enabled)

 

[Stugots]

might as well.
you cant, iirc it will only use 3gb(if enabled)

That's what I thought. Not trying to re-engineer the OP's work, but you might as well run 64bit Windows to use all the RAM. You have more than enough CPU/IO power to handle the overhead from 64bit.

 

[VoodooRufus]

I did something similar recently, making my own "peak WinXP" machine. And it is stupid fast. I made 116K in 3DMark01 with it so far. Maybe I'll crack 120K with some GPU OC'ing, but it's really CPU bound.

Asrock Z97 Anniversary
Intel G3258, delidded and at 4.8GHz (50% OC)
2x2GB Corsair DDR3-2133 CL9
240GB SSD
eVGA GTX Titan Black SSC (got two of these, and two GTX960 4GB FTWs also)
Auzentech X-Fi Prelude for that hardware EAX
Thermalright AXP-90 copper

Only games I plan on running are things like Doom3 and FEAR, and a few others. None of which I have ever played.

I went with the Titan Blacks as they had twice the ram of the 780Ti, but if you can find an OC'ed one like a Classified or Kingpin or other similarly fancy custom board, it should be about as fast or a tiny bit faster as the Titan Black.

There actually is a hack to get WinXP 32-bit to recognize more ram, but no games from that era are likely to use it. WinXP 64bit is reportedly not very good, either.

Haswell and WinXP is a beautiful combination. I also built up a "peak Win7 Ultimate" build with a 4790K and all eVGA SLI hardware, but that belongs in its own thread.

 

[t1k]

That's what I thought. Not trying to re-engineer the OP's work, but you might as well run 64bit Windows to use all the RAM. You have more than enough CPU/IO power to handle the overhead from 64bit.

I did some research on Windows XP 64-bit, and the issue with it is it apparently has more compatibility problems with programs and apps, especially older ones. It reportedly also has more driver-related issues. The 32-bit version is generally regarded as more stable. Some still use it though.

Maybe something to try one day on a separate disc drive to see how it does .

Any reason you held back from putting in a SATA SSD? Seems silly to leave that performance on the table when you're running other hardware so way above XP's level of hardware.

Also, how are you using more than 4GB of RAM with 32bit Windows XP? I didn't think XP had PAE to support higher than 4GB on 32bit systems.

I may look into doing that upgrade one day. I wanted to keep costs not too high and things not too complicated to start. With the current drive I just set it on IDE mode in the BIOS and XP installed just like in the good ole days. I think there is an extra partitioning step you need to do before installing XP on an SSD. As for the RAM, XP just ignores the extra RAM past around 3.5GB.

I am currently tinkering with a WinXP virtual machine with passthru for the GPU, USB controllers, and DVD drive on a Linux host.

That sounds really neat. I haven't tinkered with virtual machines in a good while, but that seems like it could be a good and very fast way to run XP.

Here is a first pic of the innards:



I just installed the new Asus 780 Ti 3GB, and it's working great so far :]. I will be installing a front intake fan in the case soon since it is missing one. I may also replace the CPU HSF eventually with something more silent and efficient, though temps seem to be at normal levels. I will probably replace the 2x4GB DDR3-1600 with some slightly better quality DDR3-1866 eventually. I've thought about a sound card, but I'm pretty happy with the sound quality the motherboard puts out.

I'm happy to finally have a more powerful GPU in the system though. I've been waiting a while since I had to return a dead-on-arrival Titan card that I purchased. I ended up getting a better deal on this 780 Ti anyway though, $64 shipped vs double for the Titan.

The GT 730 wasn't terrible, but I was definitely giving it the workout of its life .

 

[t1k]

I did something similar recently, making my own "peak WinXP" machine. And it is stupid fast. I made 116K in 3DMark01 with it so far. Maybe I'll crack 120K with some GPU OC'ing, but it's really CPU bound.

Only games I plan on running are things like Doom3 and FEAR, and a few others. None of which I have ever played.

I went with the Titan Blacks as they had twice the ram of the 780Ti, but if you can find an OC'ed one like a Classified or Kingpin or other similarly fancy custom board, it should be about as fast or a tiny bit faster as the Titan Black.

There actually is a hack to get WinXP 32-bit to recognize more ram, but no games from that era are likely to use it. WinXP 64bit is reportedly not very good, either.

Haswell and WinXP is a beautiful combination. I also built up a "peak Win7 Ultimate" build with a 4790K and all eVGA SLI hardware, but that belongs in its own thread.

Very nice. That score seems insane. It's been many years since I've ran any benchmark, I just jump into a game and occasionally turn the fps counter on to make sure things are running smoothly.

I had trouble finding a working Titan/Black card but ended up with a pretty decent Asus 780 Ti 3GB OC DirectCU II card for a good price. UT2003, Unreal II, Crysis, and Doom 3 play very well. Can now max them out. The GT 730 was sweating and had use lower settings, but it still worked okay once things were tuned. It is a good backup card or card for another system one day.

And once I get the new case fan installed I will clean up the wiring in the system a bit . Then it's pretty much done for the time being, just installing more software stuff.

 

[VoodooRufus]

There is a user on ebay who was selling the Titan Blacks and other compute-heavy cards of the era in matched pairs, all in pristine condition. Must have been a lab environment or similar. He doesn't have any more cards that would work in WinXP listed currently, though.

The Asus 780 Ti sounds pretty nice, too. The dual 8pin power plugs is a bonus.

It's pretty cool to be able to play games of the XP era, completely maxed out in quality and sometimes FPS, on higher refresh rate monitors and resolutions today.

 

[Red Falcon]

thats not an xp era pc though and i still dont get the appeal of going backwards...

It technically is, Windows XP was around until April 2014, and that system is from circa 2013, so it fills the category accurately.
We're getting old, and most of us think of a Windows XP desktop being from 2001-2006 (pre-Vista), but considering the unnatural longevity of Windows XP this does still fill that category, save for perhaps the PSU.

might as well.
you cant, iirc it will only use 3gb(if enabled)

3.25GB to 3.8GB of RAM will be available, depending on hardware reservations by the motherboard and peripherals.

 

[funkydmunky]

It's an anti Vista Machine. Not the same and not the same era.

 

[Stugots]

I did some research on Windows XP 64-bit, and the issue with it is it apparently has more compatibility problems with programs and apps, especially older ones. It reportedly also has more driver-related issues. The 32-bit version is generally regarded as more stable. Some still use it though.

...

Ok, now I remember. Damn, that's a reminder about how old I am...

 

[toast0]

Also, how are you using more than 4GB of RAM with 32bit Windows XP? I didn't think XP had PAE to support higher than 4GB on 32bit systems.

IIRC, the earlier you go with 32-bit XP, the more PAE support it had... But it got removed in service packs because too many drivers and software wouldn't work with it. It's certainly not worth while fighting to get it working, but maybe it's too hard to find less than 4gb ddr3 dimms? And dual-channel is nice.

You could probably do something terrible with a driver to use the memory over 4G as a ramdisk, but I don't know if anyone has been twisted enough to build that.

 

[Red Falcon]

It's certainly not worth while fighting to get it working, but maybe it's too hard to find less than 4gb ddr3 dimms? And dual-channel is nice.

Nah, it's easy to find 512MB and 1GB DDR3 DIMM modules, and they should be super low-cost at this point.
+1 for dual-channel, that dates back to DDR1.

 

[t1k]

It's an anti Vista Machine. Not the same and not the same era.

Anti-Vista is a better way to describe the PC I guess. I was just calling it XP-era to reference the fact that all of the games on the machine have support for XP. It's a physical media machine basically.

Vista forward everything started going digital (for better and worse ha).

I'm loving this PC though. I'm probably going to get or build a nicer wooden desk for it soon. I wasn't honestly sure how much I'd like the end result of building an older machine like this just for the physical media era and the nostalgia factor of windows xp, but it's actually pretty damn neat to have.

 

[GiGaBiTe]

I did some research on Windows XP 64-bit, and the issue with it is it apparently has more compatibility problems with programs and apps, especially older ones.

The only compatibility issues Windows XP Professional x64 edition has (have to be specific here, because there are two other 64 bit XP versions for Itanium systems..) is that it can't run 16 bit processes. So if you have any ancient Windows 3.1 or 95 games that rely on 16 bit code, they wouldn't work. I don't mention DOS stuff, because Windows XP 32 bit couldn't run DOS stuff properly either, because direct calls to hardware weren't allowed, and VESA modes were unavailable. Pure 32 bit Windows 9x titles run just as good (or as bad) as the normal Windows XP 32 bit.

Professional x64 edition was literally Windows Server 2003 x64 with an XP UI slapped on. I used it for the better part of a decade and never had any issues with it at all. Most of the people that discredit it as having driver issues and being unstable have never actually used it, or are confusing it with the two Itanium XP releases, which *do* have terrible driver issues and are super unstable. Those versions of XP only existed because of Microsoft's contractual obligations with HP, and those versions of XP died a quick and quiet death in the 2005 time frame when said contract expired. I had the displeasure of using the first of those two releases, Windows XP 64-bit edition. It was quite dreadful, Microsoft didn't bother porting anything but the absolute bare minimum base software, and you had to run ia64 builds of anything you wanted to run (of which there were almost no software packages.) There was a built in x86 emulator, but it was painfully slow and buggy. I never have seen the even less well known second port, I believe was called Windows XP 2005 for Itanium Systems, it was for the ill fated Itanium2 arch.

IIRC, the earlier you go with 32-bit XP, the more PAE support it had... But it got removed in service packs because too many drivers and software wouldn't work with it.

Nonsense.

Windows 2000 Server had PAE to support more than 4 GB of RAM. Windows Server 2003 had PAE to support more than 4 GB of RAM, and those shared the same driver base as XP in many cases. If the driver base was really THAT buggy, Microsoft would have had a mutiny on their hands in the server market long before XP ever came into existence.

PAE was also completely invisible to software compiled without the "large address aware" flag, so it was impossible to have compatibility issues. In fact, some software could be made LAA after the fact with a utility run on the executable. This was especially important for some games in the mid 2000s that were starting to hit process limits of 2 GB, like Supreme Commander. The LAA flag would allow it to use an extra 1 GB of RAM, which was a requirement on huge maps with massive battles going on.

The reason Microsoft removed PAE support after the RTM release is because of memory licensing, they didn't want home versions of their operating systems being used in their lucrative server licensing business, where they charged exorbitant amounts for just flicking a switch in the code. Sort of like how Intel several years prior introduced the same CPU in a different socket and called it a Xeon, jacked up the price and at the same time crippled Desktop chipsets to force people to pay more money.

There's a method to patch post-RTM XP releases to re-enable PAE support and utilize more than 4 GB of RAM, with the only limitation that no single process can exceed 4 GB. It can be a bit unstable due to you having to run a custom kernel and having to fight with Windows on system file integrity, but when you sort that out it works pretty much fine. The same can be done with Windows Vista and Windows 7 32 bit versions as well, but there's less reasons to do that than XP.

 

[t1k]

Thanks for sharing all of that knowledge GiGaBiTe. Very interesting information.

I do remember the lack of 16-bit program support being one of the main reasons I decided to stay on the 32-bit version. Installing a bunch of older W3.1/95 games is something I want to get around to eventually. Crysis is probably the most demanding thing the machine will run, and it seems to run fine, though if I start dabbling in more memory-heavy apps or multitasking with the machine I may make the switch to x64. A second HDD might be ideal since then I may be able to install both versions of some more modern games and see the differences.

 

[dogDAbone]

Sweet machine - especially the era-appropriate monitor "stand"!

FYI, but that's NOT a monitor stand, it's a 3D printed package of copy paper made to look like a 1990's "screen supporter", just sayin, hehehe

 

[schoolslave]

FYI, but that's NOT a monitor stand, it's a 3D printed package of copy paper made to look like a 1990's "screen supporter", just sayin, hehehe

The attention to detail is simply exquisite!
I mean look at that (printed heh) pressure indent

 

[t1k]

It's definitely worthy of a better desk . I have a friend with a sawmill and may be able to get something much more solid made for the PC. Most of the desks online these days seem cheap and fake.

I was lucky to find a nice, strong old oak desk at a flea market for my LG TV setup for a reasonable price. I'm tempted to use it for this, but my main rig (in sig) is more important than this one...I do still want to play some modern games like STALKER 2, Diablo IV, and POE2!

Speaking of which my Kingston KC3000 SSD in my sig seems to have just died on me...I can't get anything to install on it. I'm going to attempt to replace it with warranty but have a Samsung 990 Pro on the way. I will probably just sell the replacement.

 

[GiGaBiTe]

Thanks for sharing all of that knowledge GiGaBiTe. Very interesting information.

I do remember the lack of 16-bit program support being one of the main reasons I decided to stay on the 32-bit version. Installing a bunch of older W3.1/95 games is something I want to get around to eventually. Crysis is probably the most demanding thing the machine will run, and it seems to run fine, though if I start dabbling in more memory-heavy apps or multitasking with the machine I may make the switch to x64. A second HDD might be ideal since then I may be able to install both versions of some more modern games and see the differences.

I'd recommend more period correct hardware if you want to run ancient Windows 3.1 and 95 games, or run them in DosBox. DosBox can emulate lots of period correct sound hardware, and some basic 2D accelerators IIRC. You can run Windows 3.1 in DosBox mostly fine, Windows 95 would need the DosBox-X fork, which has more features. https://dosbox-x.com/

 

[t1k]

I'd recommend more period correct hardware if you want to run ancient Windows 3.1 and 95 games, or run them in DosBox. DosBox can emulate lots of period correct sound hardware, and some basic 2D accelerators IIRC. You can run Windows 3.1 in DosBox mostly fine, Windows 95 would need the DosBox-X fork, which has more features. https://dosbox-x.com/

Thanks for the tips. I'll probably use DosBox since I have a little bit of experience with it and am currently using it to run Duke3D and Tomb Raider '96. The GOG version of One Unit Whole Blood I have also uses a preconfigured version of it. I don't think I've ever used DosBox-X (not intentionally at least), but I'll definitely check that out.

 

[narsbars]

I did some research on Windows XP 64-bit, and the issue with it is it apparently has more compatibility problems with programs and apps, especially older ones. It reportedly also has more driver-related issues. The 32-bit version is generally regarded as more stable. Some still use it though.

Maybe something to try one day on a separate disc drive to see how it does .


I may look into doing that upgrade one day. I wanted to keep costs not too high and things not too complicated to start. With the current drive I just set it on IDE mode in the BIOS and XP installed just like in the good ole days. I think there is an extra partitioning step you need to do before installing XP on an SSD. As for the RAM, XP just ignores the extra RAM past around 3.5GB.


That sounds really neat. I haven't tinkered with virtual machines in a good while, but that seems like it could be a good and very fast way to run XP.

Here is a first pic of the innards:

View attachment 566676

I just installed the new Asus 780 Ti 3GB, and it's working great so far :]. I will be installing a front intake fan in the case soon since it is missing one. I may also replace the CPU HSF eventually with something more silent and efficient, though temps seem to be at normal levels. I will probably replace the 2x4GB DDR3-1600 with some slightly better quality DDR3-1866 eventually. I've thought about a sound card, but I'm pretty happy with the sound quality the motherboard puts out.

I'm happy to finally have a more powerful GPU in the system though. I've been waiting a while since I had to return a dead-on-arrival Titan card that I purchased. I ended up getting a better deal on this 780 Ti anyway though, $64 shipped vs double for the Titan.

The GT 730 wasn't terrible, but I was definitely giving it the workout of its life .

If set up right XP recognizes the 4gig ram but can only use a portion of that as the rest is reserved by Windows.

 

[t1k]

Added a new front intake fan and optimized all the BIOS settings. Installed some more games, including UT2004 and Age of Mythology. Runs really well. Fallout, Bioshock, Metro, Singularity, and more to be installed soon.

As soon as budget permits, I will replace the CPU HSF with a Noctua NH-D15. The current CPU fan is a little whiny, and reapplying fresh, new thermal paste would probably do it good since I doubt it has been done since the original install. I also plan to replace the RAM with slightly better DDR3-1866, mainly so that I have some spare DDR3 on hand and also because it's extremely cheap. Hoping to get a nice hard wood desk built in the next few weeks also.

All in due time... it's a very fun system to install and play classic/physical-era games on (without having to mess with Widescreen/FOV/Win10+ patches and digital distribution platforms).

Would like a nice aperture grille monitor, but those are getting very difficult to find and very expensive. And the shadow mask is honestly easier on the eyes anyway. I'd also like to acquire a legal, full retail (non-oem), copy of Windows XP x64 to play with, but those seem impossible to find anywhere.

 

[Prince Valiant]

Added a new front intake fan and optimized all the BIOS settings. Installed some more games, including UT2004 and Age of Mythology. Runs really well. Fallout, Bioshock, Metro, Singularity, and more to be installed soon.

As soon as budget permits, I will replace the CPU HSF with a Noctua NH-D15. The current CPU fan is a little whiny, and reapplying fresh, new thermal paste would probably do it good since I doubt it has been done since the original install. I also plan to replace the RAM with slightly better DDR3-1866, mainly so that I have some spare DDR3 on hand and also because it's extremely cheap. Hoping to get a nice hard wood desk built in the next few weeks also.

All in due time... it's a very fun system to install and play classic/physical-era games on (without having to mess with Widescreen/FOV/Win10+ patches and digital distribution platforms).

Would like a nice aperture grille monitor, but those are getting very difficult to find and very expensive. And the shadow mask is honestly easier on the eyes anyway. I'd also like to acquire a legal, full retail (non-oem), copy of Windows XP x64 to play with, but those seem impossible to find anywhere.

Finding a better model monitor in good condition is even less likely. If you poke around long enough you might stumble into something cheap or free though.

 

[chimera991]

OP, let me know which benchmark apps you used. I too built an XP rig, also a little more current hardware. Ended up killing a Gigabyte 980ti playing SC2 for 2 hours, it was at running at 83c sometimes going to 89c. It died while idle at the menu screen. Ended up getting newer 980ti, supposedly brand new (out of box) from ebay.

Need to benchmark and see how the newer 980ti I performs. I think its bigger than my evga 3080.

 

[GiGaBiTe]

If set up right XP recognizes the 4gig ram but can only use a portion of that as the rest is reserved by Windows.

It's not reserved by Windows, it's being used in the address space. In x86 32 bit with no PAE or PSE support, all memory mapped devices have to be located somewhere in the 32 bit address space. Example would be if you had a video card with 512 MB of video memory. All of that memory has to be shadowed somewhere in the x86 address space. So if you have 4 GB of system RAM, only 3.5 GB will be usable. In reality, much less because other devices like the hard disk controller, USB, LPCIO, etc. all take up space in the memory map. This is why no two systems will ever have the same amount of memory available.

The issue also precludes you from using video cards with large amount of onboard RAM. If you throw in a video card with 1-2 GB, your system memory will take an equivalent hit. If you put in a 3 GB card, now you have a problem. The driver will generally start to reduce the amount of video RAM available because of address space limitations.