Pulled out my Windows 98 machine last night and messed with it some. Today I find myself wanting to use it for more, and I have a feeling I had something specific in mind that prompted me to hook it up in the first place, but nothing is coming to mind =/


It's a 300 MHz Celeron machine overclocked to 450 MHz (sort of like a faster Pentium II), with 256 MB of RAM and an ATi All-In-Wonder Pro VGA card (basically a 3D Rage Pro AGP card with a built-in TV tuner). It was my family's main PC from 1998 to ca. 2004, and then my main one for another 5-10 years after that

@artiemog Sounds lovely, and congrats on a stable oc; I've tried a few celeries to 100 bus but never succeeded

was it an og Celeron with no cache? I only ever used the 300A.

@Mycroft Nope, this is the 300A, I just didn't know it was called that, heh. And "stable" might be a slightly-strong description, although I'm not so sure that's not just Windows 98 rather than the CPU speed :P

Actually, at one time I couldn't even get the machine to boot unless I OCed it, but I tried it again just now and it worked fine

@Mycroft Poking around for a minute, I can definitely feel the speed difference. It's more dramatic than I expected!

And really it hasn't been bad stability-wise on this fresh install...I really do think the old installation was just too overloaded

@Mycroft aaaaaand of course as soon as I say that I get a BSOD lmao. This system just seems happier at the faster speed, idk what it is

@artiemog Wouldn't happen to have a bunch of complicated jumpers would it? It's not common but I've seen boards that don't auto-divide the pci/agp bus and instead have to be set based on fsb; so if it's 100cpu it's normal 33/66 agp on one setting, if switch fsb to 66 and leaving the manual divider there that's a 25pci/50agp and cards don't like running too far out of spec

@Mycroft I don't think so. It's got a very thorough CMOS setup. The motherboard is an Abit BH6 board, the same one that anandtech apparently used in their test system when reviewing the 300A

@artiemog Oh, that was one of the first "soft bios" things where you could set all the jumpery things in the cmos iirc. So wow, unstable at stock speed really is quite confusing.

@Mycroft I did set it back to 450 MHz and run the same program and got it to lock up again, but it took longer and no BSOD this time. So idk lol

I do remember it crashing/freezing sometimes when it was our main PC, too, but we didn't really think anything of it. It wasn't unusable and as far as we knew that was just how computers were. Going back from the Linux world now after so long though really makes it obvious though!

@artiemog (You're welcome to follow but unfortunately I don't get to talk about old tech very often.)

@Mycroft That's fine, I liked what I did see on your timeline too :3

@artiemog I tended to trust 98se to be stable enough on its own if the third party drivers are written well and there's not junk clogging it up, like relying on 16-bit windows 3.0 hooks

Personally I never trusted all those winmodems and thought they were the prime source of crashing. (no evidence though)

@Mycroft Maybe that's the issue then, the old installation was 98fe

This machine does have a no-name winmodem, but it's seldom-used. Very glad I tracked down the driver CD in storage, because the drivers were not anywhere on the Internet at all that I could find until I put them there

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Yiff.Life - It's not what you think...

Yiff.Life is oriented towards those in the furry and LGBTQA+ communities.