The other side - spot all the little fixes and at least one miss 😅

Could be worse...

New old stock 😍 Vintage old stock hardware, just like it was in the mid 1990s. 🤩

P.S. love how some sellers list same shit with different prices and leave the higher priced one after it is long gone 😆

wtf😵‍💫

www.cpu-world.com/forum/viewto...

😵‍💫

Socket 478 Pentium 4 Willamette insta collection, thanks eBay 😆

Why even make it 4GB 🤬 kinda scummy

"As a result the 3.5 GB portion can be accessed with 196 GB/s of bandwidth, while the 512 MB portion has 28 GB/s of bandwidth available" 😵‍💫🤯

Wow, this is the first time I'm hearing about this 😬

It is also interesting how, despite having 16MB of onboard memory, the rendering speed tanks at 16MB 🫠

TNT
TNT2

7.76

but for TNT2 PCI 16 MB - 67.66 driver is faster 🤔

lol, maybe Win98 drivers are the same 😆

only if I could find what versions supported what, anyway, I'm sure it is different for Win98... and it's not like I want to use TNT on a WinXP PC anyway 😆

the problem is - between 6.31 and 45.23 - there are many versions that do not support TNT 🫠like 7.76 - only TNT2

I think 67.66 is the last nvidia driver to support TNT
6.31 vs 67.66:

I noticed how poorly it ran so only tested the 'game' tests

thank you :)

Ericsson I lusted after about that time 😀

for something released this week - sure, for some TV show from the 90s - not so much 😆

me, downloading some torrent at 25 kb/s - 🤔😆

although, it is more or less comparable to an AGP Riva TNT in a P3 Tualatin based PC and a 7.76 driver.
AGP vs PCI is probably the main reason for a higher score....

I should really test it in Win98 PC...
but meanwhile, here is 3DMark2000 with 6.31 driver:

not sure about the best driver for WinXP, the older the better it seems, although it is an Athlon XP 3200+ so it shouldn't really matter? but the difference in performance is drastic 🤯
45.23 vs 6.31:

how it looked before I added a cooler and fan connector (5V)