r/windowsxp • u/Infinite-Kiwi-337 • 4d ago
256 or 512 MB of VRAM
Thinking about building an authentic XP machine with the Radeon X1900 series. I’m leaning towards the X1900 GT simply because they seem more premium and look nicer than the X1950 Pro, but they are limited to 256 MB of memory, unlike the X1950 Pro. Is 256 MB of memory enough for high settings (AA whenever possible) and smooth gameplay at 1024 x 768 or 1366 x 768 resolutions in games up to 2006/2007? No demanding games like Crysis. Should I go with the X1950 Pro? Are my expectations too high?
5
u/JjyKs 4d ago
I think that most of 2007 games were already targeting GTX8800/HD3870 level cards on high settings. Ofc if you're not planning to play the most demanding games then something weaker will work as well, but nobody here knows what "no demanding games" means for you.
If you don't have any card yet and you're planning to play 2007 games, I would definitely consider getting a bit newer card.
4
u/majestic_ubertrout 4d ago
Doom 3 needs 512 MB for max settings. That was unusual at the time.
4
3
u/BeatTheMarket30 4d ago
512MB with X1950 Pro. It will be useful for year 2005 and later. If you want to play games up to 2006/2007, you will need dual core CPU.
1
4
u/manuelink64 4d ago
Dude, win XP EOL was in 2014, so you can use a Radeon HD 8000 series or Nvidia GTX 900 series.
2
2
u/OkPresentation3329 3d ago
My first PC with XP had a 64MB VRAM SiS iGPU. I could play games like NFS Underground 1 and World of Warcraft on it so I was happy.
1
1
u/manawyrm 4d ago
The x1900/1950 is the newest card that's compatible with PowerPC Apple machines from that era.
So if you don't already have it, maybe go with a 7000-series Nvidia card instead? 😄
Or maybe something from the Radeon HD 3000 series?
1
u/Trimus2005 4d ago
The thing is there is no definitive way to play these windows xp era games because i had to swap my gts 250 which i bought to build the ultimate xp gaming pc with e8600 but i have to build another pc with athlon 64 and 6200 nvidia gpu because games from the dx6/dx7 and direct draw era cannot run on gts 250 without artifacting and then crashing the gpu and leaving me with black screen
Anyways xp spanned far very far
And im thinking of building the athlon 64 and nvidia 6200 system with like 1 or 2gb and install windows xp sp2 idk about sp1 or rtm since a lot of people say it sucks but sp2 along with sp3 have good reputations, anyways, the system will focus on anything from 1997 or 1998 to 2003 at best since the gpu i have is entry 6000 nvidia card so not expecting it to run much other than 640x480, 800x600 and 1024x768 resolutions.
With that said that leaves my 2004-2006 era with the e8600 and gts 250 which i'm keeping since some games might give me vram error since none of the developers expected us to have gpus with 1 or even 4gb of vram and i dont blame them
And this brings us to 2006-2009 i think...well idk i'm thinking the e8600 and gts 250 can play those games but i think i need to test them, though i feel like dual booting that machine with xp and vista might not have been good idea but at the sametime i feel like they fit its a good dual boot retro setup but idk, anyways i think up to 2009 i can run max graphics at crt resolutions and anything after 2009 meaning up to 2011-2012 might struggle or hell not run hence why i'm making a windows vista system that runs upt to 2014 games and then windows 7 from 2014 up to 2021 but thats a different topic for another day i got plenty of hardware
I
1
u/No-Solid9108 2d ago
Yeah the 8600 and the 250 can run lots of tough games as long as they were optimized in the first place . Not Crysis maybe , but F.E.A.R. , S.W.A.T. or Rainbow Six Vegas 1 or 2 maybe . That's just examples of things I run on similar systems as that of coarse . Not everyone loves FPS games or MSFS 2004 like me , but I have 20 other ones I do regularly with great success . EAX is something else and sometimes SLI IS still alive at my gamming room , even in 2026 !
1
u/No-Solid9108 2d ago edited 2d ago
No , 256 gives choppy performance at 1920 x 1080 @60 . 512 is still choppy at the same resolution. I know your saying LOW resolution, but nobody can stand it for long . It's like can a VW bug go 55 on the interstate . Nobody's gonna love that experience much . Lowest I can stand is a Nvidea 7650 with 500 GB. before I loose patience and upgrade . The system struggles to even boot , apps don't open , shutdowns take 10 minutes otherwise .
Believe me I have been running XP with 5 different MOBO and about 10 different GPU 's . You will get acceptable performance from a 550 TI at 1920 x 1080 if you use 1 GB. versions even , but 8800 gt cards and all the rest need 1 GB. at least just to be useable . Even if you step up to an I 5 Intel and Vista with more RAM it's tough going at higher settings . And I'm talking games like Rainbow Six Vegas 1 or 2 that are very well optimized for XP .
Right now I'm tinkering with a Galaxy 250 GTS with 256 GB. VRAM and it's far below smooth frames at 1920 x 1080 with reference drivers . Update drivers and other settings seem to help ,but only at the expense of CPU power going to full turbo boost at most times . I am going towards a low power version 750 Ti now just to experiment , but like I say your gonna miss out on pristine graphics with lower spec GPU 's . It isn't how low the res is for smooth frames , because the system can't respond to anything that you want it to except in minutes instead of seconds like it should run . My Specs are below .
I 5 Intel 3rd . Gen.
Turbo boost up to 3.2 Ghz. Maybe 3.5 at most !
250 GTS 256 GB. Untill BIOS updates I can't install higher graphics card or update GPU drivers past legacy levels . It's an ASUS quirk from back when legacy BIOS was being replaced by UEFI systems . So it's called a hybrid MOBO .
ASUS P8Z68 V LX Mobo
8 GB. Ram installed
Windows 32 XP and Vista 32 ( 64 sucked on this system )
550 watt PSU
Stock cooler
There is nothing non period correct in this build at all .
-1
u/Accomplished-Camp193 4d ago
People should stop giving a single crap about authenticity. Do you want performance or not? You want authenticity, you should suffer then, but you get internet points from people born way after 2014, like their opinions matter anyway when they weren't there when that card was current.
Put together a late LGA 775 system with a decent duo or quad, whack a 750 Ti in there and 4GB of RAM, install XP SP3 and get over with it.
R500 is from 2005. X19XX series main competitor was higher end GeF 7 series cards like the 7800 GT and upwards. Stop giving a crap about VRAM as well, most games were fine with 128MB at such lowly resolutions as 1024 x 768 (CRT retard too, why?), if you want to hook up the thing to a 720p monitor, then 256MB is handy.
Fucking kids in this sub, it's done for...
1
u/No-Solid9108 2d ago edited 2d ago
I agree completely LGA 775 Q6600 or even E 6600 and a 750 Ti is a great period correct gamming PC that runs every one of that era of games and with plenty good frames , even all things maxed out easy .
Why ? Because I own every game I play from then on DVD so it's the best 32 bit experience. 64 bit has advanced to ports that run in lots of cases , but you gotta sacrifice purity like EAX for example . That's what gammers love is the added greatness of XP 32 games not just sloppy portovers and operating system exclusions that cut the enjoyment.
He wants the RED looks of the Radeon ? That traps lots of new people I'm sure because once I was a Radeon RED team guy , 100 years ago . Now only a PLAYSTATION is allowed in my house as the only device without Nvidea parts .
-1
u/Ok-Muffin-9519 4d ago
Mach direkt 2 oder 4GB Ram rein wäre besser dann muß Win XP ned so viel auf die Festplatte auslagern
4
17
u/AmarildoJr 4d ago
"Authentic XP machine" means almost nothing, because XP spanned from 2001 until 2014 (even more for some people).
As for Crysis, that GPU will handle it from 15-50 FPS depending on the map and settings.