Win Xp: minimum requirements?

Sam wrote:
> Hello,
>
> What are the min requirements for running XP? My father in law has a
> Win98 system and I'm wondering what hardware upgrades will be
> necessary. I know that what M$ say are minimum requirements can be
> optimistic. What would it need to run smoothly? TIA

It says 128MB here. In a system I put together for someone, intended
for web surfing and email, I used 512MB, and that was good enough
to have a couple programs open at the same time. If you
intend on doing Photoshop, then naturally more would be
advisable. Same with 3D gaming, and for that I might want 1GB
minimum.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/evaluation/sysreqs.mspx

For processor speed, you should already have some idea how things
will work, with your Win98 experiences. If things were slow
before, they'll remain so under WinXP.

What is the current motherboard, processor type and speed, RAM
type and speed ? What do you have for a video card ? What
are the intended applications ?

Paul
 >> Stay informed about: Win Xp: minimum requirements? 

About a 300MHz CPU and at least 256MB of memory are the practical
minimum. It's actually possible to install XP in 64MB of memory, but
less than 256MB won't be practically useful. A faster processor is also
a good idea. Any machine with a 300MHz CPU (which will be a Pentium II)
can probably be upgraded to about 800MHz pretty cheaply.

Sam wrote:
> Hello,
>
> What are the min requirements for running XP? My father in law has a
> Win98 system and I'm wondering what hardware upgrades will be
> necessary. I know that what M$ say are minimum requirements can be
> optimistic. What would it need to run smoothly? TIA
 >> Stay informed about: Win Xp: minimum requirements? 

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:39:28 -0400, Paul <nospam.TakeThisOut@needed.com> wrote:

>It says 128MB here. In a system I put together for someone, intended
>for web surfing and email, I used 512MB, and that was good enough
>to have a couple programs open at the same time. If you
>intend on doing Photoshop, then naturally more would be
>advisable. Same with 3D gaming, and for that I might want 1GB
>minimum.
>
>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/evaluation/sysreqs.mspx
>
>For processor speed, you should already have some idea how things
>will work, with your Win98 experiences. If things were slow
>before, they'll remain so under WinXP.
>
>What is the current motherboard, processor type and speed, RAM
>type and speed ? What do you have for a video card ? What
>are the intended applications ?


Hello,

It isn't slow with Win98, it's just that Win98 isn't supported any
more so it's difficult to find software.

It's an old Asus board with a 700MHz Celeron and 128mb ram. It's the
father in law's computer and he is only a light user, so like the
system you described, only needed for the odd word processing,
internet surfing, email, etc. Probably no need to multitask two
windows at once.

I think a Pentium 3 has more onboard cache than a Celeron so perhaps I
could swap the cpu but I think increasing the ram would have the best
performance increase.

I suppose technically I should have posted in an Asus group but all my
mobos are Gigabyte so this is where I have always looked for help

Thanks.
 >> Stay informed about: Win Xp: minimum requirements? 

Sam wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:39:28 -0400, Paul <nospam.TakeThisOut@needed.com> wrote:
>
>> It says 128MB here. In a system I put together for someone, intended
>> for web surfing and email, I used 512MB, and that was good enough
>> to have a couple programs open at the same time. If you
>> intend on doing Photoshop, then naturally more would be
>> advisable. Same with 3D gaming, and for that I might want 1GB
>> minimum.
>>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/evaluation/sysreqs.mspx
>>
>> For processor speed, you should already have some idea how things
>> will work, with your Win98 experiences. If things were slow
>> before, they'll remain so under WinXP.
>>
>> What is the current motherboard, processor type and speed, RAM
>> type and speed ? What do you have for a video card ? What
>> are the intended applications ?
>
>
> Hello,
>
> It isn't slow with Win98, it's just that Win98 isn't supported any
> more so it's difficult to find software.
>
> It's an old Asus board with a 700MHz Celeron and 128mb ram. It's the
> father in law's computer and he is only a light user, so like the
> system you described, only needed for the odd word processing,
> internet surfing, email, etc. Probably no need to multitask two
> windows at once.
>
> I think a Pentium 3 has more onboard cache than a Celeron so perhaps I
> could swap the cpu but I think increasing the ram would have the best
> performance increase.
>
> I suppose technically I should have posted in an Asus group but all my
> mobos are Gigabyte so this is where I have always looked for help
>
> Thanks.

Depending on what the motherboard is (440BX based ?), be careful about
what RAM you buy. I've used some 256MB modules from Crucial. My Asus
board has a total of 4 slots, so I bought 4 of them.

I discovered a bug in my motherboard, where I had video related freezes,
when more than two of those sticks were installed. I concluded it was
a hardware problem, when both Win98 and Linux exhibited the exact same
behavior. I could get a video related freeze with virtually no desktop
activity. The problem went away, as soon as I dropped down to two sticks.

So if you plan to upgrade, I would buy exactly 2 sticks of 256MB each.

http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.aspx?model=P2B-S

I think the kind I bought, were these - $33 a piece.

http://www.crucial.com/store/mpartspecs.aspx?mtbpoid=9E2CF4A6A5CA7304

One reason for buying them at Crucial, is they know about the "high density
memory" issue for 440BX. That 256MB stick has 16 chips on it, and is low
density. If you look elsewhere for the RAM, you could get a stick with
8 chips on it - that is the so-called high density RAM, and would only
be half-detected in a 440BX motherboard.

For other chipsets, there are likely to be fewer restrictions, and more
freedom in selecting RAM. For example, VIA chipsets are happy with more
RAM options, than Intel chipsets of that era.

The maximum processor you can buy, in a slot form factor, would be a
1.4GHz Tualatin. They were made in FSB100 and FSB133 versions, although
the FSB133 version might have been considered a "server" part. Those
processors would be S370 parts, and you need a slocket to fit them to an
older board. So there are a bunch of different options, that depend
on the details of the board. But I'd just start with the RAM, and see
how it goes with that upgrade first.

Paul
 >> Stay informed about: Win Xp: minimum requirements? 

Bump the RAM up to the max the motherboard will support or 512MB and you
will be fine. Even 256MB of ram would be serviceable.

Sam wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:39:28 -0400, Paul <nospam.DeleteThis@needed.com> wrote:
>
>> It says 128MB here. In a system I put together for someone, intended
>> for web surfing and email, I used 512MB, and that was good enough
>> to have a couple programs open at the same time. If you
>> intend on doing Photoshop, then naturally more would be
>> advisable. Same with 3D gaming, and for that I might want 1GB
>> minimum.
>>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/evaluation/sysreqs.mspx
>>
>> For processor speed, you should already have some idea how things
>> will work, with your Win98 experiences. If things were slow
>> before, they'll remain so under WinXP.
>>
>> What is the current motherboard, processor type and speed, RAM
>> type and speed ? What do you have for a video card ? What
>> are the intended applications ?
>
>
> Hello,
>
> It isn't slow with Win98, it's just that Win98 isn't supported any
> more so it's difficult to find software.
>
> It's an old Asus board with a 700MHz Celeron and 128mb ram. It's the
> father in law's computer and he is only a light user, so like the
> system you described, only needed for the odd word processing,
> internet surfing, email, etc. Probably no need to multitask two
> windows at once.
>
> I think a Pentium 3 has more onboard cache than a Celeron so perhaps I
> could swap the cpu but I think increasing the ram would have the best
> performance increase.
>
> I suppose technically I should have posted in an Asus group but all my
> mobos are Gigabyte so this is where I have always looked for help
>
> Thanks.
 >> Stay informed about: Win Xp: minimum requirements? 

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 03:12:27 +0800, "SumGuy" <some.TakeThisOut@one.de> wrote:

>I put together a machine with a 1 GHz Celeron and 448 MB RAM for a friend.
>
>Provided you turn off the default settings and use classic explorer view,
>and set it for best performance it should run quite OK.


Thanks everyone for your replies. The mobo is so old I can't buy new
parts for it, so I'm off to ebay to get some second hand parts which
should make the pc ok for light use for another couple of years.
 >> Stay informed about: Win Xp: minimum requirements? 

I put together a machine with a 1 GHz Celeron and 448 MB RAM for a friend.

Provided you turn off the default settings and use classic explorer view,
and set it for best performance it should run quite OK.

I would also take the trouble to turn off thumbnail views, or if using
detail views in folders with media, make sure the default view doesn't have
the "dimension", or "duration" column. these columns can take a while to
populate if there are many files.

"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM RemoveThis @neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:471b85e3$0$15325$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Bump the RAM up to the max the motherboard will support or 512MB and you
> will be fine. Even 256MB of ram would be serviceable.
>
> Sam wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:39:28 -0400, Paul <nospam RemoveThis @needed.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It says 128MB here. In a system I put together for someone, intended
>>> for web surfing and email, I used 512MB, and that was good enough
>>> to have a couple programs open at the same time. If you
>>> intend on doing Photoshop, then naturally more would be
>>> advisable. Same with 3D gaming, and for that I might want 1GB
>>> minimum.
>>>
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/evaluation/sysreqs.mspx
>>>
>>> For processor speed, you should already have some idea how things
>>> will work, with your Win98 experiences. If things were slow
>>> before, they'll remain so under WinXP.
>>>
>>> What is the current motherboard, processor type and speed, RAM
>>> type and speed ? What do you have for a video card ? What
>>> are the intended applications ?
>>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> It isn't slow with Win98, it's just that Win98 isn't supported any
>> more so it's difficult to find software.
>>
>> It's an old Asus board with a 700MHz Celeron and 128mb ram. It's the
>> father in law's computer and he is only a light user, so like the
>> system you described, only needed for the odd word processing,
>> internet surfing, email, etc. Probably no need to multitask two
>> windows at once.
>>
>> I think a Pentium 3 has more onboard cache than a Celeron so perhaps I
>> could swap the cpu but I think increasing the ram would have the best
>> performance increase.
>>
>> I suppose technically I should have posted in an Asus group but all my
>> mobos are Gigabyte so this is where I have always looked for help
>>
>> Thanks.
 >> Stay informed about: Win Xp: minimum requirements?