WinXp Minimum system requirements!

Hydra · April 28th, 2002

What are they?

**Bgnome** · April 28th, 2002

http://support.microsoft.com/search/...;en-us;Q314865

Hydra · April 28th, 2002

ok thanks

StriderHiryu · April 29th, 2002

i have tested it on a lowtech computer it works fine w/tweakxp on.

here is the specs:

P2:233Mhz
64MB Mem
4.0Gb hd
NvidiaTnt1

hope that helps.

Hydra · April 29th, 2002

Yeah I'm using to right now.

**Kirby** · April 30th, 2002

I beat it by 700MHZ. I'm just a little sceptic about how much free memory I will have while running XP

REi_FoX · April 30th, 2002

isnt XP buggy than ME

**Kane** · April 30th, 2002

What less? Yes. ME is rampant with memory leaks, etc, and is less stable than an italian taxi driver, stuck behind two nuns in a morris minor! XP is rock solid stable.

Syed Fawad · April 30th, 2002

Kane, r u a philosopher of humour or something?
For Xp it is essential that u have <i>at least</i> 128Mb Ram infact it would perform better with 256Mb.
I am using it and my specs are in my profile.

**Kane** · April 30th, 2002

No, not really.... You are right about the memory tho.
XP will run happy on a 266MHz as long as it has 256MB RAM (Yes, a 266. My friend has a laptop that runs it with all the detail on at full speed)

Mr Urt · May 2nd, 2002

XP is more compatible than 2000, but requires a good amout of memory. It isn't really too much to ask tho, cuz nowdays all medium to high cpu's being sold have at least 256 (and that's usually DDR/RDRAM)

G-Pitts · May 2nd, 2002

XP also optimized to play games than w2000

May 2nd, 2002

Not really. It has a few compatibility options for older games, but any modern program that runs on XP will work just as well on Win2k.

Rule No 1: Never buy any M$ product until they have released at least one Service Pack for it

ebola · May 3rd, 2002

god i think about a 8 ghz machine is the minimum. hehe (slight overexageration). XP is a load of dung. its just a pretty version of 2k. its kind of like acrabat reader. you need atleast a 2ghz machine to make that crap go a decent speed.

**Demigod** · May 3rd, 2002

Well, even with the new candy-coated GUI and fancy animations Windows XP still runs faster than Windows 2000 on my primitive 1 Ghz system. It doesn't really take up that many resources as well. Windows 2000 used to take up around 110 MB of RAM but Windows XP only uses around 95 MB. As long as you have a 500+ Mhz system it should run decently.

**Kane** · May 3rd, 2002

It ran beautifilly on my old Athlon 650MHz w/ 256 MB RAM, and it's a dream on my current machine.

Hydra · May 3rd, 2002

Yup it's running great with me. Hhmmm seems someones upset they don't have it.

May 4th, 2002

Quote:

Originally posted by Demigod79
It doesn't really take up that many resources as well. Windows 2000 used to take up around 110 MB of RAM but Windows XP only uses around 95 MB.

I think you need to disable some of the unnecessary services. I currently have 2 IE6 windows + Outlook Express open, and the task manager shows 93MB used! Try http://is-it-true.org/nt/utips/utips76.shtml.

Quote:

Originally posted by GoTrunks48
Hhmmm seems someones upset they don't have it.

I do have it, I'm waiting for Service Pack 1 before I install it though

**Demigod** · May 4th, 2002

Quote:

Originally posted by charlesg

I think you need to disable some of the unnecessary services. I currently have 2 IE6 windows + Outlook Express open, and the task manager shows 93MB used! Try http://is-it-true.org/nt/utips/utips76.shtml.

I could probably disable a few things but I don't think it's that big of a deal. I was just saying on a similar configuration Windows XP is somewhat less demanding memory-wise, especially considering the fancy new GUI and all.

Windows XP runs great even without service packs. The only security patch you really need is the Universal PnP one. And if you're worried about security on the net you can enable the firewall. There are some compatibility issues but they're minimal. Comparatively, Windows 2K had far greater compatibility issues upon its release.

May 4th, 2002

AFAIK, that depends if you're running XP Home or Pro. The Home edition is missing features compared to Win2k or XP Pro (like NT Domains) so it's not suprising it's easier on resources. Win2k is not available in a Home edition, but by disabling stuff you end up with the same thing. BTW, here is M$'s own minimum spec for VS .NET;

Windows 2000 Professional — 96 MB;
Windows 2000 Server — 192 MB;
Windows NT4.0 Workstation — 64 MB;
Windows NT 4.0 Server — 160 MB;
Windows XP Professional — 160 MB

Doesn't look less demanding memory-wise to me!

Win2k also has a "firewall", aka TCP/IP filtering, built in. I prefer to let my ADSL router handle that.

I must admit, compared to most M$ releases, there seem to be very few issues with XP. But that's not suprising given that XP is near enough Win2k SP2 with a new GUI (NT version 5.01 as against 5.0

). The biggest moan I've seen is that you can't disable mouse acceleration in OpenGL, which is a pain in FPS games.

I agree that Win2k was not a good gaming platform on it's release, see Rule No 1 above

April 28th, 2002	#1 (permalink)
Hydra ???!!!???!!!?!?! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: In your lunchbox. No don't open the lid! Ack the light it burns. Posts: 2,183	WinXp Minimum system requirements! What are they? __________________ Mobo: Asus A8V Deluxe CPU: AMD Athlon 64 3000+ RAM: 1024MB DDR400 Dual Channel Graphics: nVidia Geforce FX 6600 GT 128MB DDR3 HDD: 260GB OS: Windows XP SP2

April 28th, 2002	#2 (permalink)
Bgnome Who Da Gnome? Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: At Home Posts: 2,441	http://support.microsoft.com/search/...;en-us;Q314865 __________________ May the Gnome™ be With You

April 28th, 2002	#3 (permalink)
Hydra ???!!!???!!!?!?! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: In your lunchbox. No don't open the lid! Ack the light it burns. Posts: 2,183	ok thanks __________________ Mobo: Asus A8V Deluxe CPU: AMD Athlon 64 3000+ RAM: 1024MB DDR400 Dual Channel Graphics: nVidia Geforce FX 6600 GT 128MB DDR3 HDD: 260GB OS: Windows XP SP2

April 29th, 2002	#5 (permalink)
Hydra ???!!!???!!!?!?! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: In your lunchbox. No don't open the lid! Ack the light it burns. Posts: 2,183	Yeah I'm using to right now. __________________ Mobo: Asus A8V Deluxe CPU: AMD Athlon 64 3000+ RAM: 1024MB DDR400 Dual Channel Graphics: nVidia Geforce FX 6600 GT 128MB DDR3 HDD: 260GB OS: Windows XP SP2

April 30th, 2002	#6 (permalink)
Kirby Politically incorrect FTW Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 8,445	I beat it by 700MHZ. I'm just a little sceptic about how much free memory I will have while running XP __________________ AMD Athlon64 X2 4400+ Toledo, Nvidia GeForce 7950GT SLi, 2GB PC3200 2-3-2-5, ABit AN8-SLi, Sound Blaster X-FI XtremeMusic

April 29th, 2002	#4 (permalink)
StriderHiryu Banned Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: CrossRoads Between the Shadows of Columbia Posts: 38	i have tested it on a lowtech computer it works fine w/tweakxp on. here is the specs: P2:233Mhz 64MB Mem 4.0Gb hd NvidiaTnt1 hope that helps.

April 30th, 2002	#7 (permalink)
REi_FoX ¡¾¡¾¡¾¡ Fantasy ¡¾¡¾¡¾¡ Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Manila, Philippines Posts: 3,649	isnt XP buggy than ME __________________ FoR PiNoYs WhO WanTs To BuY CheAp ParTs CliCk Here also Here Processor - Intel Quad 2 Quad q6600 G0 Stepping [Stock Settings] Memory - 2GB Team Elite 800mhz Graphics Card - Palit Daytone Geforce 8800 GT 512 MB Mobo - Abit IP-35-E OS - Dual Boot Windows XP Professional SP3 and Ubuntu Linux Pad - PS1 and PS2 > USB Adapter 3DMark05 Score - 35082

April 30th, 2002	#8 (permalink)
Kane 邪魔ゎ指せない Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Gosport, England Posts: 26,255	What less? Yes. ME is rampant with memory leaks, etc, and is less stable than an italian taxi driver, stuck behind two nuns in a morris minor! XP is rock solid stable. __________________ >Site Live< Pop over to my site for help with setting up PSX emulators. Help for the Final Fantasies and other RPGs avalaible Celes: (Desktop) Athlon 64 X2 4200+, 2Gb 400MHz DDR Ram, MSI K8N Platinum, GeForce 8800 GTS 320Mb, 500Gb RAID HDD, Vista Business Erika: (MCPC) Athlon XP 2400+, 1Gb 400MHz DDR Ram, geForce 6800 256Mb, 80Gb Hdd, XP 2005 MCE Kimiko: (Desktop 2) Athlon 64 3000+, 512Mb 400MHz DDR Ram, Asus K8V, geForce 6800 128Mb

April 30th, 2002	#9 (permalink)
Syed Fawad -PM to advertise here- Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: In an average country of an average planet of the solar system of an average star of an average galaxy of an average cluster. Still not average... Posts: 8,261	Kane, r u a philosopher of humour or something? For Xp it is essential that u have <i>at least</i> 128Mb Ram infact it would perform better with 256Mb. I am using it and my specs are in my profile. __________________ Asus K8N (nForce3) AMD64 3000+ (754) 768MB DDR 400MHz (PC 3200) nVidia Geforce 6600GT 128MB (AGP) Aquamark3 - 53,000 "Good friends mustn't always be together. It is the feeling of oneness when distant that proves a lasting friendship"

April 30th, 2002	#10 (permalink)
Kane 邪魔ゎ指せない Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Gosport, England Posts: 26,255	No, not really.... You are right about the memory tho. XP will run happy on a 266MHz as long as it has 256MB RAM (Yes, a 266. My friend has a laptop that runs it with all the detail on at full speed) __________________ >Site Live< Pop over to my site for help with setting up PSX emulators. Help for the Final Fantasies and other RPGs avalaible Celes: (Desktop) Athlon 64 X2 4200+, 2Gb 400MHz DDR Ram, MSI K8N Platinum, GeForce 8800 GTS 320Mb, 500Gb RAID HDD, Vista Business Erika: (MCPC) Athlon XP 2400+, 1Gb 400MHz DDR Ram, geForce 6800 256Mb, 80Gb Hdd, XP 2005 MCE Kimiko: (Desktop 2) Athlon 64 3000+, 512Mb 400MHz DDR Ram, Asus K8V, geForce 6800 128Mb

May 2nd, 2002	#11 (permalink)
Mr Urt gone postal Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,569	XP is more compatible than 2000, but requires a good amout of memory. It isn't really too much to ask tho, cuz nowdays all medium to high cpu's being sold have at least 256 (and that's usually DDR/RDRAM)

May 2nd, 2002	#12 (permalink)
G-Pitts Whats Up Doc! Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Land Below The Wind, Malaysia Posts: 1,232	XP also optimized to play games than w2000 __________________ Kar-T-Ney + AMD Athlon64 X2 3600+ (2.25 ghz) + 4096 MB DDR2 + Geforce 7600GT 256 MB DDR3 + Realtek HD Audio + WinXP Pro SP2

May 2nd, 2002	#13 (permalink)
charlesg Guest Posts: n/a	Not really. It has a few compatibility options for older games, but any modern program that runs on XP will work just as well on Win2k. Rule No 1: Never buy any M$ product until they have released at least one Service Pack for it

May 3rd, 2002	#14 (permalink)
ebola Registered User Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Chanhassen, MN Posts: 900	god i think about a 8 ghz machine is the minimum. hehe (slight overexageration). XP is a load of dung. its just a pretty version of 2k. its kind of like acrabat reader. you need atleast a 2ghz machine to make that crap go a decent speed. __________________ .: Cythraul Design :: MBA-Forums :.

May 3rd, 2002	#15 (permalink)
Demigod これはバタスです Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Posts: 5,811	Well, even with the new candy-coated GUI and fancy animations Windows XP still runs faster than Windows 2000 on my primitive 1 Ghz system. It doesn't really take up that many resources as well. Windows 2000 used to take up around 110 MB of RAM but Windows XP only uses around 95 MB. As long as you have a 500+ Mhz system it should run decently. __________________ CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 @ 2.66 Ghz (Yorkfield) Mobo: Intel DX48BT2 Memory: 2048 MB PC10600 DDR3 Videocard: PNY Geforce 9800 GX2 PCIe w/ 1024 MB GDDR3 Soundcard: On-board SigmaTel High Definition Audio Hard drive: 300 MB Maxtor & 1 TB Hitachi Optical drive: LG GGW-H20L (2x BD-R DL) OS: Microsoft Windows Vista (32-bit)

May 3rd, 2002	#16 (permalink)
Kane 邪魔ゎ指せない Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Gosport, England Posts: 26,255	It ran beautifilly on my old Athlon 650MHz w/ 256 MB RAM, and it's a dream on my current machine. __________________ >Site Live< Pop over to my site for help with setting up PSX emulators. Help for the Final Fantasies and other RPGs avalaible Celes: (Desktop) Athlon 64 X2 4200+, 2Gb 400MHz DDR Ram, MSI K8N Platinum, GeForce 8800 GTS 320Mb, 500Gb RAID HDD, Vista Business Erika: (MCPC) Athlon XP 2400+, 1Gb 400MHz DDR Ram, geForce 6800 256Mb, 80Gb Hdd, XP 2005 MCE Kimiko: (Desktop 2) Athlon 64 3000+, 512Mb 400MHz DDR Ram, Asus K8V, geForce 6800 128Mb

May 3rd, 2002	#17 (permalink)
Hydra ???!!!???!!!?!?! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: In your lunchbox. No don't open the lid! Ack the light it burns. Posts: 2,183	Yup it's running great with me. Hhmmm seems someones upset they don't have it. __________________ Mobo: Asus A8V Deluxe CPU: AMD Athlon 64 3000+ RAM: 1024MB DDR400 Dual Channel Graphics: nVidia Geforce FX 6600 GT 128MB DDR3 HDD: 260GB OS: Windows XP SP2

May 4th, 2002	#20 (permalink)
charlesg Guest Posts: n/a	AFAIK, that depends if you're running XP Home or Pro. The Home edition is missing features compared to Win2k or XP Pro (like NT Domains) so it's not suprising it's easier on resources. Win2k is not available in a Home edition, but by disabling stuff you end up with the same thing. BTW, here is M$'s own minimum spec for VS .NET; Windows 2000 Professional — 96 MB; Windows 2000 Server — 192 MB; Windows NT4.0 Workstation — 64 MB; Windows NT 4.0 Server — 160 MB; Windows XP Professional — 160 MB Doesn't look less demanding memory-wise to me! Win2k also has a "firewall", aka TCP/IP filtering, built in. I prefer to let my ADSL router handle that. I must admit, compared to most M$ releases, there seem to be very few issues with XP. But that's not suprising given that XP is near enough Win2k SP2 with a new GUI (NT version 5.01 as against 5.0 ). The biggest moan I've seen is that you can't disable mouse acceleration in OpenGL, which is a pain in FPS games. I agree that Win2k was not a good gaming platform on it's release, see Rule No 1 above

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode