• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

How will Vista run on a P3?

M

mchammer

Diamond Member
I know many of you around here have played around with the beta versions. What is your best guess of how Vista will run on a P3 866 with 512 MB.
 
I'm guessing it'll be fine (never having touched vista myself) but if you want the funky gui, a half decent graphics card would be a good idea. What has the machine in question got?
 
Originally posted by: kamper
I'm guessing it'll be fine (never having touched vista myself) but if you want the funky gui, a half decent graphics card would be a good idea. What has the machine in question got?
Click to expand...

Radeon 9200 128MB
 
The final should run fine, the current betas might not run so well since they'll have a lot of debugging code still enabled.
 
Originally posted by: narutofan36
i though vista required a 256 mb graphic card
Click to expand...

Nope. It is either 64 or 128MB if you want Glass. And of course a LDDM driver for your card. Pretty sure it's 64. But pretty much any card will run the non-glass UI.
 
Originally posted by: lein
Isn't vista 64-bit?
Click to expand...

1st release will have a 32 bit version from what I've read.

And a P3 could probably run it, but what's your definition of "run" :laugh:

I had a 400mhz p2 that ran XP, albeit very badly.
 
I imagine it's not so much the cpu but your ram that's going to limit you. 512mb isn't a whole lot these days even with xp decked out and a few apps running. If you can boost your memory to a gig then I think you'll be more on the side of 'fine'.

 
I would ask "Why"....

Why spend the money on that OS when it's going to perform poorly on that hardware (and hence a "Vista is teh sUck post). Do you like pain?
 
Originally posted by: KeepItRed
That's like asking if Windows XP could run on a Pentium II. lol
Click to expand...

umm, yeah... xp would run on a pentium II. very very slowly, but it'll run it.

i know this guy that ran xp on a pentium I! it took 10 minuted for it to load and moving the mouse was torture...lol
 
Fools.
Right now running XP Pro on a Dell CPiD300XT. PII300 192MB RAM. Only has 1.5M Video memory.
Runs fine, although not particularly speedy. Office stuff, listening to music, burning CDs, and internet browsing are fine. It also plays DVDs fine with the DVD2GO card I got with it. It's only temporary until my new laptop gets here, but it does what 90% of home users would ask of it.

I wouldn't try to put Vista on it, but a PIII with decent video should be more than fine for Vista.
 
Originally posted by: ForumMaster
i know this guy that ran xp on a pentium I! it took 10 minuted for it to load and moving the mouse was torture...lol
Click to expand...
I just looked at the bottom of the XP Pro box. No specific Pentium or Celeron cpu is named; just a speed of 233 MHz. So even a Pentium I qualified, according to that. And 128 MB's RAM is supposed to be enough. That last bit is really a bad joke.

I believe that I've seen a "practical minimum" of a 2 GHz P4 or an XP 2000 with 1 GB of RAM. The recent preference from MS on VGA "has been" ATI instead of nVidia, with some complaint about the nVidia drivers.

On more than one occasion, I've tested XP on slower hardware, and found it relatively slow on an XP 1500, and very slow on a P3 600, and really ungodly slow on a K6-2 450. That would put the XP 2000 and P4 2 GHz where the 900 MHz P3 and Athlon are for XP. Practical minimum, anyway. With all of the bells and whistles active, you'd probably WANT to have another 200-300 MHz (or AMD performance points) past the practical minimum.


😉

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top