Win2k on Pentium 200

debugger · Nov 2, 2002

OK! The kid's PC, a 64 mb Pentium 200, has run out of hard disk space (2 x 2 gb is not enough for a decent MP3 collection...) I've just put my hands on a new (old) 6 gb hard disk, and am now planning on replacing one of the two 2 gb units. The question, however, is which OS to install. I'm using Win2k on the newer machine, and am still quite impressed with the stability of it. Can I contemplate putting this OS on the Pentium 200, or should I stick with the Win 98 it used to have? Since we probably won't be running older DOS apps, I guess the only issues relate to the computer's horsepower, and maybe also the fact that older components such as the Logitech Soundman soundcard / HP Travan tape drive / Matrox Mystique may not be supported. Should I give it a try anyway? Should I believe Microsoft when they state that even on that obsolete machine, I'll get 20% more apparent speed running office applications? Thanks for any insight.

heliomphalodon · Nov 3, 2002

I've been running Windows 2000 on a Pentium MMX 233MHz without any problems -- but I do have 128MB of RAM.
If you're concerned about hardware compatibility, check the hardware list (HCL) on the Microsoft site.

I say give it a try and see how it performs for you -- you can always reinstall Windows 98 if need be.

IamDavid · Nov 3, 2002

I just tried it today on a Compaq P200 w\48megs and it sucked.

. Way to slow and unresponsive.. Maybe it is because its a Compaq but I couldn't handle it, I setup 98SE on it.

WarSong · Nov 3, 2002

If you can bump it up to 128MB, it should run okay. I used to run it on a P233 with 32MB and it was slllooowwww, but when i bumped it up to 128MB, it was way better.

ProviaFan · Nov 3, 2002

Try Windows 2000 Pro on that system. It will probably work fine, but you may be somewhat disappointed in the speed.

debugger · Nov 3, 2002

It sure sounds like alot of hassle, but if the MS/ZD Labs statement that "...running the most popular business applications, with 64 MB of RAM, Windows 2000 was 32 percent faster than Windows 95 and 27 percent faster than Windows 98..." is true, then its worth a try (yeah, I know, I shouldn't be running a Pentium 200, anyway...) Well, as far as I can tell, my ISA bus devices such as the sound card and the modem may not be supported (especially the sound card, a 1993-vintage Logitech Soundman 16), and there may be tons of issues with the BIOS and stuff lurking. But, hey, if its only those old ISA devices that are a problem, then I can probably replace them by their contemporary PCI equivalent for about $50, total. Is that plus the effort worth the much increased reliability and the 27% performance gain? Probably. But I'll sleep on it anyway...

igiveup · Nov 4, 2002

The reliability is the big win over 95, 98, and ESPECIALLY ME, in my opinion. Memory management is another big one too. The minimum configuration for Windows 2000 Pro is 64MB, and 128 is recommended over that. I am running 256 and it seems to be even better.

mzewski · Nov 5, 2002

Depends on how patient you are. I personally have seen various systems running Win 2k from a Pentium 200mmx thru Pentium II 300. With 64meg of RAM the Win 98 will definately feel quicker. The Win2k is stable but it needs more RAM to get going. Personally my threshold would be a Pentium II 300 with 128meg RAM. Anything less CPU or RAM wise I'd go with Win 98.

debugger · Nov 5, 2002

Thanks to all of you who provided some insight. I guess I'll go again with Win98. Its a mixture of not being convinced that I'll get the performance improvements that MS said I'd get, plus the fear that my old motherboard which still has some ISA stuff on it is going to spit out Win2k (or is it the opposite...) So, I'll just go along, and redo a fresh install to get rid of all the clutter that has been accumulating on it in the past three years, including all the Barbie/Fischer Price/Putt Putt/Freddie Fish/Disney/etc stuff (those of you who have kids know what I'm talking about), and then add this new/old 6 gb hardisk for more MP3s. Thanks again

kurt454 · Nov 6, 2002

Definitely go 98SE. You can do a trimmed down install of the OS, and only use about ~170megs of hard drive space. Probably take about 600megs for Win2k. Win 2000 runs pretty slow with 64megs of ram too. 128 is a minimum for me(with Win 2000).

heartsurgeon · Nov 6, 2002

win 2000 pro runs fine with 64meg, better with 128

go see if the drivers are out there for your peripherals if that worries you.
i would not recommend sp3
go with win 2000 pro, sp2

debugger · Nov 8, 2002

OK. I've been having second thoughts about putting back Win98 on that old Pentium. I was thinking about all the grief my wife gives me when the system crashes. So, I dug further, and found this benchmark report, running Winsone 99, from ZD Labs that was pretty interesting. In short, the results are tabulated below.

<TABLE borderColor=#000000 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=2 width=601 border=1>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top width="23%" height=21>
64 MB Systems</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=21>
Windows 95</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=21>
Windows 98</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="19%" height=21>
Windows NT</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="21%" height=21>
Windows 2000</TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top width="23%" height=21>
P1-133</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=21>
7.4</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=21>
7.7</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="19%" height=21>
10.0</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="21%" height=21>
9.5</TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top width="23%" height=21>
P2-166</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=21>
14.0</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=21>
14.4</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="19%" height=21>
17.2</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="21%" height=21>
15.0</TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top width="23%" height=21>
P2-166</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=21>
13.5</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=21>
14.3</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="19%" height=21>
17.8</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="21%" height=21>
19.3</TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top width="23%" height=21>
Celeron-433</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=21>
17.7</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=21>
18.5</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="19%" height=21>
23.3</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="21%" height=21>
23.0</TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top width="23%" height=21>
P3-500</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=21>
18.2</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=21>
19.0</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="19%" height=21>
26.7</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="21%" height=21>
26.7</TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top width="23%" height=21>
P2-233</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=21>
10.9</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=21>
12.1</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="19%" height=21>
15.4</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="21%" height=21>
15.1</TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top width="23%" height=23>
P2-366</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=23>
16.2</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="18%" height=23>
15.7</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="19%" height=23>
20.1</TD>
<TD vAlign=top width="21%" height=23>
20.6</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
And what was interesting was that the Pentium 1 with 128 megs only showed 8.5 with W2K. Their explanation was "System 1, an older Pentium model, ran slower with 128 MB of RAM than with 64 MB of RAM. This is not unusual with older systems. The external L2 cache in System 1 did not support the full 128 MB address range. When System 1 was manufactured, 32 MB of RAM exceeded the recommended amount of memory for most business applications. With 32 MB, or even 64 MB of RAM, the L2 cache presented no danger of bottlenecking. But, when upgraded to 128 MB of RAM, the efficiency of the L2 cache degraded. As a result, system performance suffered"

So, dam the torpedoes, and forget that stupid Logitech Soundman! I'm going Win2k. Wish me luck. If I'm not back up for air in a week, call the cops!

debugger · Nov 8, 2002

Oops! Sorry about the last post. I guess pasting a table here is not a good idea.

Paulson · Nov 8, 2002

my email server is a p200 w/win2k installed with a whooping 32 megs of memory...

takes a while to boot up and is a little slow but useable...

ProviaFan · Nov 9, 2002

Originally posted by: Paulson
my email server is a p200 w/win2k installed with a whooping 32 megs of memory...

takes a while to boot up and is a little slow but useable...

I bet that beats Windows.Net ES RC1 on my 500MHz Celeron with 160MB of RAM. :Q

Search

Win2k on Pentium 200

debugger

Member

heliomphalodon

Banned

IamDavid

Diamond Member

WarSong

Golden Member

ProviaFan

Lifer

debugger

Member

igiveup

Golden Member

mzewski

Junior Member

debugger

Member

kurt454

Senior member

heartsurgeon

Diamond Member

debugger

Member

debugger

Member

Paulson

Elite Member

ProviaFan

Lifer

TRENDING THREADS