| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
So how much memory does XP need? | |
|
||
| Time: 09:40 EST/14:40 GMT | News Source: The Register | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
Microsoft's XP sales push to UK system builders, at the annual Personal Computer Association conference, prompted friendly discussion on the memory requirement for the OS. A few laughs of disbelief, and mutters of "No way will it run on that" and "As if", met group marketing man Nick McGrath's word on the subject. He said 64MB is the minimum XP will run on, but 128MB is recommended. He added that this is the first time Microsoft has come out with a memory recommendation. When pushed he reckoned a 300MHz PII box with 64MB would just about do the job. But earlier in his address he'd dismissed PII machines as XP-incapable, and their users ripe for an upsell, but his audience would want to hear that so they wouldn't be bothered to argue the point. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 301 Last | Next |
The time now is
12:22:18 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 40 (216.68.248.2) at 9/14/2001 10:32:38 AM |
| I have Xp isntalled and running on a Pentium pro 200 with 128, and it runs fine. i also installed it on a Pentium Pro overdrive (p2-333) with 128 and it worked fine. I upgrade the memory on both machines to 256 and it ran a little better. The install was of Pro and also Advance server. |
| #2 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 9/14/2001 1:15:55 PM |
|
I have 5 computers at home running Win2k or WinXP. One has 192M, 3 have 256M and one has 768M. At work my NT machine has 512M.
There is a noticeable difference from 256M to 768M. I would have to suggest any recent Pentium III computer be loaded up with 512 Megs regardless of what Microsoft states is the recommended minimum. 512Megs will set you back about $80. That's the price of 4 Megs of RAM back in 1995 when Win95 came out. GET OVER THE FIXATION OF MINIMUMS! RAM IS CHEAP! MAKE USE OF IT! |
| #3 By 182 (208.224.173.2) at 9/14/2001 2:33:20 PM |
|
#6, you're out of touch.
Most PC users don't know how to, and should not, install more RAM in their systems. And for companies that employ people who do, it is no small undertaking to install an extra DIMM into 5,000 PC's. It's not that big a deal, no, but it's a lot more than a "non-issue". |
| #4 By 61 (24.26.83.117) at 9/15/2001 7:53:50 AM |
|
Once you get to 64mb, what plays a bigger role is how good your video card is.
Simply, if you have an nVidia card, you will want more RAM, as nVidia probably makes the absolutely most PATHETIC excuse for a 2D driver set, sure they can do 3D, and do it well, but 2D is just pathetic, heck, on the latest Detonator (Det. XP as it's called), if you are on a resolution higher than 1024x768, you have lots of difficulty reading, as it is very much blurred (not that, that has anything to do with performance, just an example of how bad nVidia is for 2D).... Any Voodoo2 + card, ATi, and esp. Matrox (the absolute best for 2D) will be fine with only 64mb of RAM. |
| #5 By 61 (24.26.83.117) at 9/16/2001 1:26:50 PM |
|
#16, uhh, no, I don't think so. There are many others complaining about the same thing.
And you do realize how old the G200 is, don't you? Just because YOU don't see these things doesn't mean that they don't exist. I am a major graphics guy, I love to design and test user interfaces, create graphics, etc.... that's just what I do, and I can tell you how these things work. |
| #6 By 61 (24.26.83.117) at 9/16/2001 6:27:20 PM |
|
It's not the card itself, it's the drivers. The bluriness didn't come about until I installed the Det. XP drivers.
If you do a lot with the card, you too will start to notice it's 2D deficiences. |
| #7 By 61 (24.26.83.117) at 9/17/2001 5:22:51 PM |
|
The Det. drivers gave me a GREAT performance increase even from the 1x.x drivers, however, my 2D became very blurry once I installed these.
The ones that ship with the OS are just basic drivers, and really don't perform well. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 301 Last | Next |
The time now is
12:22:18 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
