PDA

View Full Version : Will windows XP run on this old laptop?



eragon100
March 5th, 2011, 08:37 PM
Hello guys! I know it's about windows (;_;) but I got myself an old laptop (900 MHZ pentium 256 MB RAM 8 MB savage 3 graphics card 40 GB hard drive, and cd/dvd-rom, and wonder: will windows XP run on this with any decent speed? I only intend to use it for web browsing, office, and maybe watching standard definition anime + play old games on it. Nothing more. :D :popcorn:

MasterNetra
March 5th, 2011, 08:40 PM
Hello guys! I know it's about windows (;_;) but I got myself an old laptop (900 MHZ pentium 256 MB RAM 8 MB savage 3 graphics card 40 GB hard drive, and cd/dvd-rom, and wonder: will windows XP run on this with any decent speed? I only intend to use it for web browsing, office, and maybe watching standard definition anime + play old games on it. Nothing more. :D :popcorn:

It will run, best to keep everything on minimal no themes and disabled as much as possible. However still not recommended. Performance will still be sluggish. I would recommend slapping on something like Puppy Linux or tiny core.

CharlesA
March 5th, 2011, 08:44 PM
I've run it on a similar machine, it ran slow as all hell, but it did run.

I've also run XP on a 500MHz P3 with 256 RAM - ran but it wasn't pretty.

sffvba[e0rt
March 5th, 2011, 08:47 PM
Hello guys! I know it's about windows (;_;) but I got myself an old laptop (900 MHZ pentium 256 MB RAM 8 MB savage 3 graphics card 40 GB hard drive, and cd/dvd-rom, and wonder: will windows XP run on this with any decent speed? I only intend to use it for web browsing, office, and maybe watching standard definition anime + play old games on it. Nothing more. :D :popcorn:
For what you want to do I can't believe you are opting for Windows (and asking advice on this forum)... :confused: Troll?


404

eragon100
March 5th, 2011, 08:48 PM
Thanx guys, but there is one thing I don't understand: Windows XP came out in 2001, and this was an extremely expensive brand new laptop back then -- are you talking about windows XP SP 3? I want to install the real old one ;-)

eragon100
March 5th, 2011, 08:50 PM
For what you want to do I can't believe you are opting for Windows (and asking advice on this forum)... :confused: Troll?


404

I already tried to install vector linux on it... doesn't work :O
It comes with a PCMCIA wireless card which is essential that it works... and it doesn't work with linux :-(

I asked here because I expect people to know here ;-) :popcorn:

CharlesA
March 5th, 2011, 08:52 PM
Thanx guys, but there is one thing I don't understand: Windows XP came out in 2001, and this was an extremely expensive brand new laptop back then -- are you talking about windows XP SP 3? I want to install the real old one ;-)
No reason to use anything other then SP3.

MasterNetra
March 5th, 2011, 08:55 PM
I already tried to install vector linux on it... doesn't work :O
It comes with a PCMCIA wireless card which is essential that it works... and it doesn't work with linux :-(

I asked here because I expect people to know here ;-) :popcorn:

Well with windows xp your not going to be able to do much on the web anyway. Forget flash... And installing a firewall and AV? Yea...believe me you probably won't even want to bother much with XP...though you could dual boot, use xp for internet connection and Linux for everything else on it. Puppy Linux and tinycore would still burn rubber on it.


No reason to use anything other then SP3.

Well, I've noticed before after installing SP3 in windows xp that the system used more ram, went from around 230-250mb of ram idle (after minimizations) to around 320MB+. He should have a fully updated SP2 at least.

eragon100
March 5th, 2011, 08:55 PM
No reason to use anything other then SP3.

SP 3 doesn't use more memory and stuff? :D

Quadunit404
March 5th, 2011, 08:57 PM
I've ran Windows XP on a Pentium III 900MHz, 128MB RAM, 40GB hard drive and some really really low-end Intel "card" before at decent speed, including the Luna theme. This was from 2001 - 2006 (when the machine gave in.) If I could run Windows XP on a machine with THOSE specs, there should be no problem running it on the specs you gave out here.

MasterNetra
March 5th, 2011, 09:01 PM
I've ran Windows XP on a Pentium III 900MHz, 128MB RAM, 40GB hard drive and some really really low-end Intel "card" before at decent speed, including the Luna theme. This was from 2001 - 2006 (when the machine gave in.) If I could run Windows XP on a machine with THOSE specs, there should be no problem running it on the specs you gave out here.

Indeed but that was before service pack 3. ;)

@OP Also avoid extras in updates like the lastest Windows media player and .Net Frameworks, that's more ram choking there.

CharlesA
March 5th, 2011, 09:08 PM
Well, I've noticed before after installing SP3 in windows xp that the system used more ram, went from around 230-250mb of ram idle (after minimizations) to around 320MB+. He should have a fully updated SP2 at least.

Hrm. I checked my machine running XP and it's using around 156MB of RAM idle. Of course the only thing running on it is IE8.. but still..

eragon100
March 5th, 2011, 09:08 PM
Indeed but that was before service pack 3. ;)

@OP Also avoid extras in updates like the lastest Windows media player and .Net Frameworks, that's more ram choking there.

Allright I am gonna run the original without any service packs XD thanx for the info people! :popcorn: :KS

Hur Dur
March 5th, 2011, 10:05 PM
Yes, it will run. It will run rather well, actually. As long as you don't expect to run Flash, or anti-virus. Although, you would probably get better performance out of a Linux distro like Arch, SliTaz, Puppy, TinyCore, Slackware, Gentoo, etc.

Quadunit404
March 5th, 2011, 10:15 PM
Indeed but that was before service pack 3. ;)

This is true, that PC never got anything higher than Service Pack 1a :lol:

And just be aware that Microsoft cut off life support for Windows XP without any service packs around 2003 iirc, so you HAVE to install SP3 if you want updates.

Pougnet
March 5th, 2011, 10:29 PM
I have run windows xp on a 800mhz p3 cappermine and it ran great. I posted a picture of that computer on here a while back...here it is again,
http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/6428/imag0011oe.jpg

eragon100
March 5th, 2011, 10:49 PM
I have run windows xp on a 800mhz p3 cappermine and it ran great. I posted a picture of that computer on here a while back...here it is again,
http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/6428/imag0011oe.jpg

A beatifull craptop! XDDD

Quadunit404
March 5th, 2011, 10:57 PM
I have run windows xp on a 800mhz p3 cappermine and it ran great. I posted a picture of that computer on here a while back...here it is again,
http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/6428/imag0011oe.jpg

It... it's so beautiful...

eragon100
March 5th, 2011, 11:15 PM
It... it's so beautiful...

Actually I have an even older laptop which is even crappier! 433 mhz celeron, 64 mb ram, also 8 mb dedicated graphics card :D Windows me flies on it! XD

mips
March 5th, 2011, 11:38 PM
Hello guys! I know it's about windows (;_;) but I got myself an old laptop (900 MHZ pentium 256 MB RAM 8 MB savage 3 graphics card 40 GB hard drive, and cd/dvd-rom...

Pentium WHAT?

You don't supply much information. Give some more specifics about the processor. The Pentium 4 for example came out in 2000.

We cannot smell what processor you are using.

But regardless if it came out in 2001 the XP will run just fine on it, a bit more ram will only help.

sudoer541
March 6th, 2011, 07:55 PM
Go to control panel > Administrative tools > services and make sure to disable and stop ALL services except:



DHCP client
Plug and play
Remote procedure call (RPC)
Windows Audio
DNS Client
Removable storageMake sure to disable themes and delete all fonts on the font folder (dont worry xp will recover the ones you need automatically after you log out and log it)
Before I forget, there is a good site to tweak Windows xp. Look here (http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1590).
Follow the instructions on the site I posted and your xp will fly on your system!

Tell me how it went, ok?

asifnaz
March 6th, 2011, 08:13 PM
I've run it on a similar machine, it ran slow as all hell, but it did run.

I've also run XP on a 500MHz P3 with 256 RAM - ran but it wasn't pretty.

I wonder how you are ignorant about windows . My friend has a Pentium 1 199 Mhz with 64 mb ram (yes 64 mb) and windows xp works ok with it . If you are going to install heavy software it might not ork ( but it is not OS's fault )

CharlesA
March 6th, 2011, 08:17 PM
I wonder how you are ignorant about windows . My friend has a Pentium 1 199 Mhz with 64 mb ram (yes 64 mb) and windows xp works ok with it . If you are going to install heavy software it might not ork ( but it is not OS's fault )
Not blaming the OS. :)

It was a work PC, loaded with a bunch of junk. I think most of the slowness was the AV and Outlook causing it to eat all the memory. Otherwise it was pretty decent overall.

TriBlox6432
March 6th, 2011, 08:23 PM
Try a live cd and see if everything works. :lolflag:

asifnaz
March 6th, 2011, 08:28 PM
Not blaming the OS. :)

It was a work PC, loaded with a bunch of junk. I think most of the slowness was the AV and Outlook causing it to eat all the memory. Otherwise it was pretty decent overall.

But you previously said it was slow as hell . windows xp can run on very old hardware (it is about 10 years old ) . If someone has a Pentium II and ram anything above 64 mb he can run windows xp without any doubt at ok speed . He can not watch youtube , or HD movies or games released after 2000

Dustin2128
March 6th, 2011, 08:56 PM
No reason to use anything other then SP3.
except for SliTaz...
Yeah, should run, not well but it will run.

Hur Dur
March 6th, 2011, 09:07 PM
Isn't ReactOS compatible with a lot of Windows programs, and lighter than XP? You could always give that a try. I'm pretty sure it only requires 32mb RAM.

Quadunit404
March 6th, 2011, 09:11 PM
Isn't ReactOS compatible with a lot of Windows programs, and lighter than XP? You could always give that a try. I'm pretty sure it only requires 32mb RAM.

Yes, ReactOS is compatible with a lot of Windows programs, but only when the planets align correctly :lolflag:

coolbrook
March 6th, 2011, 09:44 PM
Thanks for the reminder about ReactOS. If it keeps an old TV tuner doing its job, then an install will be worth my while.

papaapa
March 6th, 2011, 10:23 PM
XP? (Facepalm) Unless you NEED Diablo, Quake, Doom, Starcraft, Scrabble Comeplete, XP is going to be a frustration in patience for the web.
Lubuntu (LXDE Desktop)
or Puppylinux, Tinycore (A Whopping 20 megabytes),

Flubuntu, and Xubuntu just didn't do it for me. - A WiFi guru test. Xubuntu was slower than Ubuntu - yech.

Dr. C
March 7th, 2011, 04:25 AM
It will run Microsoft Windows XP but it can be very slow. The limitation here is the 256 MB RAM not the processor or video card. I would find out the maximum amount of RAM the laptop will take and max it out. It will make a huge difference. I have got XP to run on lower specs: Caleron 400 with 192 MB of RAM

If you wish to run Microsoft Windows on the laptop, consider Windows 98SE. It will run really well on those specs.

For GNU / Linux consider a light distro Puppy, DSL etc or get the RAM up to 512K and run the latest Ubuntu!

ReactOS would be a good idea were it not for the fact that it is still in alpha, and there again extra RAM is a good idea.

Dustin2128
March 7th, 2011, 04:31 AM
XP? (Facepalm) Unless you NEED Diablo, Quake, Doom, Starcraft, Scrabble Comeplete, XP is going to be a frustration in patience for the web.
Lubuntu (LXDE Desktop)
or Puppylinux, Tinycore (A Whopping 20 megabytes),

Flubuntu, and Xubuntu just didn't do it for me. - A WiFi guru test. Xubuntu was slower than Ubuntu - yech.
Quake and Doom run nativley in linux, diablo and starcraft work well in wine. Well diablo II does..

eragon100
March 7th, 2011, 06:47 PM
It will run Microsoft Windows XP but it can be very slow. The limitation here is the 256 MB RAM not the processor or video card. I would find out the maximum amount of RAM the laptop will take and max it out. It will make a huge difference. I have got XP to run on lower specs: Caleron 400 with 192 MB of RAM

If you wish to run Microsoft Windows on the laptop, consider Windows 98SE. It will run really well on those specs.

For GNU / Linux consider a light distro Puppy, DSL etc or get the RAM up to 512K and run the latest Ubuntu!

ReactOS would be a good idea were it not for the fact that it is still in alpha, and there again extra RAM is a good idea.

512 K of RAM? :O :guitar:

I already bought a memory bank to upgrade it from 128 to 256 MB of ram, it was very cheap on ebay. But usually this old memory is very expensive (right?) :D So 256 MB will have to do... >_<

FoxEWolf
March 7th, 2011, 06:56 PM
Yes it will run. I would keep it in Windows Classic and disable as much GUI effects as much as possible and it would run smoother.

mips
March 7th, 2011, 09:31 PM
34 posts later and we still don't know what cpu it has or the brand/model of the laptop everybody is providing suggestions to....

fyfe54
March 7th, 2011, 09:48 PM
I have a similar spec Dell at my second home - used for surfing etc. I was running XP-Pro-SP3 but it was sloooooooow. Didn't want to buy a new machine just for weekends, so I went dual boot with Ubuntu and it was like it got a shot of steroids. Despite the improved performance, I had to keep XP for my wife as she hates change.

CharlesA
March 7th, 2011, 09:58 PM
34 posts later and we still don't know what cpu it has or the brand/model of the laptop everybody is providing suggestions to....
Yep. Gotta love it. :lolflag:

mips
March 8th, 2011, 01:20 PM
Yep. Gotta love it. :lolflag:

I suppose that's the internet for you.

I honestly don't understand how people can even make suggestions when they don't know the details surrounding the question.

Maybe I should have just replied with "42" :lolflag:

Pogeymanz
March 8th, 2011, 11:16 PM
XP will run fine on that guy. And SP3 shouldn't give you too much trouble.

The real question is what kind (if any) anti-virus do you want to run? I've heard that Windows now has its own anti-virus (Microsoft Security Essentials) that works very well, while being much lighter on resources than the other options out there.

Also, you can disable a lot of services by going to Start->Run and typing "msconfig" and going to the services tab.

Make sure you also go to the advance settings in the appearance options and you can disable things like shadows and fade effects.

We're all Linux fanboys here, but XP SP3 will run way better on that machine than any flavor of Ubuntu (maybe Lubuntu stands a chance), especially if you ever want to watch a flash video. Or open an office document.

Quadunit404
March 9th, 2011, 01:25 AM
Oh, of course, anti-virus! :D

Keeping the low specs of this machine in mind, here's my recommendations:

Paid:
- ESET Smart Security 4: I use this and it's really quite possibly one of the best paid anti-virus suites out there. It's fast, it's light-weight (ekrn.exe typically takes up 44MB of RAM on idle and 128MB when scanning) and viruses barely stand a chance against it. Seriously, I saw a protection test video on YouTube where the user mzrios installed it on a heavily infected virtual Windows XP box (I'm talking 100+ viruses here) and in the end only ONE of those ~100 viruses - a nasty rootkit - survived. It will even cancel downloads as soon as it detects a virus in whatever it is your downloading, which is nice. Basically any Windows security "expert" (as they call themselves) should know how untouchable ESET's reputation is when it comes to protecting your PC while not draining your resources.
- Norton Internet Security 2011: It's lightweight, but the interface sucks and it's very hard to get it to exclude items from scans AND keep it that way (which is annoying especially for false positives.) That, and the threat activity map is useless. Those three reasons are why I dumped it for ESET (and eventually the rest of my family's gonna switch too.) I guess it's okay because Symantec typically delivers at least ~200 updates per day.

Free:
- Microsoft Security Essentials: It's free, it's lightweight and provides good basic protection against viruses. It's not perfect, though - but then again, what is? The only major problem is that, being a Microsoft product, it will refuse to install on a copy of Windows Microsoft does not consider to be "genuine."
- MalwareBytes Anti-Malware: Absolutely, ABSOLUTELY have this on your PC as a backup anti-virus/malware. MBAM is often considered to be THE best at detecting malware and other bad crap and is frequently used in rouge anti-virus removal videos as the preferred method of removal. There's also a pay-once version that costs $24 and provides real-time protection, but it's not worth the extra cost as while it's extremely capable in on-demand detection, it's not at real-time detection.

Feel free to contribute to this list of possible good choices if you wish.