Your Ad Here Your Ad Here
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Running Windows 2000

  1. #1
    Would a Celeron 433mhz with 192mb of ram be aquidate to run windows 2000 at a good speed? If not, how much ram would be needed to run it at a comfortable speed? Or is it not possible on such a low end processor?

  2. Software & Hardware   -   #2
    Regular Member BT Rep: +5
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    935
    yeah it should be ok, also check here for offical requirments:-
    http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/profe...eqs/default.asp

  3. Software & Hardware   -   #3
    _
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    151
    That would run great.

    Call me crazy but I got Windows 2000 running on 56MB of RAM. Yes, 56MB. Way below the minimum of 64MB. It's runs okay. It took a very long time to install though.

  4. Software & Hardware   -   #4
    Regular Member BT Rep: +5
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    935
    yeah i can believe. Win 2000 is my favourite OS, runs great and smoothly even with minimum specs and in your case below minimum B) good luck installing it!

  5. Software & Hardware   -   #5
    Chewie's Avatar Chew E. Bakke
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    4,883
    Originally posted by apunkrockmonk@17 July 2004 - 18:29
    Would a Celeron 433mhz with 192mb of ram be aquidate to run windows 2000 at a good speed? If not, how much ram would be needed to run it at a comfortable speed? Or is it not possible on such a low end processor?
    My girls' puter is a K6-II/350 with 192MB and has WinXP installed so I would've thought you'd have no problems at all.
    There isn't a bargepole long enough for me to work on [a Sony Viao] - clocker 2008

  6. Software & Hardware   -   #6
    tesco's Avatar woowoo
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Canadia
    Posts
    24,069
    ha my old comp's the worst yet...

    has an amd k6\2 333mhz and 64mb ram back in the day and was running windows 2000, then upgraded to xp and got 256mb for it though, then downgraded to 2000 again then back to xp.
    that thing's been through a lot. It's even oced now to a hefty 350mhz


    btw, both run great. except for playing music or movies...but even with windows 98 it was slow playing them.

  7. Software & Hardware   -   #7
    Alright, thanks for the input, I'd knew it'd run, I just didn't know how well. All I've used is XP, but I knew that probably wouldn't run to well... lol

  8. Software & Hardware   -   #8
    Snee's Avatar Error xɐʇuʎs BT Rep: +1
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    on something.
    Age
    38
    Posts
    22,677
    I think it's possible to run win2k with 64 mb ram, tho' I don't recommend it.

    Anything equal to or above 128 is good.

    XP might run with what you have, tho' I'd much prefer a minimum of 256, and a better processor for that not to move a tad sluggishly.

    EDt: apache's link is good.

  9. Software & Hardware   -   #9
    Twist3r
    Guest
    xp runs on 64 ram. you just have to be very patient

  10. Software & Hardware   -   #10
    shn's Avatar 3μ|\|(7
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    3,585
    I installed xp on a pentium 100mhz and 64 megs of ram once. I forget what kind of box it was but the school was about to throw it away so I took it home and it ran pretty good. Limited with the number of programs it could run at one time though.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •