Minimum requirements for XP...

[Mini-Me]

Hi there.
:)

This may seem like a strange question for me to be asking, as I build so many computers, but they are all built from 99% new parts - all designed to run XP.

My question is: What really are the minimum system requirements to run XP Home? MS says one thing, but forums such as this say another, so i'm trying to strike a happy compromise.

I am building a radio-station box for a new community station, using a PCS PCI MAX transmitter card (http://www.pcs-electronics.com/en/products.php?sub=pc_fm_trans), and want to use XP as the OS, as it is far more stable when used as a 24/7 music player then 95/98/Me.

The version of XP I will be buying for this box will be XP Home SP2.(OEM)

I am thinking of using an old Celeron 500MHz, with around 128MB of RAM or so.

XP will be installed as small as possible, to save HDD space for the music.
All visual effects will be disabled, and system adjusted for best performance(makes it look like a slightly scaled up win98).

I think that a 500MHz should be able to run XP OK, albeit a little slower then a newer machine, but the important thing to understand here, is that it only needs to run two applications: The software to control the transmitter, and an MP3 player such as Coolplayer or similar with playlists.

I do not want to use new bits - I like to push some of the older machines back into service if I can rather then trashing them!

So, in a nut shell, I am looking for a concensus on what some of you guys would RECYCLE in terms of computer parts, if you were about to do what I am going to...

Also, how small can you get the install footprint?
Standard installs of XP take about ten times that of 98!!!

Thanks!
:)


MM.

[hockey man]

First off, what do you ahve from the old system? We need to know that before we go on. Couple of thing though, for RAM XP really likes 512. It can run on 128, but that is really low. I would suggest at the minimum 256MB.

[Mini-Me]

Hokey pokey.
I'm planning at this stage, to use an old Compaq SFF box(slim CD rom drive), currently fitted with a Celeron 500MHz(socket 370), and 64MB RAM - this was an old win98 box, but is getting an 80GB HDD upgrade as the 1st step(OK - so I lied - 1x new part, but that's all!! :D )

Re: 512MB - I agree. This is the MINIMUM RAM I would put into a new XP build, but was kinda hoping I might be able to cheat the OS of some RAM, when all it is really, is a glorified MP3 player, and nothing else...

I will try to hunt down some 128MB sticks...(only have 64's for this box at the moment - it is SD RAM)


MM.

[hockey man]

I had XP on a 333Mgh, PII, 128 MB RAM system before. If took a while to boot and load programs, but it did run :). The extra Ram will really help out the slower CPU.

[saphalline]

My experience: the slower the CPU, the more RAM you need. It's a complicated function of the CPU type & speed and the platform being used (chipset & RAM type) but that's what it boils down to. A Celeron 500 might be able to get away with 192MB-256MB, but the more the better. Especially if you'll be running a transmitter and playing MP3's at the same time. It sounds silly now, but these tasks are actually fairly intensive for older processors like that. And the less onboard components the better. Does that thing have a dedicated vid card and sound card?

[123456]

I've had XP on a 64mb RAM 233MHz Pentium MMX.

[Mini-Me]

OK - thanks for all the info.

Saph: Intergrated Intel 810 graphics, and ESS sound.(intergrated)

The only thing plugged in will be the transmitter card.

Funny thing is - I could do this easily(MP3 player) with a P100 and 8MB of RAM using DOS.
:D

But the transmitter card needs 95/98/Me/NT/2000/XP.

I could build a 95/98 box, but the stability is nothing on XP, and a radio-station MP3 player needs stability...

What it boils down to, is if the card is new technology and needs a Windows GUI, then you're best to go straight to XP.(that's my 2c, anyway...)


MM.

[saphalline]

Wait, what about 2000? Win2K requires half the RAM of XP and is just as stable. Plus it doesn't require activation to install or reinstall, which could be very helpful to the radio station in the future. Have you considered Win2K?

[Mini-Me]

Actually, I have not.
Thanks for that.

Does Win 2k use the NT filesystem?
It's the stability of NT I really need more then anything else...

I will look on Trademe for a copy(NZ version of E-bay)


G.

[hockey man]

I believe so. The company my dad works for still has many 2000 PRO systems running and they are as stable as a windows machine goes :p.

[jlreich]

Yes 2K is NTFS. And I agree it seems to fit the bill for what you are doing. It's very stable and uses less resources. If I remember right it only comes in the Pro version, so it was made with businesses and such in mind. And many businesses still use it.

I had it running on an old Dell laptop P3 450MHz 256MB RAM a couple years ago and it did very well. I kind of wish I had left 2K on it.

I would still recommend as much ram as you can. Any kind of server environment benefits from more ram.

[kenja]

Windows 2000 is my favorite MS system. Uses either (or both) NTFS or FAT. The RAM footprint is noticably smaller than XP's. I just gave a hand-me-down rig to my friend, though, and loaded XP on it. The reason is: he will likely own this for a few years (being of very limited means) and MS will be supporting XP further into the future.

The rig: Compaq (they were fairly good in 1998) Athlon 600MHz (half-speed cache), PC100 RAM maxed out to 384MB, stock 20GB 7200rpm HDD, and a 30GB 5400rpm drive for storage. Voodoo 16MB video card and SB 128 sound card.

This is really not enough for me to be happy running XP. There is sometimes a noticable delay between typing characters and seeing them displayed in a field. :(

[jcnoernberg]

I'm running XP on 500mhz PII (or is it 3?) and 256mb pc100 ram in my garage for a music/schematics pc. works fine for music, 512mb ram couldn't hurt... you're only talking $20-30 on ebay

[123456]

Yes, 500MHz is a PIII.

2k is your best bet, NT-based OS. More stable than XP.
Recommended requirements based on personal use: 128mb RAM, 400+MHz, and 2GB hard disk space.

[Mini-Me]

Thanks a lot guys - this is a goldmine of info.
:)

I have decided to track down a copy of 2k then.
:)

I will let you all know, when I have it...


MM.

[Mini-Me]

Hi guys - how about Win NT 4?
I found a spare OEM copy of NT 4.0 workstation.
Win NT is most definetely NTFS, so could I sell them this spare copy, and make myself a little extra profit margin do you think?

I might install it, and see how we go as a test...
:)


MM.

[123456]

NT 4 is around 95's time, I believe.

[PrntRhd]

NT 4.0 is no longer supported by MS, expired about a year ago.
I agree Win2000 is the best for resources and stability. Kind of like a NT5.0 if there was one.

[jlreich]

I don't know the particulars but I don't think the files system in NT 4 is exactly the same as the NTFS in 2K and XP. I do believe there are subtle differences that make security a little better in later versions of NTFS.

[printer88]

We're running XP pro on my wifes pc and it only has 64 mg ram and is a 400 mhz. It is doing just fine. But then all she does is play word games and send email. But it does great. :D

[saphalline]

Yes, I've also seen WinXP run on 64MB of RAM. But I've also seen those same systems with more RAM and I give my vote to more RAM! 128MB is often twice as fast for XP, and 256MB is twice as fast again. RAM, RAM, RAM!! I always find systems with way too little RAM for what they should have, and it drives me nuts! :mad:

Sorry... had to rant...

[Mini-Me]

Hokey pokey then.
:)
Back to 2k...
;)


MM.

[thesupernova86]

I had an HP 6573Z that came with win98, a celeron 500mhz cpu, and 64mb of ram....when i uppen to xp i had probs with memory...so i maxed out the mobo with 256mb..but didnt touch the cpu other than a new fan and some new ArticSil 5 on it. The whole think worked remakkably well i must say..kinda shocked me....that same system is still kickin over at my moms house. No problems. Although i think im gonna find her a P3 1Ghz b4 too long...or maby a new mATX mobo and a 2.4 P4.....but as far as the XP went it ran petty good on the HP. I was shocked at it, really