Jump to content











Photo
- - - - -

Windows 10 on old hardware (2007)

win10 old harware

  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 alacran

alacran

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 473 posts
  •  
    Mexico

Posted 21 July 2015 - 11:17 PM

Just to let you Know:

 

I wanted to test W10 and having an old CPU from 2007 not in use, I decided to try it.

I'm in a Pentium 4 631 Hyperthreading 3GHZ CPU, 2GB Ram (DDR2 667MHZ), Samsung 80GB HDD, GeForce 8400 GS 500MB, Updated from Win7 x86 SP-1 Pro OEM licence, to W10 buid 10240 x86 Pro & fully activated. Processor is x64 capable, but having only 2GB Ram I went to x86 version, (dual booting with XP SP-3 x86). It is working fine, now I'm going to format & repartition disk to make a clean install dual booting with XP SP-3 x86 again.

CPU Properties
CPU Type Intel Pentium 4 631, 3000 MHz (15 x 200)
CPU Alias Cedar Mill
CPU Stepping D0
Instruction Set x86, x86-64, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3
Original Clock 3000 MHz
Min / Max CPU Multiplier 12x / 15x
Engineering Sample No
L1 Trace Cache 12K Instructions
L1 Data Cache 16 KB
L2 Cache 2 MB (On-Die, ECC, ATC, Full-Speed)



#2 Zoso_The_Internet_Tard

Zoso_The_Internet_Tard

    Silver Member

  • Advanced user
  • 545 posts
  • Interests:An investigation is underway to determine whether Trump has any ties to America.

Posted 22 July 2015 - 01:55 AM

Good luck getting Windows 10 to run on a Pentium, your CPU is the biggest bottleneck. I recently installed on my Alienware M14X R1, it ran OK until I installed drivers and a few programs. With only a couple of Opera tabs open, an Explorer window, and Steam running but not downloading/playing a game, it was already bombarding my system with frequent "not responding" messages almost every time I try to access a desktop app. My specs are a good deal better than what you've listed:

 

Intel i7 2630QM

16GB DDR3 Corsair Vengeange, 1600MHz

Nvidia 555M
1TB Samsung 850 EVO SSD (boot drive)

2TB Seagate HDD (secondary data drive)

 

You would think 10 would run fine on specs like that that, but it doesn't. I typically only install what I need, keeping startup items and running processes to a minumum, run a daily malware scan with MBAM, but none of that seemed to help. I've rolled back to OEM 7, with mostly the sane drivers and softwares installed, and it runs fine except when I ocassionally stress it a bit. No frequent lockups or crashes though.

 

I really do recommend that you stick with 7 or XP. All your drivers for those OSes should be available if you hunt for a bit. As an example, I recently helped a friend install Windows 8.1 on a Dell Studio laptop which was either a 2007/2008 model, with specs similiar to yours. We managed to get most of the drivers, but no matter where I checked we couldnt find a compatible Intel graphics driver anywhere. Windows Update didnt have it. And installing a 7 driver didnt work, it failed with a error similiar to incompatible OS. This left him running with the Microsoft basic display adapter driver, and he couldnt use the full resolution of his screen, which also meant he couldnt use Metro apps, which requires 1024x768 minumum.

 

If you can find compatible drivers for all your components then maybe give it a shot, but otherwise forget it.



#3 v77

v77

    Silver Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 521 posts
  •  
    France

Posted 22 July 2015 - 11:14 AM

@AnonVandetta:

 

A lot of people use Windows 10 on much lower hardwares without any issue.
The hardware requirements for Windows have not changed since Vista, except some new CPU instructions for 8.1.
So, I would say there is a bug somewhere, maybe a driver.

There were too many known bugs for releasing the RTM so soon. Microsoft is doing the same mistake than with Windows 8: releasing the new version at any cost because the date was settled.



#4 S466531257BOSS

S466531257BOSS

    Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts
  • Location:NIEDERSACHSEN ( Lower Saxony ) , HANNOVER ( Hannoi )
  • Interests:ETC PP ...
  •  
    Germany

Posted 05 August 2015 - 12:58 AM

Just to make my statement against the common ' Why would you run some dat new on dat ol crap '

: I am running a bunch of systems around the 7th generation, means Intel Pentium IV / 4 / D | AMD Athlon XP | etc. because these are the systems THAT ARE IN USE in the Kindergarten | School | AfterSchool | Youth-Centre | Hostel -Groups i help to survive digitally ;

 

Since BMWN512P | MicroSoft Windows XP ( NT 5.1 ) SP 2 Professional i have tested and proven extensively that running modern Windows-Systems on so-to-say-junkyard-hardware is the best one can do in all kinds of aspects from whatever perspective you look at it ;

 

EXAM

: Energy FootPrint

 

A P4-System runs with a power consumption of 35 to 45 Watt in standard desktop-use like browsing the internet , listening to music , watching a movie etc, if using graphics onboard ; Although the Pentium 4 was one of the sickest energy-hungriest and most inefficient CPU Intel ever made ( before inventing the Atom ) in comparison to actual systems it has a highly admirable energy-efficiency and solidity at least when using Windows as Operating-System ;

 

Why ? Well, it is simple : MicroSoft never obtained to make use of any Extension invented since the 686 ( namely Pentium ) so features like SSE 0 / 2 / 4 and all the fancy accelerators and microcode-libraries available today are fairly unused all the time ; Windows itself has no usage of these features. The only extension that might be in steady use on a well-setup-system for average usage is mostly the hardware-decoding acceleration for MPEG-2 / -4 / WMV delivered by the graphics hardware.

 

So in short:

 

Best thing you can do : Grab a Good Ol AMD Athlon X2 or Intel Pentium D and you have a slick Core-System, especially by running Windows 8.1 x86 ( which at the moment is the best optimized Windows available for general multimedia use.

 

By the way :  A message to all those that might say i am bullshitting or who like to state that only a TinCan imprinted i5 from an AntHill Inside can juggle the bugs into cozy conditions : Name one ( and i mean only one ) Standard Windows Application / Routine / Process / Service / Function that is running as a part of your allday-everyday Windows WHICH IS USING A CPU EXTENSION LIKE E.G. SSE AT ALL . You won't find one. There ain't any. Windows itself actually is using nothing of your fancy hardware. Windows is just an Operating-System that can be a rapid rabbit, because it opens any available door to the sheer power normally well hidden inside of that shiny part of digital horsepower stronghold.

 

If you want to see what modern hardware is able to, you should began to run open-source-systems which you can recompile specifically to the feature sub- and super-sets your hardware can deliver. If you use Windows you get what you asked for: Windows. you can sty and stare out of them or open them or put some fancy stickers on it, that's it.

 

The other way around: YOU SHOULD DEFINATELY RUN WINDOWS 8.1 OR 10 ON OLD HARDWARE IF OLD MEANS FROM GENERATION PENTIUM III AMD-K6 III UPWARDS : Because that generation is the Control-Set Windows 8.1 and Windows 10 are compiled for.

 

So, yes please, do some more of that, you also do a good thing in economical and ecological aspects: The costs ( measured in ressources and how they have been gained ) to produce these ol' machines mostly were not calculated into their market-price and just dumping these machines is effectively a crime.

 

Windows 8.1 runs nearly as fast as Windows 98 on a Pentium 4 but is much more stable and delivers the full set of possibilities a PC can give-away.

 

If you are lucky enough to have a Presler - you can use even a Hyper-V Bare-Metal to support up to 4 clients with 4 GB RAM for effective maximum 85 Watts or 115Watts consumption when using a 1GB Nvidia 8600. Ubuntu, by the way is even more responsive as long as your onboard card supports Open-GL 2.0; so any PC from 2006 on definately is the most solid variant with perfect balance between energy-consumption, sheer computing power and responsiveness.

 

Almost no problems with drivers, because you can ( if you use Win 8.1 use the whole available set of WDM / WDDM 1.0 / WDDM 1.1 Drivers - in cleartext: any driver from Windows 2000 up to Windows 10 ) ;

 

The best power-juggling of any Windows-System available also delivered by Win 8.1; For example i am running it ( for native coding / compiling purposes of customized software ) on a DELL Pentium III 750/1150 MHz LapTop via native VHD-Boot from a nearly decade-old Compact-Flash-Card of about 8GB ) - in that configuration the battery which runs with the Windows 2000 about 60 Minutes with Windows XP about 85 minutes , Windows 7 around 90 to 100 minutes is triumphed on Windows 8 by usual 200 to 230 minutes !

 

Windows 8.1, when deactivating all effects and using latest drivers on an HP 6715b ( AMD Turion X2 ) runs on battery on 60% screen brightness with a resolution of 1680*1080 for around 6 to 7 hours, whereas the original vista and even a optimized XP is not able to reach 3hours battery-driven.

 

By the way Intel Pentium 4 Presler EE / AMD Turion|Athlon X2 / Intel Celeron Core 2 Duo are delivering the best performance and there is no throtteling at all; subjectively  the i3 and i5 -Systems are running much more hicky and tricky and deliver a very unpleasant User Experience, besides a hunger/lust for energy that is far far away from good and evil.

 

I7 would be at least the only modern Intel Processor that can deliver a remarkable experience if used with say:Virtualization or video-editing, arrangement or plug-in heavy painting in combination with serial digitizers or capture decks.

 

For all other purposes like just running an os to surf the net take some notes, write a letter, play some casual online-games, emailing, chatting and so on ... PLEASE USE THAT SYSTEM THAT IS MINIMUM A DECADE AWAITING TO SHOW ITS USEFULNESS !

 

 

THANKS FOR YOUR INTEREST.

 

S466531257 BOSS

PAETH CLAUDIUSRAPHAEL


Edited by S466531257BOSS, 05 August 2015 - 01:03 AM.


#5 S466531257BOSS

S466531257BOSS

    Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts
  • Location:NIEDERSACHSEN ( Lower Saxony ) , HANNOVER ( Hannoi )
  • Interests:ETC PP ...
  •  
    Germany

Posted 05 August 2015 - 01:21 AM

By the way: I am writing this from a Athlon X2 2,2 GHz with 3 displays ( running 2 headless vboxes with acceleration and 1 vbox install of server 2012 r2 actively ) whereas i have chrome with 13 tabs plus chromium with 7 tabs plus firefox with dunno around 30 tabs and opera old with irc open while in the background muTorrent leeches some gigs, i am listening to music from windows media player and have vlc open to stream to the telly over a second separate wifi ( gigabit lan for net plus wifi for remote desktop to server 2012 hyper-v running on the 6715b with 3 machines ;oh yes and gimp - libre office - some instances of foxit-reader, calibre , calculator , diverse messengers, 3 ms-sql instances , a full blown apache, eclipse with a project about 2.4 GB and synchronization via torrent-sync plus 24-bit 48kHz audio with a latency of around 3.6 ms plus some external hdd and dvd are hung right now. i am taking recordings and documentation via 2 webcams and a firewire-linked ol camcorder inbetween when i have to note some.

 

Yes, i mean it, that is all running right now.

 

without a problem. on a machine that is 11 years old right this moment, running on Windows 8.1 via native vhd boot from a 128GB vhd on a 750GB 15k Barracuda plus 3 * 750GB 15k Barracudas additinally for editing and archival purposes. And no, i do not need to cover my ears, anything is silent enough. The PCI-express graphics is an AMD V5700 FirePro with 2 DisplayPort ( 2* 1440*900 19'' plus DVI 1920*1200 23'')

That's my normal allday-setup i use for stuff like this. The consumed wattage right now is 76,3 Watt.

 

THANKS FOR YOUR INTEREST.

 

S466531257 BOSS

PAETH CLAUDIUSRAPHAEL



#6 v77

v77

    Silver Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 521 posts
  •  
    France

Posted 05 August 2015 - 10:33 AM

MicroSoft never obtained to make use of any Extension invented since the 686 ( namely Pentium ) so features like SSE 0 / 2 / 4 and all the fancy accelerators and microcode-libraries available today are fairly unused all the time ; Windows itself has no usage of these features. The only extension that might be in steady use on a well-setup-system for average usage is mostly the hardware-decoding acceleration for MPEG-2 / -4 / WMV delivered by the graphics hardware.

 

Wrong: Windows 8.1 (but not 8) requires SSE2 instructions (and that's why you cannot install Windows 8.1 on a Pentium 3).

And about the power efficiency, it's the exact opposite: using the SIMD instructions reduces the required power, because the CPU can be put to sleep sooner.

Another mistake: 686 means Pentium Pro, not Pentium.



#7 S466531257BOSS

S466531257BOSS

    Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts
  • Location:NIEDERSACHSEN ( Lower Saxony ) , HANNOVER ( Hannoi )
  • Interests:ETC PP ...
  •  
    Germany

Posted 05 August 2015 - 12:10 PM

Sorry, but not truly true ( simply because i am running 8.1 for example on a Toshiba/Panasonic ToughBook with a Pentium III --- SSE 2 is not needed , the installer requires the NX-Bit enabled but there are many ways to circumvent that necessity ; e.g.: for example Windows 8.1 runs also on thin-clients based on Via C3 which has no SSE2 or to be precise : Streaming SingleInstructionMultipleData Extensions Generation 2 .

 

But to correct myself on the point that MicroSoft never obliged to use any extension at all, for sure that was aggressively spoken ; SSE 1 is in use, because of the necessity of the functions delivered by MMX, before which were generally used since XP ( NT 5.1 ) Though even XP can be used without using them .

 

Whilst you are very right by pointing out that 686 is equivalent to Pentium Pro, the reason behind is the fact that if compiling a native win-application the instruction set of the 686-baseline is the least common denominator that has to be fulfilled as in comparison this need is also given for running the standard linux kernels 3+ ( in sense of a common base / instruction set ) .

 

What you can say is that Windows up to Windows 8.1 runs definately on any x86-CPU released after 2004 ( That was the year when the least Pentium-M Systems were manufactured for public-use ; That processor misses in some variants the capability of complete PAE ( Physical Adress Extension and the Disable Execution Bit , which is needed to install but not to run Windows 8.1 )

 

I am granting you that we can discuss this into atomic structures, but i think my comment can be interpreted in the simple form of : MicroSoft Windows Systems actually in wide use are NOT IN NEED OF special Instruction-Sets AND CAN NOT USE THE CAPABILITIES OF MODERN CPU-ARCHITECTURES ON THEIR OWN, but for sure : the person that configures the Windows-System to its needs CAN MAKE ACTUAL WINDOWS SYSTEMS IN USE TO BEHAVE PERFORMING SUPERIOR BY USING THESE EXTRA CAPABILITIES BY MAKING THEM AVAILABLE THROUGH ADDITIONAL SOFTWARE LIKE FOR EXAMPLE DRIVERS .

 

However, just make it a bit more clear, not to offend your opinion/statement/correction or having interest in starting a flame-war about that topic.

 

Thing is just. I love to maintain rusty flagships and make them usable ( especially because of the ecological footprint, which is not only based on running costs, but implies production costs, too ).

 

And by the way. I hate the HYPE and the constant supression / opression given in the marketers wars , which can sate whatever they want : If it is possible to make use of PC's older than a decade and let them perform as they were originally built for by using actual Operating Systems well that's wonderful; And one should not forget: the days when Operating Systems behaved like 300MegaTon-cargoliners because the industry wished to sell more and newer generations of Computing-Architectures are gone since 2007 , From then on ( Post-Vista so-to-say ) the systems became much more effcient , smaller and leaner in the core by steadily opening more and more opportunities to gain efficiency by enabling supersets like SSE.

 

 

THANKS FOR YOUR INTEREST .

 

S466531257 BOSS

PAETH CLAUDIUSRAPHAEL



#8 v77

v77

    Silver Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 521 posts
  •  
    France

Posted 05 August 2015 - 01:43 PM

You may find a way to force Windows 8.1 to install on a Pentium 3, that does not mean that SSE2 is not required. You will likely just get some bugs here and there. It is even possible that Microsoft has kept a test in the concerned code parts to run an alternate code that does not uses SSE2.

Anyway, SIMD instructions are usually used for very specific cases where high performance is required and when it's possible, not for a general logic such as all that can be done by a kernel.
I personally use them in two small tools : ProxyCrypt and Whirlpool File Checker. For example, there is nothing to do with the SSE2 instructions in the AES algorithm.
There is also Bitlocker that is able to use the AES instructions, but of course it's not a requirement.

When a developer, or even Microsoft, says that an instruction set is required, this is not for bothering the users. Microsoft has nothing to gain to add such a restriction, unless there is a good reason for that.
That's why I think it's not a good idea to bypass the checks of an installer.



#9 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 13649 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 05 August 2015 - 01:57 PM

When a developer, or even Microsoft, says that an instruction set is required, this is not for bothering the users. Microsoft has nothing to gain to add such a restriction, unless there is a good reason for that.
That's why I think it's not a good idea to bypass the checks of an installer.

This is correct for "a developer" :thumbsup: but not for Microsoft, they IMHO already burned their credibility many years ago with the so called AARD code:

https://en.wikipedia.../wiki/AARD_code

and later in several occasions "strange"  (unneeded) limitations were imposed to users.

 

:duff:

Wonko


  • Nuno Brito likes this

#10 v77

v77

    Silver Member

  • Team Reboot
  • 521 posts
  •  
    France

Posted 05 August 2015 - 02:18 PM

This is correct for "a developer" :thumbsup: but not for Microsoft, they IMHO already burned their credibility many years ago with the so called AARD code:

https://en.wikipedia.../wiki/AARD_code

and later in several occasions "strange"  (unneeded) limitations were imposed to users.

 

What you are showing here is that Microsoft defends its business. This may sound dishonest, but there is nothing surprising.
But I still don't see what Microsoft could gain to put an hardware requirement such as SSE2.



#11 Wonko the Sane

Wonko the Sane

    The Finder

  • Advanced user
  • 13649 posts
  • Location:The Outside of the Asylum (gate is closed)
  •  
    Italy

Posted 05 August 2015 - 02:35 PM

Sure :), definitely not surprising.

 

 

But I still don't see what Microsoft could gain to put an hardware requirement such as SSE2.

 

There may be several reasons, including pushing sales of new hardware (with the new Windows version OEM installed), as an example.

 

This - mind you I am not saying this is the case, only that it may be the case - would generate more revenue for OEM licenses and at the same time, since more copies of the OS are sold, indirectly influence the perceived success of the new OS release.

 

One thing MS seems like having (maybe) learned with Vista is that a new (bloated) OS on underpowered hardware results in slow operations that are attributed to the software/OS (which is true, though what actually caused it were the OEM's that shipped the underpowered hardware) but on the other hand the other way round it is likely that new, snappier operation notwithstanding the bloated OS is as well attributed to the software/OS (which is largely not true as it is mainly making leverage on the much faster hardware).

 

As well in Vista times all the geeks that tried it (often on good enough for XP hardware but not anywhere near what the stupid bloated OS actually needed) had the same experience of a sluggy, unresponsive system and instantly abandoned it to never touch it again (if not with a 10 feet pole).

 

By imposing a limitation like the SSE2 one the good MS guys (on purpose or not) actually drew a definite line excluding aging and less suitable hardware platform, this may well be a side effect (or collateral damage) or the main scope, anyone may have his/her opinion on that. :)

 

To give you another example, the memory limit introduced in XP SP2 would make no sense whatsoever unless we interpret it as a way to eliminate (with a very low cost and making very few users discontented about it) a whole set of instabilities/issues of the OS on common (but likely "low grade") hardware and with the involved drivers.

 

:duff:

Wonko



#12 Xiaopang

Xiaopang

    Member

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  •  
    Iran

Posted 05 August 2015 - 03:06 PM

I agree with *indecipherable_name* to some extent. Running new operating systems on older hardware doesn't just extent their life, it might actually get more out of it. I have a cheap Samsung R51 Laptop from around 2007 with a 1.8GHz Celeron. It came with Vista and was rather slow. I've been keeping it up to date and currently it sports a Windows 8.1 Update 1. The user experience is not just buttery smooth, but also the performance got better and better. Ever since I switched to Win 8.1 I was able to stream 720p which before was just a sluggishly unwatchable mess.

 

However, this only applies to old systems with plenty of memory to run the OS. The above PC has 1,5GB RAM, of which the internal graphics card uses 128MB. Since I use a lite version of Win 8, it only consumes about 350MB upon system start, leaving the computer with about 1GB of free memory. Enough to use Office and web browsers to a normal extent.

 

Even though the memory footprint of Windows has gone down quite impressively since Vista, it is by no means negligible for old systems, especially those having less than 1GB of RAM. In these cases, XP is still the best choice in terms of stability and speed. While these systems might have enough RAM, I wonder which school or hostel that can't afford newer hardware had the funds to upgrade the memory to a usable point.

 

I actually tried running 8.1 on an old comp with an AMD Athlon 2400+ (2003), but ran into a boot error since it doesn't support SSE2. I'm wondering how you even managed to get the system to run. I used a Windows to Go which was already fully installed and which refused to boot due to the missing SSE2-instruction set, so it's certainly not a question of merely hacking the installer.

 

Regarding your plea for using those old boxes out of energy concerns, I have to say that this holds little water. Currently, I'm running an Phenom II X6 1095 BE with a GTX260. Maxed out, the machine can draw about 450W from the socket, but in idle mode when merely surfing the web, it hovers around 90W. The difference is though, that I have all the power of a modern computer system at my finger tips when I need it without having to switch computers. Considering that many people rely on portable computers nowadays which may use as little as 10W for idle operations while still being more powerful than those outdated computers, it makes no sense prefering an old computer over portable ones if they are available.

 

Also, while Windows might run on these old Computers, the delays for opening software, or just working in it, are a lot bigger, causing you to wait longer to get the same job done. Needless to say that you get less done in the same time which in return also means that you need to burn more energy thanks to that overtime.

 

All of this seems to end with Windows 10 though, because its out of the box memory footprint is more than twice as big as that of Windows 8.1. I tested a beta version a month ago in a VM with a memory of 1GB and deactivated swap-space. Windows used up 950MB. I have yet to see how much stuff I can kick out of it when I customize the installer, but I doubt that it'll match the 350MB of 8.1.

 

And lets not forget that these old machines may house hardware that might not be supported by newer operating systems natively and which may have no Vista/7 compatible drivers to offer.



#13 flyboytim

flyboytim
  • Members
  • 5 posts
  •  
    United Kingdom

Posted 05 August 2015 - 11:23 PM

Junkyard system describes my Windows 10 machine perfectly. The only parts bought were the graphics card and keyboard/mouse at a total cost of about £25. All the rest were thrown out with the trash. I  quite agree that these older systems seem to be more responsive than modern ones, on the newer operating systems, although Windows XP runs really great when all the Windows update, error reporting and windows security is stripped out and replaced with a smaller security solution.

 

Fujitsu Siemens Scaleo P (BIOS dates back to March 2nd 2005.) 
Windows 10 x86 10240 Insider Preview, XP Sp3, Windows 8.1, Linux Mint, Ubuntu and Puppy linux
Intel socket 775 Pentium 4 540 HT 3200 Prescott (2005)
Fujitsu Siemens ASUS P5GD1-FM/S (2005)
2GB DDR (4x512MB)(2004 and 2005)
GeForce 9500GT 512MB (2011)
on-board Realtek High Definition Audio
Hewlett Packard HP vs17 1280 x 1024 @ 60hz (August 2005)
2 Seagate 500 GBs, Maxtor 300GB, WD 150GB - all rescued from old Sky and NTL STB throwouts or the disk that came with the PC.
Antec 380W PSU in a Antek NSK 4000B - another doorstep orphan with a Core 2 Duo on a dead motherboard - The Fujitsu Siemens cooling system was too noisy. Pity that the ASUS P5GD1-FM/S does not support the Core 2 Duo CPU though.
Keyboard: Logitec K120
Mouse: Logitec  
 
Runs any and all the OSs without any issues at all.
 
My next challenge is to get my old Acer Travelmate 2423 with a Celeron M 1.50Ghz to install Windows 10 properly. I have half an installation currently - with no proper user logon.There are issues with setup, since it has an external monitor (the notebook screen got smashed years ago), a dead keyboard and touchpad and no battery life - but I only use it as a print server and a desktop substitute with external input hardware on occasions. Crazy that the display, and battery problems impact on the installation, but they do. It may not have quite the age - 2006, but it has a smaller and less featured processor, and runs Windows 8.0 passably well.


#14 flyboytim

flyboytim
  • Members
  • 5 posts
  •  
    United Kingdom

Posted 05 August 2015 - 11:24 PM

Junkyard system describes my Windows 10 machine perfectly. The only parts bought were the graphics card and keyboard/mouse at a total cost of about £25. All the rest were thrown out with the trash. I  quite agree that these older systems seem to be more responsive than modern ones, on the newer operating systems, although Windows XP runs really great when all the Windows update, error reporting and windows security is stripped out and replaced with a smaller security solution.

 

Fujitsu Siemens Scaleo P (BIOS dates back to March 2nd 2005.) 
Windows 10 x86 10240 Insider Preview, XP Sp3, Windows 8.1, Linux Mint, Ubuntu and Puppy linux
Intel socket 775 Pentium 4 540 HT 3200 Prescott (2005)
Fujitsu Siemens ASUS P5GD1-FM/S (2005)
2GB DDR (4x512MB)(2004 and 2005)
GeForce 9500GT 512MB (2011)
on-board Realtek High Definition Audio
Hewlett Packard HP vs17 1280 x 1024 @ 60hz (August 2005)
2 Seagate 500 GBs, Maxtor 300GB, WD 150GB - all rescued from old Sky and NTL STB throwouts or the disk that came with the PC.
Antec 380W PSU in a Antek NSK 4000B - another doorstep orphan with a Core 2 Duo on a dead motherboard - The Fujitsu Siemens cooling system was too noisy. Pity that the ASUS P5GD1-FM/S does not support the Core 2 Duo CPU though.
Keyboard: Logitec K120
Mouse: Logitec  
 
Runs any and all the OSs without any issues at all.
 
My next challenge is to get my old Acer Travelmate 2423 with a Celeron M 1.50Ghz to install Windows 10 properly. I have half an installation currently - with no proper user logon.There are issues with setup, since it has an external monitor (the notebook screen got smashed years ago), a dead keyboard and touchpad and no battery life - but I only use it as a print server and a desktop substitute with external input hardware on occasions. Crazy that the display, and battery problems impact on the installation, but they do. It may not have quite the age - 2006, but it has a smaller and less featured processor, and runs Windows 8.0 passably well.


#15 alacran

alacran

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 473 posts
  •  
    Mexico

Posted 08 August 2015 - 09:35 AM

Pentium 4 631 CPU fully comply requirements for Win10

 

So I didn't use any trick to upgrade or reinstall, it is working very fine, no drivers problems or any other issue,  By the way Office 2003 runs great on 10 and 8.x even if MS says it doesn't, I have tested that myself, I prefer it for the small foot print, also I hate the ribbon (there are compatibly pakages from MS to read and write to Office 2007 & latter formats).

 

Only problems I found are so many spying services running in 10, I used this guide to try to improve privacity:  http://www.msfn.org/...-in-windows-10/

But now ericgl has made his own script available here : http://reboot.pro/to...-tweak-scripts/

 

About forced updates: Here I quote my post on MSFN forum about that:

 

If you are on WIFI you can permanently avoid downloading updates, valid for all versions.

 

Go to config, select Internet, Wifi & Bluethoot, open WIFI, in advanced options select metered conection, (better reboot just in case).   Then you can go to check for updates as usually but you only see what is available and no more updates download. I guess they made this option thinking in cell phones, tablets and laptops.  Desktop is not a priority anymore.

 

This utility is free for home users: http://www.portableupdate.com/

From it you can check for updates, select what you want  to download, and then it installs your selection if you want, It uses MS API's.  I recomend to read all info in that page to learn how to use it.

 

On cable conections you can try disabling the windows update service, and use the mentioned utility. I haven't tested this approach.

 

This is only for testing, all other equipment I have are running Win7 SP-1 dual boot with XP.   I hate 8.x (looks like a cell phone). I only have installed once 8.1u1 Technical Preview on VHD for testing.

 

I recomend using ClassicShell v4.2.3RC (FREE) to improve desktop start menu on 10: http://classicshell.net/

 

There is a tool freely available on Internet to let you install 8.x on non capable CPU's, I haven't tested it.

Attached Files



#16 sixcentgeorge

sixcentgeorge

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 190 posts
  •  
    France

Posted 10 August 2015 - 10:33 AM

your ram level is very low...you should post the mainboard name so we can see the chipset and then the max install able ram 

i have a nvidia chipset with a 775 cpu , it holds 4 Go .

 

beside that your cpu is very not power full... 

may be you can update it to a 8400 : http://www.cpu-world...tium_4_630.html

there are some on ebay for less than 20$ .

 

i have one that i updated with a quad core low energy ...very nice

beware doing that can kill the mobo , with a so old one , you have to be very careful and operate only when mobo is very "cold" [ that looks hard to imagine in Mexico.....[ viva Zapata.. ] ]



#17 alacran

alacran

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 473 posts
  •  
    Mexico

Posted 11 August 2015 - 12:44 PM

your ram level is very low...you should post the mainboard name so we can see the chipset and then the max install able ram 

i have a nvidia chipset with a 775 cpu , it holds 4 Go .

 

beside that your cpu is very not power full... 

may be you can update it to a 8400 : http://www.cpu-world...tium_4_630.html

there are some on ebay for less than 20$ .

 

i have one that i updated with a quad core low energy ...very nice

beware doing that can kill the mobo , with a so old one , you have to be very careful and operate only when mobo is very "cold" [ that looks hard to imagine in Mexico.....[ viva Zapata.. ] ]

 

Thanks for your comments, I appreciate your good intentions, but I'm not going to spend a cent in this old system, I do own much better PC's, as I said in first post this CPU was not in use from some time ago, so I decided to use it just for testing Win10 upgrade procedure and latter reinstall, and satisfy my curiosity, I thought this was not going to work, so my surprice was every thing worked flawlessly, not a single problem.  Now I'm experimenting on it all tricks I found about disabling the spying services, and stoping forced updates.

But let me tell you it works fine with that amount of RAM (10x86 Pro), when idle, System uses less than 600 MB out of 2 GB of RAM including AVAST Free running, page file use is about 50 MB, of couse I'm not runing AutoCAD or other heavy program on that amount of RAM, (I'm a little crazy but not so much), but it is very capable to run Office 2003 with compatible packs for Office 2007 and higher (even if MS says it doesn't run on win10 or Win8.x wich by the way also in 8.x works fine), haven't tried newer versions on it but I don't think that could be a problem as there is  70 %  of RAM free, to be honest I don't like newer versions, when Office v2007 was released I tested it and I hate the ribbon, and as far as v2003 can do all I need to do (and I know where to find it), didn't see any need to upgrade.

I wanted to let other people know the fact that Win 10x86 can be run in a very old system like this even if it sounds dificult to belive.



#18 sixcentgeorge

sixcentgeorge

    Frequent Member

  • Advanced user
  • 190 posts
  •  
    France

Posted 11 August 2015 - 02:42 PM

A good computer can be useful , with a 8400 or else ....[that is depending of bios and updates .. ]; you will spare money because these cpu consume less energy because the Lithography is smaller , in this case it half the size..and you spare 30 % of watt with better computing power of 3 times..that should make your old computer jumping...

 

i installed a Q9550S with 4 cores and i spare money , cool .

 

in your case for less than 100$ you will have a good boost and a new video card that will handle gpu computing like the ati hd5k and higher or others nvidia gtx 5xx ; the first price for a brand new card being dx12 [ so made for win 10 ] is below 50 euro : Gainward GeForce GT 720 1 GB

 

the pc has 4 hd of 2 To and serves as backup , like an other one having 3 hd of 4To ...i transfers files in lan using the torrent protocol...so files are all corrects 





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: win10, old harware

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users