Minimum Processor to run Windows Vista 64-bit decently

2048Megabytes

2048Megabytes

Active Member
What are the opinions on the list of processors and other requirements I have compiled for Windows Vista 64-bit to run at a decent speed? Did I miss any processors that could run Windows Vista at a decent speed?


Recommended Requirements for Windows Vista 64-bit:

Intel Core 2
Pentium Processor Extreme
Pentium Dual-Core
Pentium D
Intel Celeron D
Pentium 4 2.26 GHz and faster

AMD Phenom
AMD Athlon X 2 Dual-Core
AMD Turion 64 X 2 Dual-Core
AMD Athlon FX
AMD Athlon 3200+ or higher
AMD Turion 64 2.2 GHz and faster
AMD Sempron LE-1200 or higher
AMD Sempron 3800+

1.5 gigabytes of random access memory

DirectX 9.0-Capable Graphics Processor, with 128 megabyte graphics memory. (64 megabytes of graphics memory to support a single monitor less than 1,310,720 pixels [no more than 1440x900); 128 megabytes of graphics memory to support a single monitor at resolutions from 1,310,720 to 2,304,000 pixels [no more than 1920x1200]; 256 megabytes of graphics memory to support a single monitor at resolutions higher than 2,304,000 pixels [more than 1920x1200]).

40 gigabyte hard drive. Windows Vista requires 15 gigabytes of free hard drive space
 
For one you left out the Intel Q series quad core lineup of cpus there. You'll get some flack about that from some probably. A more accurate comparison updated to match the changes in hardwares as well as OSs would be comparing what was needed for 98 when going from the previous 16bit version of Windows namely 95.

98 was a bit slower on an old AST I486 then 95 for two reasons 1) being the new version seen then. 2) the move from 16 to 32bit? Not really! 98 simply saw more startup items like Vista over XP in that regard. 512mb was usually more then needed for the typical 64-129mb system. Likewise 2gb is still enough for running a 64bit edition of Vista since XP Pro 64bit never saw the amount of driver support no starting to be seen.
 
Wow i would never think my system could run vista 64 bit effectively, but apparently so if what you write is true.
 
The Intel Intel Core 2 Quad Processors were covered under "Intel Core 2."

So would Vista 64-bit run fine with 1.5 gigabytes of RAM, or at an annoying speed?
 
lion149 said:
Wow i would never think my system could run vista 64 bit effectively, but apparently so if what you write is true.
Click to expand...

Microsoft says the minimum required processor is 1 gigahertz in speed. I doubt it would run it efficiently. Vista would be painfully slow with a processor that outdated.
 
Try running XP on an old AMD Duron model. :eek: Those out of the entire AMD line were the slow boats! The cpus that support Vista have been out since 2003 namely anyone that signifies 32/64bit.

Even with XP seeing a good 2ghz or faster is preferred. going from an XP3000+(2.167ghz) to an XP3200+(2.205ghz) only saw a .100ghz difference yet noticable in many ways on the old systems. By going from 3ghz seen on the 6000+ X2 to the 3.2ghz seen on the 6400+ X2 I wouldn't expect to see anywhere as near the size speed gap there.

The problem running a system that takes the old cpu types is also with the memory used as well. Some 1ghz boards ran PC133 memory while newer saw DDR for the first time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top