Putting XP on windows 98
 
  Tweaks.com
 Home    Members    Calendar    Who's On        Main Site
 




Putting XP on windows 98Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted 4/12/2008 11:50 PM
New Member

New MemberNew MemberNew MemberNew MemberNew MemberNew MemberNew MemberNew MemberNew MemberNew Member

Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 4/13/2008 2:48 PM
Posts: 1, Visits: 4
I'm trying to turn my old 98 comp into a gaming comp. But most of games I have now only run on windows XP! Of course! So is there a way I can put XP on my windows 98?
Post #237875
Posted 4/13/2008 12:47 PM


Forum Advisor

Forum AdvisorForum AdvisorForum AdvisorForum AdvisorForum AdvisorForum AdvisorForum AdvisorForum AdvisorForum AdvisorForum Advisor

Group: Advisor
Last Login: 7/17/2008 9:13 PM
Posts: 305, Visits: 785
Here's the article from Microsoft explaining the hardware requirements for XP.

It can be found here.


As a footnote, I turned a '98 computer into an XP machine a few years ago, and was disappointed in it's performance. It had a 366 MHz Intel, 512 MB of RAM and plenty of hard drive space, onboard video and audio, but it was painstakingly slow. I put '98 back in it and it's been fine performance-wise.


___________________________________________________




Firefox 3
Post #237915
Posted 4/13/2008 1:23 PM


Forum Moderator

Forum ModeratorForum ModeratorForum ModeratorForum ModeratorForum ModeratorForum ModeratorForum ModeratorForum ModeratorForum ModeratorForum Moderator

Group: Moderators
Last Login: Today @ 12:09 PM
Posts: 2,172, Visits: 3,937
Annubis (4/12/2008)
I'm trying to turn my old 98 comp into a gaming comp. But most of games I have now only run on windows XP! Of course! So is there a way I can put XP on my windows 98?
I've put WinXP on a number of computers that were running Win98/98SE/ME but as mentioned the hardware can be insufficient for a good experience. I ran WinXP Pro on an AMD Athlon 700MHz with 384MB RAM for 2 years but with only Dial-Up at the time didn't have much problem.

It may depend upon the CPU, the older Intel Celeron had less L2/on-die Cache and didn't perform as well as Intel Pentiums of the same speed. The first Celeron's up to 300MHz had no L2 cache, beginning with the 300A there was some cache which gave about a 50% performance boost. Even today the Celeron's today don't have as much L2 as the Pentium 4 but then they are cheaper. Same in comparing AMD's Athlon and Athlon XP with Duron or Sempron.

The amount of RAM on the video card is important and if the video adapter is built onto the motherboard it usually requires the BIOS assigning part of the System RAM to it, makes less available to any Operating System.


__________________________________________________

Post #237920
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »


Reading This TopicExpand / Collapse

All times are GMT -6:00, Time now is 5:59pm

Powered By InstantForum.NET v4.1.4 © 2008
Execution: 0.031. 11 queries. Compression Enabled.