Comments on: What’s An Adequate PC For Windows 7? http://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/ Helping Normal People Get Their Geek On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 10:29:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Sharron Fieldhttp://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/comment-page-1/#comment-34724 Sharron Field Mon, 09 Nov 2009 23:26:43 +0000 http://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/#comment-34724 Just one more thing: I'm now a proud owner of Windows 7 Home Premium and I'm running the 64-bit version on my box that was previously running the RC.I quote Rich here: "Your video card should be at least 512MB and the RAM a minimum 2GB.".Well I've been running a cheapo nVidia 256MB graphics card (7200 SE) with both the RC and now with the RTM. Whilst it's probably at the very base-level of the minimum specs required for Win 7, it nevertheless manages the aero glass effect without any problems. I do know that it works with a 256MB 6200 TC also, but I wouldn't expect much performance from anything less.2GB RAM should be enough to run the 32-bit version with, and the 64-bit version will start with 2GB. - While 2 GB should be OK for most 32-bit general users, I'd recommend at least 3GBs, hopefully more like 4GBs, if running the 64-bit version. Just one more thing: I’m now a proud owner of Windows 7 Home Premium and I’m running the 64-bit version on my box that was previously running the RC.

I quote Rich here: “Your video card should be at least 512MB and the RAM a minimum 2GB.”.

Well I’ve been running a cheapo nVidia 256MB graphics card (7200 SE) with both the RC and now with the RTM. Whilst it’s probably at the very base-level of the minimum specs required for Win 7, it nevertheless manages the aero glass effect without any problems. I do know that it works with a 256MB 6200 TC also, but I wouldn’t expect much performance from anything less.

2GB RAM should be enough to run the 32-bit version with, and the 64-bit version will start with 2GB. – While 2 GB should be OK for most 32-bit general users, I’d recommend at least 3GBs, hopefully more like 4GBs, if running the 64-bit version.

]]> By: franzhttp://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/comment-page-1/#comment-27474 franz Sun, 05 Jul 2009 16:23:44 +0000 http://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/#comment-27474 well here in the philippines you can buy generic pc's buy hardware one by one and assemble them it is more cheaper than to buy a branded PC... i have a standard specs of pc it is 50% Cheaper. well here in the philippines you can buy generic pc’s buy hardware one by one and assemble them it is more cheaper than to buy a branded PC… i have a standard specs of pc it is 50% Cheaper.

]]> By: Sharron Fieldhttp://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/comment-page-1/#comment-25082 Sharron Field Mon, 25 May 2009 21:58:39 +0000 http://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/#comment-25082 It's interesting to note that Windows Seven runs well on some hardware up to 5 years old: The problem here is that such hardware, at least with regard to a processor of that age, is that it will probably only be 32-bit capable and therefore you'll only be able to run a 32-bit version.What's wrong with that? Absolutely nothing; except that you'll be limited with regard to the amount of RAM that you can use with it. The computer that I'm writing this on has a dual-core processor, runs 32-bit XP, and has 2GB DDR2 RAM. That's great for what I use this particular computer for, namely office work, and also watching the odd DVD occasionally via the 512MB graphics card.If I wanted to run RAM-hungry apps, then the most RAM I'd be able to get this machine to see is <4GB. 32-bit operating systems cannot see more than that. If more were needed I fortunately have my Windows Seven RC box on standby running 64-bit Win 7 with 8GB DDR2 300MHz RAM. I could install a virtually unlimited (6.4 exabytes) amount of RAM on it if I could afford to do so and if I had a motherboard the size of a football-field.In the future, as time goes by, I think that <4gb RAM won't be enough to run all the desired apps of some users. (Maybe it'll do for laptops and netbooks; but desktops probably not.) Therefore I suggest that those of us that have 64-bit-capable hardware bite the bullet and install 64-bit Windows Seven - Therefore hopefully sounding the death-knell to 32-bit operating systems.In fact Windows and some old Linux distros are the only reason why 32-bit operating systems are still around today. Mac hardware is all 64-bit these days without exception. Most new Linux distros are 64-bit or have a 64-bit version. It's Windows that clings to 32-bit the most. - And while there's a 32-bit version of the latest Windows version available; guess what retailers are going to pre-install onto new 64-bit capable machines? Yes; the 32-bit version. This is seriously limiting the machine; although I do see it from the retailers' perspective: If they pre-install 32-bit and you want or need 64-bit at any time in the future then there's a sales opportunity opens up that they can hopefully take advantage of. - However, like I said, this severely limits the machine.I'm hoping that Windows Seven's successor is only made available in a 64-bit version: Then, apart from a few old Linux distros on the surviving few 32-bit-only capable machines, 32-bit operating systems will be all but dead and buried. - And not before time either. It’s interesting to note that Windows Seven runs well on some hardware up to 5 years old: The problem here is that such hardware, at least with regard to a processor of that age, is that it will probably only be 32-bit capable and therefore you’ll only be able to run a 32-bit version.

What’s wrong with that? Absolutely nothing; except that you’ll be limited with regard to the amount of RAM that you can use with it. The computer that I’m writing this on has a dual-core processor, runs 32-bit XP, and has 2GB DDR2 RAM. That’s great for what I use this particular computer for, namely office work, and also watching the odd DVD occasionally via the 512MB graphics card.

If I wanted to run RAM-hungry apps, then the most RAM I’d be able to get this machine to see is <4GB. 32-bit operating systems cannot see more than that. If more were needed I fortunately have my Windows Seven RC box on standby running 64-bit Win 7 with 8GB DDR2 300MHz RAM. I could install a virtually unlimited (6.4 exabytes) amount of RAM on it if I could afford to do so and if I had a motherboard the size of a football-field.

In the future, as time goes by, I think that <4gb RAM won’t be enough to run all the desired apps of some users. (Maybe it’ll do for laptops and netbooks; but desktops probably not.) Therefore I suggest that those of us that have 64-bit-capable hardware bite the bullet and install 64-bit Windows Seven – Therefore hopefully sounding the death-knell to 32-bit operating systems.

In fact Windows and some old Linux distros are the only reason why 32-bit operating systems are still around today. Mac hardware is all 64-bit these days without exception. Most new Linux distros are 64-bit or have a 64-bit version. It’s Windows that clings to 32-bit the most. – And while there’s a 32-bit version of the latest Windows version available; guess what retailers are going to pre-install onto new 64-bit capable machines? Yes; the 32-bit version. This is seriously limiting the machine; although I do see it from the retailers’ perspective: If they pre-install 32-bit and you want or need 64-bit at any time in the future then there’s a sales opportunity opens up that they can hopefully take advantage of. – However, like I said, this severely limits the machine.

I’m hoping that Windows Seven’s successor is only made available in a 64-bit version: Then, apart from a few old Linux distros on the surviving few 32-bit-only capable machines, 32-bit operating systems will be all but dead and buried. – And not before time either.

]]> By: Bill Shoffhttp://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/comment-page-1/#comment-25069 Bill Shoff Mon, 25 May 2009 16:36:22 +0000 http://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/#comment-25069 I'm running the 32bit version of Windows7 RC on a Foxconn MB, Pentium 4 3.0gb, and 1.5 gb of 333mhz memory with no problems except that it cannot maintain a steady wireless connection to my Belkin54g router. I only use a pc for email and net surfing so I'll stick with a single core cpu. I’m running the 32bit version of Windows7 RC on a Foxconn MB, Pentium 4 3.0gb, and 1.5 gb of 333mhz memory with no problems except that it cannot maintain a steady wireless connection to my Belkin54g router. I only use a pc for email and net surfing so I’ll stick with a single core cpu.

]]> By: Joseph Villineshttp://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/comment-page-1/#comment-21609 Joseph Villines Sat, 07 Mar 2009 19:26:00 +0000 http://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/#comment-21609 Here is my new build for Window 7, I am currently beta testing the 32-bit versus. Runs great Here is my new build for Window 7, I am currently beta testing the 32-bit versus. Runs great

]]> By: Miss Virtual Realityhttp://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/comment-page-1/#comment-21282 Miss Virtual Reality Fri, 27 Feb 2009 19:54:16 +0000 http://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/#comment-21282 Thats nice to know, thanks for sharing. I love the fact that Dell has some low priced laptops! Thats nice to know, thanks for sharing. I love the fact that Dell has some low priced laptops!

]]> By: Davehttp://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/comment-page-1/#comment-21278 Dave Fri, 27 Feb 2009 16:18:58 +0000 http://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/#comment-21278 I'm running win7 64 bit beta on an older MB in a 25GB partition with 1GB PC3200 ram and an AMD 64bit single core proc. I had to run my wireless dongle in "signed drivers disabled" and in xp32 compatibility mode. I found a small program that runs the wireless usb adapter dll in test mode which by-passes the need to disable signed drivers every time I boot. I have live desktop running and nothing else tweeked and it runs fine the way I usually use a PC (not too many windows open at once). I like it and may even buy it when it comes out in August (also, when the beta expires). I am planning an upgrade though because new components are now less expensive than legacy. I’m running win7 64 bit beta on an older MB in a 25GB partition with 1GB PC3200 ram and an AMD 64bit single core proc. I had to run my wireless dongle in “signed drivers disabled” and in xp32 compatibility mode. I found a small program that runs the wireless usb adapter dll in test mode which by-passes the need to disable signed drivers every time I boot. I have live desktop running and nothing else tweeked and it runs fine the way I usually use a PC (not too many windows open at once). I like it and may even buy it when it comes out in August (also, when the beta expires). I am planning an upgrade though because new components are now less expensive than legacy.

]]> By: Sharron Fieldhttp://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/comment-page-1/#comment-21275 Sharron Field Fri, 27 Feb 2009 13:40:09 +0000 http://www.pcmech.com/article/whats-an-adequate-pc-for-windows-7/#comment-21275 In a few cases it is possible to stay with the same motherboard and yet upgrade the processor from single to dual-core. See <a href="http://kkomp.com/archives/4329" rel="nofollow">here</a> for an example.In most cases, however, and due to aging hardware, it would probably be better to build or buy a new box. In a few cases it is possible to stay with the same motherboard and yet upgrade the processor from single to dual-core. See here for an example.

In most cases, however, and due to aging hardware, it would probably be better to build or buy a new box.

]]>