Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

7 MHZ running with windows xp!

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Pentium
  • RAM
  • Windows XP
Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 2, 2006 9:17:48 PM

Hi. You will see a pentium 7 MHZ running under Windows XP pro with 20 mb RAM.

Normaly, windows xp minimal configuration is: 266 MHZ and 64 mb RAM.

Here a screenshot:

More about : mhz running windows

February 2, 2006 9:34:35 PM

i wonder if its not in guiness world record book....
Related resources
February 2, 2006 10:00:29 PM

:roll:
February 2, 2006 10:07:47 PM

And just what's the point of only running an OS? I mean, try to run an application and see what happens. Play Q4 with those 7MHz and a voodoo1 VC and 16MB ram. I would worship you if you succeed.
February 2, 2006 10:09:56 PM

Just to say to MicroSoft, they are false.
February 2, 2006 10:12:20 PM

Running a pirated copy of all of their software is just enough for me right now.
February 2, 2006 10:22:26 PM

I don't give a damn if it's fake or not. Microsoft didn't want anybody to put it on a computer slower than that, because crashes might occur, and it would be extremely miserable for the user.
February 2, 2006 10:24:27 PM

Dude. Its like the 5GHZ project. Its just for fun.
February 2, 2006 10:48:29 PM

I actually found that article quite entertaining, it's a breath of fresh air in here compared to the normal "Overclock everything that has a clock" that I see in these forums everyday.

Overclocking is usually down to the best parts and lots of money, plus some skill in the art, with a bit of luck, to produce a stable megaly overclocked box.

Underclocking has a bit of an appeal to me, because it's something one could piss around with old delapitated computers, that have past their day, the aim to underclock them the lowest before you cannot run Windows XP. Basically something that you do for shits & giggles :p 

And for those overclockers who are probably gonna jump on me and flame me, do something challenging for a change, go overclock your oven, microwave or TV... :lol: 
February 2, 2006 10:50:30 PM

Pretty cool. Lowest I've ever seen WinXP run on (in person) was a Pentium 50 w/ 32MB of RAM. It was a laptop.

-mpjesse
February 2, 2006 10:51:01 PM

overclock a oven? lol
February 2, 2006 10:54:26 PM

I see you've made stupid posts all over the place, is this the same piece of shit you wanted the cable for, cause its all a BIG wast of time, the 5ghz thing was a speed record attempt for the fastest time, yours is to see how cheap you can be a hang on to a piece of crap for as long as possible.
February 2, 2006 10:57:10 PM

dude, the 7 mhz running on winXP is just.. impressive!
February 2, 2006 11:09:44 PM

If you went and complained to microsoft about something petty like that, i'm SURE they would hang up on you and send you a virus for being stupid
February 2, 2006 11:15:01 PM

free windows 95? kewl


no im joking.
February 2, 2006 11:18:59 PM

we are joking so don't get offended and leave cause your really fun to make fun of :lol: 
February 2, 2006 11:20:46 PM

Are you kidding? You really need to lighten up. Maybe he's just mad because their PCs were outperforming his.
February 2, 2006 11:48:48 PM

The slowest Pentium ran about 60 MHz. Even the 386 ran faster than 7 MHz. You gotta get down to the 286 or 8088 range to get down to 7 MHz.
February 3, 2006 12:45:52 AM

Quote:
The slowest Pentium ran about 60 MHz. Even the 386 ran faster than 7 MHz. You gotta get down to the 286 or 8088 range to get down to 7 MHz.



He is 100% correct, that link is bullshit due the fact its nothing but a bunch of photoshop work.

The slowest Pentium was 60Mhz and was 273 Pins.

Now if if go back quite abit.
Now the slowest processor intel ever made of 740Khz C4004 made for calculators.
a b à CPUs
February 3, 2006 12:48:44 AM

Impressive, yes if it's true. I have to agree with prozac26 and go with the Photoshop theory. Pointless: hell yeah! Who wants to wait 30 minutes for a machine to boot then do nothing with it? Hell, even running Solitaire on that machine would crash it.
February 3, 2006 12:51:18 AM

:twisted: :twisted: :twisted: HOOOOOORRRRRRAAAAYYYYY!!!! :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
February 3, 2006 12:54:29 AM

20 gig ram, thats nothing i have 40 gigs of ram on mine, and i have also overclocked my printer i know get 480 ppm the paper shoots out so fast i get paper cuts if i try to catch them.
February 3, 2006 1:02:44 AM

i'm wondering myself if it real screenshot or not the text even when enlarged is all messed up i mean the 7 can be there but some other number might be missing case its all messwed up. if I see a better screenshot I may beleve it
February 3, 2006 1:20:00 AM

Pentiums never was at 7mhz, a 286 ran at 12mhz. I have ran windows xp pro on my old Pentium 100mhz 96 megs of ram from 1995 and it ran fine. Windows Media Player also worked with mp3s but i couldnt have visualations or equlizer on. Windows XP will thereticly run on a 486. the only differance between a 386/486 and a Pentium 4 is the math/multi-media instruction sets and speed of course. The image looks like it was on a very very old gfx card. I have an old ISA 128k VGA card and thats what it will look like at 640x400 at 4 bit color depth.
February 3, 2006 1:34:51 AM

Quote:
The slowest Pentium ran about 60 MHz. Even the 386 ran faster than 7 MHz. You gotta get down to the 286 or 8088 range to get down to 7 MHz.



He is 100% correct, that link is bullshit due the fact its nothing but a bunch of photoshop work.

The slowest Pentium was 60Mhz and was 273 Pins.

Now if if go back quite abit.
Now the slowest processor intel ever made of 740Khz C4004 made for calculators.

They have underclocked it
February 3, 2006 2:03:10 AM

is that screenshot in german or somethimg?
February 3, 2006 3:21:42 AM

Man... why are you so nasty to him? All he said was underclocking a CPU is a challenge and is interesting...

-mpjesse
February 3, 2006 3:28:07 AM

If you look at the frikin motherboard you'll quickly discover he's using either a 486 or a Pentium. The packaging is consistent with those two CPU's and he has a small fan on it. 286's and 386's (even low end 486's) didn't even require heatsinks for cooling. It's obvious that he is underclocking a 486DX-100 or a Pentium 75/100.

-mpjesse
February 3, 2006 11:41:04 AM

Did you even read the link? Ever heard of underclocking?

There is no reason to think the artical is fake, although I wonder how they got XP to run with only 20Mb of RAM? Even in safe mode on a clean install it would surely need more than that?
February 3, 2006 1:22:51 PM

Quote:
overclock a oven? lol
Isn't that what clues do at Thanksgiving? Now let's see, if this turkey takes 4 hours at 350 degrees, then I'll just crank it up to 450 and it'll only take 3 hours. :D 
February 3, 2006 1:52:59 PM

He said 20 MEGABYTES.
February 3, 2006 2:49:19 PM

Quote:
and i have also overclocked my printer i know get 480 ppm the paper shoots out so fast i get paper cuts if i try to catch them.

:lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 
That takes all of the cake (actually only the rest, coz I ate the biggest part the other day)!!

Quote:
Isn't that what clues do at Thanksgiving? Now let's see, if this turkey takes 4 hours at 350 degrees, then I'll just crank it up to 450 and it'll only take 3 hours.

Ya... thats what I did wif my turkey till I smoked it to hell n back

@topic:
7 MHz is actually pretty nice considering that XP even recognized hardware older than 5 mins...
February 3, 2006 6:18:38 PM

that is so cool
February 3, 2006 7:38:46 PM

:twisted: only shit ,we people r serious people.THIS IS A CRAP PROJECT.if it is possible then it can help to offer acess to the computer in underdeveloped countries.
February 3, 2006 9:06:15 PM

Linux can run on a 386, let's see XP do that!

lol

:D 
February 3, 2006 10:47:15 PM

what are you talking about? they both said 20mb megabytes
February 4, 2006 1:07:57 PM

? what do u mean?
February 5, 2006 2:36:00 AM

personally, i really don't care about XP on such a slow machine; however, i am curious how long it would take to install/compile gentoo on such a machine. my bet is that the install CD wouldn't boot into the shell. that being said, i installed FreeBSD on a 133 MHz with 128 MB of RAM. made myself a fine gateway that was significantly more useful than ANY machine running XP. :D 
February 5, 2006 2:53:48 AM

dude, that sounds like a vacuum tube transistor computer man. No, way it would run windows even just to idle it. My atari is faster than your computer.
a b à CPUs
February 5, 2006 3:08:51 AM

Again, WHY?!! Who would wait 30 minutes for a machine to boot then be able to do nothing with it! Insane!
February 5, 2006 3:36:53 AM

Fascinating. Reminds me of the old days when computers had "turbo" buttons.
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!