«

Can you run Vista with less than 512 meg of ram >?

Bluesplayer wrote:
> Can you run Vista with less than 512 meg of ram >?

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/919183/en-us

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=2163

It doesn't look like you'd want to. If the computer
is that low on memory, either stick with a previous
version of Windows or go with Linux.

The biggest reason for upgrading, would probably be
for gaming on the PC. For example, I have Win2K, and
support has substantially dropped for it, even though
it is very similar to WinXP. For example, a video card
I was interested in, only has WinXP or Vista drivers,
and there is no longer a driver for Win2K. And some
game installers are quite picky, and will refuse to
install or deal with Win2K.

But a lot of other software will continue to run just
fine using older operating system options.

Paul

You really will hate Vista even more if you run it on anything less than an
Intel Core Duo/Quad with at least 2gbs of RAM and a video card with at least
256mbs of memory that is not more than one generation old, either NVidia or
ATI.

According to the system requirements, no.

RAM is cheap. Buy some.




"Bluesplayer" <> wrote in message
news:9748de05-33b4-4428-8700-...
> Can you run Vista with less than 512 meg of ram >?

Jeff Strickland wrote:
> According to the system requirements, no.
>
> RAM is cheap. Buy some.
>

There are some chipsets, that have a 512MB total RAM limit.
Some of Intel's handywork (not done for tech reasons but
for marketing reasons).

See the five rightmost columns here. 810 and 815 chipsets.
http://developer.intel.com/design/ch...ture/index.htm

Paul

>
>
>
> "Bluesplayer" <> wrote in message
> news:9748de05-33b4-4428-8700-...
>> Can you run Vista with less than 512 meg of ram >?
>

"Paul" <> wrote in message news:fug4no$fqd$...
> Jeff Strickland wrote:
>> According to the system requirements, no.
>>
>> RAM is cheap. Buy some.
>>
>
> There are some chipsets, that have a 512MB total RAM limit.
> Some of Intel's handywork (not done for tech reasons but
> for marketing reasons).
>

That is true, but the processors they carry do not support Vista ...

On 20 Apr, 15:27, "Jeff Strickland" <cr...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Paul" <nos...@needed.com> wrote in messagenews:fug4no$fqd$...
> > Jeff Strickland wrote:
> >> According to the system requirements, no.
>
> >> RAM is cheap. Buy some.
>
> > There are some chipsets, that have a 512MB total RAM limit.
> > Some of Intel's handywork (not done for tech reasons but
> > for marketing reasons).
>
> That is true, but the processors they carry do not support Vista ...

The reason i asked the question is because at the moment im running
win xp ser2 on spare rig using only 128 meg of ram and it flies . I
was just curious as to what would happen . I see it as an experiment
thats all .

"Bluesplayer" <> wrote in message
news:b6c12af4-5783-4708-8938-...
> On 20 Apr, 15:27, "Jeff Strickland" <cr...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> "Paul" <nos...@needed.com> wrote in messagenews:fug4no$fqd$...
>> > Jeff Strickland wrote:
>> >> According to the system requirements, no.
>>
>> >> RAM is cheap. Buy some.
>>
>> > There are some chipsets, that have a 512MB total RAM limit.
>> > Some of Intel's handywork (not done for tech reasons but
>> > for marketing reasons).
>>
>> That is true, but the processors they carry do not support Vista ...
>
> The reason i asked the question is because at the moment im running
> win xp ser2 on spare rig using only 128 meg of ram and it flies . I
> was just curious as to what would happen . I see it as an experiment
> thats all .


The System Requirements for Vista say you need 512M of RAM, I run 1G on one
machine and 2G on another.

There is a Processor Speed requirement as well. I don't recall what it is.

Load it and see what hapens. It should be very slow.