Win2000 Pro for Pentium 233 MMX?

[theif]

I'm currently running 98SE, I'm perfectly happy with it.

However, i'm curious to know the effects that Installing Win2000 Pro. would have on my system. I have 128MB RAM, if that adds anything. Any advice is much appreciated.

-the_if

 

[Boozy43]

ummm...my answer would be no...stick with win98.

i may be wrong but win2k is quite alot heavier than win98...i am dual booting an i like 2000 alot and i've been using it all the time for everything, but...well...here's an example.
i have 128mb of ram.
in win98 i never use any swapfile at all.
in win2k i always use some swapfile [pagefile].

win2k is alot more stable tho, and is a nice change, but there is alot more to it and alot more running, etc.

i guess it would depend on how you plan to use your comp.

i have win98 tweaked to the max...its installed with 98LitePro [no web integration with my desktop] and i also use darkstep usually [both in win2k and win98]...

with wi98 there is a tonn you can do to tweak your comp and make it run ALOT better...but with win2k it does everything pretty damn well already!!...its just heavier.

if you have enough hdd space [say atleast 4gig hdd] i would recommend dual booting.

just use partitionmagic to create another partition...keep c: primary with win98 and make d: logical for win2k.
use FAT32 for your partition.

actually, come to think of it, you don't even need partitionmagic to create a partition.

win2k has its own partition utility that will create a partition with unused hdd space during install ...it can also format, delete, and resize [i think] existing partitions....quite a good utility...especially to come with an OS and run during setup.

let me know what you decide to do

 

[celeritas]

I'm using a Pentium 233 (overclocked to ~300) with 64MB RAM & Win2K Pro for my file/DHCP server. It works great. I don't know if I'd want it for my everyday system, though.

 

[mpancha]

when my comp was down I had to resort to using my old Compaq Presario 1540.. its a P133, with 48MB Ram. I had win2k on it, and as long as I wasn't doing too much at the same time, it worked fine. It never crashed on me, but it was slow when I was trying to load up programs, but that was due to the low RAM. Since then the Compaq has become a file server, and its still running fine. The only bottleneck on it is the RAM. It should work fine for you, temporarily.. but I owuldn't stick to the 233 chip for too long.

 

[nexus9]

I was running windows 2000 Advanced server on a Pentium 233 w/72megs of ram. Took about 5-7 minutes to boot up! I wound up giving it to a friend... he's using it as a firewall/internet sharing server. Works pretty good for that, once it's booted up.

 

[nexus9]

arg, double post...

-Nexus9

 

[billw]

hehehe..... running win2k advanced server on a P166 with 128 megs of ram.... not a problem.... Note: I started out with a P75 overclocked to 110mhz

I don't think you'll have a problem with your processor

 

[urbantechie]

Windows 2000 Advanced Server is almost like Pro if you disable the unnecessary services. I'm running it and runs FAST.

 

[Patriot]

If you are going to be using this machine alot, I would stick with Win98. But if you just want to use it as a file server/ICS box than it will work fine. My ICS server is a P133 w/ 64MB of RAM.

 

[Durron]

I've had Win2k running on a dual P233mmx machine w/64 ram and it was quite fast. Not sure about one CPU however, I didnt try it.

 

[TwiSTEd365]

I'm using Win2k Server without installing the server apps. It runs on a Cyrix 6x86 pr233 (really 200Mhz, I hate PR ratings) with 64 Megs ram. It runs as fast as NT did on this machine, but when viewing my Task Manager, I can see why I could use another 64 megs of RAM. 64 megs is ok for now; at this moment I'm playing mp3s and surfing, don't notice much more lag than with NT4 or win98, and it's way more stable than either. I wouldn't trade Win2k for anything else MS makes. BTW, I bought win2k pro, but my cd got one tiny scratch, and the install proggie wouldn't load a few files... so I borrowed the W2k Server disk from work. The serial worked and I'm not using any of the server apps, so my conscience is lifted.

Twisted365

 

[Cosmic_Horror]

you can run it, but make sure you have driver support for everything in win2k before you take the leap.

 

[noxipoo]

o233 with 64 meg ram, running ME and 2000 dual boot. i use w2k as my everyday OS and its good. have a bunch of stuff running and its not that slow. (intellimouse, mcafee, aim, 2 mirc, IE, somemore crap)

 

[Topochicho]

Ran 2000 on a 233 with 96MB until last month when my company updated me. Much faster than NT was on the same machine. Very stable just took forever and a day to compile anything. But for standard task its plenty fast. My boss has a laptop with a p200MMX and 128MB and he runs plenty fast. We upgraded his from NT to 2000 to enable his USB stuff and it works very well.

one BIG step you need to take is to partition off about 256MB (or how ever large a pagefile you use) and format it to fat 32 and put your pagefile there with it MIN/MAX to the size of the partition. This will keep your pagefile one unfragmented file and will keep the machine up to speed. If its a dual boot do the same for the other system,but each system needs a partition of its own. NT4 will need to use fat 16 because it doesn't recognize 32 and never ever use NTFS becuase it puts all the over head in the middle of the disk and will split your pagefile.

My 233 was a LOT faster than most of the people running PII 266 simply because they had eaten up there c drives or fragmented them.