VOGONS


First post, by yuhong

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Have anyone installed Win2000 on a 486? It would be fun to see what modern Windows software would run, and which would crash on an 486.

Reply 1 of 8, by leileilol

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

/me raises hand

One definite way to crash is to get CPU frequency by the TSC function which a lot of apps do......

DirectX 8 and newer refuses to install on 486 architecture at the installer level.

Steam almost runs. I almost entered the valve hardware survey with it 🙄

apsosig.png
long live PCem

Reply 2 of 8, by elianda

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Infact alot of newer software simply fails without error message on older systems.
Like Everest don't run on a 386/W95, but it should regarding the official system requirements...
IE6 fails on 386, Firefox also.
Most of the Video stuff requires SSE. There is no check, the exe-files usually just crash.

I would really like to see a error message that states already at installer level that the application is compiled for pentium+ f.e.
Just finding out by try and error is really a pain.

Retronn.de - Vintage Hardware Gallery, Drivers, Guides, Videos. Now with file search
Youtube Channel
FTP Server - Driver Archive and more
DVI2PCIe alignment and 2D image quality measurement tool

Reply 4 of 8, by Old Thrashbarg

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Not quite true. Windows 95 was the last version that would officially install on such a machine, but Windows 98 will run on a 386, if you patch the installer to disable the hardware check (or install it from a different machine then swap the hard drive over).

...Not that any sane person would want to actually use Win98 on a 386, but that's another matter entirely. 🤣

Reply 5 of 8, by awergh

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

This is my best attempt with Windows 7
7onacyrix.png

Cryrix 6x86MX @ 233Mhz
512MB RAM
20GB HDD

It wasn't a permanent arrangement it wasn't the fastest experience and I was pretty lazy in putting 512MB RAM when I could of gone for 384MB easily or maybe less.

I think eventually the CPU usage went down from 100% and sortof just permanently fluctuated to something slightly less then 100% I think.

I almost want to install it again to find out. The board is an AOpen board not sure what else about it without looking.

Reply 6 of 8, by Tetrium

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
awergh wrote:

-snip-

Well done 🤣!
I remember having seen a vid of 7 (or was it Vista?) installed on a s7 Cyrix and it took forever to reach the desktop!

Reply 7 of 8, by awergh

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I don't remember the startup time being a huge amount of time but I don't quite remember.
I'm sure you still could get better though I gather it has to be at least a 686 processor from what I read somewhere or something like that.