My version of the game lacks the 3D accelerated or DOS versions.

640x480 is... pretty small by today's standard. I'm using the Windows 95 version (non-accelerated) with the 1.1 patch on Windows 98 SE. I know the 3dfx version can be coaxed into higher resolutions, but I'd prefer software rendering.

Latest was Valiant Hearts. I've also beaten Portal 2 (on console though) and Deus Ex. Not really a completionist.

Exactly. Your 386DX from 1990 would not run Windows 2000 well, if at all. A Core 2 Duo from 2006 will run Windows 10 without problems.

The minimum requirements for Office 2010 can be met by hardware from 2000, as long as it's upgraded. My 867 Mhz Coppermine with 512 MB RAM has no problems. Ultimately, the world moves on and sometimes things have to be left behind to move forward. Even then, we're at a plateau of hardware mostly …

Office supports OpenDocument. I know because for some reason, people send me ODTs.

Office 2010 works fine on Windows XP, but XP as a daily driver is stupid today. Windows 7 is I find far faster and stable than XP, as long as your hardware isn't crap, as well as improved security. To be on the internet basically demands security patches and something that has barely been touched in …

Also depends on OS. I got my Rage Pro to cough out 1680x1050 perfectly, but only on Linux. On Windows, I have to use 4:3 resolutions.

Nowadays, Wifi just works, at least with Atheros and Intel stuff. Broadcom is the hard part, but they're getting more obscure at this point. I've never had luck with Live USB, always problematic. I just stick with DVDs.

For Fedora/privacy things: I'm pretty sure you can flip a switch in Privacy settings or just remove the package altogether. I try to avoid RPM distros altogether - they just feel wrong to me. For Mint: It's OK, but the developer seems to be a bit dickish. I don't get the love for GNOME 2 and the …

I just use the LTS of Ubuntu nowadays, likely in amd64. Less hassle. There are specialized distros for recovery, but it's usually an easier experience to apt-get what you need from the live environment.

I'll just quote myself (from this thread ): That's reality, unfortunately. I had to do the same with my P4 Northwood rig - a 2.4GHz CPU, 2gb of DDR-333 ram and 256mb GF6600 AGP video card just didn't cut it by 2013, ended up building my current Core i5 to replace it. And that PC had a fully updated …

...which would also be Prescott. They're oddly named Celeron D, despite not being dual cores.

idspispopd wrote: How slow can you clock the CPU? A Prescott is basically the slowest you can go on LGA775 if he wants to manually swap.

You can't claim this is ultimate without sticking dual Tulatins in a BP6!

I'm not terribly surprised 8.1 runs fine on such hardware. The 6xxx chips will stick around for a while due to the cheap nForce chipsets with 6150SEs that spring up everywhere. Core 2 is still competent, even with anachronistically slow RAM and disk I/O. The 8xx, among most chipsets of the time, is …

I'm a bit doubtful if this can handle Tualatin, due to voltages and the BIOS. If it doesn't, oh well. RDRAM is worth its weight in pure Columbian cocaine, so I'm a bit aware. Finding a cheap pair of 256 MB was hard enough. Windows 7 actually performs pretty well, until you get to browsers and …

A nice P3 box, hot-rodded and tricked out to run Windows 7, which it does surprisingly well. Album for a reddit post I made a while ago . I acquired it from my neighbour barely used, and I got it for the price of one sweet potato. Specs: 866 Mhz Coppermine P3, 512 MB RDRAM (upgraded from 128), Intel …