VOGONS


First post, by Living

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

i need to know if im correct: Windows 10 Requires NX.

So in theory the slowest processor you can run it is the Pentium 4 2.4Ghz Prescott and Sempron 2500+ 754?

Last edited by Living on 2021-10-11, 18:02. Edited 1 time in total.

Reply 1 of 22, by keenmaster486

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Why would you want to run Windows 10 at all, let alone on a Prescott?

I flermmed the plootash just like you asked.
World's foremost 486 enjoyer.

Reply 2 of 22, by DosFreak

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Well if you are going by slowest my Mom has a Dell Latitude D520 with a Core Duo running Windows 10 32bit. Think it might be the T2300 but I don't have it in front of me.
It works well but IIRC has 4gb of memory and flash storage.

All 64bit processors support NX by default.

For processors without NX I believe there is an unofficial patch to bypass the installer check. You'll probably have to be careful with what updates windows patches though and considering they are all cumulative now....

DOSBox Compilation Guides
DosBox Feature Request Thread
PC Game Compatibility List
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Running DRM games offline

Reply 3 of 22, by Living

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
keenmaster486 wrote:

Why would you want to run Windows 10 at all, let alone on a Prescott?

why not?

Windows 10 Pro Anniversary Edition X86 on Sempron 2500+ x64 + 1GB DDR400 (2x512) + Biostar KM8VGA-M + Gigabyte Radeon 9550 128MB AGP + SSD Kingston 120GB
image.jpg

Sin_t_tulo.jpg

Reply 4 of 22, by Standard Def Steve

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

It's not quite the slowest, but I had Win10 Anniversary running just fine on my Pentium M rig.

Looks like the slowest AMD CPU supported is indeed the Sempron 2500. The slowest Intel would probably be one of the 775 Celeron Ds...I can't remember which ones supported NX (or if they all did).

Ten Gigahertz
5 Groovy GHz: Ryzen 9 5900X | GTX 1080 Ti | 64GB DDR4-3600 | 2TB NVMe, 8TB HDD | Win 10 & 11
5 Troll GHz: AMD FX-8350 | Radeon R9 Fury | 16GB DDR3-1866 | 500GB SSD, 2TB HDD | Win 8.1

Reply 5 of 22, by Living

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Standard Def Steve wrote:

It's not quite the slowest, but I had Win10 Anniversary running just fine on my Pentium M rig.

Looks like the slowest AMD CPU supported is indeed the Sempron 2500. The slowest Intel would probably be one of the 775 Celeron Ds...I can't remember which ones supported NX (or if they all did).

The Slowest Celeron D that supports NX is the 330J (2666Mhz 256Kb L2 Prescott)

Reply 6 of 22, by FFXIhealer

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Don't know if it helps, but I refurbished two Core 2 Duo machines with DDR3 memory and I put Windows 10 on both of them and they run perfectly happy. Both CPUs are Wolfdale. Check on the specs below if you don't believe me.

79hk4p.png
gubjwc.png

The only thing I would want to add to these before using them for everyday computing like websurfing (Facebooking, YouTubing, iHeart Radioing, etc.) is a smaller (say ~250GB) SSD to move the OS to. Yes, I know I'd be limited by the SATAII interface to only ~300MB/s, but the difference would still be dramatic. I swear by SSDs now.

292dps.png
3smzsb.png
0fvil8.png
lhbar1.png

Reply 7 of 22, by candle_86

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Living wrote:
Standard Def Steve wrote:

It's not quite the slowest, but I had Win10 Anniversary running just fine on my Pentium M rig.

Looks like the slowest AMD CPU supported is indeed the Sempron 2500. The slowest Intel would probably be one of the 775 Celeron Ds...I can't remember which ones supported NX (or if they all did).

The Slowest Celeron D that supports NX is the 330J (2666Mhz 256Kb L2 Prescott)

Yea thats slower than a Sempron 2500, its about a dead heat with a Pentium 4 1.6 or Athlon 1400 🤣

Reply 8 of 22, by jade_angel

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
FFXIhealer wrote:

<snippety>
The only thing I would want to add to these before using them for everyday computing like websurfing (Facebooking, YouTubing, iHeart Radioing, etc.) is a smaller (say ~250GB) SSD to move the OS to. Yes, I know I'd be limited by the SATAII interface to only ~300MB/s, but the difference would still be dramatic. I swear by SSDs now.

The sheer difference in random read/write speeds due to the low and fixed latency makes all the difference in the world. The bit a lot of folks miss is that while yeah, the older SATA interface might hold things back a little in sequential transfers, random stuff is so much faster than magdisk that you can tell the difference even on ancient hardware. (Try the poor man's version, a CF card, on a 486 and tell me that's not faster for random stuff than a vintage disk!)

Main Box: Ryzen-TR 1900X | GTX 1050/Radeon RX 580
98/2000 Box: PIII/766 |Quadro4 380 XGL

Reply 10 of 22, by Azarien

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
FFXIhealer wrote:

Don't know if it helps, but I refurbished two Core 2 Duo machines with DDR3 memory and I put Windows 10 on both of them and they run perfectly happy. Both CPUs are Wolfdale. Check on the specs below if you don't believe me.

Well, I still use Core 2 Quad as my main machine (It's 10 years old now but I see no reason to upgrade...) and Windows 10 works just fine. Didn't even think that it might not work.

I also have Windows 10 on a 1,66 GHz Atom N570 which is rather slow, but I'm not sure if it counts as a "desktop" processor. Both x86 and x64 builds run, but hibernation doesn't work on x64 so I use x86.

Reply 11 of 22, by PhilsComputerLab

User metadata
Rank Hardware Mod
Rank
Hardware Mod

I have no qualms running Windows 10 on older machines for testing or mucking around 😀 It runs surprisingly well with low resources and everything is pretty much auto-detected or gets picked up by update.

YouTube, Facebook, Website

Reply 12 of 22, by creepingnet

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I managed to trick Windows 10 into installing on our old Dell Dimension P4 2.6G system, ran like total shit though, but then that system was a total dog under 7, and would become one under XP once all the updates were applied. Total P.O.S., I'm considering getting rid of it at some point as all it does is take up space these days.

Funny, almost EVERY computer in my house is 10 years old or older, even the one I built last night is - a dual core Core 2 Duo P8800 that I bought for $40 with RAM and everything else slapped in my recently procured InWin D500 mATX Beige case that is as yellowed as a 486 DX that spent too much time in the window of an office. Just slapped in my SSD and it boots in like 30 seconds with all the latest updates, patches, and even loading STEAM and all that other crap on boot. The oldest modern box is my Antec 300 cased Pentium D system - 3.40 GHz - that thing runs Windows 10 x64 as well off an SSD, also fast as heck. I don't really need much computer. And EVERYTHING has internet - even the 8088 based Tandy 1000.

I think we've hit a plateau for regular end users in a way. Also, where I work, I still see 7-10 year old workstations on a regular basis come in for repairs. So as slong as it's nothing worse than a hard disk or memory module, we fix it, and I say why the heck not as long as productivity is not affected.

~The Creeping Network~
My Website - https://sites.google.com/site/thecreepingnetwork/home - ending 9/2021
My Youtube Channel - https://www.youtube.com/creepingnet
NEW WEBSITE - 9/2021 https://creepingnet.neocities.org/

Reply 13 of 22, by jade_angel

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I think that's broadly true. The class of user that really needs power can never really get enough, but we hit the level of "enough CPU" for J. Random with midrange to high-end stuff from a decade ago. El cheapo machines from back then don't hold up as well, but midrange and up sure do, as long as you're not doing heavy gaming or video editing.

As for RAM, I don't think we've quite plateaued there - stuff seems to be getting more memory-intensive still, and that's the one thing that's actually making 5-10 year old machines age out: the inability to go above 8GB of RAM (or the few that are still 32-bit-only without PAE).

Main Box: Ryzen-TR 1900X | GTX 1050/Radeon RX 580
98/2000 Box: PIII/766 |Quadro4 380 XGL

Reply 14 of 22, by Azarien

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
PhilsComputerLab wrote:

It runs surprisingly well with low resources and everything is pretty much auto-detected or gets picked up by update.

Well, that doesn't always work as it should. On my Intel Atom netbook Windows 10 constantly wants to update the drivers, and the new ones have fewer options (gfx) or are less stable (wifi) than those dedicated for Windows 7.

Reply 15 of 22, by ppgrainbow

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Living wrote:

i need to know if im correct: Windows 10 Requires NX.

So in theory the slowest processor you can run it is the Pentium 4 2.4Ghz Prescott and Sempron 2500+ 754?

Windows 8 and Windows 10 are not compatible with processors older than a Prescott-based Pentium 4 processor, because it hard requires a processor with SSE2, NX-bit and PAE instructions. Windows 10 will run on a PC with as little as 192 MB RAM. But out of a absolute minimum of 256 MB, only 192 MB of it will be usable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmqN6V9Cyo0

Anything lower than 192 MB will cause Windows 10 to not boot at all. With less than 1 GB of memory, Windows 10 will be increasingly difficult to use.

Reply 17 of 22, by Azarien

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
malika wrote:

I'm using Dell Latitude D520 with a Core Duo running Windows 10 32bit but still it is not that slow.

Well, we should distinguish "slowest" from "oldest".
If "slowest" is wanted, then we should look at some single-core no-hyperthreading CPUs, like Prescott-era Celerons, or something with low clock rates, like Celeron 220 which is only 1.2 GHz.

Reply 18 of 22, by FFXIhealer

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I have a Samsung N150 netbook with an Atom N450 processor running Windows 10. I was going to post that it doesn't have NX (because it's not listed in CPU-z) but I checked the BIOS of my netbook right now and there's an option for Execute Disable Bit (Enable), so I guess it's there. Nevermind.

292dps.png
3smzsb.png
0fvil8.png
lhbar1.png

Reply 19 of 22, by PhilsComputerLab

User metadata
Rank Hardware Mod
Rank
Hardware Mod

I'm testing a MeeGoPad Compute Stick with Z3735F, 2 GB RAM, 32 GB storage and Windows 10 installed.

It's working fine, I am positively surprised. I haven't done any benchmarks yet to see how it matches up against older retro systems, but I will find out soon 😀

YouTube, Facebook, Website