Poster | Thread |
BrianK
|  |
Re: x86 CPU Progress Posted on 29-Dec-2003 19:26:42
| | [ #41 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 30-Sep-2003 Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA | | |
|
| @vortexau
While, you are correct about each additional release of Windows requires more and more hardware. Longhorn's offical release date isn't out, let alone the specs. There are specs for the pre-alpha version. 30GB, I believe, is the minimum size drive not the requirement for the OS itself. Also, the current version of Longhorn, according to Microsoft, hasn't been gone through to reduce resources or speed up use.
Microsoft isn't my favorite company but I think it's hard to start stating what the requirements are for a software package that's estimated to ship end of 2005 if not 2006. Also, if prices for hardware continue their downward spiral the hardware requirements will be equal to or less then the cost of a new computer in 2003. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Seer
|  |
Re: x86 CPU Progress Posted on 29-Dec-2003 19:54:57
| | [ #42 ] |
|
|
 |
Team Member  |
Joined: 27-Jun-2003 Posts: 3725
From: The Netherlands | | |
|
| Having acces to Longhorn (Got 1 friend who get's all alpha/beta/RC's from M$, costs him a lot of money, and 1 coworker gets them as well, real nice to have those DVDs) it runs fine on a P4 2Ghz and 512MB ram.. Offcourse the new filesystem is a long way from completion and the "new" TCP/IP6 isn't working, so anything can happen..
As for now, the latest build is just as resource hungry as Win XP.. Sure its' not Amiga OS, but it's not Win98 either.. _________________ ~ Everything you say will be misquoted and used against you.. ~ |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
vortexau
|  |
Re: x86 CPU Progress Posted on 30-Dec-2003 17:15:46
| | [ #43 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member  |
Joined: 10-Mar-2003 Posts: 2651
From: . . outside the Pod-bay; Australia | | |
|
| @BrianK & Seer:
Of course those RAM and drive size requirments I posted weren't factual! I was just driving home why I sometimes call the product FLAT TYRES 98, FLAT TYRES 2000, FLAT TYRES XP (etc) in saying what an ever more-powerful Personal Carriage is running on!
Didn't you see the "Longhorn -- running like cold treacle in Antarticia" . . . and Intel- "We ramp it up so MS can slow it down"! lines?
This was in relation to why PC Users never fully gain from the speed-increase in x86 CPUs! _________________ -vortexau, who's A1 XE-G4 remains at half-RAM ! A2000HD (from 1991) 060 64Mb PicassoII with OS3.5 . . . still working. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
fricopal!
|  |
Re: x86 CPU Progress Posted on 20-Mar-2025 2:40:19
| | [ #44 ] |
|
|
 |
Cult Member  |
Joined: 12-Mar-2025 Posts: 799
From: Unknown | | |
|
| Quote:
by rayt on 11-Dec-2003 19:40:16
I wonder how much power will be consumed/wasted by the 4Ghz P4... |
Estimating a typical desktop PC with an AMD Athlon XP X3 processor running at full load for about 8 hours would consume roughly 100-250 watts. Higher power consumption applies to systems that run intensive applications or multiple tasks simultaneously, potentially reaching up to the system's maximum TDP (Thermal Design Power). |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|