Tom's Guide | Tom's Hardware | Tom's Games
 |
 |
 |
Gosh, computers nowaday are very cheap. You can virtually ask companies who are throwing old computers away to get a much better configuration, at least Pentium class with much larger memmory configuration. Move on, its 2002 now. It might work but sluggishly.
0 
I have moved on! I have a Pentium 4, 256MB ram,Windows XP,
I just like messin around with my 486 dx2, and im tryin to upgrade it from windows 3.1
0
I found that a 486 dx2 16MB ram, are the exact minimum requirements for Windows 98, so Windows 95 will work fine<.<.<
0
Even though this question should be in the Windows 9x forum...
It should run fine. I have a 486SX 25Mhz with 8MB RAM running Windows 95A perfectly fine.
0
Well Win95 may run, but would you really say it ran "fine"? I think I get a better user experience with Win3.1x on a box with 25 percent of the MHz and 25 percent of the RAM.
0
I run Windows 95A on two 486 machines that are 486 dx2 66mhz machines with 56k modems & they run well, not sluggish in anyway. You guys need to check your facts.
0
well windows 95 will work on that it only requires 8 megs of ram so it should work fine yes computers are cheap but what about the old ones just laying around that still have years of life they can be used for something and i am glad they are and i have noticed something there seems to be a lot more windows 95 post here in this 3.1 forum since xp come along well i think it just got shifted down because most of the users in the 9x area use 98 but some do still use 95 anyway why am i just rambling on like this i will never know
0
Just FYI I'm running 95 on a 386 w/4mb ram internet is slow but it runs good enough for the games and limited apps I have on it. Granted it's not perfect, but then again neither is my new Compaq with XP. So, what else is new?? My Suggestion would be to backup your drive and make/get a copy of you existing OS and give 95 a try. You just may be surprised.If not just go back to the old way. Both are good. 3.1 glitches alot less than 95 but, 95 is easier for most to use.(myself included) You make the call!
Just my opinon. That's why you should decide cause what works for you my not for someone else. and vise/versa
0
Seen this answered before here many times. One post you can look up :
http://www.computing.net/windows31/wwwboard/forum/6607.html
0
I said this on "Answered before" 's quoted topic (Response no.8 ), but it will run OK. Dont't worry.
(Actually, the weaker point is not the 16 MB RAM, but the 486 DX/2. I have seen and "made" very well running Win95, Office 97 and full network on a Pentium 120 Mhz with 16 MB RAM. The memory was enough.)
0
Um.... those guys that are saying its to slow... are just bulls---ting you the truth its windows 95 runs good on 16 RAM whether its 50mhz or more...8 ram its pretty dam good to... 4 ram is when the computer is sluggish alot but still ran good. So just install 95 on it. I had windows 95b on my laptop with 4 ram 33mhz 200mb was pretty damn slow but was good for what i needed (icq,msn messenger,dos games,word processing,mirc,programming C++) what other guys are saying is true too about it working fast and stuff... just ignore the bulls---s ahead of you
0  |
 |
 |
This post is quite old and has been locked from receiving new replies. Please create a new posting instead.
| Ads by Google |
