Facebook Plunges Again
Tumblr 101: Tips And Tricks To Get Started
Windows 7 system requirements: You can probably run it
And that means if you can run the release candidate on your computer you can probably run the final build. So what does it take to run Windows 7 RC? Not much:
- 1GHz 32-bit or 64-bit processor
- 1GB of RAM
- 16GB of disk space (or 20GB for 64-bit users)
- DirectX 9 graphics device with WDDM 1.0 or higher driver
The system requirements aren't actually much higher than those for Windows Vista. The difference is that all versions of Windows 7 will run well on machines with the minimum specifications, whereas the higher end versions of Vista really worked best on machines with more RAM and better video cards. A large part of the difference is due to the fact that Windows 7 was designed to run on slower systems such as netbooks, which are the fastest growing segment of the PC industry.
Comments
28
Subscribe to commentsJennMay 1st 2009 3:39PM
I installed in a virtual machine with 512MB and it works ok. The xp Mode is available on technet as well, but the program I tried did not work with it.
fikhlMay 1st 2009 4:52PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the 'DirectX 9 graphics device' only required for Aero interface? I mean with Aero disabled, can't we run Win7 even with those crappy Intel graphics solutions?
PeterMay 1st 2009 5:01PM
I'm running Vista with Areo on a 3 year old Dell Dimension with built in Intel video and it works fine.
FWIW, I was at a Microsoft event yesterday and they showed Windows 7 running on an old Toshiba laptop with 512 Meg RAM and an 800 MHz processor. They actually ran the PPT presentation from the machine just to prove it was fast enough. It ran surprisingly well. The only thing that really strained the machine was bitlocker encrypting a USB drive.
JohhMay 1st 2009 5:26PM
All "those crappy Intel graphics solutions" support DirectX 9 as well, don't they?
ParanoisedMay 2nd 2009 10:01AM
No they don't. Intel GMA 910 for example on my 2006 HP laptop wouldn't run Aero because it wasn't WDDM compliant.
MarkMay 1st 2009 5:25PM
Can I install this over Vista and run Win7 that way? Or is there an "expiry date" on this load?
JonMay 1st 2009 5:31PM
It expires June 2010 or something ... A year or so
JohhMay 1st 2009 5:31PM
Doesn't matter if you install this over Vista or onto a formatted drive.
It makes no difference as far as expiration dates, product keys, etc are concerned.
ZeroK2May 1st 2009 5:41PM
All Intel GMA's from the 950 series onward support DX9, anything before that doesn't.
Also from the article "(which lets you run Windows XP programs)" should be "which lets you run incompatible Windows XP programs" most XP programs work just fine the XPM is for those that don't. It's also limited to the business/ultimate editions for that purpose so lazy developers for the home market cannot coast by on an old platform..
JohhMay 1st 2009 6:16PM
Are you sure? I do believe *all* Intel GMAs support DX9, even before 950. Possibly not WDDM though.
You're indeed spot-on with the XP compatibility comment. I think the whole "XP mode" has been needlessly over-discussed and most users will certainly never use or need it.
I run a very wide range of specialised applications (most of them dating from XP times or older) on my Vista at the moment and I've yet to encounter an incompatibility issue. I can't see why I would on Win7.
chefgon_ignMay 1st 2009 10:10PM
"If you want to use Windows XP Mode (which lets you run Windows XP programs)"
Windows XP programs run natively in Windows 7, this is an emulation compatibility layer for the rare program that doesn't work quite right. The vast majority of Windows XP programs will run perfectly on Windows 7 without installing a virtual XP on it.
shermanmilMay 1st 2009 10:10PM
Will voice recognition come with this new operating system?
superhoboMay 4th 2009 9:02AM
It's already present in Vista.
jump1234May 1st 2009 10:17PM
Will it run Leopard (Mac) compatibility mode?
superrrguyMay 2nd 2009 1:47AM
I'm running 7 on on an old Toshiba Protege 3505 Tablet and it works just as well/miserable as XP did on this thing. It's quite usable.
Pentium III M 1.33Mhz w/512MB Ram.
Besides that MS wants users to have a better "experience", I wonder if they just didn't want to list lower requirements for this over Vista.
koanMay 2nd 2009 8:46AM
I'm using it successfully on an Asus EEEPC 900: it starts in 29 seconds and works surprisingly well. It occupies the entire disk on that netbook in its full version but it's great!
bobeotmMay 2nd 2009 10:59AM
I'm running it on a 1.5yr old Vaio FE with 1.4ghz processor, and 2gbs of ram. Runs like a dream, due to the low system requirements. If feels more stable than vista on pretty much every front. The combined memory footprint of explorer and desktop window manager on vista used to rival memory heavy programs, but in 7 they don't seem to make as much of an impact.
Erik SagenMay 2nd 2009 9:46PM
Can't wait for this to launch. I've held off on upgrading to Vista because I wasn't impressed with it and it was a pretty whiny OS.
Windows 7 looks like a solid product, something Vista should have been when it was released.
TscharliMay 2nd 2009 9:47PM
Can anybody tell me, how often explorer on win7 will crash throughout a day? And: is w7 now again a multitasking system or do we have the same effect than VIXA(tm) provided: to open the DVD and inserting a cd-rom causes the whole machine freezing for 40-50 seconds.
BTW: Doesn't really matter, wether mankind will vanish cause of swine flu or a new M$-O$
JohhMay 3rd 2009 9:42AM
Explorer on Windows will crash zero times a day. And that goes for XP, Vista, 7... you name it.
If it indeed crashes (or freezes for a minute, as you claim), you better check and improve either your hardware and/or user habits. The real problem may be in front of the monitor.