Pentium 4 and Windows 8 compatibility

[Noir Angel]

The specifics can be up for debate, I'm not saying SSE2 or NX should or shouldn't be necessary, I'm just saying that in the computer world, a computer with a P4 is ancient. I've had a P4 retired in a box for probably about 8 years now. When you can probably build a system that's at least 5 times faster for $150, it's probably time to just do the upgrade. You can debate whether it's fair or not on Microsoft's part, but the argument is entirely and 100 percent useless since you'll never find enough people running systems that old and trying to upgrade to the "latest and greatest" OS. Usually people who are willing to pay for the very latest OS as soon as it comes out are also willing to pay a little to keep their computer at least somewhat up to date. The people who aren't interested in updating their computer usually stick to the OS that came with it like XP which would still run just fine on a P4.

Have to admit you make fair enough points, in modern terms those P4's are ancient given any CPU from 2005 onwards should meet the requirements. Having said that the charity I do volunteer work for rely on hand me downs and we get a surprisingly high volume of Socket 478 Pentium 4 computers come in so old computers are still useful to some people. I think we have... maybe 3 computers out of the 20 odd in service that meet the requirements for Windows 8, even though all but about 5 of them can run 7. Still I'm hopeful we can get some less crappy equipment soon :p

[AJerman]

Have to admit you make fair enough points, in modern terms those P4's are ancient given any CPU from 2005 onwards should meet the requirements. Having said that the charity I do volunteer work for rely on hand me downs and we get a surprisingly high volume of Socket 478 Pentium 4 computers come in so old computers are still useful to some people. I think we have... maybe 3 computers out of the 20 odd in service that meet the requirements for Windows 8, even though all but about 5 of them can run 7. Still I'm hopeful we can get some less crappy equipment soon :p

Yeah, I've been in that situation for sure. Sometimes it's hard to get better, and when you need to upgrade a number of systems, I understand that even $150 a piece would be expensive for a charity organization, but those systems are the kind of systems that will keep on running just fine on XP or 7.

Another things to consider is that restrictions can be put in place so that hardware can be phased out. If Windows 8 could install on anything, then people would try it, and people would complain when it didn't work. MS has to have a point where they can stop supporting older hardware or else their testing process would have to be absolutely enormous. You're talking about testing an entire OS. I do software QA for a living and we test about 15 update packages for servers that WE build and sell, and we only run back a few years in models. Now imagine MS having to test a software packages massively larger than ours, on systems made by anyone and everyone, and for how many years? There's quite a possibility that some restrictions are somewhat arbitrary for the exact purpose of limiting older hardware. On top of the testing, think about the code that has to be there to do checks to see what your system supports and how to handle things depending on what it supports. Supporting incredibly old hardware requires a lot more resources than a lot may think.

I think an OS upgrade or two should generally be expected to work fine on a system, past that, you're going to be pushing to see how much more than system can handle without upgrading it. This goes for mobile OSes too. For example, everyone seems so entitled to get the latest and great version of Android, but they still want to use the junk phone they got for free 2 years ago.

[J400uk]

FWIW I've got it running on a Pentium D, albeit slowly!

[ToneKnee]

People need to remember that companies like Intel and AMD add specific processor optimisations and additional system protection i.e. NX. The fact that it's taken Microsoft nearly 10 years to have these optimisations as default shows that Microsoft is not trying to **** it's customers over (quite the opposite), and believe me, Windows 8 is as slimmed down as Windows XP, it's the fact that we have these optimisations that make the experience that much better and more responsive.

So cut out the stupid 'M$' behavior and live with the fact that your computer is getting old and Microsoft is moving with the times. Be glad that SSE3, 4 etc aren't minimum requirements.

[MtnDewCodeRedFreak]

I've installed Win 7 Ultimate 32-bit on my old Dell Dim 8400 computer released in 2004. That Dell has P4 with HT. Win 7 worked fine with it.

What about the HT part? Would Win 8 even install? That Dell Dim 8400 already had many parts upgraded - vid card, RAM, DVD burner, and SATA HDD.

[statm1]

I've installed Win 7 Ultimate 32-bit on my old Dell Dim 8400 computer released in 2004. That Dell has P4 with HT. Win 7 worked fine with it.

What about the HT part? Would Win 8 even install? That Dell Dim 8400 already had many parts upgraded - vid card, RAM, DVD burner, and SATA HDD.

Hyper Threading does not effect whether you can or can't install Win8 because there are even versions of the newest Intel processors that doesn't include HT. It would all depend on which P4 you had. You can search for CPU-Z on google and download/install and it will it will tell you the exact P4 and chipset you have and then you can type that processor into the search box on ark.intel.com and it will list what features that particular processor has. It will support Win8 if at the bottom it has "Yes" beside the Execute Disable bit. But, you will have to make sure that the chipset and BIOS on your P4 machine will support a newer P4. The date of your BIOS version should be in CPU-z and the intel site will be able to tell you which processors your chipset supports. It will also need to support PAE which the intel site does not tell you. cpu-world.com will show you whether your particular processor supports PAE(physical address extensions) or not (if not on the spec tab then on the CPU id tab).

I think I said this is an earlier post, but I had the P4 540 and that does not have the bit that is required and so in order to beable to use Win8. I updated my BIOS and upgraded to a P4 650 refurbished and now Win8 runs just fine. It is even faster than Win7 and as icing on the cake, the processor I upgraded to was 64bit capable. So the $9 I spent on the new processor was well worth the effort to beable to upgrade to Win8. I was a little worried about it being refurbished but having ran it non-stop since January I haven't had a problem with it.

[Yuhong Bao]

Hyper Threading does not effect whether you can or can't install Win8 because there are even versions of the newest Intel processors that doesn't include HT. It would all depend on which P4 you had. You can search for CPU-Z on google and download/install and it will it will tell you the exact P4 and chipset you have and then you can type that processor into the search box on ark.intel.com and it will list what features that particular processor has. It will support Win8 if at the bottom it has "Yes" beside the Execute Disable bit. But, you will have to make sure that the chipset and BIOS on your P4 machine will support a newer P4. The date of your BIOS version should be in CPU-z and the intel site will be able to tell you which processors your chipset supports. It will also need to support PAE which the intel site does not tell you. cpu-world.com will show you whether your particular processor supports PAE(physical address extensions) or not (if not on the spec tab then on the CPU id tab).

NX implies support for PAE, so no need to check separately.

[Detection]

I've got a machine with a P4 Northwood 2.6GHz which does not support Win 8

http://www.cpu-world...PG2600D%29.html

[statm1]

NX implies support for PAE, so no need to check separately.

Ah well I was just giving him enough info to check everything out for himself is all.

[vcfan]

if I had a p4 id burn the bitch to the ground.at least that would be more fun than running a modern os on an ancient cpu.

[ingramator]

if I had a p4 id burn the bitch to the ground.at least that would be more fun than running a modern os on an ancient cpu.

I think I would overvolt mine and see how much juice i could get out of her before she blew.

[Ulpian]

Hmm, NX can be disabled in BIOS. Enable it then.

[statm1]

My P4 is just as good as having any low end modern processor. It has no problem running Win8 and games at low settings. No reason to waste it just because of its age.

[Yuhong Bao]

I think I said this is an earlier post, but I had the P4 540 and that does not have the bit that is required and so in order to beable to use Win8. I updated my BIOS and upgraded to a P4 650 refurbished and now Win8 runs just fine. It is even faster than Win7 and as icing on the cake, the processor I upgraded to was 64bit capable. So the $9 I spent on the new processor was well worth the effort to beable to upgrade to Win8. I was a little worried about it being refurbished but having ran it non-stop since January I haven't had a problem with it.

Next time, you may also consider an upgrade to the lower power P4 6x1 which has lower power consumption in addition.

[statm1]

Next time, you may also consider an upgrade to the lower power P4 6x1 which has lower power consumption in addition.

I would have used Cedar Mill but the last version of my BIOS does not support it. There won't be a next time anyway but thanks!