I have Windows XP and am about to buy my first memory stick. Is it important to get 2.0 "hi-speed"?
540815
Hispeed USB2.0 port transfer data faster.\nUSB2.0 offers an underlying bit transfer rate of 480 Megabits per second.\nSo get that USB2.0 Now :)
649552
The memory you have is not sufficient if you have Win XP.\nIf you have integrated video on your computer and not a video card you have less than 200MB which is just sad. Memory is dirt cheap for 512MB do yourself a favor and get it.
909878
dont use ur old stuff unless its ddr2 ... if its older than 6 months it isnt ... dont mix the types or you'll slow everything down , just add another 512 if you have a SINGLE stick, and check out the site the guy above mentioned to get the same speed memory ... if you have two sticks of mem now they are 256 each and most likely in dual channel configuration ... in that case i would get the same speed memory but buy (2) 512s' or (2)1gig sticks ... if you break up a pair of sticks in dual channel or add a third you will slow things down also ...
641175
Increase your RAM to 512MB. XP Pro requires that much memory. The hard drive is plenty big.
487770
Everything else equal, the 7200 because hard drives these days aren't fast enough to max out the USB 2.0.\n\nThe 5400 would also be more likely to be an older generation and might have less cache.  Most of the newer hard drives that have good performance run on 7200.
64020
well if you need it just for the applications that you wrote about any speed over 1GZ would be more than ennough,however you should keep in mind that these programs in their new versions require more and more resources so my advice is to go for at least 1.5 GZ and something like 256 or 512 RAM and at least 10 GB hard drive. I hope i helped you.
630648
I would not consider 2000 an upgrade over 98. Keep the 98 until you know for sure that 2000 is working ok for you. Better yet get xp. You will not have nearly as many problems with xp.
1185963
Get a USB memory stick.  This is a much more useful device.  The prices have gone way down.
608030
It will let you upgrade - I like windows 2000 far better than XP though why would you want to do this - 2000 does 95% of what XP does and does it all far better. All XP really gives you is tellatubby colors and far more resource useage!!!!
879738
Answer :\n\nYES YES U CAN...\nsee\nhttp://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/upgrading/sysreqs.mspx\n\nits said "64 MB minimum supported; may limit performance and some features"...\n\nAND\nhttp://www.pcmall.com/pcmall/shop/detail~dpno~416844~name~Windows+XP+Home+Edition+with+Service+Pack+2+-+Upgrade+Package~mfg~N09-00985+++++++++++.asp\n\nfor the "Service Pack 2"\n\nMy Recommendation :\n\nDON'T DO THAT... buy some RAM (at least 256).... just for the sake of XP.
383463
If you are running older computers you may want to stay with W2k Pro. I have P-III computers of which two ran XP and the others W2k Pro. When the XP computer needed reistalling I went back to W2k. I could see no advantage and XP soaked up most of the computers resources. I found W2k very easy on the resources and could do everything I needed. I just thought I would mention it before you took the plunge. \nIMHO
463868
Flash8 has some specifications like 256mb ram,windows xp etc... check wether u have them all.
939977
That is well below my advised minimum for RAM which is 384MB but the processor is OK according to me. I advise everyone to have at least a 500MHz processor, 384MB RAM, and 10GB of Hard drive space. \nYou meet two of these and that is good enough to run windows xp without a service pack. You must meet all three before installing SP2, which you need to do if you have data you need protected. No matter what though windows xp is indeed the best choice for you.\nI will show you how I know. Most people say 256 is the minimum for windows xp but I've noticed Windows XP without a service pack uses 64MB RAM leaving128MB free for you. Windows Xp Sp2 starts up using 128MB RAM leaving you with 64 MB. At times only one Internet explorer window can use  34MB of RAM or more, an instant messenger uses 32 MB of RAM. Windows Xp without a sp would be best because it is about the same as windows 2000 but more compatable with software/hardware.
719445
Okay...  The difference between a 3.0 and a 2.8 is negligible.  However, if the 3.0 were tapped with HT, or Hyperthreading, the difference would be enormous.  Hyperthreading virtually turns one processor into two.  It will significantly increase the PC performance when it comes to multi-tasking.  Look for it.\nFSB... or Front Side Bus...  Imagine a funnel.  The CPU speed, like 3 GHz, would be the top of the funnel.  The FSB would be the bottom.  No matter how big the top is, the bottom can only allow so much out at one time.  There are FSB's up to 2000 now.\nMemory... the speed is what you're looking at.  This means that the memory clock is set at 533 MHz/sec.  The higher the speed, obviously, the faster information can be retrieved from memory.  The DIMMs are the number of slots availible.  If you have 2 DIMMs, then you have 2 slots for memory.  A maximum of 2 GHz of memory is availible.  At 4 DIMMs, your maximum is 4 GHz.  The more memory, the faster you can get programs to load, or the less lag you'd see in high res games.\nHard Drive...  As a hard drive reads its disks, it writes information to the cache.  The larger the cache, the more information you can access before the HDD has to read more.  So, the higher the Cache, the better.  As far as RPMs, this is the speed at which the disks spin, and logically, the higher the RPM, the faster the HDD can access new information.\nYour options are all dependant on your budget.  You will get great performance with the 2.8, with 512 Megs of memory, with a 7200 RPM hdd with an 8MB cache.  But, the more you can afford to put in it, the longer it will take before you are way behind tomorrow's technologies.\nIf you have further questions, feel free to email me at this yahoo screen name.  I build and repair PCs for a living.
984959
If you want Vista, 1GB for any kind of speed (of course it also depends on your processor, video card and to some extent your hard drive).  If you want to game on Vista, nothing less than 2GB.  You heard it here... first?\n\nFor Windows XP, I'd say if you are happy with 512MB then stick with it, if you want it to appear to run faster, then get 1GB.  More memory never hurts, ever.
303128
That's going to be pretty tough.  ME is still tied to DOS.  XP doesn't use it at all and that is part of the reason it's fast.  If you want to speed up your machine, install more memory or install XP.
374647
No, not at all.  It is supposed to free up RAM that a program/application didn't release (back to the operating system).  However, these types of applications aren't needed with Windows 2000 or XP.  Now, if you still have any of the 3 versions of Windows 98, then it will work great, and you actually need it.