none
minimum ram and hdd space need for windows 7

    Question

  • What is the minimum of ram and hdd space memory to use with windows 7. Is the windows 7 faster than vista on the same machine ? thansk


    Nothing is impossible
    Saturday, January 10, 2009 1:23 AM

Answers

  •  Minimum system requirements
    • Processor: 1 GHz 32-bit or 64-bit processor
    • Memory:  1 GB of system memory
    • Hard drive: 16 GB of available disk space
    • Video card:  Support for DirectX 9 graphics with 128MB memory (in order to enable Aero theme)
    • Drive: DVD-R/W drive
    • Internet connection (to download the Beta and get updates)
    Saturday, January 10, 2009 9:56 AM
    Answerer
  • Hi New_AGE

    The same as Vista.

    1 GB RAM
    40GB hard drive.

    Don't be fooled by the required hard drive space value. The requirements state that you need 15GB of free space, but this is only for the expansion of files during installation. It still requires a hard drive or partition of 40GB.

    See this article for more details. System Requirements

    Hope this helps.


    Ronnie Vernon MVP
    Saturday, January 10, 2009 9:59 AM
    Moderator
  • There is apparently also a great deal of misconception on test builds and the conclusions that can be drawn from comparing system requirements, overall speed, and used resources.

    Please remember:
         
    • A test build of an Operating System may not provide a 100% picture of how the final (RTM) version will work or feel.
    • A test build of an Operating System may not be as stable as the final (RTM) version.
    • System requirements for test builds may not 100% reflect system requirements for the final (RTM) version and are subject to change
    • Some features in test builds are not 100% complete or supported for usage and are subject to change
    • Test builds contain a lot of debug code, slowing down the system and using resources. Usually the debug code is removed in the Release Candidate stage and speed increases in that timeframe.
    Saturday, January 10, 2009 6:11 PM

All replies

  • What was it... 1GB RAM and 16GB HDD?

    For the Vista vs Win7. It is Vista.

    Idle CPU seems to be hovering lower than Vista.

    RAM at 41% used of 2GB.

    Feels snappier but also feels slower at the same time. Can't put my finger on why.

    @ 41/42 processes currently.










    Saturday, January 10, 2009 5:08 AM
  • New_AGE said:

    What is the minimum of ram and hdd space memory to use with windows 7.
       

     
    Minimum requirements for the Windows 7 Beta are equal to the minimum requirements for Windows Vista.
     

    New_AGE said:

    Is the windows 7 faster than vista on the same machine ?
       

    In most tests it is.
    For more detailed information, take a look here.

    Saturday, January 10, 2009 8:58 AM
  •  Minimum system requirements
    • Processor: 1 GHz 32-bit or 64-bit processor
    • Memory:  1 GB of system memory
    • Hard drive: 16 GB of available disk space
    • Video card:  Support for DirectX 9 graphics with 128MB memory (in order to enable Aero theme)
    • Drive: DVD-R/W drive
    • Internet connection (to download the Beta and get updates)
    Saturday, January 10, 2009 9:56 AM
    Answerer
  • Hi New_AGE

    The same as Vista.

    1 GB RAM
    40GB hard drive.

    Don't be fooled by the required hard drive space value. The requirements state that you need 15GB of free space, but this is only for the expansion of files during installation. It still requires a hard drive or partition of 40GB.

    See this article for more details. System Requirements

    Hope this helps.


    Ronnie Vernon MVP
    Saturday, January 10, 2009 9:59 AM
    Moderator
  • Thanks for clearing this up.

    There is a lot of misconception on the Internet, it's often (wrongly) said that Windows 7 would need less RAM and disk space than Vista.

    I just checked for comparison:
    For XP, Microsoft recommended 128 megabytes (MB) of RAM or higher
    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sysreqs/pro.mspx

    So the RAM requirement for Windows 7 is 8x (eight times) that of Windows XP.

    Looks like it's just another incarnation of the same old upgrade race game.
    Many people had hoped Microsoft would present something in XP's footprint range this time.
    Saturday, January 10, 2009 5:32 PM
  • There is apparently also a great deal of misconception on test builds and the conclusions that can be drawn from comparing system requirements, overall speed, and used resources.

    Please remember:
         
    • A test build of an Operating System may not provide a 100% picture of how the final (RTM) version will work or feel.
    • A test build of an Operating System may not be as stable as the final (RTM) version.
    • System requirements for test builds may not 100% reflect system requirements for the final (RTM) version and are subject to change
    • Some features in test builds are not 100% complete or supported for usage and are subject to change
    • Test builds contain a lot of debug code, slowing down the system and using resources. Usually the debug code is removed in the Release Candidate stage and speed increases in that timeframe.
    Saturday, January 10, 2009 6:11 PM
  • Ronnie Vernon said:

    Hi New_AGE

    The same as Vista.

    1 GB RAM
    40GB hard drive.

    Don't be fooled by the required hard drive space value. The requirements state that you need 15GB of free space, but this is only for the expansion of files during installation. It still requires a hard drive or partition of 40GB.

    See this article for more details. System Requirements

    Hope this helps.


    Ronnie Vernon MVP



    Not so currently. Running it fine with ~10GB extra space available on ~23GB partition. Surely though, if you use it to the full the OS will take up a lot more space as you explained.


    Saturday, January 10, 2009 10:38 PM
  • Hi Sander

    Thanks, that is some good information to remember.

    Win7 really does have a smaller footprint and this is probably the most stable beta 1 that I have ever encoutered.

    Regards,



    Ronnie Vernon MVP
    Sunday, January 11, 2009 3:20 AM
    Moderator
  • >  The same as Vista.

    Then that could be  512 MB!

    <title>System requirements for Windows Vista </title>
    http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/919183

    (Live Search of Microsoft.com for
        requirements RAM Vista
    )

    <quote>
    512 megabytes (MB) of system memory
    </quote>

    E.g. that would be for Vista Home Basic with independent memory for graphics

    Also, FWIW  when I try to boot my Vista Business on my XP machine
    the installer tells me that it wants to see 512...   ; )


    Robert
    ---
    Tuesday, January 13, 2009 12:14 AM
  • It's somewhat anecdotal, but I've heard of several instances of people installing the Win7 beta on machines with as little as 512mb of system ram and having it run quite smoothly. I'd like to try it but don't have a machine with those specs around. I imagine somewhat could run a virtual machine with 512mb to test it out.

    For those complaining that too much ram is required, just look at the ridiculously low ram prices nowadays. 128mb for XP cost a heck of a lot more than 2gb for Win7. Ram can be bought for as little as $10CAD per gigabyte. Perhaps a better way to look at it is to compare how much a Win7-capable computer costs right now compared to an XP-capable computer when it was in beta? Truth be told I don't remember, perhaps someone else here has a better memory.
    Tuesday, January 13, 2009 12:37 AM
  • I am running 7 on an old Pentium 4 2GHZ with 500mb ram and 40g hdd. Runs a little slow, but I am amazed it would even run. Installed in less than half an hour and found all of my peripherals etc. When this comes out in full there will be no excuse for people to stick with XP. So far it is a very good system, on 2 of my machines anyway, which are entirely different.
    In Australia I bought 4g ddr2 for $40 and a 3ghz core 2 duo for $200, so really, I think most people should be able to afford an upgrade.
    Tuesday, January 13, 2009 1:19 AM
  • Sander, thanks for remembering us. So I will stand corrected:

    The RAM requirement* for Windows 7 Beta 1** is 8x (eight times) that of Windows XP*** and twice that of Windows Vista****.

    * Requirement as specified by Microsoft

    ** 1 GB of system memory
    http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/beta-download.aspx

    *** 128 megabytes (MB) of RAM or higher recommended (64 MB minimum supported; may limit performance and some features) 
    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sysreqs/pro.mspx

    **** 512 MB of system memory (Home Basic)
    http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-vista/get/system-requirements.aspx
    Friday, January 16, 2009 12:03 AM
  • BillWindows said: (...) I bought 4g ddr2 for (...) I think most people should be able to afford an upgrade.

    Sorry, but I disagree fundamentally here. While it is true that RAM prices have come down since XP was released, there are many machines out there for which you can't just buy regular RAM around the corner. Either because the systems were designed so that only a certain amount of RAM can be used (e.g., 128 MB on one of my VAIOs) or because they use a special socket or because you are not allowed to open the case or for whatever other reason you can think of.

    I am not necessarily complaining. But I frequently hear that Microsoft wants to sell Windows 7 upgrades to XP owners. So if Microsoft wants to upgrade XP owners to Windows 7, they should better make sure that technical requirements are less or equal to those of XP.

    And no, it's not given by nature that newer OSes always need to become fatter, slower, and more RAM hungry: have a look at Mac OS X which actually improved performance over the past releases, even on older machines. 

    Also, before you flame me, I'm not just caring about "museum age" computers. I bought a netbook just months ago and it came with 1 GB of RAM. Warranty is void if I open the case. So I can't "just" upgrade to more than 1 GB RAM.
    Friday, January 16, 2009 12:14 AM
  • I am using 32bit Windows7 on a 5 year old Athlon XP 3000+ with only 1GB of RAM and an 80GB hard drive.  The memory footprint of the OS is definitely smaller than Vista.  I would not think of running Vista on a machine with less than 2GB.

    The microsoft minimums are nothing more than a martketing tool guesstimation about how much is the absolute minimum to run the OS.  What you actually need to make it usable and enjoyable is a different thing entirely.

    Win7 is the first MS operatiing system that I have used that runs pretty decent on the minimum spec.  I took a screenshot last night, sitting at the desktop with no programs open, it was using 317MB of physical memory.  That is really fantastic.

    Personally I hope they don't change much about this OS between now and the gold version.  If they keep it going this will be Microsoft's best OS.

    _iodo, standard memory is as cheap as it's been right now.  If you have a machine that does not run standard memory like DDR2 or DDR1, then you're probably not a good candidate to run Windows7 anyways.   The initial version of the Pentium4 is a good example about this, it used Rambus memory and cannot be easily upgraded.  You are better off getting a used machine off of Craigslist that uses DDR than to try to upgrade the ram in one of those due to cost.
    Friday, January 16, 2009 1:15 AM
  • Haven's right. A good computer during the XP beta (256GB RAM, 40GB HD, 1.6GHZ processor) could run anywhere from $850  to $1000. Now if you look at a good machine for Windows Vista or 7 Beta (4GB RAM, 320GB HD, Intel Core 2 Duo T6500 processor @ 2.10Ghz per) you're looking at only aorund $500 to $600 maybe as much as $650. Not only that but many reports have shown that Windows 7 takes 1GB to run but often a 1GB computer with Windows 7 is able to run other intensive programs at the same time with little to no problem.
    Saturday, July 18, 2009 4:52 PM