Print

Print
FYI:

Here is Dell's answer to the question of Windows 7 compatibility: Microsoft Windows 7 Compatible Dell Systems and System Requirements

Optiplex 360, 760, 780, 960 are compatible and Dell supplies drivers.

Optiplex 320, 330, 740, 745/745C, 755 have been tested for basic Windows 7 functionality, but Dell does not supply Windows 7 drivers.

The official documentation from Dell declares maximum memory for the Optiplex 320 is 2Gb, and they have Pentium 4 processors, not dual core, so I would scratch that one off the list of possibilities.

Dell Dimension 9200C is not on either list (compatible vs tested) but the machines we have at KBS are labeled for Vista, and Dell has 32 and 64bit Vista drivers available for it.  A computer manager here upgraded them to Windows 7 64bit seven months ago and upgraded the memory to 2.5Gb (or more).  For lab technicians they are OK, since in a research lab a common style of use is to fire up a spreadsheet and enter data for an hour or two and log off.  They probably wouldn't be good in a situation with lots of open windows and opening and closing of applications.  FYI: the model shown by "WMIC computersystem get model" is Dell DXC061, not Dimension 9200.  The CPU is Intel® Core™2 CPU 6300  @ 1.86GHz, and the base memory usage with one user logged in on this model is only 800Mb.  Aero is enabled and it seems to have drivers provided by the Windows 7 installation.  On this model, Win7 "WMIC memphysical list full" reports MaxCapacity=1Gb which is clearly wrong, and max modules (MemoryDevices)=4.  Since the machine has both 1024Mb and 512Mb modules in four slots, the maximum is obviously at least 4Gb.

Based on the above example, I would say that the place to draw the line whether to upgrade or scrap is also dependent on how the computer will be used.  Based on the responsiveness I received in my tests, the $54 for Windows 7 and the $38 for a 2Gb (1Gbx2 667MHz) DDR2 PC2-5300 memory upgrade were worth it to upgrade the Dimension 9200C.  The same memory can be used to upgrade an Optiplex 745.  The Optiplex 745's that we have were manufactured a few months later than the 9200C's, they have faster dual core processors and their maximum memory is 8Gb as opposed to 4Gb for the 9200C.  Machines with memory 667MHz (Optiplex 745) are probably the minimum to run Windows 7 one app at a time with apps running for long periods and being opened infrequently.  Machines with 800MHz memory (Optiplex 760) are probably more reasonable for light usage, and machines with memory at 1066MHz (Optiplex 780) or higher are probably more reasonable for multiple open applications.

The following WMIC command can report the capacity (size in bytes), slot number and speed of memory modules installed in a computer:

wmic path win32_physicalmemory get capacity,devicelocator,speed

If you want memory module size in Mb, you need a script (which I have), or a program.

-Stefan

On 11/14/2014 15:41, Gary Schrock wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">
I'm kinda curious what other people think about this issue, and where people would tend to draw the line.  As part of this sudden (and about-faced policy from what it was a few weeks ago) deadlines on xp machines being on the network, we're looking at the task of what to do with what's turning out to be a *lot* of machines that are still running xp.  And while we're still early in the process of identifying and determining what the hardware is under each of these machines, needless to say we're already getting pushback from faculty (some of which will give up a computer when you can pry it from their cold, dead fingers :) ).

So basically, I'm kinda curious what people think is a reasonable minimum machine that runs windows 7 decently enough that it's worth the effort of upgrading from xp to windows 7.  What cpu and memory combination do people think is a reasonable cut-off point?

Personally, I'd probably look at something like an E8400 Core 2 Duo processor machine with 4 gigs of ram as what I'd call about the bottom end of acceptable.  I wouldn't really say it's a great machine when running win 7, but it seems to be an adequate machine.  From what I can tell, machines with this combination tend to be in the 4 to 6 year old range (and I have to admit, the idea of upgrading a lot of 6 year old machines that might only last another year or so is a little on the depressing side).

Or heck, maybe we're the only department on campus that really has this issue of a large number of machines that need to be dealt with, and everyone else has done better at keeping machines newer in their departments?  Personally, I found it kinda laughable that the linked to form in the email that went out only allows one to enter a single machine at a time, because I'm facing numbers where that isn't exactly practical :).  (And anyone else notice that the linked form last I checked still said that December 1st the machines would be blocked from accessing the internet, we still haven't gotten an answer on why that discrepancy is there and whether we really have till Feb 1 before they're blocked from the internet or not).

Thanks,
Gary