+ 1 Votes It will work, slowly, but it will work robo_dev 3 years ago As long as the clock speed is at least 2.4GHZ or so, and the hard drive is not some ancient Maxtor 40, it will run XP. Not well, but it will run. If you really tweak it (shut off services and startup programs you don't need) then it may be useable. The issue is that the hard drive will really thrash with only 256, so if it's an old and slow hard drive, the system will crawl. + 0 Votes It'll work fine with 256 Slayer_ 2 years ago I have a work station I use constantly, it has 256 RAM, current usage is 188mb (including swap file) and that's with SQLserver 2000 running on it, and about a dozen applications plus VNC and other remote client tools. Its actually pretty snappy and fast. Its only a 1.6ghz computer. XP figures out its RAM usage pretty well, the more you add, the more it will use, the less you have, the less it uses. I am frankly amazed this system doesn't use any swap file with such low RAM. + 1 Votes i've seen xp run with only 64 PurpleSkys Moderator 3 years ago but it sure wasn't pretty. 256 isn't too bad, but if you could get your hands a little more, it would run smoother. + 1 Votes Why not install Ubuntu? Choppit 3 years ago . + 2 Votes Onboard video Nunob 3 years ago If you have onboard video you may want to either look for an add on video card or at bare minimum go into the BIOS and make sure it is stealing as little as possible say 8MB's. If you have any extra hard drives you could toss one on a separate controller and move the pagefile to it which may help some. You can find lots of tips also for things like disabling the effects in XP that all will add up. + 1 Votes It will be slow doug m. 3 years ago XP, in my opinion, really should have 512 as a bare minimum. You are planning on running some sort of anti-virus, right? That alone will place a burden on the RAM. + 0 Votes Linux pivotmac 3 years ago Nuf said. + 0 Votes I'm gonna say, 512 is realistic as well JamesRL 3 years ago My parents had an old PC that I set up for them as a browser/email only box, running Win2K, which is less demanding than XP. They had 512MB and a 2Ghz processor. And once you load it up with things like, antivirus, antispyware, flash, java etc, its pretty darn slow. + 0 Votes 512 mb is better SarahC_ 3 years ago With 512MB, the computer can swap between a couple of applications without stuttering to a standstill. I'd still leave all the fancy effects off Windows, and leave the desktop plane blue though. + 0 Votes Max the RAM whenever possible Juanita Marquez 3 years ago Lots of RAM covers a lot of sins, where applications are concerned. I've seen some older systems do quite well when there is RAM aplenty. + 0 Votes Wow, wompai Updated - 3 years ago it's a 1.5 GHz AMD sempron... XD But I'm hoping on adding an extra 256 plus there's a separate video-card (AGP) and HDD (for paging). I'm planning on tweaking windows and installing a stripped version of windows to remove all functions I don't need. I want to thank you for the quick (and a lot of) replies.