Even if this is in safe mode with practically no GUI, breaking the record by 50 KHz is impressive! For reference, CD quality audio is 44.1 KHz... it's running at a slower speed than the highest frequency an average CD can reproduce! ~25 KHz give or take is even more astounding, but I don't think it would be able to recover at that point.
@@random_person618 No, but it means that it couldn't play back a CD💿 at that clockspeed (unless I'm missing something). That's the reason why early PCs only supported MIDI music, it has close to no Hz at all.
@@whohan779 not really. The first commercial CPU ever, the Intel 4004 had a clock speed way more than a CD's sample rate, which means it was technically capable of playing CDs, so I don't exactly know what you mean to say. But there's no point in arguing here because I just wanted to say that a CD technically supports doing work at about the same speed as the speed of the emulator in this video. They're just doing different work (also I know the CD isn't doing any work, the computer is).
@@random_person618 But how does that contradict my assumption? CDs hit the market in the early 80s but CPUs (in what could be called PCs) existed way before then. Especially if they were capable of some form of multi-tasking, playback of files that could hit 130 KB/s in throughput could overwhelm them. A CD is a passive element, basically a fancy vinyl with a more complicated reading and writing technology for digital instead of analog data (although that can encode analog). CDs couldn't exist as early as the 50s as processors of the time were either a cluster of relays or too low clockspeed. This wasn't a problem in the 70s anymore and especially not in the 80s when they actually became available.
@@whohan779 you're saying early PCs only supported MIDI music because of their low Hz, that's was I was talking about. Edit: I think I'm wrong lol, sorry
I wonder if this could go any lower on one of the 9x based Windows, or maybe even 3.1 That would probably be a lot more usable, given that the lowest Windows 3.1 will work with is a 286, and 3.0 works with a 8088
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
Enderman wakes up and see's this: SHOCKED
He want to break @Endermanch record
@randomguy_227 he has already broken it in this video
LOL I just noticed that we have similar usernames.
@@WindowsDestroyer then he cries
Even if this is in safe mode with practically no GUI, breaking the record by 50 KHz is impressive!
For reference, CD quality audio is 44.1 KHz... it's running at a slower speed than the highest frequency an average CD can reproduce!
~25 KHz give or take is even more astounding, but I don't think it would be able to recover at that point.
That means that theoretically a CD can be used as the CPU in a Windows XP computer I guess
@@random_person618 No, but it means that it couldn't play back a CD💿 at that clockspeed (unless I'm missing something). That's the reason why early PCs only supported MIDI music, it has close to no Hz at all.
@@whohan779 not really. The first commercial CPU ever, the Intel 4004 had a clock speed way more than a CD's sample rate, which means it was technically capable of playing CDs, so I don't exactly know what you mean to say. But there's no point in arguing here because I just wanted to say that a CD technically supports doing work at about the same speed as the speed of the emulator in this video. They're just doing different work (also I know the CD isn't doing any work, the computer is).
@@random_person618 But how does that contradict my assumption? CDs hit the market in the early 80s but CPUs (in what could be called PCs) existed way before then. Especially if they were capable of some form of multi-tasking, playback of files that could hit 130 KB/s in throughput could overwhelm them.
A CD is a passive element, basically a fancy vinyl with a more complicated reading and writing technology for digital instead of analog data (although that can encode analog). CDs couldn't exist as early as the 50s as processors of the time were either a cluster of relays or too low clockspeed. This wasn't a problem in the 70s anymore and especially not in the 80s when they actually became available.
@@whohan779 you're saying early PCs only supported MIDI music because of their low Hz, that's was I was talking about.
Edit: I think I'm wrong lol, sorry
still not slow as school computers
Amazing video! Windows XP on 0.04MHz is surely crazy lol
congrats on beating Enderman with this one!
FIRSTTTTTT LETSGOOOO
Amazing video as always dude! Was fun making this together :)
also, yes, I'm here before this was published :P
you're the real first comment lol
@@laglife bro beat me by ONE second lol
@@laglife indeed I am...
That's a cool record! Good job!
Woah, beating Enderman’s record of 0.09 MHz (If I could remember) by decreasing the amount of 0.05 MHz
why does all the comments feel like 2017 spam
but the video is great, i may try to recreate that on linux
arch linux on 200Hz
fastest school-issued laptop be like
I wonder if this could go any lower on one of the 9x based Windows, or maybe even 3.1
That would probably be a lot more usable, given that the lowest Windows 3.1 will work with is a 286, and 3.0 works with a 8088
@WindowsVista64x windows 3.0 ran slow as molasses on the 4.77 8088
Nice work ;)
Now get it down to 16 khz so we can hear the cpu
LOL
32 khz should be enough iirc
nice video :D
Windows xp at 10 khz then you can actually hear it processing
Cool video!
A NEW RECORD! LET'S GOOOOOOOOOO!
Ngl I feel like it’s possible to go even lower if the resolution was smaller (somehow), but maybe I’m wrong
640*480 is the minimum resolution for Windows XP.
@ I already know…
Amazing!! Never seen an os work in 40khz! Or a pc lets say.
Amazing!
finally i can run windows xp on 5% of an intel 4004
@Endermanch your nightmare comes true
Crazy
windows xp in 0.009 mhz
peak
nice video
0.04 MHz I can finally play GTA San Andreas 🌚
*mind blown*
windows xp on WHAT
Imagine if enderman will comment on this video ^_^
Nice vid laglife
nice!
I feel sad for the windows hero and enderman :(
youtube.com/@thewindowshero?feature=shared
😡😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
It's sad, but there are better RUclipsrs like LagLife out there! ;)
@TheWindowsHero Thanks you for writing to me, but you know we need you, you teach us important things as well
😢😢😢😢😢😢
@StartupGuys1 Don't worry, I might consider coming back after a while but I'm not sure when.
@TheWindowsHero ❤️❤️❤️❤️
@TheWindowsHero I don't know how we're going to do it for October 2025.
Big fan
Why was it running slower than you set it to? You clicked Pentium 75mhz, but Windows said it was 40mhz
There is a throttle option
Laglife when will release RevertSV 1.2?
He will release it when he finishes that, patience is the key.
I'm aiming for October this year
@@laglife But why is it too many months for your famous operating system to be released and W10 Normal will end the end of support
Nice
Now it's possible to run XP on a intel 8008
Well XP still uses C & Assembly functions that the Intel 8008 doesnt have so it isnt possiblr
@premiunm well the 8008 is 8 bit instead of 16 bit so that's a problem
ChromeOS up next
Cool
wow
nice
Now, run it on arduino :)
I Could do 30/20 kHz (/ means or not division)
Now do it on 1 khz
:O
not first comment