The pc is a pc with a RAM Memory whose image appears here https://postimg.cc/gallery/BJnN0RR a pc with a RAM Memory of 8GB DDR3, a processor CELERON G 1610,a processor of 2. 6 Ghz processor clock speed, a FOXCONN H61MX motherboard and the iGPU that comes by default on a pc with the above mentioned processor and motherboard and a storage of a 320 GB partition of an internal HDD storage device, with 1 TB maximum storage capacity, the storage device has a SATA 6 GB/s port and is called WD10EURX and on the surface of the hard drive the following appears: “ CH HA500 ” I do not know what it corresponds to, the storage device has a S/N: “ WCC4J7ZRRH86, a CDM: ” WD10EURX-63YYYY0 “ and an R/N: ” 800006 ",and in the storage device surface doesn´t appear more information, it is a storage device from the manufacturer Western Digital and the linux distros that I want the people helping me to think about, when they are helping me, are from the list that appears in this link: https://en/.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-weight_Linux_distribution and those that you know of or that you have undertaken to consult under your will
What is the lightest Linux distro compatible with the EUFI BIOS and the PC in this forum thread?
- Thread starter ascampli
- Start date
Sooo... you've got
Your link with the list of lightweight distros is broken but it looks like you're referring to this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-weightan_Linux_distribution
There are plenty of distros you could try on that machine so you'd have to choose based upon
You don't need to upgrade the hardware but, if you feel that urge, that MOBO will take up to 32 GB of ram and you can drop in as big of a SATA hard disk as you like. No doubt someone will suggest an incredible speed up if you put in an SSD instead of the HDD - which might help some but I doubt that machine will ever be a real screamer.
- A dual core Celeron at 2.6 Ghz. It's about 12 years old
- 8 GB of RAM, presumably suitable for that CPU
- An unremarkable MOBO with a gigabit ethernet port and four USB 2.0 ports
- An unremarkable 1 TB hard drive which, if around twelve years old like the CPU, has an expected remaining lifetime of anywhere from ten minutes to ten years.
Your link with the list of lightweight distros is broken but it looks like you're referring to this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-weightan_Linux_distribution
There are plenty of distros you could try on that machine so you'd have to choose based upon
- your skill/comfort level with linux
- your use case
- personal preference
You don't need to upgrade the hardware but, if you feel that urge, that MOBO will take up to 32 GB of ram and you can drop in as big of a SATA hard disk as you like. No doubt someone will suggest an incredible speed up if you put in an SSD instead of the HDD - which might help some but I doubt that machine will ever be a real screamer.
An entry level machine with a 64 bit celeron [entry level] CPU, not the fastest machine but capable of running any 64 bit Linux but do not expect it to be lightning fast. I used to run a similar SPC laptop with the medium weight Mint LMDE it also ran Peppermint and Debian [with driver pack] just fine, the only upgrade i made was to swap out the plate spinner HDD for an SSD.
if you want to stick to a light weight distro any on the following link would do fine, my preference being Linux-Lite and Lubuntu
www.techradar.com
if you want to stick to a light weight distro any on the following link would do fine, my preference being Linux-Lite and Lubuntu
Best lightweight Linux distro of 2025
Stripped-down versions of Linux, especially for older computers.
They've improved a great deal since the Deathstar era.
Lubuntu is still pretty light and should run on that hardware without much of a fuss. You'll be limited by the CPU speed and RAM, but that's fine. You're just not going to have a ton of tabs open in your browser, for example.
How did you know I have an old Dell tower here whose host name is "deathstar"?
I've dismantled a lot of defunct hard drives over the years (I salvage the magnets out of them) and it seems (without having actually kept count) like the majority of them have been WD. Having said that, it's only fair to say that I've also dismantled a lot of perfectly functioning hard drives (*) and the majority of them were WD also, so it may just be that WD drives, being just a tad cheaper, are just more common than, for instance, Seagate or Toshiba or IBM drives.
*) yes, tearing down working hard drives, because when m I ever going to use a 127 MB PATA drive that's 25 years old? And they do have those nice magnets.
Unless they're exceptionally rare, who cares?
