All recent AMD CPUs DO have AMD-V, see link

[VirtualLarry]

Well, I admit I am a big fan of AMD, as I like rooting for the underdog, and AMD has always delivered value for money, although I just sorted through my Intel CPU collection and put them all in a big (BIG) cardboard box, so I'm hardly a fanboy of either, really, as far as my actual purchasing goes.

One of the things that I like about AMD is that all of their chips seem to have power-saving features integrated (AMD64 onwards), whereas Intel charges extra for those features, especially in laptop chips (speaking of their widely implemented mobile celerons).

One thing that I'm rather not happy about with AMD is that not all of their CPUs support VT/AMD-V. I had foolishly thought that since all of their chips supported CnQ, that they would all support VT, but that isn't true. My TF-20 apparently does not support VT. The MS HAVtool diagnostic says that I have to enable it in BIOS, but looking up the CPU reference, there is no mention of VT support.

So I'm still searching for a laptop solution to run VPC 7 on Win7 Pro.

Edit: See the posts by frostedflakes. It turned out to be an immature BIOS that was holding me back, the TF-20 CPU DOES have AMD-V. AMD comes through again!

 

[IBuyUFO]

It's the same for intel cpus too. AMD charges extra for VT support.

 

[CurseTheSky]

Like IBuyUFO said, both Intel and AMD lack virtualization support on some of their CPUs. Generally, I check Intel's database first to see what the CPU supports. I don't know if AMD has something similar.

I find that virtualization is only available on mid-upper tier CPUs.

 

[nyker96]

i believe intel now puts VT in lower end stuff like e6xxx series etc. amd has it in x2 5000+ 45nm i got recently for a new build so I don't know maybe amd is using vt on all low end chips if x2 5000+ has it I think everything upwards has it for amd.

i used to run virtual machines on a e7200 chip that has no VT support just get sun's virtual box or the free version of VMware both can use VT or not, honestly I cannot say it makes a huge difference at all although you can only run a 64bit VM inside a vista/win7 64bit os with hardware VT support but I hardly ever allow more than 4gb in a VM anyways so just use 32bit VMs. oh don't use VPC it's pretty crappy, tried it and ditch it in a day or two.

 

[frostedflakes]

You're sure the CPU doesn't support virtualization? I thought AMD enabled it on all of their processors except Semprons.

Maybe try downloading this utility and see what it tells you.

http://support.amd.com/us/Pages/dyn...cd2c08-1432-4756-aafa-4d9dc646342f&ItemID=177

This article might help as well, you can download CPU-Z and use that to identify what revision your CPU is.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-cpu-windows-xp-mode,7739.html

 

[mutz]

you got the answer in the earlier thread u had opened,
try the I5/I7 laptops chips.

AMD's should also support it,
for probably cheaper prices either.

E:
nvm, got it wrong.
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K8/AMD-Athlon%2064 TF-20 - AMGTF20HAX4DN.html

 

[VirtualLarry]

You're sure the CPU doesn't support virtualization? I thought AMD enabled it on all of their processors except Semprons.

Maybe try downloading this utility and see what it tells you.

Thanks, it said it wasn't enabled in BIOS, and to enable it and try running the util again.

Only problem, there is no Virtualization switch in the BIOS.

This article might help as well, you can download CPU-Z and use that to identify what revision your CPU is.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-cpu-windows-xp-mode,7739.html

According to that article, my chip should have VT support.

 

[frostedflakes]

The laptop manufacturer might not have bothered implementing the feature in the BIOS, or maybe implemented it incorrectly. Just out of curiosity, who's the manufacturer of the laptop? Also, have you already checked if a newer BIOS version is available? Maybe try flashing to the latest version if there's a newer one out.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Yeah, well, I went looking for a new BIOS, and it shipped with BIOS 1.07, but BIOS 1.08 and 1.09 were availble. I tried flashing BIOS 1.08, and now MS's HAVtool and AMD's AMD-V tool both show hardware virtualization as available!!!

I'm thrilled, and I guess my thread title is wrong now, like I originally thought, I guess most AMD chips DO have AMD-V. It was my stupid BIOS all along.

So I think I'm going to upgrade this machine's RAM and HD, and install VPC 7, after I install Win7 Pro on here.

 

[wayliff]

seems you answered your own question but AMD does advertise having VM technology in all their current processors unlike intel...

 

[frostedflakes]

Cool, glad to hear you got it working.

 

[waffleironhead]

too bad the last gen mobile chip the turion ultra lacks VT. I'm glad they finally realized that laptop owners like VT as well.

 

[nyker96]

too bad the last gen mobile chip the turion ultra lacks VT. I'm glad they finally realized that laptop owners like VT as well.

like I said before, I really didn't feel too much difference going hardware vt with either vbox and vmware. NTL, it might be relevant in some apps I'm not using though.

 

[JFAMD]

It's the same for intel cpus too. AMD charges extra for VT support.

How? AMD doesn't charge for virtualization, it should be built into just about everything.

 

[jvroig]

How? AMD doesn't charge for virtualization, it should be built into just about everything.

VirtualLarry made a mistake, then cleared it up and changed the title to reflect the revelation he had. I am pretty sure IBuyUFO simple made the same mistake, but all that should be clear now that the thread has turned into that direction and it is once again clear that AMD does in fact offer VT for free on all modern chips since ~5000+ or so.

 

[JFAMD]

Thanks. AMD-V, VT is th other guys

 

[Cogman]

I've never liked the idea of having "special" instructions for certain CPUs. I can understand cutting cache, doing different clock speeds, even cutting out features like CNQ or whatever intels alternative is called.

It just seams counter productive to have the same generation of CPU having different instruction sets as it really discourages programmers to use a given instruction set (effectively eliminating the benefit of the new instructions.)

Neither Intel nor AMD have been TOO bad in this respect. However, the one case that I can think of is Intel's Virtualization tech. I guess it is specific enough to not matter too much, however, dang it, I want my celerons to have virtualization tech.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I've never liked the idea of having "special" instructions for certain CPUs. I can understand cutting cache, doing different clock speeds, even cutting out features like CNQ or whatever intels alternative is called.

It just seams counter productive to have the same generation of CPU having different instruction sets as it really discourages programmers to use a given instruction set (effectively eliminating the benefit of the new instructions.)

Neither Intel nor AMD have been TOO bad in this respect. However, the one case that I can think of is Intel's Virtualization tech. I guess it is specific enough to not matter too much, however, dang it, I want my celerons to have virtualization tech.

I fully agree. I also think that cutting SSE 4.1 out of the E5200s, etc., hampers the adoption of those opcodes in the software.

Even worse, is when is VT not VT? Intel originally came out with VT technology, and now it has morphed into VT-x and VT-d, and some of their CPUs support VT-x but not VT-d. Causing even more confusion, because people think that they are getting a "VT" processor, but it's really not.

Microsoft could really do some good here in the processor market, if they started certifying CPUs for Win7 compatibility, as AMD CPUs would be "fully compatible" (including XP mode support), whereas many, if not most, of Intels CPUs would NOT be "fully compatible", because they lack full VT support for XP mode.

AMD should really pressure MS into doing that, and adding a feature to the Win7 upgrade advisor, that tests whether or not the CPU supports VT/AMD-V, and reports to the user if their CPU is not "fully compatible" with Win7 (XP mode).

 

[jvroig]

Thanks. AMD-V, VT is th other guys

Sorry, my mistake, I meant to say AMD-V. I was confused there for a moment because the IBuyUFO quote you questioned said "VT" instead of AMD-V.

AMD should really pressure MS into doing that, and adding a feature to the Win7 upgrade advisor, that tests whether or not the CPU supports VT/AMD-V, and reports to the user if their CPU is not "fully compatible" with Win7 (XP mode).

I agree, this seems to be a good idea, pretty much in the same vein as the Windows Performance Score, both will do a good deal in helping some customers "rate" the hardware they have or are about to get from a vendor. WPS helps some non-technical customers from getting ripped-off. Your proposed advisor for virtualization would certainly also be of help, but I guess this time for the more tech-savvy users who don't necessarily understand all the VT-x/VT-d stuff.