[Microsoft] New CPUs will require Windows 10

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

2is

Diamond Member
Apr 8, 2012
4,287
1
106
#76
Title is correct. Win 10 is required if you want all the newest bits and extensions. Clarification sure, but the point still stands. And DOS on Skylake, heh.
No, the title isn't. You included "if you want all the newest bits and extensions" the title did not. In other words, misleading. The word "required" has a pretty specific meaning when you don't qualify it as you did, but the title did not.
 

ehume

Golden Member
Nov 6, 2009
1,339
11
91
#77
As long as your XP box is not connected to the Internet, it should be OK. On the right hardware, even Win95 could run like lightning. But I wouldn't want it near a network, much less a network that itself is connected to the Internet. The problem I had was my work-supplied box was XP and connected to the Internet for 6 mo before we got Win7 machines.

Win10 is buggy. I switched my two 8.1 systems to Win10 just to try out the OS. It's not ready. I think most of us will wait to June before we switch OS's.

I can sympathize with MS for wanting us all off Win7-8.1 and onto 10. But I can really sympathize with CPU owners who are stuck with Win10 before it is ready for prime time.
 

Magic Carpet

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2011
3,107
0
81
#78
No, the title isn't. You included "if you want all the newest bits and extensions" the title did not. In other words, misleading. The word "required" has a pretty specific meaning when you don't qualify it as you did, but the title did not.
Yeah, I agree with you.

Windows 8.1 x64 requires the following instruction: CMPXCHG16b. Which means, a CPU without it won't run that OS at all. OP, feel the difference :cool:
 
Oct 10, 1999
11,915
0
76
#79
Is Windows [78A] so thick that an application -- that has been written and compiled to use AVX instructions -- cannot execute?
AVX and AVX2 didn't just bring new instructions. It also brought an extension of the SSE registers to 256-bit (ie XMM + 128-bits = new YMM registers). If an OS doesn't support AVX/AVX2, this means it won't know that it's supposed to save the upper 128-bits of the YMM registers before a context switch. So, here comes your program that uses AVX, then the OS switches to another program that also uses AVX. Because the YMM registers weren't saved properly, when the OS switches back to your program, there's going to be some errors.

I'm pretty sure Windows 7 has AVX support. However, when Intel brings out AVX-512, Windows 7/8.1 definitely won't know about it, and any AVX-512 programs that run on it will have unexpected results.
 
Last edited:
May 9, 2015
143
0
0
#80
The Windows 8.0 Costumer Preview and Windows 8.1 install didn't even start on my old Athlon X2 3800+, I guess it is the norm.
 
Apr 27, 2000
11,495
820
126
#81
Really?

So new Intel CPUs require Windows 10. They won't work without it.

I read it as Microsoft isn't supporting new CPUs on older versions of Windows. Which makes this a Windows issue and not a CPU issue for the ADF.
Read it however you like, that's just the title. That's why it's in the CPU forum. You are, of course, free to disagree with the OP's assertion.

Wow, that seems pretty irresponsible for a company to use such out of date software :eek:

I wouldn't touch Windows XP with a ten foot pole. That OS has so many security vulnerabilities, even compared to Windows 7..

If using old and out of date software is still that prevalent in the corporate sector, then it's no wonder companies get hacked so often..
Older operating systems sometimes go along with old, proprietary control software for lab equipment and other crap. Computers like that may be on a local intranet and not exposed to the Internet in any way, effectively air-gapping them from the greatest possible security threat.

Also, large firms continued to get security updates from MS for older OSes like XP even after they went into unsupported status. For a price, I'm sure you could keep anything from Win2k on up running securely.
 

Techhog

Platinum Member
Sep 11, 2013
2,834
0
26
#82
It's a free upgrade. Ironically, it'll stop working as soon as you install a new CPU because it's only authorized for that specific system.
Because it works like an OEM license. I don't know what point your're trying to make, and phone activation might still work anyway. Also, it's if you replace your motherboard, not your CPU.
 

EXCellR8

Platinum Member
Sep 1, 2010
2,980
79
126
#84
I guess I'm okay with this. I run windows 10 on a few machines and for the most part I'm happy with it. I still need a socket 1151 CPU for my skylake build but I've been lazy about picking one out; I will most likely run 10 on that rig when it's done.

I still have 7 on my primary computer, but before that it had XP. I slowly transitioned over but I'd rather start fresh with a clean install of 10. Not free I realize but I don't care all too much.
 

bystander36

Diamond Member
Apr 1, 2013
5,153
10
106
#85
Because it works like an OEM license. I don't know what point your're trying to make, and phone activation might still work anyway. Also, it's if you replace your motherboard, not your CPU.
That's not even true, unless it was bought with a prebuilt OEM build that doesn't give you a physical copy of the software.

MS lets you transfer your license as many times as you like, it just can only exist on 1 machine at a time.
 
Mar 27, 2009
12,910
27
106
#86
The only thing I lose sticking with 7 is DX12, which may come quite soon when UE4 gets the latest update.
You might want to check and see if UE is adding support for Vulkan.

Valve's Source engine is planned to have Vulkan support. (Makes sense since they support Linux gaming)

And EA is supporting Vulkan specifically for those using Windows 7 computers (but apparently not Linux at this time)

https://twitter.com/repi/status/585752514303262720
 

nismotigerwvu

Golden Member
May 13, 2004
1,568
0
91
#87
Read it however you like, that's just the title. That's why it's in the CPU forum. You are, of course, free to disagree with the OP's assertion.



Older operating systems sometimes go along with old, proprietary control software for lab equipment and other crap. Computers like that may be on a local intranet and not exposed to the Internet in any way, effectively air-gapping them from the greatest possible security threat.

Also, large firms continued to get security updates from MS for older OSes like XP even after they went into unsupported status. For a price, I'm sure you could keep anything from Win2k on up running securely.
Actually the system I referred to wasn't even connected to the local network. All machines with anything older than Windows 7 are blacklisted as well so even if someone tried to plug them in it wouldn't do much. We also have a scintillation counter that's controlled by an old 386 running DOS, but I can't exactly see that thing being all that useful to a botnet even if someone did manage to find some way to communicate with it.
 
Mar 27, 2009
12,910
27
106
#89
As to the OP, I honestly don't see why so many people still want to stick with Windows 7. Windows 7 was a great OS when it first debut, but now it's just old and dilapidated...
Windows 7 has Windows Media Center though and some people really like that program.
 

Shmee

Memory and Storage, Graphics Cards
Super Moderator
Sep 13, 2008
3,779
50
126
#93
Title seems to be oversimplifying things, as their are alternative OS's besides just Windows that are modern. Linux, Mac OSX etc.

Not supporting windows 7 or windows 8 anymore would be a better title.
 
Aug 11, 2008
10,457
67
126
#94
Actually the system I referred to wasn't even connected to the local network. All machines with anything older than Windows 7 are blacklisted as well so even if someone tried to plug them in it wouldn't do much. We also have a scintillation counter that's controlled by an old 386 running DOS, but I can't exactly see that thing being all that useful to a botnet even if someone did manage to find some way to communicate with it.
Yea, all the mass spectrometers in our analytical lab are still powered by XP machines. Worse than that, they are actually the original P4 systems. They control the instruments fine, and it is a software issue to update to a more modern OS, since it might not work with the instruments. I have to admit, some of the machines are pretty laggy though.
 
Apr 27, 2000
11,495
820
126
#95
I have to wonder if an old OS in a VM couldn't run some of that lab equipment. Sadly you have to worry about the interface, too. Serial and parallel port stuff . . . ugh.
 
Mar 27, 2009
12,910
27
106
#97

mv2devnull

Golden Member
Apr 13, 2010
1,237
8
91
#98
Nokia N9 has MeeGo/Harmattan.


PS. The OS Forum seems to have a thread about this same MS announcement -- with same, misleading title.
 

mv2devnull

Golden Member
Apr 13, 2010
1,237
8
91
#99
I have to wonder if an old OS in a VM couldn't run some of that lab equipment. Sadly you have to worry about the interface, too. Serial and parallel port stuff . . . ugh.
It is usually the interface.

Alternatively, the vendor of the instrument insists on selling "whole solution"; they sell the fully installed and configured control PC and it has steep premium.

One can move those "obsolete" systems into isolated network. IMHO, that should be done even for fresh installs.
 

Similar threads



ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS