UNHAPPY DISCOVERY: LUCID_VIRTU, Z68 boards and OS choices

[BonzaiDuck]

Correct me if you know something I don't. Because I'd love to know what you know, if my pessimistic conclusions are incorrect here.

The various reviews for the Z68 motherboards all feature a section on LucidLogix' Lucid Virtu software that makes iGPU and dGPU work together on these boards.

Call that "FACT #1."

FACT #2: All OEMs shipping computers today for their mainstream basic computer-users are bundling their systems with Windows 7.

FACT #3: ASUS (and just about every other Z68-mobo-maker I can imagine) is mindful that NOT ALL ENTHUSIASTS will necessarily install Win 7 on the board. Of course, they would be stupid to install XP; a little silly to install a 32-bit version of any OS, although it would work. That is -- and here's what I mean:

-- All the chipset driver software is compatible with VISTA [as well as Win 7]
-- all the "utility" software -- i.e., "AI Suite II," etc. is specifically compatible
with VISTA [ . . . . Win 7 ditto . . ]
-- All the SSD-caching Intel-driver and software is specifically compatible with VISTA
[ . . . . Win 7 ditto . . ]

FACT #4: My mobo maker ASUS, while offering no specific prohibitions, indicates with implicit qualifications, omission of Lucid Virtu from the "VISTA" ASUS "INSTALL-ALL" setup -- that the Lucid software doesn't work with VISTA. LUCID, on their website, annotates their software promotional description with "compatible with Win 7 32/64" -- and I think they use the word "only."

Call me a whiner. Tell me I should just jump on Win 7 -- even now that there's an SP1 avaiilable. But it seems it wouldn't have been that much trouble for Lucid to produce their bundled software so that it was compatible with VISTA as well as Win 7. All the other participating companies -- Intel, ASUS, etc. -- didn't have a problem with doing that.

Shame on you, LUCID!!

 

[DaveSimmons]

You're a whiner who should jump on Win 7

But seriously, this might help someone who has an old Vista license and wants to use it instead of upgrading to 7.

 

[Syran]

I actually believe this has to do with the fact that XP & Vista cannot handle switching graphics on the fly, and require a reboot. Windows 7's HAL can handle it properly.

 

[Binky]

Fact #5 - you really need to ditch Vista!

I'm a happy Win7 & Lucid user.

 

[Dahak]

I actually believe this has to do with the fact that XP & Vista cannot handle switching graphics on the fly, and require a reboot. Windows 7's HAL can handle it properly.

yea, I remember vista could not handle 2 cards that where different at all, ie one nvidia and one ati. had to be the same cards if wanted to do multi-output. which is why probably the lucid software won't work with vista

 

[BonzaiDuck]

With all due respects, Syran, I am just skeptical that there would be such a stunning difference between Win 7 and VISTA-64. Maybe . . . I'd need further confirmation. Anyway, I don't THINK this is about switching between GPU's, but only getting them to work together . . .

At this point, with SP1 versions of Win 7, I should probably go forward to make the switch. I was planning to buy an OEM 3-pack, anyway. [Please -- don't tell me I should buy "retail." I'll post a thread about that on the OS forum . . . Anyway, I can say I have three PC's "originally" built by me -- in the family, which I service . . . so . . . there you are. . . . The family comes to me -- the "OEM builder" -- for support, and they don't pester MS.]

But . . . I sent an message to LUCID asking for clarification. I also sent a message to ASUS. I should be hearing from them. LUCID -- if I didn't already say it -- notes on their customer-support web-page that questions about VIRTU should be directed at the hardware (motherboard or graphics) manufacturer. See how conscious they are about the OEM limit of their software-focus? I put in my question and told them it was a "general" question -- which it is -- directed at a different e-mail address.

It just seems to me -- unless Syran is correct -- that the extra effort to make VIRTU work with VISTA would have been insignificant. I'll admit a bias, but I think my bias will prove out in a broader unfolding of world history and "economic history:" Economic motives offer the most reliable explanations . . . [unless, of course, Syran is correct . . . ] They just didn't want to bother, and since their software only ships with OEM systems, it was "convenient." We'll see. I'll post what I hear from both Lucid and ASUS.

Let me also touch a bit on "market integration" within these industries. You can tell me if you think I'm wrong on this one. It's the "TRIM" implementation for SSD-caching.

What's the chronology? SSD caching was only available with the recent implementation of the Z68 chipset, although Intel had been working on it for several years. They would've been called on the carpet for attempting to make that technology proprietary to only their own SSDs.

Windows 7 has been available long before this, even if MS may have known about INtel's project for SSD-caching, and that possibility would seem total speculation [unless any of you "know" something I don't.] We can assume then that Windows own TRIM capability addressed only "regular" SSD usage -- conventional usage.

I checked before going forward with VISTA-64 on this box: Where Windows7 provided TRIM within the OS, INTEL had provided it for both XP and VISTA through SSD-Tools and SSD-Optimizer software. Otherwise, I would've changed course and dumped VISTA.

Now, checking Intel's web-site, PDFs, knowledge-base etc. -- I find that they are saying "INtel is 'investigating' the use of TRIM or application of TRIM in RAID configurations." In other words, TRIM doesn't work for SSD-caching for the Intel SSD tools software, since SSD-caching is a type of RAID0 configuration. Therefore, I deduce that Windows7 own TRIM doesn't work for SSD-caching, either.

And the ruling factors for this are as follows. Intel developed the Z68 chipset. Intel developed SSD-caching to implement in that chipset. The SSD manufacturers most likely developed the TRIM capability, and so as MS does as a regular practice -- they incorporated features addressing the hardware into their OS versions.

I'd be willing to bet that LUCID could also provide VIRTU for VISTA. I think my assessment of TRIM is more certain, but I'd still be willing to bet a Mexican dinner on it. . . . .

 

[BonzaiDuck]

yea, I remember vista could not handle 2 cards that where different at all, ie one nvidia and one ati. had to be the same cards if wanted to do multi-output. which is why probably the lucid software won't work with vista

How would we confirm that such is the case with Windows 7 -- excluding any thought about LUCID? It seemed to me -- vaguely, and I acknowledge you could be correct on your point -- that you could socket two different video cards and use them going back to Win 98. Then, there was the feature of the onboard nForce graphics that preceded Win 7, or even VISTA.

Well -- as I said -- I'll post what they send me.

 

[VirtualLarry]

At this point, with SP1 versions of Win 7, I should probably go forward to make the switch. I was planning to buy an OEM 3-pack, anyway. [Please -- don't tell me I should buy "retail." I'll post a thread about that on the OS forum . . . Anyway, I can say I have three PC's "originally" built by me -- in the family, which I service . . . so . . . there you are. . . . The family comes to me -- the "OEM builder" -- for support, and they don't pester MS.]

I don't understand why you wouldn't buy a retail Win7 Family Pack. Not only is it cheaper than OEM three-pack ($50/license or less), but you can then transfer those licenses to new machines when your users upgrade. And you can install them as full-versions, which is legal as long as you have a prior OS license somewhere, even if it's not currently installed on the machine.

 

[Syran]

nVidia and ATI have both played around with technologies to allow power savings via drivers with an on-board and a discrete video card, but in both cases, it was only using similar styles of technologies; ended up being very limitied, and pretty much got thrown away almost immediately if they ever came out at all.

As for the SSD Cache bit, it makes sense that the Windows TRIM wouldn't work, as windows itself should not see the raid set as individual drives. It would have to be included in the intel drivers for it.

That all said, Honestly, I MUCH prefer windows 7 over Vista, runs much smoother and cleaner on all my machines; even in RC stages. I ended up upgrading much quicker to 7 over Vista (vs Vista over XP) on my home network. My biggest problem with 7 is at the corporate level, many of the tools I'm used to running with a Windows 2003 server environment definitely are not happy under 7 64-bit; and running the Windows XP virtual machine in a domain network is a bit annoying.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Answering V-Larry -- We've crossed paths about this in recent weeks. I almost don't want to talk about what happened on a [non-Anand] OS-specific forum when I brought up purchase and installation of OEM licenses. Let's drop that for now.

Isn't the "family pack" you spoke of for "Home Premium?" Or is there one also for "Pro?"

Last time around --[did I say this before?] -- I just HAD to have "Vista Ultimate." They didn't include Media Center on the "Business" version. Other features that I wanted weren't on "Home" or "Home Premium."

I was going to buy Win-7(64) Ultimate, when I ran the comparison-of-features list that MS has at its web-site. There are two items Ultimate has over Pro, one or both related to "Enterprise" configs, and neither of which I would place any value on for my LAN, our installations or usage. I think that "bit-locker" thing can be had differently as an internet-security suite feature -- better or worse -- doesn't matter.

Without precipitating "discomfort among posters and old colleagues such as yourself, I've been buying these OEM discs for a long time. Never really had much of a problem -- until that slipstreaming debacle I spoke of in another thread last or a few weeks ago -- which you answered.

Answering Syran: Sure -- and I'm still testing this system, getting a feel for it. It's a gamble, but it should turn out to be a computer that I'll keep for four or more years. I also suspect that Win 7 has various "classic view" modes, just as does VISTA. I HAD the RC -- with a choice to "get a deal" on renewal once the year had passed. Installed it on a system, not enough drivers, didn't think the performance differences between the two 64-bit OS's was significant. Friends down the hill from here -- I have to do maintenance on their machines with Win 7. Nothing very daunting.

I can go out on a limb and get the OS now. I just want to keep my credit cards cleared monthly, avoid dipping into saving, and plan everything. Sure. I pinch pennies. And we could get into that "OEM" issue . . . again . . . . But I'm leaving this desk right now -- going up the hill to buy the weekly 25-lb bag of navel oranges. We buy those in "OEM-wrap" too . . .

 

[VirtualLarry]

The biggest differences between Home Premium and Pro, are:

Pro can join domains
Pro can act as an RDP server (can RDP into the box)
Pro has "XP Mode"

BOTH Home Premium and Pro have Media Center functionality. This time around, unlike Vista, all editions of Win7 are supersets of lesser editions.

So you don't have to get Ultimate to get both the Media Center as well as the business-oriented features.

The only reason that I can see to get Ultimate, is to use BitLocker, a form of FDE. Useful on a laptop, I suppose.

No, the Family Pack doesn't come in Pro or Ultimate. Only Home Premium.

But it is cheaper than OEM copies. It's what I use here.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

The biggest differences between Home Premium and Pro, are:

Pro can join domains
Pro can act as an RDP server (can RDP into the box)
Pro has "XP Mode"

BOTH Home Premium and Pro have Media Center functionality. This time around, unlike Vista, all editions of Win7 are supersets of lesser editions.

So you don't have to get Ultimate to get both the Media Center as well as the business-oriented features.

The only reason that I can see to get Ultimate, is to use BitLocker, a form of FDE. Useful on a laptop, I suppose.

No, the Family Pack doesn't come in Pro or Ultimate. Only Home Premium.

But it is cheaper than OEM copies. It's what I use here.

I appreciate your advice on this. My point was that I -- as many of us do sometimes -- assume that "Ultimate" means "the best" and that "the best" includes extras that we would value for th money we spend. And as you said, or we both said, VISTA only had MC available in Home and Ultimate, while Win-7 includes them for all. I had found the comparison list of features for the various "flavors" at the MS web-site, and it confirmed what I'd assumed before about the difference between Home and Pro. I may not NEED some of the additional networking features, but I WANT them for my own, personal workstation.

As for "pro" versus "Ultimate:" I see bit-locker, an apps protection feature, and an ability join Enterprise domains. I think those security features can be had through my Internet Security license renewals or annual new licenses. And -- we're not part of "Corporate" here at the house -- just a LAN of personal computers. So - really - those features have a $0.00 value to me. If I don't "forget" Ultimate, I can "forget" an extra $30 or $40 which could be better spent elsewhere.


That being said, Mom and Bro' are fine with Home, but the allocation of new licenses in the house will proceed with installing virgin VISTA-64 OEM's on the XP machines -- which were "recently once new" and built by the reputable OEM "Yours Truly." Bro' is embracing the idea and Mom is worrying so much about change, risk and uncertainty it will take months to get there.

That leaves my other Bro' who lives about 15 miles from here: He's going to want the "Pro" version too. So that leaves me with "Mine's," "Mah Bro's," and a spare license. I might just get MOM to accept Win 7 and skip the VISTA. My Bro down the road has agreed to subsidize 1/3 of my purchase, so that I can give him a "fresh" system -- also OEM-built by "Yours Truly."

Keep an eye out, Larry. I may be inclined to post an "issue discussion" about ethics and software on the OS forum. I'd like you to drop in on it.

 

[Syran]

I appreciate your advice on this. My point was that I -- as many of us do sometimes -- assume that "Ultimate" means "the best" and that "the best" includes extras that we would value for th money we spend. And as you said, or we both said, VISTA only had MC available in Home and Ultimate, while Win-7 includes them for all. I had found the comparison list of features for the various "flavors" at the MS web-site, and it confirmed what I'd assumed before about the difference between Home and Pro. I may not NEED some of the additional networking features, but I WANT them for my own, personal workstation.

As for "pro" versus "Ultimate:" I see bit-locker, an apps protection feature, and an ability join Enterprise domains. I think those security features can be had through my Internet Security license renewals or annual new licenses. And -- we're not part of "Corporate" here at the house -- just a LAN of personal computers. So - really - those features have a $0.00 value to me. If I don't "forget" Ultimate, I can "forget" an extra $30 or $40 which could be better spent elsewhere.


That being said, Mom and Bro' are fine with Home, but the allocation of new licenses in the house will proceed with installing virgin VISTA-64 OEM's on the XP machines -- which were "recently once new" and built by the reputable OEM "Yours Truly." Bro' is embracing the idea and Mom is worrying so much about change, risk and uncertainty it will take months to get there.

That leaves my other Bro' who lives about 15 miles from here: He's going to want the "Pro" version too. So that leaves me with "Mine's," "Mah Bro's," and a spare license. I might just get MOM to accept Win 7 and skip the VISTA. My Bro down the road has agreed to subsidize 1/3 of my purchase, so that I can give him a "fresh" system -- also OEM-built by "Yours Truly."

Keep an eye out, Larry. I may be inclined to post an "issue discussion" about ethics and software on the OS forum. I'd like you to drop in on it.

Honestly. If you have a Microsoft domain at home (as I do), get PRO. If you don't, there really is no reason to get Pro over Home unless you really need XP mode for something. (And don't think of gaming as one of those reasons to have XP mode). You can pick up the 3 pack for $120 on amazon. If you REALLY want pro, you could use an anytime upgrade to go from Home -> Pro for another $70-80, which would put you at $200. I'd almost say it's cheaper to pick up a 2nd 3 pack at that price for your off-site brother, and have 2 copies in the wind for later use.

Ultimate gets you bitlocker, and more languages, and is mostly useless this time around, which is a good thing, I paid way too much for my Vista Ultimates on the last go around because I wanted features from both.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Honestly. If you have a Microsoft domain at home (as I do), get PRO. If you don't, there really is no reason to get Pro over Home unless you really need XP mode for something. (And don't think of gaming as one of those reasons to have XP mode). You can pick up the 3 pack for $120 on amazon. If you REALLY want pro, you could use an anytime upgrade to go from Home -> Pro for another $70-80, which would put you at $200. I'd almost say it's cheaper to pick up a 2nd 3 pack at that price for your off-site brother, and have 2 copies in the wind for later use.

Ultimate gets you bitlocker, and more languages, and is mostly useless this time around, which is a good thing, I paid way too much for my Vista Ultimates on the last go around because I wanted features from both.

I can see that. We buiilt machines for Mom and Bro from the same mobo and processor-family, same DDR2-667 RAM, etc. Mom is terrified to move beyond XP-32-bit. Bro is just happy with anything he gets, and wants to go forward with 64-bit OS. And we'd installed XP Home on Bro's machine at the git-go.

There are networking and other features I wanted -- respective to Win 7 -- with the "Pro" versus the Home. And you're right -- I might have saved money on the "front-end" and turn around to get the anytime-upgrade. But all decisions are trade-offs between price, features and convenience, and I thought to skip the "anytime." My other Bro -- who also want's "Pro" -- is happiest also with that decision. Especially, the XP-compatibility-mode is essential. Mom uses this . . . old . . . genealogy software that lags between one OS version and the next, and she doesn't want to change. [I already said that -- in general terms . . . ]

The regime of feature-differentiation is of course different between XP, VISTA and Win-7. But I was a bit miffed when I found out I couldn't easily do (or do at all) the Remote Desktop feature with Home.

But we might make these sorts of discussions in the "Software -- OS" forum, although no harm done. I'm feeling particularly voluble and animated today -- somebody could say "failed to take your medication" -- but I'm not diagnosed or prescribed. It's just the German "Instant Espresso" I buy at the 99-cent Store by the case. Like Alf said in "ALF" when Willie asks "How many cups of coffee did you have today, ALF?" -- drumming his three furry fingers on the coffee-table frenetically -- "Oh, about 32. Why?"

I suspect the Forums administrators tolerate me as the resident eccentric. . . .

 

[Binky]

I suggest that you Google/Bing the following: "enable remote desktop on windows7 home"

In addition, for the needs of most home users, the built-in remote desktop function is generally inferior to free alternatives like teamviewer.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I suggest that you Google/Bing the following: "enable remote desktop on windows7 home"

In addition, for the needs of most home users, the built-in remote desktop function is generally inferior to free alternatives like teamviewer.

Yeah -- I'd used another alternative, although I paid a few bucks for it. I can't even remember at the moment what it was called. It's still probably good . . . my license is good if I can find the download. I'd used it to get remote access to a Win 2K system I'd used as a server before my WHS system.

So it COULD be that I spent more than I needed to. But I got "more than I needed" at less than retail-box, but again . . . . I might have had retail box for less according to Virtual Larry's observation . . . .

Hmmm. . . . Live . . . and Learn . . . .

 

[NewbiePC]

I just learned the hard way that Lucid does not offer drivers for Vista. This was Gigabytes response to my inquiry on future driver availability:

Dear customer,

The Virtu software is base on new technology and the support is only limited to Windows 7. This is base on the manufacture info that was provided to GIGABYTE and currently there are no information on weather there will be support for other OS.

Thank you


I have not yet received a response from Lucid but I'm not holding my breath. Too bad this important detail was omitted from the motherboard product description (box and website).

 

[e-drood]

pls view: http://www.lucidlogix.com/driverdownloads-virtu.html

for those running w7 os - there is updated driver

w7-leads-into-w8-v.soon support will be gear'd to w8...

I v. recently purchased new mb - my focus asus m4e or m4e-zed, & I chose m4e as separate gpu hi priority + this is 2nd iteration of "turbo boost" 1st time in notebooks did not function properly (no user pinning supported) and now 2nd time zed68 & again has functional limits imposed by driver/software... I v. much wish I could be more positive about this chipset feature...

p67+ ssd boot & mech sata3 hdd on intel native sata3 controller can work v. well... all ssd controller issues aside --- for those w budget add (hardware) raid card

vista is nearly historical footnote...

 

[BonzaiDuck]

pls view: http://www.lucidlogix.com/driverdownloads-virtu.html

for those running w7 os - there is updated driver

w7-leads-into-w8-v.soon support will be gear'd to w8...

I v. recently purchased new mb - my focus asus m4e or m4e-zed, & I chose m4e as separate gpu hi priority + this is 2nd iteration of "turbo boost" 1st time in notebooks did not function properly (no user pinning supported) and now 2nd time zed68 & again has functional limits imposed by driver/software... I v. much wish I could be more positive about this chipset feature...

p67+ ssd boot & mech sata3 hdd on intel native sata3 controller can work v. well... all ssd controller issues aside --- for those w budget add (hardware) raid card

vista is nearly historical footnote...

What was the mainstream user-lifespan for XP, disregarding the point when they stopped supporting it with new SP's? I think XP had a longer string, so to speak. But there's "no consistent pattern" while there IS a consistent pattern given circumstances: Win98 appeared on the heels of Win95; ME seemed to be a "mainstreamer" development that didn't last long, coming in with W2kPro; VISTA had bad press because of the pre-SP flaws. Whether the mainstream and enthusiast community chose to "shine-it-on" it's still in a mature phase. I think the news was "discontinuing support for SP1 in June 2011; continuing support for SP2 . . . "

I've just been notified that my Win-7 disc/license has been shipped. I'll probably pull the VISTA hard drive, put in another fresh one, and install the WIN-7. Then -- make sure there's no conflict with "active drive" settings and throw the VISTA unit back in when I feel more comfortable with the Win 7. Maybe -- it's about "comfort-level." I can't tell. I'd worked with the Win7-RC, stuck with VISTA, now help my friends with their Win 7 installations.

Like VirtualLarry said about over-clocking . . . . this is a "process" and a "journey."

 

[e-drood]

it's probably best to migrate to w7, with clean installation, to have upgrade path to w8...

95-98-98se-me - supported 5yrs fully - & intro'd office suite to corporate users

the golden child xp has been too successful & continues on over 40% ALL pc's worldwide but no longer rec'g functional updates & only minimum security patches --- for those who believe in sf i can only mention that tsmc still has (2) users w w98 on their pc's & most xp supporters...

xp tolerates (yes really) intel p3's & p4's still living & breathing in over 1/2 the pc's / workstations worldwide --- when older pc's are put out for collection/recycling, the cpus stripped out & shipped to many countries for reuse & the mb's w leaking caps are repaired & put back into service by users who will tolerate slower but functional machines, reloaded w unlicensed xp

ever wonder why asus & others still manufacture agp graphics cards

of course only 512 or 1gb ram is supported by older hardware platforms...

xp was intended to be mainstream os for (6) yrs only, but vista (initially) attempted to intro too many user features & simply didn't achieve critical user mass - corporate users - intel chipset/cpu intro's lagged a little behind as well, hindering vista (original presentation of HT never correctly functioned)...

i completely agree the real user issue is "comfort level" re: os & hardware platform