Microsoft Announces Windows 11 - Benchmarks Against Linux To Begin Soon

[fkelava]

It could be Microsoft's way of bumping up x86_64_v levels. AFAICT their CPU list is V3 and up using GCC levels (though I wouldn't be surprised if one of those no-AVX Intels was in the list). Perhaps the new hardware requirements was what warranted the name change?

I don't think MSVC has the concept of feature levels. In .NET code, they are irrelevant, as you do not specify a feature level, but instead guard instruction sets as such:

using System.Runtime.Intrinsics.X86;

if (Avx2.IsSupported) {
  // AVX2 code here
}
else {
  // fall back to normal
}

Honestly, I'm not that upset about a new 2021 OS having newer CPU requirements; especially when the previous OS version will get 5 more years of support to allow people time to buy newer hardware.

My only objection is that I don't see a viable reason for the change. Coffee Lake and Zen onwards include a fTPM, but what other than that warrants the change- I'm uncertain. I doubt Microsoft would introduce a strict dependency on an advanced instruction set seeing as the only similar thing in recent memory was a hard requirement on the CMPXCHG16B instruction in, AFAIR, Windows 8.1. This "requirement" was hard only in name, as it restricted you to things a decade old at that point.

Maybe a break with tradition wouldn't be completely unwarranted, though. I do wonder what a hypothetical build of Windows that bothered unrestricting itself in terms of legacy support could do. Such thoughts should still remain firmly in the domain of the hypothetical for 11, however.

[Vistaus]

The only thing in 11 that made kind of jealous as a linux user, this android app integration.

Then install Deepin where you can install Android apps by default.

[Vistaus]

Now Windows run Android apps out-of-the-box, mean while Linux distributions still does not run Android apps out-of-the-box even though Android is based on Linux.
It is possible to run Android apps on Linux but you have to use Anbox, it doesn't work out of the box, you can't install it as a Snap, Flatpak or Deb, you need to have some weird install that installs a Linux kernel module.

I can install Android apps on Deepin out-of-the-box through the Deepin App Store, but also manually, so your statement about Linux as a whole is wrong. It's just that not many distros have picked it up to install it by default yet, but Deepin did.

(and a few mobile Linux distros did so as well)

Also, Anbox is available as a Snap and I also see the modules in Synaptic on Debian, so that part of your post is also wrong.

[Vistaus]

When Win 10 was released, Microsoft said v10 would be the "last version" of Windows, and that going forward, Windows OS would be a rolling release, like a SaaS model. Didn't them long to change course yet again. LMAO. Can't wait to experience all the new spy-ware they've baked in!

They will officially no longer release new versions when they hit Windows 42.

[CommunityMember]

It could be Microsoft's way of bumping up x86_64_v levels.

Microsoft confirmed that the Intel gen 8 levels are a soft requirement, in that the installer will give you a warning, but let you proceed, if that is the only thing that is not in compliance.

[StarterX4]

Instead of fixing the current Win10 which is still de facto Beta, they're pushing it back to Alpha (Win11).

[skeevy420]

I am suspecting that the lack of previous gen CPUs in the list is that Intel has marked them "discontinued" rather than they may not work, so they technically cannot be claimed to be supported. The same is true for Windows 10 21H1 where the list of supported processors is for CPUs that had not yet been discontinued by Intel at the time of availability of 21H1, even though it certainly runs on processors where Windows 10 was installed on previous gen products.

Of course, when the Windows 11 builds are officially available to insiders I am sure some people will test things out.

It could be Microsoft's way of bumping up x86_64_v levels. AFAICT their CPU list is V3 and up using GCC levels (though I wouldn't be surprised if one of those no-AVX Intels was in the list). Perhaps the new hardware requirements was what warranted the name change?

Honestly, I'm not that upset about a new 2021 OS having newer CPU requirements; especially when the previous OS version will get 5 more years of support to allow people time to buy newer hardware.

[skeevy420]

After some research I found out that I have Intel Platform Trust Technology, which is the Intel equivalent of AMD's fTPM. There are also reports that TPM 2.0 will not be a hard requirement (TPM 1.2 will also work). I do wonder though what's the point of having a TPM header on mobo's like yours, if the mobo already has a firmware TPM functionality?

I was wondering the same thing. I've read that the header method is more secure because you can remove it and anything that used the header to be encrypted won't work. AFAICT that's the only benefit to the header.

[Henk717]

Not having a physical TPM chip is normal these days. TPM as a chip is obsolete technology. These days the secure parts of the CPU can emulate one so check your bios for this feature. On my first gen Ryzen it was disabled by default but the fTPM was supported and allows me to use bitlocker.

I'm more worried about the secureboot requirement screwing up custom kernels. That has always been unnessesary hassle for me so i always leave it off.

As for the reasoning, modern machines automatically enable harddrive encryption and certain hypervisor based security mitigations. Its clear those will formally no longer be optional.

[user1]

If you're in my position you might think have to buy some bullshit like this that is out of stock pretty much everywhere. Asus has one too.

Damn, I looked at your motherboard schematic and it doesn't look like it has a TPM header. That sucks more ass than Cardi B. FWIW, there's already a dll to get around not having TPM 2.0.

Fortunately I have a Ryzen so all I had to do was enable fTPM in my UEFI and everything is all good. Thankfully I don't have to have a special chip on my TPM header (yet). Enabling fTPM was all that was necessary for me to be able to reenter the Beta Channel and I'll be able to update to 11 as soon as it's available. If anyone else has a Ryzen and was wondering why they got kicked off the Dev or Beta Channel in Windows 10, try to enable fTPM (or not if you want to stay on 10 ).

After some research I found out that I have Intel Platform Trust Technology, which is the Intel equivalent of AMD's fTPM. There are also reports that TPM 2.0 will not be a hard requirement (TPM 1.2 will also work). I do wonder though what's the point of having a TPM header on mobo's like yours, if the mobo already has a firmware TPM functionality?