brucek
Posts: 1,741 +2,720
If you believe TPM is going to speed up any meaningful portion of your computing experience by 40% I have a fantastic bridge I'd like to sell you....
Microsoft confirms: Windows 11 requires TPM 2.0 in all machines... even virtual ones
- Thread starter AdrielBruno
- Start date
PenguinJoe
Posts: 28 +16
I can see no overwhelming reason to jump through Microsoft's TPM hoops just to run Windows 11. Windows 10 seems to work just fine for me. I doubt I will move to Win 11 until there is a compelling reason to to so.
bluetooth fairy
Posts: 235 +166
Can't see any reason for a whine for typical end user. If MS can't explain something to you, it's their problem. They just won't sell it to you when you don't get it right. So why do you think they should?
Can't see why the whole thing matters. TPM 2.0 means pre 2018 cpu, right? We are 4 years off of win10 support end. Imagine, we are in the 2026, and we have something like i6700 or r1x00 on the ddr4-2667 platform, hmm.
Can't see why the whole thing matters. TPM 2.0 means pre 2018 cpu, right? We are 4 years off of win10 support end. Imagine, we are in the 2026, and we have something like i6700 or r1x00 on the ddr4-2667 platform, hmm.
brucek
Posts: 1,741 +2,720
The whine will be if/when they have actual user benefits in Windows 11 that they do manage to communicate effectively, but then put an artificial block to those actual benefits by requiring TPM when it has nothing to do with those actual benefits.
For some typical end users, 11 being +1 more than 10 will be all the explanation they need for feeling frustrated they can't have it. I'm glad I no longer work in the sort of job where it will be my job to absorb that frustration - but it will be someone else's.
PenguinJoe
Posts: 28 +16
Actually they haven't. There is nobody holding a gun to my head forcing me to Windows 11. The day that happens I will finally format my hard drive, put Linux on it and delete any Windows(whatever) .iso files/VMs I have. And my next car will be a turbo gas drinker.
Mr Majestyk
Posts: 2,063 +1,905
There are nefarious reasons behind this as sure as the sun rises in the east. I do not trust them at all. I will stick with Windows 10 for as long as possible and see how the sh!t storm develops over the next 12 or so months.
Hmm.. Maybe I'm paranoid but the only reason they want to have this implemented is piracy. Not privacy, not or benefit. It's theirs. Of course.
Back in 2008, TPM waa sold to us asva means to end piracy. Of course, that wasb just wishful thinking back then, when no one had TPM on their motherboards (by no one, I mean a negligible amount). Now.. It can be a different story.
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/encryption-chip-will-end-piracy-open-markets-says-bushnell
Back in 2008, TPM waa sold to us asva means to end piracy. Of course, that wasb just wishful thinking back then, when no one had TPM on their motherboards (by no one, I mean a negligible amount). Now.. It can be a different story.
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/encryption-chip-will-end-piracy-open-markets-says-bushnell
Axle Grease
Posts: 306 +262
But specific, low level CPU hardware characteristics missing from older CPUs like mine might be required by any or all higher level processes to perform within spec on Windows 11. We don't know, and like I wrote on another forum, they might be as important as TPM 2.0. Microsoft has done a poor job at conveying specifics for a successful Windows 11 upgrade path, and getting an inane message saying aww "Your CPU is incompatible with Windows 11" is just as unhelpful as "Oops! Something Went Wrong."
I will do a summary of what's happening:
- MS could just add two W11 versions (like home and pro, pro has bitlocker), one for older PCs with some disabled features, one "security" for TPM 2
- why not? Because some companies will earn a LOT of money selling new PCs and CPUs and pay MS a lot for using their W11. One hand washes the other...
- as such MS also forces people into buying new hardware making W11 lighter to update, maintain, and also Apps from store won't be pirated so easily. And as MS will be changing to ARM, people that will still be by W10 due to recent-but-not-W11-compatible hardware, will change in 2-3 years to mature ARM ecosystems.
- MS could just add two W11 versions (like home and pro, pro has bitlocker), one for older PCs with some disabled features, one "security" for TPM 2
- why not? Because some companies will earn a LOT of money selling new PCs and CPUs and pay MS a lot for using their W11. One hand washes the other...
- as such MS also forces people into buying new hardware making W11 lighter to update, maintain, and also Apps from store won't be pirated so easily. And as MS will be changing to ARM, people that will still be by W10 due to recent-but-not-W11-compatible hardware, will change in 2-3 years to mature ARM ecosystems.
MacOS is not only compatible with the T2 chips, Monterey (the next gen) will still be compatible with many models from 2013/2014, and almost all from 2015. So a HUGE difference. Also iOS is very compatible with older models.
I have for the first time a Mac (mini M1) and MacOS is great, smooth and the updates are no issue! With W10 I still struggle with some updates damaging the printer connection over lan, windows store on 2 devices doesn't update anymore etc etc... so I'll try going MacOS in the future or ChromeOS/Android/iOS.
Loli Pop Carbon
Posts: 103 +120
Exactly. Make w11 home, pro, and enterprise. Make only the enterprise to require tpm secure boot. Actually I dont mind using Home version in W7, but micro$hit disables gpedit and lot of function in W10 home, which existed in W7 home.
They are greedy and forcing user to use pro. Maybe they think home users are bunch of old people and kid who are not tech savvy at all.
Exactly. This TPM requirement is simply good excuse to get rid of Windows "compatible" hardware (works but runs very slowly). If Windows runs slowly because hardware is 10 years old is not Microsoft's fault but end users are typically too morons to realize that and say Windows is crap. This way even morons get at least acceptable "Windows experience".
I am using Ryzen 5 1600 (AF model), which is listed as unsupported, altought is the same silicon as the R5 2600 - they differ on clock speeds only. My CPU supports TPM 2.0 via firmware, fTPM, and, as mentioned, it's the same chip as the R5 2600 just rebranded as R5 1600. Microsoft chosen what they want to support, it's not like using other hardware may leave us vulnerable or TPM and other requirements are really needed for anything at all. They just got tired of dealing with the enormous amount of hardware supported. Like others said, this isn't a move thinking on consumer's interest. TPM may be a requirement just to be used as a identifier of our computers on the web by M$ to serve adds and track us non-stop.
Fastturtle
Posts: 146 +80
If Microsoft was really interested in Security, they'd have thrown much of the backwards compatibility out the door with 11 along with insisting on far more restrictive hardware requirements.
Look at what they're telling us is needed in Ram and CPU to run Win11 - 4GB/4Core while Win10 only needs 2GB/2Core. Not enough of a change even mention as you can't get 1 or 2 GB memory modules anymore. Minimum that's available is 4GB. They really needed to increase to at least 8GB, meaning Win11 would run with acceptable performance on anything new before they started tossing in the TPM/Secure Boot of the Trusted Computing Platform they've been pushing since the 90's (google it) which is all about <b>them</b> controlling your hardware instead of you.
Win10 is going to be the last version of Windows I run as I'm moving back to Linux to avoid the biggest issue with 11 - IrisAdware (that's right) MS is now malware in my book and I've been running pro since Vista came out due to control. So Linux, here I come once again and no, I don't need to worry about SystemD since my chosen Distro offers a configuration without it. Alternative is for me to move *BSD as the OS of choice but FreeBSD <B>does not</b> meet the UEFI Boot Specification and I have looked into it.
Look at what they're telling us is needed in Ram and CPU to run Win11 - 4GB/4Core while Win10 only needs 2GB/2Core. Not enough of a change even mention as you can't get 1 or 2 GB memory modules anymore. Minimum that's available is 4GB. They really needed to increase to at least 8GB, meaning Win11 would run with acceptable performance on anything new before they started tossing in the TPM/Secure Boot of the Trusted Computing Platform they've been pushing since the 90's (google it) which is all about <b>them</b> controlling your hardware instead of you.
Win10 is going to be the last version of Windows I run as I'm moving back to Linux to avoid the biggest issue with 11 - IrisAdware (that's right) MS is now malware in my book and I've been running pro since Vista came out due to control. So Linux, here I come once again and no, I don't need to worry about SystemD since my chosen Distro offers a configuration without it. Alternative is for me to move *BSD as the OS of choice but FreeBSD <B>does not</b> meet the UEFI Boot Specification and I have looked into it.
Sausagemeat
Posts: 1,597 +1,423
Lots of people are throwing their toys out of the pram because they can’t get Windows 11 because their hardware does not physically have the security capabilities for it.
Why? What about windows 11 is so exciting? I have a 4790K, I can’t get windows 11 but so far I haven’t seen anything on windows 11 to get excited about.
Personally though, I think it’s good that we have an OS with a decent minimum standard. Maybe Windows can actually improve this way as MS won’t have to ensure everything runs on a 1.4ghz celeron from 2013 or whatever.
Why? What about windows 11 is so exciting? I have a 4790K, I can’t get windows 11 but so far I haven’t seen anything on windows 11 to get excited about.
Personally though, I think it’s good that we have an OS with a decent minimum standard. Maybe Windows can actually improve this way as MS won’t have to ensure everything runs on a 1.4ghz celeron from 2013 or whatever.
Theinsanegamer
Posts: 5,474 +10,275
They didnt say that specifically, the community FOUND that on their own.
The community also found that 99% of the time the performance impact is 1-2% at worst, not 40%.
That is a lame arse excuse.
Theinsanegamer
Posts: 5,474 +10,275
Well windows 10 will go out of support in 4 years. A brand new build using a 1600AF isnt supported, neither is a 5950x, both systems have WAY longer then 4 years remaining. This is palcing arbitrary time limits on hardware that should not exist.
I think you A) forgot that MS is still supporting those 1.4 GHz celeron netbooks, it's the 8 core 16 thread 5960x systems they are cutting out of the loop, so that's not going to fix anything, and B) cutting slower hardware out does not make for a faster, nor more convenient, system. The first is the opposite, as raising the hardware bar excuses lazy programming and optimizations, and the latter is mutually exclusive.
MS has had 10 years to move the control panel to the settings app. 10 years. Supporting old CPUs did not prevent them from finishing this task. Supporting old CPUs did not cause the myriad of nasty bugs that MS has been haphazardly patching the last 3 years, like printnightmare. CPU bugs like spectre and meltdown were affecting brand new hardware.
MS is in shambles right now shoveling beta half baked software onto consumers. Anyone who thinks that excluding older hardware is going to get MS's rear end in gear and actually fix their borked OS is delusional, and totally ignorant of how lazy MS has been since 7.
Windows processor requirements Windows 11 supported AMD processors
This specification details the AMD processors that can be used with Windows 11 customer systems that include Windows products, including custom images.
docs.microsoft.com
For 1600AF, it was very cheap CPU vs Ryzen 2000 series. Microsoft just didn't want to make exception for supporting single 1xxx series Ryzen. While 1600AF is technically same as 2600, still it's 1xxx series and in this case it does matter. No surprise that buying cheaper one does have some drawbacks.
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/wi...supported/windows-11-supported-amd-processors
Sausagemeat
Posts: 1,597 +1,423
What are you on about? Celerons from 2013 are not supported actually. Also the requirement is not about performance. It’s about security. Yes well done a Ryzen 1600af performs like a 2600. But it doesn’t have the security features that windows needs.
Also you are incorrect. Removing slower hardware absolutely makes software better as it no longer needs to be gimped to run older hardware. Look at iOS. It’s defined by the oldest devices in the stack - the bottom line.
And yes MS is a shambles. But having hardware requirements for Windows 11 was not a shambolic move, it’s a very welcome one. But I understand some people are upset that they can’t run Windows 11. I’m not sure why tbh..
AdrielBruno
Posts: 11 +0
Indeed. If we are to consider all possibilities, you might be correct. Microsoft really needs to be way more upfront with these things so that people know exactly what they need to get the upgrade.
Ryzen 1600 (AF model) = Ryzen 2600. That thing you said about some secutiry features needed is a misleading information. When talking about the original model, OG 1600 and 1600X, yeah, you are right. But the R5 1600 is the same chip, except for the name and clock speed - that includes memory clocks.
https://www.techspot.com/review/1977-amd-ryzen-1600-af/
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-5-2600-review,6.html = CPU-Z printed by guru3d showing 2600's supported instruction sets
https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_ryzen_5_1600_review,6.html = CPU-Z printed by guru3d showing the original 1600's supported instruction sets
= Pinnacle Ridge's R6 1600 CPU-Z printed just now
It's worth note that both Pinnacle Ridge components supports AMD's firmware TPM (fTPM).
There's really no reason that CPU shouldn't be supported by M$. I already use Linux on my system as the secondary OS. So I'll keep W10 and use more Linux on my daily basis if that's the way M$ will handle their product.
Sausagemeat
Posts: 1,597 +1,423
Does every single config of the 1600X and mobo meet the TPM 2.0 requirement? Maybe MS is playing it safe and just selecting chipsets that they know will have the required spec.
MS haven’t allowed an i3 8100 and barred an R5 1600X and a i7 7700K on windows 11 because they felt like it. There is some reasoning there. Doesn’t the spec and implementation of the module matter?
I mean don’t get me wrong MS are awful but there must be some reasoning behind this move. Why would they want to exclude users?
Also, I like minimum hardware requirements. App developers will know that anyone on windows 11 will have a reasonably modern system.
Personally I don’t care. I have yet to learn of anything windows 11 can do that windows 10 can’t and I really can’t be bothered with the hassle of a windows OS upgrade right now.
Burty117
Posts: 5,116 +3,701
See, this is the problem with the vast majority of the comments here complaining about Windows 11. (Sorry wiyosaya for quoting yours, it was the first response to mine).
You don't NEED to upgrade, they aren't forcing you and have actively said "stay on windows 10 if you have unsupported hardware".
This strange mentality that Microsoft is somehow bullying you to upgrade is what's wrong with most people's arguments here.
Hell I have a supported system and I won't be upgrading straight away. I've never felt compelled to upgrade, why you lot feel forced to, I'll never know.
Sausagemeat
Posts: 1,597 +1,423
After doing some research it appears that the TPM 2.0 functionality needs to be enabled via AGESA updates on the Ryzen 1xxx series. And whilst you or I may be quite competent in updating a BIOS, its not realistic to expect users to do that. In fact many manufacturers would tell you not to update a BIOS if you have no problems. And updating BIOS' can cause problems. MS clearly want to avoid anything like this and have clearly only selected platforms that they know will definitely have TPM 2.0 and will be enabled from day one.
It might be the case that if you have updated the BIOS and you have the TPM 2.0 functionality enabled that you will be able to install Windows 11. It would make sense, it looks like Windows 11 will be designed to extract yet more metadata for MS to sell so they will want as many people as possible using it.
Similar threads
- Locked
