If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
AMD Ryzen will be supported under Windows 7!
It was stated that Microsoft won't support either Intel Kaby Lake or AMD
Ryzen under anything but Windows 10. Well, some cracks in that wall have appeared, as AMD will make drivers available for Ryzen under Windows 7. Now, I guess you could say that Microsoft still doesn't support it, but AMD seems to be doing so. https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/ryzen-windows-7-drivers Yousuf Khan |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
AMD Ryzen will be supported under Windows 7!
Yousuf Khan wrote:
It was stated that Microsoft won't support either Intel Kaby Lake or AMD Ryzen under anything but Windows 10. Well, some cracks in that wall have appeared, as AMD will make drivers available for Ryzen under Windows 7. Now, I guess you could say that Microsoft still doesn't support it, but AMD seems to be doing so. https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/ryzen-windows-7-drivers Yousuf Khan I think Microsoft made an announcement too, a while back. "I love it when a plan comes together." [A-Team] Paul |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
AMD Ryzen will be supported under Windows 7!
"Paul" wrote
| I think Microsoft made an announcement too, a while back. | Not according to that link. "Microsoft have previously stated they will only be supporting AMD's next-gen CPUs via Windows 10" MS have been very close buddies with Intel for a long time. (The Vista fiasco over the PCs with no Aero was due to a favor to Intel that alienated OEMs and customers alike.) I'm guessing the Microsofties are none too happy that gamers can build new rigs with Win7. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
AMD Ryzen will be supported under Windows 7!
Mayayana wrote:
"Paul" wrote | I think Microsoft made an announcement too, a while back. | Not according to that link. "Microsoft have previously stated they will only be supporting AMD's next-gen CPUs via Windows 10" MS have been very close buddies with Intel for a long time. (The Vista fiasco over the PCs with no Aero was due to a favor to Intel that alienated OEMs and customers alike.) I'm guessing the Microsofties are none too happy that gamers can build new rigs with Win7. I think I'm confusing the "Skylake support to mid-2017" announcement, with these other ones. ******* http://hothardware.com/news/microsof...y-lake-and-zen “Windows 7 was designed nearly 10 years ago before any x86/x64 SOCs existed. For Windows 7 to run on any modern silicon, device drivers and firmware need to emulate Windows 7’s expectations for interrupt processing, bus support, and power states - which is challenging for WiFi, graphics, security, and more." That makes it sound like hardware developers go out of their way to break stuff ? Think how long the marketing guy had to sit at his desk, and write up that "plum" :-) Musta taken all week. "Technology is hard" - Said the marketeer who didn't know how it worked I was able to boot Win98 on a Core2 motherboard. A board with PCI Express on it. Now was that an accident ? Or good hardware design ? Win98 doesn't know what PCI Express bus is, but because the bus "appears" to be a PCI bus, the system comes up. These articles they write, are pretty disingenuous. Hardware guys actually work damn hard, to make stuff work on older OSes. The mess would be unbelievable, if they weren't doing that. There would be nothing but continuous moaning and groaning in the newsgroups, if it were not so. The Zen (Ryzen) architecture is "conventional" on SMT. I don't see why this is going to be a big deal. As for AMD providing drivers, you'll remember AMD had to do that for Cool N' Quiet too. There is a history of AMD having to provide a shim for stuff. If AMD can do this, it tells you the architecture (around the edges) looks pretty conventional to the software. For $150 million dollars, you can get Microsoft to do almost anything. Some of these announcements read like "well, I'm not giving you wodges of cash for this, **** off". And that's why you see an MS announcement, an AMD announcement, an Intel announcement, all seeming to pull in different directions. There is a shortage of wodges of cash in the picture, to "smooth" things over. Paul |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
AMD Ryzen will be supported under Windows 7!
In message , Paul
writes: [] that for Cool N' Quiet too. There is a history of AMD having to provide a shim for stuff. If AMD can do [] The earliest one I remember was a patch (I think it was just a file replacement) for Windows 95 that stopped the (then!) latest AMD processors, which were capable of higher clock speeds, crashing in Windows if you set the clock faster than the low 300s MHz. (It varied a little with temperature and other parameters.) The processors were capable of faster - e. g. 350 or 400 MHz (rated, not overclocking or anything), and were fine in e. g. DOS. Windows 98 did not have the problem (i. e. would run on AMD processors at any clock speed they could run at), so presumably M$ had "fixed" whatever it was. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Grief generates a huge energy in you and it's better for everybody if you harness it to do something. - Judi Dench, RT 2015/2/28-3/6 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
AMD Ryzen will be supported under Windows 7!
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Paul writes: [] that for Cool N' Quiet too. There is a history of AMD having to provide a shim for stuff. If AMD can do [] The earliest one I remember was a patch (I think it was just a file replacement) for Windows 95 that stopped the (then!) latest AMD processors, which were capable of higher clock speeds, crashing in Windows if you set the clock faster than the low 300s MHz. (It varied a little with temperature and other parameters.) The processors were capable of faster - e. g. 350 or 400 MHz (rated, not overclocking or anything), and were fine in e. g. DOS. Windows 98 did not have the problem (i. e. would run on AMD processors at any clock speed they could run at), so presumably M$ had "fixed" whatever it was. Yeah, I've never run into that bug. I guess that's what I get for not having Win95 here. When I installed Win98 on the Core2, I stopped the install at the first reboot, and fixed the "too much RAM" problem. As otherwise, it wouldn't have come up on the first reboot. I didn't really want to be pulling sticks of RAM out of it all the time. So it was easier to set it up to "co-exist". Paul |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|