• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Some Intel Chips Don't Support 'XP Mode'

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
I know most people with a new Core 2 Duo or Core 2 Quad would feel safe thinking their processor will support Windows 7 XP Mode but, if you have certain CPUs, you might be out of luck.

Now, three years later, it appears to be time for the “Vista Capable” sequel. How much positive Windows 7 buzz will be wiped out in coming weeks and months when consumers and business buyers discover that a heavily hyped new Windows 7 feature, XP Mode, won’t work on some Intel-based products?
Click to expand...
 
How's AMD's position on this? According to the article, you need Intel-VT and AMD-V support (Virtualization mode) enabled in the BIOS to use VXP. I'm not a virtualization user, so I haven't been keeping up with this. But since this would greatly benefit my company upgrading to Win7 while maintaining XP compatibility, I'm interested in knowing.
 
I guess I am lucky as my home machine is Q6600 and the one at work was specifically ordered with VT support in mind since I am using Virtual PC extensively for application end testing on different OSes...

Having said that, I won't use Windows 7 until 2020 anyway... just upgraded from Windows 2000 pro to XP couple of months ago only because certain software refused to install on Windows 2000 :)
 
What I read about it on the amd side of things is that any amd64 cpu and any x2 cpu and above from socket AM2 upwards will be ok, sorry socket 939 folks with X2's.

I got that from some site that had a thing about win 7 and its xp mode.
 
Azhar said:
How's AMD's position on this? According to the article, you need Intel-VT and AMD-V support (Virtualization mode) enabled in the BIOS to use VXP. I'm not a virtualization user, so I haven't been keeping up with this. But since this would greatly benefit my company upgrading to Win7 while maintaining XP compatibility, I'm interested in knowing.
Click to expand...

All modern AMD processors including the Athlon X2 support this.
 
JimmiG said:
All modern AMD processors including the Athlon X2 support this.
Click to expand...

Actually is it all X2s are just the AM2 ones and above? I don't think the socket 939 support it but I might be wrong.

But yah AMD is in a far better positioin. At the very least every AM2 and above supports it, along with all dual core Turions (and quad cores if they have them).

I was looking at this yesterday and was minorly surprised at how spotty Intel support was. AMD was pretty much if you have a dual core or better (with the exception of maybe the socket 939 ones) you are set. Intel not so much.

Overall I don't think this will be a Vista Capable sequal, but just another feature that not everyone can use, just like the touch screen features.
 
Makes you wonder why Intel pulled VT out of certain CPUs. Probably some lame marketing reason I am sure, in which case Intel needs some marketing people in touch with the real world, you know, the one *we* all live in LOL.
 
that is what happens when you buy cheap over best price/performance/features

I have done my damndest to stay away from those types of processors.....not that there is really anything wrong with them
 
ir0nw0lf said:
Makes you wonder why Intel pulled VT out of certain CPUs. Probably some lame marketing reason I am sure, in which case Intel needs some marketing people in touch with the real world, you know, the one *we* all live in LOL.
Click to expand...

Probably to bring the cost down drastically when selling bulks to OEM, like the "Pentium Dual Core" lines.

nVidia does pretty much the same thing. Rip out a couple pipes or omit specific software support and call it something else.
 
I don't feel sorry for anyone about this. The Intel VT requirement was made quite clear right up front, and the target audience for this (big businesses) are fully aware of what will (not) work with it.
 
Yup, I heavily use virtualization at home and work for lab environments. Intel doesn't support VT on any of their low end products so I've avoided those.

Again, MS will probably get blamed because people buy hardware that doesn't support what they want to do.
 
darkpaw said:
Again, MS will probably get blamed because people buy hardware that doesn't support what they want to do.
Click to expand...

To true and as much as I hate Microsh!t they shouldn't be blamed for Intel's decisions. A software company simply cannot support every single piece of hardware out there.

Especially when the hardware just can't do it, lol.
 
Great What did we just order for my current district E4500, not supported! I was hoping this mode would help with the mountain of software we have, heck there are teachers that want to hold on to software that references windows 95! We bought some lower spec systems a year ago I can't remember whats in them but I'm going to go check them now with PC Wizard 2008. We may also luck out with the pentium Ds we have too I can't remember the version on them either.

How is it going to look when you tell the someone "Oh it won't work on your new machine but your older one and the one before that should be fine." Progress!
 
Exavior said:
Actually is it all X2s are just the AM2 ones and above? I don't think the socket 939 support it but I might be wrong.

But yah AMD is in a far better positioin. At the very least every AM2 and above supports it, along with all dual core Turions (and quad cores if they have them).

I was looking at this yesterday and was minorly surprised at how spotty Intel support was. AMD was pretty much if you have a dual core or better (with the exception of maybe the socket 939 ones) you are set. Intel not so much.

Overall I don't think this will be a Vista Capable sequal, but just another feature that not everyone can use, just like the touch screen features.
Click to expand...

939 socket x2's do not support it, its only revision F and higher cpu's which are on the AM2 side of things, revision E is socket 939 and 939 is a dead socket for virtual xp mode.
 
bigstusexy said:
How is it going to look when you tell the someone "Oh it won't work on your new machine but your older one and the one before that should be fine." Progress!
Click to expand...

Throw in a "You shoulda bought AMD" while you're at it. : P
 
Lamont Cranston said:
that is what happens when you buy cheap over best price/performance/features

I have done my damndest to stay away from those types of processors.....not that there is really anything wrong with them
Click to expand...

Actually, read the article. Intel mix and matches so much that you can actually end up having the feature with a cheap processor, then you pay more for a faster processor and NOT have the feature. It isn't a case of more expensive having more features.
 
InorganicMatter said:
I don't feel sorry for anyone about this. The Intel VT requirement was made quite clear right up front, and the target audience for this (big businesses) are fully aware of what will (not) work with it.
Click to expand...

That's my thought as well. I've always understood how this technology worked and what the requirements were from the first time I heard about it. Additionally I don't think the XP mode will be as big a deal as people make it out to be. I can't really imagine myself using it a whole lot if ever.
 
Azhar said:
Probably to bring the cost down drastically when selling bulks to OEM, like the "Pentium Dual Core" lines.

nVidia does pretty much the same thing. Rip out a couple pipes or omit specific software support and call it something else.
Click to expand...

It isn't so much a rip out as a binning system, the chip failed in the test for that specific part but works fine for others. Why trash $50 of silicon that would normally retail for $250 when you can sell it for $80 as a lower sku and still make a profit albeit lower then desired it still isn't a loss.
 
I have warned for ages on [H] forums not to buy proc's without hardware VT. I have been pretty much buying AM2's (mostly 45W) for most of my boxes. I'm all set (not that I need it too much anyway -- I mostly run Linux). The one exception is my wife's box which was an Q8200. She has XP home + vertex 60GB + 2G ram. I dont' see her upgrading for ages -- and if she wants too, I'll swap the e8400 on my fileserver with her Q8200.

It's hilarious that $39 AMD processors are compatible but $100+ intel procs are not.

That being said, I still love the c2d architecture -- just not intel marketing.
 
Actually is it all X2s are just the AM2 ones and above? I don't think the socket 939 support it but I might be wrong.
Click to expand...

True. However S939 is outdated and was replaced a long time ago by AM2/AM2+ and now that is being replaced with AM3. Hence why I said all "modern" Athlon X2's and Phenoms support it :) Only the lowest-end Semprons lack the support. On the Intel side, even many new mid-range CPUs using the current socket lack it.

Actually, read the article. Intel mix and matches so much that you can actually end up having the feature with a cheap processor, then you pay more for a faster processor and NOT have the feature. It isn't a case of more expensive having more features.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and there's no logic behind it. For example, the cheaper E8500 C2D supports it, but the more expensive Q8200 Quad does not.
 
read the 3 pages in that Front Page News, the second page shows getting the more ££$$ cpu has no VT, no Q8xxx has VT at all

if thay have been buying amd x2 or higher thay are ok (you do not need to check)
 
Dan_D said:
That's my thought as well. I've always understood how this technology worked and what the requirements were from the first time I heard about it. Additionally I don't think the XP mode will be as big a deal as people make it out to be. I can't really imagine myself using it a whole lot if ever.
Click to expand...

Same here, if you knew you were going to be using VT tech to begin with you would have the proper hardware.
Plus, let XP go. It's time to move on.
 
Lebowski said:
Same here, if you knew you were going to be using VT tech to begin with you would have the proper hardware.
Plus, let XP go. It's time to move on.
Click to expand...

Agreed. If you still need legacy XP support, keep an XP box around or use it through Microsoft Virtual PC, VMWare, or ESX.
 
Lamont Cranston said:
that is what happens when you buy cheap over best price/performance/features

I have done my damndest to stay away from those types of processors.....not that there is really anything wrong with them
Click to expand...

That is what happens when you buy Intel over AMD. As people pointed out top of the line cpus don't support it any better than low end.

Ualdayan said:
Actually, read the article. Intel mix and matches so much that you can actually end up having the feature with a cheap processor, then you pay more for a faster processor and NOT have the feature. It isn't a case of more expensive having more features.
Click to expand...

That is what I was talking about with somebody yesterday. It is almost like they used a dart board to decide what would and wouldn't support it.

Dan_D said:
Agreed. If you still need legacy XP support, keep an XP box around or use it through Microsoft Virtual PC, VMWare, or ESX.
Click to expand...

But what if you only need it for 1 or 2 programs? There are times in which you can't update a single program and it should be a shame to keep your systems left at xp just because of that.
 
That's BS, the mobile Q9000 has VT, but the Q9100 does not...WTF! Atleast my desktop and current notebook processors support it.
 
My laptops C2D T7500 2.2GHz has it. :D Have been playing with the VXP since yesterday just for the hell of it.

I made sure my desktop had it when I built it.
 
Exavior said:
But what if you only need it for 1 or 2 programs? There are times in which you can't update a single program and it should be a shame to keep your systems left at xp just because of that.
Click to expand...

Well unless you need a piece of software that interfaces with certain hardware, (video cards, scanners for example) you can use a VM with XP installed to do it. Virtual PC and the like do not require VT to be enabled on the processor to run. Though they do benefit from it.
 
Udaldayan, not true. VT is missing from low end of each category. It's missing from E2xxx, E4xxx, E5xxx, E7xxx, Q8xxx. Present in E6xxx, E8xxx, Q6xxx, Q9xxx.
 
No big deal, everything I run (mostly games) works fine in Vista x64 native so I would never use it.
 
DusterAZ said:
No big deal, everything I run (mostly games) works fine in Vista x64 native so I would never use it.
Click to expand...

That's kind of my point. There are a few things that won't run properly in Windows Vista, but those programs are few and far between. Since Windows 7 is similar to Windows Vista, the same should be true of it as well.
 
While I'm not clear why hardware virtualization support is REQUIRED for the "XP Mode" to work, I totally agree that Intel's marketing is screwy when it comes to the VT support.

To the guy who's supporting the teachers - Virtual PC is FREE from microsoft, and will work on ANY processor (you don't need hardware virtualization support). Just run the Apps in a VM - as an added bonus you can make resetting software to the baseline a snap. Just setup the VM, install the software, then make a copy of the vm container files. When you want to reset it, just copy the container files back and your back to the intital state. Also, if the lesson doesn't get done in one class session the user can PAUSE the guest OS, and when they restart it, they are right where they left off. Not only that you'll be able to insulate your host computer from ill behaved applications.

If you haven't tried it yet, it's easy - I've done it at home, and there's really nothing to it.

You'll want Virtual PC 2004 for Win95. Virtual PC 2007 only supports 98 as a guest system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top