Microsoft has published the minimum CPU requirements for Windows 11

Interesting read here on Microsoft expanding the hardware requirements and the testing they are doing on other processors as well as the upgrade path.

...I liked the statement over at Techradar -
"But with Windows 11, it’s starting to feel like Microsoft is distancing itself more from the ‘we’re listening to feedback’ philosophy that came around with the launch of Windows 10, and is leaning more towards telling folks how things should be done – much more in the vein of Windows 8. And we don’t need to tell you how dangerous that stance is…"
 
Last edited:
@Briggsy Wow, this is wonderful if true. It will be a HUGE boost to business seeing as people can't just install Windows 11 themselves through the free upgrade. Let's just hope that Windows 11 accepts Windows 10 keys in the BIOS. Seeing as Microsoft wants to make Windows 11 free to users of Windows 10 who have a "supported" computer, I'm sure it will. I can just imagine all the people coming in to buy a new computer from me because they want Windows 11 and me offering to upgrade their old one for 1/2 the price instead.
 
Microsoft backing down......


I'm not holding my breath. There is absolutely nothing that has come out of Microsoft in very recent days that suggests that "wide open Windows 11" is what's going to happen.

I think this article is wishful thinking. If you can't site actual sources, and given what's been officially announced in the past few days . . .

Not to mention, what the article states is that a nuke and pave would be required for "non-supported" hardware. Most people aren't going to want to go that route.
 
@Porthos You mean Microsoft won't constantly stick it's d*ck up your a$$, screw with your workflow, botch your Windows install, and spy on you if you're running an old processor? Sign me up! Windows "updates" are worse than hackers and viruses these days.

In all seriousness though, I would LOVE it if Microsoft just offered security updates with NO feature updates of any kind. Who wants them screwing around with your computer constantly? If Microsoft is just threatening to not give you useless new "features" like inking in Edge and crap, then I think I'll run old hardware on purpose just to get on this channel.
 

For the love of heaven, anyone who can write, "the company seemingly wants to push Windows users to buy a new PC, whether they need one or not," when Windows 10 support is officially going to be around through 2025, really needs to get out of the tech press!

There is no way to fix those who really must, whether they need it for anything or not, have the latest and greatest. For those concerned with getting several more years of life out of older hardware there's nothing they must do.

I am sick to the death of the ludicrous idea that Microsoft, or any other company, is supposed to offer perpetual backward compatibility in their software. I don't want an OS that can run on the earliest 32-bit processors through the very latest 64-bit processors because you lose almost all of the advantages that can be gained from targeting newer technology. And newer doesn't mean 5-minutes old, but less than 5 years old, which in computer terms is "ancient" to begin with.
 
You know, Microsoft has published, and continues to update, it's list of supported processors (provided other hardware requirements are also met). Why not just us the material from the proverbial horse's mouth? It doesn't get any more accurate than that; all else is speculation.

Windows processor requirements Windows 11 supported Intel processors


Windows processor requirements Windows 11 supported AMD processors


Windows processor requirements Windows 11 supported Qualcomm processors

 
You're expecting daily?
Not at all, you miss my point. I was saying the IT media is how we find out about any changes. And the quoted article had a link to the Microsoft blog post announcing the additions. So why the snark in response to Galdorf's post? We need to find out about these changes to the Windows 11 requirements somehow...
 
Anything that's not being put out by Microsoft is speculation
And this was put out by Microsoft, hence I've said in my last two posts that the article linked to the Microsoft announcement. It's right at the top for those that bothered to read the first two lines.
 
Seriously everyone, chill.

Windows 11 isn't out yet and already it's an 10 legged freak with 8 arms and 4 heads that will give you cancer and then cure you with 5G radiation that makes you lonely.

We get it, you want more. You want it now. I think Microsoft has accomplished its mission: to convert normally level headed consumers and techs into a blabbering mass of hungering masses looking for the latest scoop.

And when all this passes by, we'll return to our scheduled broadcast and wonder what the fuss was about.

So your current chip isn't on the list? Grab your favorite drink, and enjoy another four years of support with Windows 10, which at that point, let's be honest, you're gonna buy something newer.

Now anyone seen my Mac G10 anywhere? I'm running a prediction for the when the universe will end. Apparently it's billions and billions of years from now but I have to know when!
 
And when all this passes by, we'll return to our scheduled broadcast and wonder what the fuss was about.

I already wonder what the fuss is about. It's Windows 10, Version 20H2, with a new coat of paint. And if your hardware is compatible, Windows Update will update you to Windows 11. If it isn't, it won't, and you'll continue on with Windows 10.

That is what's important to know.
 
I already wonder what the fuss is about. It's Windows 10, Version 20H2, with a new coat of paint. And if your hardware is compatible, Windows Update will update you to Windows 11. If it isn't, it won't, and you'll continue on with Windows 10.

That is what's important to know.
Except is that really safe? The argument that Microsoft is saying is that Windows 11 is only for systems that make the minimum hardware requirements for security reasons. Yet the OS from what has been observed is just Windows 10 with some cosmetic changes. If it is not safe for Windows 11 then why is it ok for Windows 10? EIther the security issue is overblown(my theory) or because of not wanting to cause a panic they are not saying what they should be saying that any system will a CPU under 8th gen should be immediately scrapped as an unsecured device that can't be rectified.
 
Except is that really safe? The argument that Microsoft is saying is that Windows 11 is only for systems that make the minimum hardware requirements for security reasons. Yet the OS from what has been observed is just Windows 10 with some cosmetic changes. If it is not safe for Windows 11 then why is it ok for Windows 10? EIther the security issue is overblown(my theory) or because of not wanting to cause a panic they are not saying what they should be saying that any system will a CPU under 8th gen should be immediately scrapped as an unsecured device that can't be rectified.
The security issue isn't overblown, it's the nature of what caused spectre and meltdown. It's the laws of physics in our collective faces.

There are OS level mitigations, but no actual cures without updated firmware. You need CPUs of the requested age to have the required HARDWARE to be software supported without massive performance penalties. Worse, missing instructions lead to system instability, the telemetry shows this too...

So as time goes on, older systems on Win10 will become less and less stable due to these changes, Win11 ready systems won't. It's just the usual march of time and change. And this is the hardware support line in the sand I'd long since wondered about, and finally see. Time to adapt.

TLDR, people using older hardware will be at a higher risk of crypto assault over the next 4 years than those on younger. MS's own telemetry shows a 70% reduction in malware infection on younger hardware as a result. Which makes the modern CPU a better vaccine against computer malware than the COVID shots are vs SARS-COV-2, but both stand in similar spaces.
 
And yet I've never heard of either flaw being exploited, even WITH known exploit code "in the wild" and even that code has to get around the patches that WIndows and the Linux kernel have in place for them. Obviously not perfect but perhaps good enough?
 
Back
Top