Going back to Windows 7 from 10: how?

[hutch--]

Both AMD and Intel have recently produced some very fast CPUs but unfortunately they run like furnaces but I get the impression that over time they both will get that under control, perhaps better technology or better cooling or both.

Now by the time Microsoft get Win11 reliable and not p*ssing off end users, it may be viable to use Win11 or 12 or whatever but currently they are playing games like insisting on a board late enough to have the trusted platform module and a CPU to match which shuts the door to most of the earlier stuff.

None of my socket 2011-3 CPUs will run it and I am not vaguely interested in hacks to bypass it so with Win10 working very well, I am in no hurry to test Win11. I just have to suffer 4 x Xeon CPUs, 2 x 12 cores and 2 x 14 cores that both peak at 3.6 gig. My trusty old i7 clocked at 4 gig is no slouch and its a great dev box so no hurry here.

[TimoVJL]

Luckily Intel will have these soon:
https://uk.pcmag.com/processors/132419/intels-7nm-pc-chip-will-arrive-in-2023-using-tsmcs-tech

[Greenhorn]

Both AMD and Intel have recently produced some very fast CPUs but unfortunately they run like furnaces but I get the impression that over time they both will get that under control, perhaps better technology or better cooling or both.

Regarding the AMD processors, you can limit the TDP to 105W or 65W without too much loss in performance.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/17585/amd-zen-4-ryzen-9-7950x-and-ryzen-5-7600x-review-retaking-the-high-end/20

Restricting our Ryzen 9 7950X processor to just 65 W in comparison to leaving power settings untouched, the CineBench R23's multi-threaded test performance is impressive, a score of just over 31K. For comparison, the Intel Core i9-12900K only managed just under 27K at default settings, which shows that even when restricting the power proportionally down to 65 W, there's still plenty of performance available in multi-threaded situations. For reference, restricting the Ryzen 9 7950X to 65W only loses around 18-19% in CB23 MT performance; very impressive.

In the single-threaded test with CineBench R23, we only saw a drop of around 0.3%, which is negligible depending on the workload. Dropping down the overall TDP isn't as harsh on single-threaded workloads as it will be for multi-threaded workloads. ST performance remains intact mainly despite restricting overall power consumption.

[daydreamer]

Hutch it's rerun win 10 ->win 11 too hard high cpu demand for me,my amd xp box to Win7, adds weakness of be one step behind in SSE generation
But assembler programming might end up advantage the day maybe cpp 2030 something needs latest cpp runtime to run, that requires win11, but asm don't?

[TimoVJL]

Some of this site oldies have supported all OS systems from beginning of personal computers.
We have seen many kind of OS systems.
I worked in IT and industrial automation and we have to support all systems in factories.
Some of us even remember QNX and first Compaq 386 (SX)
Those who hoarders, have those old things in their storage.
How many remember Schneider tower 286 ?

[daydreamer]

Those who hoarders, have those old things in their storage.

I have stopped hoarding 7 stationary PC's years ago,I prefer less space laptops now,also lighter to move away from table,to instead serve guests drinks,cakes,food or liquer
also multicore laptops replace several old onecore towers in a 3d render animation network I had+one linux webserver+one PC control things with printer port
one bad thing its easy to wreck a laptop compared to a tower,already wrecked two times:(
also 2 android tablets even lighter and smaller than laptops,two programmable calculators

[greenozon]

So Intel just prepares for 7nm and at the same time AMD will hit 4 nm in next year?... 

[hutch--]

With real oldies, I still have my first 486 DX CPU and board, it cost me so much money back about 1990 that I did not have the heart to chuck it out. Also an ESDI 300 meg HDD the size of a housebrick that never failed but the ESDI controller did and they were rarer than hens teeth.

None of the rest survived, the oldest box I have that has not been plugged in for some years is an XP box with a 3.8 gig PIV. It was a nice box to use but I shifted to Win7 64 shortly after so it was in good nick but useless.

[NoCforMe]

I just have to suffer 4 x Xeon CPUs, 2 x 12 cores and 2 x 14 cores that both peak at 3.6 gig. My trusty old i7 clocked at 4 gig is no slouch and its a great dev box so no hurry here.

Y'know, maybe I'm naive or something, but I just don't get it: why the obsession with processor speed here? What are you doing there in Oz: global weather simulations, perhaps, or maybe a Cray emulation, trying to break blockchain codes, something else equally processor-intensive? I mean, unless you're doing computations like that regularly, what difference does it really make how fast your computah is?

If the answer is "because I think fast computers are cool" then I guess I can accept that. Otherwise, I really don't see the point.

Most of us have computers that are so woefully overkill for what we actually use them for that it's not even funny. (I guess I forgot about games, but since you didn't mention that I'm not sure that's one of your uses. And then of course there's the overclocker crowd. Is overclocking still a thing, btw?)

I've always said that the lowly '386 is one of the most underrated and under-used machines that mankind has ever produced. Just think of the piles of 'em, sitting on shelves or in bins.

[jj2007]

why the obsession with processor speed here?

Good question! Speed-wise, we should be the most relaxed nerds of the World, given that our code is typically a factor 2-3 faster than equivalent C/C++ code

[hutch--]

 

There is speed and there is speed, having the fastest Messagebox() on the planet may generate all of the fanfare of a gnat breaking wind but measure you task in hours and speed gains are meaningful. Each to their own but in my case I process a lot of 4k video and if there are a couple of hundred clips, they can take hours to process.

My old overclocked 6 core dev box can do a few in a reasonable time but with big quantities, that is what I have a couple of 14 core Xeons for.

If someone can live with 286 performance, best of luck to them but its a small, old and slow world where you cannot do much and most people want to do more, much more and you need grunt to do that and the more grunt you have, the faster you can do things.

I could routinely do my email on Win95 OEM on what I think was a Pentuim 1 or 2 with no problems and many do simple things like that now with a smart phone but do anything large that takes a long time and speed becomes your friend.

[jj2007]

in my case I process a lot of 4k video and if there are a couple of hundred clips, they can take hours to process.

Your problem is that your video software was not written with the Masm32 SDK

[hutch--]

I doubt I would live long enough to write an alternative to ffmpeg. 

Most of the tools I use are 64 bit MASM but they are only to control ffmpeg options.

You would love the performance of the 14 core Xeons. 

[daydreamer]

@NoCforMe
Computer 3d art and animation, I need all the speed I can get
But similar to fewer clock cycles is faster,so is lowpoly ca 500 polys fighter jets 3d models
Interest born from make my own tiles, sprites
Historically optimize speed was born out of necessity when few MHz cpu was doing everything without any 3d gpu accelerated hardware
And we just continued make fast code,long after we started on z80,6502,68000,286...

[TimoVJL]

why the obsession with processor speed here?

Good question! Speed-wise, we should be the most relaxed nerds of the World, given that our code is typically a factor 2-3 faster than equivalent C/C++ code

Need for Speed - C++ versus Assembly Language