Is Windows 8 lighter than 8.1?

[dencorso]

On 9/9/2016 at 5:06 PM, dencorso said:

Of course we're talking about Intel processors from Jan 2006 or newer. It turns out that the 1st Intel processor to support PREFETCHW was Cedar Mill, the 65 nM final revision of the Pentium 4 released on January 5, 2006. [However], it seems that the 1st AMDs to support CMPXCHG16B were the Bulldozers, from late 2011!!!

On 12/5/2020 at 8:34 PM, Jaguarek62 said:

But who uses pentium 4 as their daily machine anyways? I don't want to wait 5 minutes just for the browser to load.

On 12/6/2020 at 10:02 AM, dencorso said:

No more than a few. As for AMD users, I guess there may be some more users of CPUs from before 2012, though.

On 12/6/2020 at 12:07 PM, UCyborg said:

Indeed.

However, that's where you're wrong:

https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K8/AMD-Athlon 64 X2 6000+ - ADV6000IAA5DO (ADV6000DOBOX).html

I'm glad to stand corrected: the AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ is a Brisbane from mid 2008, but Brisbanes were around since Dec 2006. However, the TL-60 Turion 64 X2 mentioned by @Jaguarek62 is a Tyler, from early 2007, so that info moves the line-in-the-sand right back to around Dec 2006, for AMD CPUs! That means all CPUs from that time and later can run 8.1 x64! Ain't that great? 

[cc333]

Quote

But who uses pentium 4 as their daily machine anyways? I don't want to wait 5 minutes just for the browser to load.

I have been using my twice rebuilt P4 machine (2.8 GHz Northwood, 2 GB RAM, quad boot Windows 98 SE, Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Windows 7), off and on, for the past couple of summers while I packed the good stuff in a safe place (because I live in hot and dry California never know if/when our house, and everything contained therein, will be damaged or destroyed by a fire or earthquake).  Browsing is remarkably pokey compared to a modern machine, but surprisingly, everything works more or less fine, just slower (not 5 minutes slow, more like a few seconds here and there, which do add up and require some patience, but not so much that it becomes unbearable).

Aside from that, it's as fast (slow?) as it has ever been, and as long as I use period-appropriate software on it (basically, anything up to about 2008 or so), it can do pretty much anything I want (about the only thing it can't do well is Youtube, but I don't care because I usually use it mostly for streaming music, thus making video quality more or less irrelevant).

On 12/9/2020 at 12:59 AM, dencorso said:

I'm glad to stand corrected: the AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ is a Brisbane from mid 2008, but Brisbanes were around since Dec 2006. However, the TL-60 Turion 64 X2 mentioned by @Jaguarek62 is a Tyler, from early 2007, so that info moves the line-in-the-sand right back to around Dec 2006, for AMD CPUs! That means all CPUs from that time and later can run 8.1 x64! Ain't that great? 

I have a PC with one of these in it that I recently rebuilt, and it runs XP really well (much better than my P4).  It's good to know that I can run 8.1+ on it if I *really* wanted to (I don't), but I want to keep it as is because it works.

c

[Win10-Hater]

On 12/5/2020 at 10:22 PM, Jaguarek62 said:

Actually sometimes they are not only security fixes. Windows 8.1 received nvme updates and usb-c reliability updates. They are important for new systems.

Valid point, but

@Jody Thornton Did Server 2012 R1 and/or Win8 Embedded receive these updates? And if yes, I'm guessing they can be installed on Windows 8.0 without any hassle?

[Jaguarek62]

4 hours ago, Win10-Hater said:

Valid point, but

@Jody Thornton Did Server 2012 R1 and/or Win8 Embedded receive these updates? And if yes, I'm guessing they can be installed on Windows 8.0 without any hassle?

Usb type c update is only for 8.1 and server 2012 r2