How do you decide to upgrade to windows 11?

[Paratech2008]

Microsoft has been bugging me to upgrade but I run a lot of older games using DOSBOX, and worry about compatibility issues...

I have a 6 core I5 Intel processor running around 4.2, a 1660 6GB Super Video Card, 1TB SSD Hard Drive, 2TB regular hard drive.

I just would appreciate hearing the pros and cons...

Thanks in advance...

[plat]

Well, now I have to be honest and tell ev/one, Windows 11 is currently having issues with KB5013943--some apps like Powershell won't open for many users, it seems.

Some are now refusing to install update previews, as this one is. Hmm, I wasn't affected in my Insiders build but that means nothing to those who were affected.

So, there you go. But I would still not disable Windows Updates altogether. Stuff happens anywhere.

Edited to correct the update number

[Bad 💀 Motha]

plat님이 먼저 게시:

Well, now I have to be honest and tell ev/one, Windows 11 is currently having issues with KB5012463--some apps like Powershell won't open for many users, it seems.

Some are now refusing to install update previews, as this one is. Hmm, I wasn't affected in my Insiders build but that means nothing to those who were affected.

So, there you go. But I would still not disable Windows Updates altogether. Stuff happens anywhere.

MS said to uninstall the optional bugged update. No big deal.

[Azza ☠]

Windows 10 support will end on 14th October 2025 by the way, for those that wish to stick with it.

[Paratech2008]

That's over 3 years from now,,,your point?

[Azza ☠]

Paratech2008님이 먼저 게시:

That's over 3 years from now,,,your point?

You got 3 years to consider upgrading yet. If they don't want to rush in.

However, for security reasons or if on 12th gen cpus, I would highly recommend Win 11 over 10, if your PC fully supports it.

[Mittens]

Azza ☠님이 먼저 게시:

Mittens님이 먼저 게시:

Tests has shown that it doesn't really improve gaming significantly (a few seconds faster, at best), and during loading alot of other stuff besides loading textures happen; like loading 3d models and convert them into vertex buffers, loading the world data, calculating lots of data, parsing scripts and so on - it will never eliminate loading screens.
Modern SSDs are plenty fast for streaming objects and textures, so Direct Storage is just a gimmick IMHO :)

Direct Storage is something which came from Xbox consoles and has already been proven to work well.

PC games currently just don't fully support it yet. You would be waiting for the next gen games coming at the end of this year or the next (2023).

It also takes the load off the CPU. Originally the CPU would get the game textures and decompress them, then hand it across in memory to the graphics card. Now, the game textures get handed across to the graphics card which decompresses them for usage. That means it's using less bandwidth too. As the hand over is still compressed. It raises the GPU usages but cuts the CPU usage out completely. So you benefit greatly if your SSD and graphics card are high-end performance, leaving your CPU to process other things.

As for the game's performance, it will be pretty much the same or slightly better, it's more to do with removing the loading screens and becoming more seamless with level progression.

You said it yourself however "Modern SSDs are plenty fast for streaming objects and textures" and it's just making better usage of that feature. Most don't understand it's an API which game developers need to use to make the most of it.

Ideally you want a Modern SSD, like M2 SSD and a DirectX12 graphics card on PCI-E 4.0 to get the most from it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-P0ZISKCGo

It's the "removing loading screens" that will NEVER happen, because as I wrote; during loading alot of other stuff besides texture loading needs to happen that needs the CPU. Games are not just textures.

DS is mostly mentioned in regards to textures as that's more or less the only data that can be loaded straight into a DX buffer - 3D models contain stuff like animation data and such, that needs to be parsed by the CPU.
Streaming data on a CPU is no big issue, since most 3D engines spawn worker threads that read and process data in the background - and it doesn't take long at all on modern hardware.

[plat]

Does everyone think it's absolutely necessary to update to Windows 11 if eligible? I mean, I rationalize it this way: if it's JUST for better security, you can enable Secure Boot, your tpm (virtual or discrete), Core Isolation/Memory Integrity and Windows DEP in 10 also.

If it was "just" security, Windows 11 would have a new kernel but it still shares with Windows 10. You can verify this in Windows 11 by simply opening Administrative cmd:

https://i.imgur.com/1Phvbgb.png

Both Windows editions are running concurrently for the next THREE years, as already mentioned. And as I said, you can run both as a dual boot or on separate drives, in order to help you decide one or the other. Now, it remains to be seen if Windows 12 gets a whole new kernel, OR 11 for that matter. In that case, I would update.

[snip]I'd like to hear from anyone running Windows 10 after demoing 12 generation Intel on Windows 11. Is it that much better on 11?[/snip]. never mind, got a clue.

It's not that I'm anti-Windows 11. I'm just not "pro" Windows 11. But I have an open mind.

[Der tüddelige Fußgänger]

When windows 11 released i was already daily driving Linux for 1 month.
So i just updated day-one, knowing that if windows died, i could still use my Computer.
It didn't break and those 2 hours I've spend in windows 11 were quite stable.

[Lambros]

Things werent working right in Windows 10 didnt want to do full reinstalls, hunt down save game files to backup that may or may not be in cloud, just went for Windows 11 instead.

[Azza ☠]

Mittens님이 먼저 게시:

Azza ☠님이 먼저 게시:

Direct Storage is something which came from Xbox consoles and has already been proven to work well.

PC games currently just don't fully support it yet. You would be waiting for the next gen games coming at the end of this year or the next (2023).

It also takes the load off the CPU. Originally the CPU would get the game textures and decompress them, then hand it across in memory to the graphics card. Now, the game textures get handed across to the graphics card which decompresses them for usage. That means it's using less bandwidth too. As the hand over is still compressed. It raises the GPU usages but cuts the CPU usage out completely. So you benefit greatly if your SSD and graphics card are high-end performance, leaving your CPU to process other things.

As for the game's performance, it will be pretty much the same or slightly better, it's more to do with removing the loading screens and becoming more seamless with level progression.

You said it yourself however "Modern SSDs are plenty fast for streaming objects and textures" and it's just making better usage of that feature. Most don't understand it's an API which game developers need to use to make the most of it.

Ideally you want a Modern SSD, like M2 SSD and a DirectX12 graphics card on PCI-E 4.0 to get the most from it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-P0ZISKCGo

It's the "removing loading screens" that will NEVER happen, because as I wrote; during loading alot of other stuff besides texture loading needs to happen that needs the CPU. Games are not just textures.

DS is mostly mentioned in regards to textures as that's more or less the only data that can be loaded straight into a DX buffer - 3D models contain stuff like animation data and such, that needs to be parsed by the CPU.
Streaming data on a CPU is no big issue, since most 3D engines spawn worker threads that read and process data in the background - and it doesn't take long at all on modern hardware.

We will have to wait and see future games, but it's quite possible.

Games such as Harry Potter Hogwarts Legacy could seamlessly load on the fly the entire world as you move within it, rather than have it level loading. It's fast enough to just swap textures in and out of the graphics card with direct storage when it needs them, for a cave or castle nearby, etc. The game itself will have to be developed to use that API direct storage feature.

I'm aware there's other stuff too, not just the textures.

The first game to use Win 11 Direct Storage is Square Enix's Forspoken. I haven't seen that myself to know what it's like real-world. They say it takes 22 seconds on a standard hard drive to load compared to 1.9 seconds loading the scene on a M.2 SSD with Direct Storage. Faster the SSD, the better it works, but that makes more usage of your latest high-end tech. Paying for a high-end SSD and graphics card, might as well make the most of it.

DirectStorage API can reduce CPU usage by up to 40% either way. A 2.5GB/sec NVMe SSD is more than enough to have very close to real-time 4K textures.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

All of the write-ups I've seen for DirectWrite showed that so far its not all it's cracked up to be. In MOST scenarios all it did was help speed up loading and in-game real-time asset prefetching by approx 30-50%. Now that might sound great and all to reduce by 50%. But not when it might only take 5-10 secs to load the game anyways without DirectWrite but with the game on an SSD. Even on decent SATA SSDs, most games load about as fast as you are ever going to see.

But yes the good news is that it can greatly reduce the overall CPU usage that would normally be involved without DirectWrite.

Time will tell though as to how good it can be, as devs would have to update games to properly utilize DirectWrite. By that time it'll be like 2024/2025 and we'll have ridiculously blazing fast hardware and drives as standard anyways.

[Kobs]

You don't, you wait till Micro$oft stop supporting windows 10

[Watermelon {JESUS IS LORD}]

my desktop doesnt support win11
but my laptop does
i still dont want win11 on my lappy

[Pocahawtness]

Bad 💀 Motha님이 먼저 게시:

Cause otherwise you can't stop the Win11 advertising itself from Windows Updates in Win10.

And no, there is no point to move to Win11 anytime soon. When you do, you want a clean install of it. And do thag once you have Intel 12th Gen or newer plus a 1TB minimum NVME SSD. Nothing older.

Absolutely this.

I tried allowing one of my unimportant PC's to go to 11 and within half an hour took it back to 10. The problem was that some of the tweaks I have in 10 caused serious problems with 11. My conclusion was that 11 should be a clean install.

The only thing I would differ on this is that I intend to take a 9th gen PC to 11 eventually. But who knows? There is a long time left for 10 yet and things may change.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

MS eventually wants to make everything in Win11 an App. Even Windows Explorer. With embedded ads and data collection with every click and with everything you do, period. In every app, no matter what it is that you do.

Do you really want that?