+++ HERE +++ is a comprehensive review of Windows 11 by the editorial staff of ARS Technica.

The great thing about this article is it works hard to demystify and clear up Windows 11 misinformation.

Excellent read. Enjoy!

Thanks for the share sir!

I really loved the introductory page about the failure of Universal Windows Platform (UWP) apps and Microsoft Store.

I will definitely be reading the rest......

For those ready to dive in and start looking at Win11, here's the Microsoft page to start from.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows11

I may try it in the next week or so on one of my machines. I like to be early adopter on new Win OS software...

I want to read these - thanks, guys - but do they deal at all with digital audio specifically?

Nope. That's why I want to upgrade soon so I can see how it works. The document in the original post is a great read at 10 long pages but I don't think Microsoft did any major infrastructure changes that would impact audio at all.

The link I posted is just the landing page to start the upgrade process and which method you want to do that.

The only point I saw regarding audio is the single click to select audio output in the task bar takes two clicks in Windows 11.

That's been my experience so far - nothing much has changed. Of course, I'm using newer hardware (2020 HP Envy and Focusrite Mk3) so other people's results may differ.

At home, I'm building a new Windows machine around an i5 11400 and associated "up to date" parts compared to my old ~2014 machine, so I don't imagine I'll have too many problems with Windows 11. Of course, the one part I'm waiting on is the CPU itself...

simon.
can you read my mind. lol.
ive been looking at same i5 processor.
rateing on cpubenchmark.net 17372.
but otoh i might wait for prices to come down.

best
om

Sweetwater does a pretty good review of the impact on digital audio at their site. Along with some of the how's as far as what is required for upgrade etc.

The 10400 is a good alternative for a few bucks less, though it does bench a bit lower. That's the problem with waiting - there's always new stuff around the corner.

I'm going with the 11400 specifically because it's the most power for the money with the lowest TDP. It's a 65-watt chip, which is important because I'm building a very small formfactor ITX machine (the case is just over 3" thick and around 15"x13"), and if I were to put in the i9 9900k I have in my main machine it'd probably melt. There are faster 65-watt chips, but they take a big jump in price.

IIRC Planobilly recently built a 10th gen i5 machine and was very happy with it even compared to the i7 or i9 he put in his other machine. I think it was Billy anyway...

I read an article about Win11 yesterday, and I wasn't happy with what I read. Win11 is all about security enhancements, but what M$ is doing is requiring new hardware with these security protocols built in for Win11 to install properly. I wasn't happy because my newest system, which I put together just a few months ago so I could run Win10, has a motherboard that's about 7 years old. I bought a clean used MB with the old style PCI slots because I have some legacy hardware that I run on my DAW.

So it looks like I won't be upgrading to Win11 -- or any other subsequent M$ OS -- for as long as I continue to use the legacy hardware. The day may come when its drivers will no longer be compatible, which will force its retirement, but until then I will use the hardware and I'll be happy using it.

Personally, I do not like the idea of embedding code into hardware. I just don't like it, no matter what the hardware is or what its purpose is. Except maybe BIOS, but that's it.

Hey Michael, check out my post over in Off Topic:

Installed Windows 11 on Laptop Successfully!

There's some tools you can use to check your system and some prep things you can do with your machine to get it ready. My laptop CPU is 8 years old and I was able to get it working flawlessly so far. I think that although Microsoft has a lot of requirements, they want your machine to be more secure from attack. Once you go through some of these steps prior to upgrade, I think you'll feel a little better about it. I'm a huge tech nerd and wanted to dive in right away to share my experiences with all of you.

Like Windows 10, is Windows 11 being made available to we disabled folks for free!

From a quick Google, every Intel computer since 2008 has had the Intel Management Engine built into it, and every AMD computer since 2013 (maybe earlier) has the AMD Platform Security Processor. Both of which use proprietary embedded code for a variety of things. Going further back, most motherboards had an embedded controller of some sort. Unless you don't mind running really old hardware or you design your own, this kind of stuff is inescapable no matter what OS you use.


While I agree that the CPU cutoff Microsoft decided on is higher than it needs to be, one of the reasons they decided this is likely due to the other associated hardware and any required drivers. Many of the companies that produce sound chips, LAN controllers, WiFi, etc probably don't want to create Windows 11 drivers for decade-old hardware.

I don't personally recommend installing Windows 11 on unsupported devices, as there can be a host of problems involved. An older unsupported computer might be able to boot Windows 11 and might appear to be stable, but might end up having very strange and seemingly unrelated problems. Your mileage may vary, but from my experience working in tech support here and at previous companies, the users who have problems are most often users with the oldest hardware, and exponentially more when running an unsupported OS.

That said, I'll personally be running Windows 11 on a 4th gen i7 desktop with no TPM for at least a few months, so I'll see how it is.

This is exactly what I'm in the middle of researching now. My only issue is if I build a new system myself I'll have to pay for Win 11 Pro which could be $150? I just spent a few minutes surfing the MS site and don't see Win 11 for sale. Is it actually for sale yet? That's the main reason I bought the ZBox used, it had 7 already on it so 10 was free. Otherwise I see a lot of mini ITX's on Ebay with that i5 10400 chip with Win 10 Pro so 11 is free.

Bob

Simon and JM.
one reason i like refurbs is i save on buying windows, plus i get a decent warranty.
also ive never had one prob ever compared to friends buying new retail pc's which often need cleaning up..
of bloat etc.

but the 11400 cpu has sorta thrown me cos...is it better
basing a pc round it, OR are the 500 buk ...........

hp z or lenovo beasts a better deal. with xeons.
om

I agree about the value of refurbs it's just that I'm replacing my ZBox which is about the size of an older external drive. For me it's about the smaller size. The one Simon is building is about twice that big but still small and you can fit some high end parts in it. That's why I'm considering both right now. The mini ITX can be a fairly powerful machine but the standard ITX is better. I think the difference is the regular ITX can be almost as powerful as a full size tower while the mini ITX can be comparable to a high end laptop.

Bob

JM. Bob.
case size dont bother me.
i'm seeing some silly low prices on off lease refurb hp and lenovo workstation beasts with xeons/ssd etc. win 10 included.
(for win 7 lovers some include 7).
prices as low as under 300 buckies for a refurb xeon beast.....how much faster will rt's gen useing one vs tother. i mean if i'm only gonna save one second..meh lol. i'll stick with refurbs. but if 11400 is a BIG diff
over cheapo refurbs, then that interests me.

so i wonder if i'm mixing down a 40 trak song, how much time will i save useing a new 11400 based system vs a refurb beast.

what i'm hoping for is now that apple has gone with its own silicon (now added m1max etc) that intel will respond by lowering prices on its higher end processors.
thus undercutting apples mi pricing.

the other option bob i sometimes consider is pc turnkey for recording studios. some reaps users seem to like these...
https://studiocat.com/opencart2/
(i got nuttin to do with them. just find em interesting.)
and there are lots of others silentpc, scan uk etc etc.
i think some even offer small form factor if i remember.
https://www.slickaudio.com/mini-pc-for-music-production/

best/happiness bob
om

The 10400 is a very good chip, so if that's much more cost effective I'd say go for it. I might go that way too, simply due to motherboard availability and cost.

This is also the reason I bought a "retail" Windows license, as it can be moved from one machine to another. Some Windows licenses can be transferred, particularly the "upgrade from regular Windows 10 to Pro". OEM licenses that come preinstalled cannot be transferred.



Depends which Xeon. Quick google search, the HP Z400 is a common inexpensive refurb with a Xeon W3503, which has a benchmark score of 1052, while the i5 11400 scores 17383 - no I did not type an extra digit in there, it is 17 times as fast!

Another one that came up, an HP Z800 with two Xeon E5620's would score around 6528, so the i5 is still 3x as fast. Nice thing about a new 10/11 gen build is new connectivity, like USB-C, options for Thunderbolt, super fast PCIe storage, etc.

All depends on the total cost though. A cheap refurb is still a bit cheaper than the parts to build your own 10/11th gen machine. Mine's going to cost around $800 CDN or so just for parts, not including labour or the video card and OS I bought previously (not that everyone needs a fast video card).


There is only Mini ITX, no other versions exist - perhaps you're thinking of Micro ATX or full ATX vs ITX?

The mini ITX I'm building is not using laptop-grade components - it'll have a desktop i5 11400 (or 10400 depending on what parts I find - local supply is atrocious at the moment), 32gb of desktop-size RAM, 2tb NVMe SSD, and a GTX 1060 6gb video card. What ITX does is simply make the motherboard smaller by reducing some connectivity options - only 1 PCIe slot, reduced port selection, only 2 RAM slots, and on many ITX boards they'll only accept the "lower"-spec chips like the 11400, 11500, 11700, but not the overclockable K-series chips that require more wattage. There isn't much power difference for me between an 11400 and an 11600K, but the 11600K uses 50% more electricity and subsequently creates more heat.

I'm talking much smaller than the mini ITX. Here's the newest Zotac Zbox: https://www.amazon.com/ZOTAC-i7-10510U-G...73130&psc=1

This is only 5 x 5 inches and uses the mobile U chips. But I can't find a separate case for one of these, just the barebones kits like this one. My current Zbox is sitting next to my 60" HDTV in my living room which is why I want it small but a few of the mini ITX cases would fit behind the TV too. I'm just deciding how much power do I really need because I'm not a gamer. A desktop CPU is better than the mobile one but do I care? Not sure yet because as far as Biab is concerned my old I7 4770 will still render a full RT song in about 10 seconds depending on if I'm using a RT soloist or not. I've found it's the soloist that slows down the generation and can double that time.

Bob

Just to clarify the differences, the Zbox and similar small computers like the Intel NUC are not really standardized like the ITX form factor. ITX is a full-power desktop in a small package with a standardized motherboard layout, meaning you can buy an ITX motherboard from any company and it will fit any ITX case - not so with the Zbox or NUC.

The Zbox you linked is actually quite fast compared to similar small form factor computers, however the CPU is still less powerful than your i7-4770, though only by about 2%. By comparison the ITX computer I'm building is around 2.5x as fast with the i5 I'm using, or up to 3.5x as fast if I were to use an i7 or i9. Of course it's much bigger though - the case is just over 3" thick and around 15"x13".

Storage speed is probably more of an issue than CPU speed - from the looks of it, the Zbox only supports SATA SSD's and not PCIe/NVMe. ITX or the NUC platform would be much faster in that respect, as SATA tops out around 550mb/sec where NVMe currently tops out at 7300mb/sec which is 13x faster.

Thanks Simon and man, this gets confusing. I had to check my system and my current CPU is the 4770T which is a desktop CPU but as you said, the new ones are all U series and the Geekbench scores are pretty close to what I have now. I can see how a new system with the PCIe NVME storage would be the major improvement as opposed to the CPU itself.

Bob

You're welcome Bob, happy to clarify.

Yep, storage speed is a big one. I upgraded my computer recently, went from an older 8-core to a newer 8-core and from 48gb ram to 64gb ram, and although the new cpu is about twice as powerful as the old one, the computer is MUCH more than twice as fast thanks to going from SATA to NVMe.