Windows 11 - Here is everything you need to know - OUT NOW!!!

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

You still are putting the OS in a VM and you still need to run the hypervisor. 

Running something will always have a performance impact compared to not running it. 

How much of a performance impact it has, and if it's worth it is up for debate, but I don't agree that we can say it doesn't have a performance impact. It absolutely does. 

If you cannot prove it outside of statistical variance then does it exist? I think is not therefore is. Now in general running something as a VM does have a performance impact and that can be extremely minimal to a decent amount and that can depend on a lot of things, if I exclude multi socket configurations then that removes pretty well all of the more significant performance impacts of running something in a VM. However as I explained the host OS VM is not running like other Hyper-V VMs.

 

To equivocate the host OS when running Hyper-V as any other VM, on Hyper-V or any other hypervisor is misunderstanding of how Hyper-V works and how the host OS is run. If you just run with the generic "it runs as a VM" then that is showing a deficiency in understanding for how the host OS actually runs when talking about Hyper-V.

 

Note: Depending on diagram you'll see a direct line down from 'Device Drivers' to hardware as the Host OS/Parent Partition has direct access to hardware and does not go through the Hypervisor. I used this one as it looked the most readable and best presented.

 

 

 

Until we start bringing in something like VBS where the Kernel is pulled out in to it's own Partition and thus security placed around it performance of the Host OS is greater than that of any Child Partition aka Guest VMs. Host OS VM != Guest OS VM.

 

TL;DR If something has equal to or less than 1% performance impact then it would have been difficult to show this with significant confidence simply due to how computers work. That sort of difference is so close to immeasurable it's just as accurate to say there is no performance impact. When moving your mouse around a lot or typing on the keyboard when running CB/Blender/3DMark etc could have as much difference then what on earth is the point? 

 

The only reason we are having this conversation at all is is because most people, even IT professionals, discard and discredit Hyper-V with no understanding of how it works and have never used it at all. If the majority are saying it's bad while having limited understanding and no practical experience with it are they actually correct? No. Hyper-V is not the right choice for everyone and every use case, that doesn't make it bad or worse in general than any of the other options.

 

I'm an outright VMware user and I wouldn't willingly use anything else unless I have to. I pay for VMUG to use it in my lab at home, I've used it since way back when it was a Type 2 hypervisor (VMware GSX Server 1.0), hell I was at the VMware NZ launch event when they first came to our market. You'll hardly find anyone else more in favor of VMware than myself, that does not mean I will take unfounded shots at any other hypervisor.

[jagdtigger]

12 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Depending on diagram you'll see a direct line down from 'Device Drivers' to hardware as the Host OS/Parent Partition has direct access to hardware and does not go through the Hypervisor. I used this one as it looked the most readable and best presented.

Somehow i doubt this, either the hypervisor goes through the kernel or the kernel goes through the hypervisor. If they would do as you said that would create a rabbit hole of issues that is deeper than hell itself....

[leadeater]

5 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Somehow i doubt this, either the hypervisor goes through the kernel or the kernel goes through the hypervisor. If they would do as you said that would create a rabbit hole of issues that is deeper than hell itself....

It is the case, again Hyper-V is not ESXi or KVM etc. How it runs and functions is different. This is the reason why all your USB ports keep working, your GPU and 3D acceleration, that random PCIe capture card, the TB dongle thing to some dock with SD card ports and another Ethernet.

 

These all work because the Host OS has direct access to the hardware.

 

Until you bring hardware under Hyper-V management i.e create a Virtual Switch and assign a NIC to it then it is not Hypervisor managed. Go create a Hyper-V Virtual Switch and watch what happens to your physical NIC before and after doing this.

[leadeater]

@jagdtiggerNotice how the Host OS owns all this hardware, and it's not using anything like PCIe passthrough as Hyper-V for the longest time didn't even support that.

 

 

 

As should be clear this is an active Hyper-V server, one ran by one of the departments.

[StDragon]

24 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Go create a Hyper-V Virtual Switch and watch what happens to your physical NIC before and after doing this.

Unless things have changed substantially with Windows 11 / Server 2022, bridging a VM through a physical NIC is buggy AF! 

 

Edit: This would be bridging through a *shared* NIC. Dedicated NICs to Hyper-V isn't a problem.

Edited October 17, 2021 by StDragon

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, StDragon said:

Unless things have changed substantially with Windows 11 / Server 2022, bridging a VM through a physical NIC is buggy AF! 

Doubt it, the more annoying thing for me is that when you create a virtual switch for external connectivity so the Host OS has to also use it (if you only have 1 NIC) it breaks 802.1X. So if you have RADIUS/802.1X auth network ports in your org and you use Hyper-V then you'll fail to auth on the port. Far as I know that is not fixed.

[jagdtigger]

53 minutes ago, leadeater said:

It is the case

Fair enough, that little drawing you linked implied otherwise. (Its for a type 1 hypervisor i assume.)

[Goliath_1911]

Are the performance issues fixed??? 

[StDragon]

15 minutes ago, Goliath_1911 said:

Are the performance issues fixed??? 

You're going to have to be more specific. But if you're asking specifically of AMD performance issues, scheduled updates are pending on the 19th (tomorrow) or 20th. We'll just have to see the new benchmarks to validate the correction once available.

[Goliath_1911]

8 minutes ago, StDragon said:

You're going to have to be more specific. But if you're asking specifically of AMD performance issues, scheduled updates are pending on the 19th (tomorrow) or 20th. We'll just have to see the new benchmarks to validate the correction once available.

not just AMD cpus, i remember reading that it decreases performance in games by 20 % give or take

 

[StDragon]

6 minutes ago, Goliath_1911 said:

not just AMD cpus, i remember reading that it decreases performance in games by 20 % give or take

 

5% to 15% with VBS and HVCI enabled. It might improve with code optimization, but it's basically a CPU generation worth of performance lost. Basically, VBS is here to stay, and everyone is just going to have to live with the performance penalty if you value security. But, it can be disabled if you really want too if all you do is game and need to squeak out every last bit of CPU cycles.

[GoodBytes]

48 minutes ago, StDragon said:

You're going to have to be more specific. But if you're asking specifically of AMD performance issues, scheduled updates are pending on the 19th (tomorrow) or 20th. We'll just have to see the new benchmarks to validate the correction once available.

And AMD Ryzen users would still need to wait for AMD driver update. I think they said the 21st as a target release date for them. (I guess they want extra days to tests with the latest update, and fix whatever that might need to be fixed, if anything was found)

[Goliath_1911]

2 hours ago, StDragon said:

5% to 15% with VBS and HVCI enabled. It might improve with code optimization, but it's basically a CPU generation worth of performance lost. Basically, VBS is here to stay, and everyone is just going to have to live with the performance penalty if you value security. But, it can be disabled if you really want too if all you do is game and need to squeak out every last bit of CPU cycles.

 

2 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

And AMD Ryzen users would still need to wait for AMD driver update. I think they said the 21st as a target release date for them. (I guess they want extra days to tests with the latest update, and fix whatever that might need to be fixed, if anything was found)

Thanks for the info, guess imma stick with windows 10 for a while... My 8th gen i5 8400 is already bottlenecking my gpu a bit, but i fear that 5-15% hit might bottleneck it more (was supposed to get a 9900k, the i5 was supposed to be just a temporary cpu and get replaced last year, but life smacked me and am stuck with it for now, f  for paying extra for a proper board for the i9) 

[StDragon]

12 minutes ago, Goliath_1911 said:

 

Thanks for the info, guess imma stick with windows 10 for a while... My 8th gen i5 8400 is already bottlenecking my gpu a bit, but i fear that 5-15% hit might bottleneck it more (was supposed to get a 9900k, the i5 was supposed to be just a temporary cpu and get replaced last year, but life smacked me and am stuck with it for now, f  for paying extra for a proper board for the i9) 

Stick with Windows 10 at least a year for all the bugs to shake out with 11. You've got until October 14, 2025 to decide as that's when Windows 10 will no longer be supported.

[OneOfYas]

I don't have a TPM 2.0 thingy so not compatible.

[grayperview]

I rolled back to Windows 10 after 8 days of using 11, Didn't really like the Start "menu" firstly, not really a fan of the new right click context menu's adding an extra click to get to things didn't work for me, I can see why they would want to keep the menu less cluttered, but this had the effect of making it less efficient for me.

 

Overall there was lots of little bugs nothing major (eg. Youtube mouse clicks not working for me in chrome to pause video). The lack of the taskbar clock on the second and third display was annoying and having to download a third party one is something that I should not have had to do.

 

I didn't really notice any drop off in CPU performance, and games seemed to work pretty much the same as windows 10 for me.

 

I will reinstall once the platform matures a little, as windows 10 is fine for me.

[CommanderAlex]

AMD released new chipset drivers (version 3.10.08.506) to fix the high performance core priority and Microsoft released patch KB5006746 to fix the L3 cache latency issue. Let's see if this will fix the problems introduced since Windows 11 was released. 

 

https://www.engadget.com/amd-microsoft-ryzen-processor-windows-11-bug-fixes-190439836.html

[RejZoR]

How to disable god damn Lock Screen (Windows 11 Home because it auto decided during install that I shall have Home version...)? Why is Microsoft constantly shitting on things that were there and were working great. Even guides from July 2021 are different than Final release. With, of course, missing Lock Screen setting to turn this garbage off. I'll never understand why does Lock Screen have to even exist on accounts without password. It's dumb and just wastes time when waking up system.

[Donut417]

52 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Why is Microsoft constantly shitting on things that were there and were working great.

Because they are copping Apple. Thats the only reason Windows 11 exists. Because if Apple didnt go to MacOS 11, these updates likely would have been "Windows 10" feature updates. 

 

52 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

I'll never understand why does Lock Screen have to even exist on accounts without password. It's dumb and just wastes time when waking up system.

Ive heard they have made it harder to instal Windows without a Microsoft Account. 

[jagdtigger]

6 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Ive heard they have made it harder to instal Windows without a Microsoft Account. 

the usual 1@1.bs as email will get around it, one major headache is that the dumb installer wont let you do the setup without internet.....

[RejZoR]

4 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Because they are copping Apple. Thats the only reason Windows 11 exists. Because if Apple didnt go to MacOS 11, these updates likely would have been "Windows 10" feature updates. 

 

Ive heard they have made it harder to instal Windows without a Microsoft Account. 

Tell me about it. Asshole installer just decided I'll have Home version (which can't be installed with offline account so I had to find some hack where you invoke Task Manager during install and kill a network checking process and then it skips the account idiocy. I don't know why the F Microsoft is insisting so much on it. I don't want a god damn online account. Stop shoving it down my throat by making it mandatory. It's stupid and annoying and an absolute asshole design. STOP IT MICROSOFT.

[Donut417]

1 minute ago, RejZoR said:

F Microsoft is insisting so much on it

Again because Apple does it with their machines. Microsoft wants to have an ecosystem like Apple. They wont achieve it, but they are going to keep trying. 

[RejZoR]

12 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Again because Apple does it with their machines. Microsoft wants to have an ecosystem like Apple. They wont achieve it, but they are going to keep trying. 

Same idiocy as comparing iOS with Android. One runs exclusively on products of single manufacturer and other runs on millions of different versions. What ecosystem? Microsoft doesn't have phones, smartwatches, laptops are whatever and only thing really going on for them is Windows and Xbox. And instead of attracting people with features and reasons to connect devices they are assholes about it by forcing it on us making us hate their crap even more.

 

Only reason I installed Windows 11 again on laptop is because of Dolby Atmos that I use with my AirPods which I don't have on Linux. Otherwise I was using Manjaro on it for like 2 months now and it was working great. And it's quite likely I'll just go back to Linux.

[GoodBytes]

1 hour ago, RejZoR said:

How to disable god damn Lock Screen (Windows 11 Home because it auto decided during install that I shall have Home version...)? Why is Microsoft constantly shitting on things that were there and were working great. Even guides from July 2021 are different than Final release. With, of course, missing Lock Screen setting to turn this garbage off. I'll never understand why does Lock Screen have to even exist on accounts without password. It's dumb and just wastes time when waking up system.

You cannot not have a login, however you can setup so that it auto logins for you:

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/downloads/autologon

Run AutoLogon64.exe, and enter the password. The other fields will be auto populated.

 

For not asking for a password when you wake up the system:

Settings > Account > Sign-in option > "If you've been away, when should Windows require you to sign in again?", and pick "Never".

[Donut417]

3 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Microsoft doesn't have phones, smartwatches, laptops are whatever and only thing really going on for them is Windows and Xbox. And instead of attracting people with features and reasons to connect devices they are assholes about it by forcing it on us making us hate their crap even more.

Microsoft does have phones and tablets and laptops. Granted their phones run Android, but still its their phone. From what I have read they added features in to Windows 10 to allow texts and maybe phone calls from phones thru Windows. Much like Apple does, but Apple does it better. By using a Microsoft account your settings and files are synced with other devices running Windows.