Recommended Posts

On 05/08/2021 at 21:46, domboy said:

Has anyone switched from dev to beta and installed this update? My device gets to 100% and then fails with 0x800f0831.

Ehhh maybe you should switch back to Dev, check for updates and install .120 then switch to Beta. 

On 05/08/2021 at 17:03, Steven P. said:

Ehhh maybe you should switch back to Dev, check for updates and install .120 then switch to Beta. 

That's a good idea! In theory I should be able to switch on either the current .100 or .120 since they're in both in both channels concurrently. I'm not sure why I didn't think to try that yet. Thanks!

Got it to upgrade. For some reason I had gotten a green screen of death (some power related message) as it had initially started downloading, so I wondered if something got corrupted with windows update, and my attempts at all the windows update repairs didn't fix it. Did a system restore to a point a couple days ago, and even though system restore said it had an error, but it seemed to roll it back anyway. Weird 🙄. Anyway after that, I tried switching to beta, rebooted, and then the update installed just fine. Again, weird. 

 

Windows hello is definitely working again. I might be imagining it, but facial recognition seems to work much better than it used to when holding the device in portrait mode. I know it's better than windows 10 was, and I'm pretty happy about that as the whole reason I set it up was so I wouldn't have to type in a pin when I've got the keyboard removed, and I usually hold it by the long edge when using it as a tablet, and I used to have to tile my head sideways to get it to recognize me!

It seems with 22000.160 (and possibly the last build) my Surface Pro X doesn't stay in connected standby nearly as long as it used to (with earlier Windows 11 builds), and hibernates quite often. Kind of annoying as the first Windows 11 dev build seemed to finally fix that issue with Windows 10, and it almost never hibernated. Submitted feedback, but unfortunately it's not something I can take a recording to help them re-create :/

Hopefully since it's Microsoft's hardware they can figure it out.

 

The start of the branch split might be today?   I expected them to jump dev ahead to future builds in Sept,  so maybe next week at the earliest but I guess they're moving quicker.

  • Like 2

Time to get the old vm sorted out again, see how much different Dev is to Beta (Dev on vm, Beta on main pc) ... and if it is as unstable as they have been making it out to be.

On 27/08/2021 at 03:50, Sulphy said:

Time to get the old vm sorted out again, see how much different Dev is to Beta (Dev on vm, Beta on main pc) ... and if it is as unstable as they have been making it out to be.

I've been running it as my main OS and it's gone pretty swimmingly.

 

...but honestly so far it doesn't seem like much to talk about.  New UI?  Sure.  A few cool features?  Sure.  Still feels exactly like Win10?  Yes. 

 

I would love it if they went a bit more in depth about the changes, but I'm not even sure the important bits are implemented yet. 

On 27/08/2021 at 11:16, Randomevent said:

I've been running it as my main OS and it's gone pretty swimmingly.

 

...but honestly so far it doesn't seem like much to talk about.  New UI?  Sure.  A few cool features?  Sure.  Still feels exactly like Win10?  Yes. 

 

I would love it if they went a bit more in depth about the changes, but I'm not even sure the important bits are implemented yet. 

Indeed, I have been using it as main OS since it was released.... now they split the builds out, and emailed us on the Dev channel about instability... hence me getting the vm up and running (remembering to install the vbox guest additions... no more square corners!) ... i reckon, if i dont se any major issues with the vm, i may put my pc back on dev channel, as vm wont give a true reflection IMHO .. :) ... but if there are serious flaws... then at least i can carry on with day-2-day.

 

Going to be a rebuild from scratch again sometime... 

I've got it installed in vbox, .160.  Also set it to the dev channel though it tossed a nag at me saying my system doesn't meet the requirements.  Well duh, it's a VM.   Anyways, we'll see how long it gets updated for.

On 27/08/2021 at 18:42, George P said:

Sounds like 22000.168 is on the way.  Doubt it'll have much new stuff but who knows?

KB5005191 is now being served for Dev and Beta.

https://blogs.windows.com/windows-insider/2021/08/27/announcing-windows-11-insider-preview-build-22000-168/

  • Like 2

There's a lengthy hardware support blog post to.   They're not going to change the min requirements much, if at all.  BUT what they'll let you do is install 11 on unsupported hardware if you want.  You can only do so using the ISO or the Media Creation tool though.  It won't allow you to upgrade via WU etc.

I just updated my VM from .160 to .168, it's for sure faster than Windows 10.  Even though it's on vbox it went pretty quick for me.   It should be blazing fast on newer hardware and a nvme etc.  

On 28/08/2021 at 08:48, George P said:

I just updated my VM from .160 to .168, it's for sure faster than Windows 10.  Even though it's on vbox it went pretty quick for me.   It should be blazing fast on newer hardware and a nvme etc.  

It depends on the hardware. It is slower on my machine, which falls in line with apparent L3 issues with W11 and Ryzen. 
 

It should smoke on my machine. It’s slower than 10 though. L3 cache latency is through the roof. 
 

Ryzen 9 3950X

128GB DDR 3600

PCIe gen4 2TB SSD

RTX 2080 Super

 

On 28/08/2021 at 19:46, adrynalyne said:

It depends on the hardware. It is slower on my machine, which falls in line with apparent L3 issues with W11 and Ryzen. 
 

It should smoke on my machine. It’s slower than 10 though. L3 cache latency is through the roof. 
 

Ryzen 9 3950X

128GB DDR 3600

PCIe gen4 2TB SSD

RTX 2080 Super

 

Interesting, I didn't hear about that type of issue.  Hope they work it out in the next update.

On 28/08/2021 at 11:25, George P said:

Interesting, I didn't hear about that type of issue.  Hope they work it out in the next update.

It’s out there, but nobody is really paying attention so it’s not gaining traction. 
 

Which is worrisome. 

On 28/08/2021 at 14:54, adrynalyne said:

It’s out there, but nobody is really paying attention so it’s not gaining traction. 
 

Which is worrisome. 

It's kind of hard to say for most of us whether problems are specific to one type of build or have specific requirements to come across or they already plan to fix them or anything, really.  I haven't noticed anything on mine.

On 28/08/2021 at 13:18, Randomevent said:

It's kind of hard to say for most of us whether problems are specific to one type of build or have specific requirements to come across or they already plan to fix them or anything, really.  I haven't noticed anything on mine.

So far, its been every update., though I've not tried 168.

Appears to be specific to Zen2 and 3.

I myself am not concerned about the unsupported models to verify if it affects those.

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/windows/comments/oamp05/cache_l3_completely_off_on_windows_11_with_amd/

 

There are quite a few of these as well as feeedback reports.

On 28/08/2021 at 17:34, adrynalyne said:

So far, its been every update., though I've not tried 168.

Appears to be specific to Zen2 and 3.

I myself am not concerned about the unsupported models to verify if it affects those.

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/windows/comments/oamp05/cache_l3_completely_off_on_windows_11_with_amd/

 

There are quite a few of these as well as feeedback reports.

I'm using a 3700X atm and am not seeing perf problems anywhere. 

 

I'll look into it.  Later. 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      580
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!