Saturday, July 4th 2009

Windows 7 Confirmed to Hit RTM on July 13

It would appear as though rumours which surfaced around a month ago are going to be proved correct, as sources close to multiple technology sites have confirmed that Windows 7 will be released to manufacturing on 13th July. Although general availability is still not until 22nd October, this is a significant milestone as the RTM build will be the final code which also gets shipped to the general public later this year. As well as OEMs, the build should also be available to TechNet and MSDN subscribers and will also no doubtedly find its way on to torrent sites shortly after. The wait for Microsoft's highly anticipated operating system is less than four months away, but for many of us little more than a week of waiting stands in our way.Source: Neowin.net
Add your own comment

136 Comments on Windows 7 Confirmed to Hit RTM on July 13

#1
Mussels
Moderprator
devguy said:
Using the Daniel_k drivers with the DDL Audio pack, they work almost flawlessly in Windows 7. I say almost as ocassionally (still rarely), the DDL craps out for about 2 seconds and then returns. It is irritating, but not that big a deal.

As for the Atom, what in the world was intel thinking only letting the desktop versions of the atom have the AMD64 (or whatever intel calls there clone of it) instructions? That was a pretty lame move. Granted I think that most wouldn't use them now, but it could haunt them in the future like the issues with Aero + intel notsoExtreme Graphics around the windows Vista launch.

BTW, got my Home Premium preordered from Newegg! Although I really wish us Americans could have the option of getting those EU versions without the WMP / IE8...
intel would have cut the instruction sets to make them smaller, cheaper, and cooler. who'd need 4GB of ram on an atom based PC anyway? intel and MS made logical decisions, it just means that x86 lasts a little bit longer.
Posted on Reply
#2
devguy
Mussels said:
intel would have cut the instruction sets to make them smaller, cheaper, and cooler. who'd need 4GB of ram on an atom based PC anyway? intel and MS made logical decisions, it just means that x86 lasts a little bit longer.
Yeah, I understand what you're saying ('specially the cheaper part). But then why are they on the 330 and 230 desktop parts? I'm now intrigued to see if I can find any power consumption / heat output benchmarks for an Atom on a 32bit OS vs a 64bit OS. I'll bet the difference would be negligible, especially when you compare the CPU with EM64T instructions to the 945 chipset...
Posted on Reply
#3
Mussels
Moderprator
devguy said:
Yeah, I understand what you're saying ('specially the cheaper part). But then why are they on the 330 and 230 desktop parts? I'm now intrigued to see if I can find any power consumption / heat output benchmarks for an Atom on a 32bit OS vs a 64bit OS. I'll bet the difference would be negligible, especially when you compare the CPU with EM64T instructions to the 945 chipset...
its not related to the OS whatsoever. its literally that more hardware is required in a CPU to make it 64 bit - you know, physical parts of the CPU. the more there is inside, the more power it takes and the hotter it gets.

Only the atom 290 and 300 series supports x64 instructions - since those are the desktop models, it kinda makes sense. they can spare the power and heat there.

wiki
Atom implements the x86 (IA-32) instruction set; x86-64 is so far only activated for the Atom 230 and 330 desktop models. N and Z series Atom models cannot run x86-64 code.


Notice how the x64 models have far higher TDP's? (percentage wise) - atom N vs atom 200, both 45nm, both single core - yet the x64 variant is almost twice the TDP (i'm sure higher clocks make up some of that too)
Posted on Reply
#4
devguy
Mussels said:
its not related to the OS whatsoever. its literally that more hardware is required in a CPU to make it 64 bit - you know, physical parts of the CPU. the more there is inside, the more power it takes and the hotter it gets.

Notice how the x64 models have far higher TDP's? (percentage wise) - atom N vs atom 200, both 45nm, both single core - yet the x64 variant is almost twice the TDP (i'm sure higher clocks make up some of that too)
Interesting. Yeah, I know that including the x86-64 instruction set increases the hardware in a chip, but I guess I always assumed that when running an 32bit OS, that they were not being used by the chip. I'm sure we've all noticed that a processor can usually run stable at higher speeds in a 32bit OS than an x64 one. I always assumed that was because the x64 hardware/instructions were more sensitive to instability than the 32bit ones and that when one ran a 32bit OS, the instability was unnoticed because the 64bit hardware wasn't being used.

But you're saying that the x64 hardware is getting used even in that case and the instability is there, just going unnoticed due to the chip not using the result of any the 64bit hardware? I guess that makes sense now that I think about it, no way you're going to stop that current from getting in there, regardless of whether the results of the 64bit hardware is even added into the data path.

Either way, I find it unlikely that the extra x64 hardware is accounting for the roughly 60% increase in TDP between the N and 200 series chips. It is more likely the higher clock speed causing that (as you said). And I still stand by what I said that I believe the difference between adding the EM64T instructions or not is dwarfed by the high TDP of the 945 chipset.
Posted on Reply
#5
cray86
Netbooks fit a role. Anyone purchasing one should understand said role. They are small, mobile, and made for basic entry level computing tasks. The integration of air cards from Cell Phone companies makes a lot of sense too. I like one simple rule -

A Netbook is a powerfull cell phone, leaning towards computer capabilities
A HTC Diamond touch pro is a powerful cell phone, leaning towards phone capabilities

It's the kind of paradigm where they fit in. You get wireless N, music storage, word processing, mobile internet, a real keyboard, an 8 hour battery life, and the real windows XP enviornment to work in.

There is nothing holding them back from 2GB of RAM, 120GB Hard Drive, and Windows 7 x64. Price perhaps, but DDR2 is perdy cheap. The Atom will come along.
Posted on Reply
#6
Mussels
Moderprator
devguy said:

But you're saying that the x64 hardware is getting used even in that case and the instability is there, just going unnoticed due to the chip not using the result of any the 64bit hardware? I guess that makes sense now that I think about it, no way you're going to stop that current from getting in there, regardless of whether the results of the 64bit hardware is even added into the data path.
Exactly. there may be a small amount of power savings on x86 due to those parts of the chip idling, but idle is as low as they'll get - they dont turn 'off

devguy said:

Either way, I find it unlikely that the extra x64 hardware is accounting for the roughly 60% increase in TDP between the N and 200 series chips. It is more likely the higher clock speed causing that (as you said). And I still stand by what I said that I believe the difference between adding the EM64T instructions or not is dwarfed by the high TDP of the 945 chipset.
x64 + clock speed would make the difference. Not entirely sure how much goes to where - chip size and production cost would also have factored in to intels decision to not make the chips x64 all around, and that decision to make netbooks cheaper is what has forced us another generation of x86 and x64 OS on the market.


At least the server versions of 7 are only going to be x64, which gives me hope that the next gen home OS will be x64 only
Posted on Reply
#7
Makaveli
TheMailMan78 said:
Then drop anything made by Creative. They couldn't physically suck more at making drivers. It would defy the laws of physics to do so.
lol

so i'm suppose to stop using my creative sound card that works perfectly fine in vista, doesn't seem like much of a fix!

LagunaX said:
Why not just pop your card out and just use this until there is a better driver?
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=92384
Last time I checked my Nforce 4 board didn't have a realtec HDA codec on it.

Thanks for the suggestions guys but pulling out my perfectly working sound card is not an option. Its clearly a Creative and Windows 7 Issue, whats surprising is I haven't seen to many issues reported and I know some of you are using Win 7 with a creative soundcard with no problems. However on my platform that is not the case, so I will be sticking with vista and keeping an eye on this for the time being. Might be worth trying a newer build of 7 also.
Posted on Reply
#8
DataCabbitKSW
Makaveli,there have been a good number of potential fixes posted to the official Windows 7 RC Support Forum located here http://tinyurl.com/9fhdl5 . Maybe one of them might work for you.

DaveK, you can get it off TechNet until August 15th. Get the Windows 7 Release Candidate over here: http://tinyurl.com/832nco
Posted on Reply
#9
domy85
So you have to pay a $350 subscription in order to download Windows 7 RC?
Posted on Reply
#10
Mussels
Moderprator
domy85 said:
So you have to pay a $350 subscription in order to download Windows 7 RC?
no, you pay a $350 subscription to get full legit copies of windows 7 once it hits retail.


If you pay a lot more, you get access to the RTM right away - the RC is, and always has been, your friend free
Posted on Reply
#11
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
Since there is no Win 7 AGP Hotfix Catalyst Driver for X1K cards and lower, Windows 7 will be on my new machine, Windows XP will remain on this one.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment