Hyper-V RTM

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by Charlie Russel - MVP, Jun 26, 2008.

  1. Charlie Russel - MVP, Jun 26, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Charlie Russel - MVP

    Bender Guest

    Bender, Jun 27, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Are you talking about the tools or Hyper-V itself? Hyper-V or similar for
    Vista is not in the cards. I recall it being stated six months ago or more
    that it would not be in Vista. Windows 7? No announcements made. Probably
    would not be the same anyway since an interface more like VPC's would be
    more useful IMO.

    The remote mangement tools are at http://support.microsoft.com/kb/952627

    "Bender" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > When does the Vista client version come out? January 2010 ?
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/default.aspx
    >>
    >> Download today, or wait till early July for WU/MU of your existing
    >> environments
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>
    >>
     
    Colin Barnhorst, Jun 27, 2008
    #3
  4. Vista remote mgmt is out now, and vista is supported as a "guest" (actually
    child partition).

    New in the RTM from previous RC's - support for XP x64 as a child partition!

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel


    "Bender" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > When does the Vista client version come out? January 2010 ?
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/default.aspx
    >>
    >> Download today, or wait till early July for WU/MU of your existing
    >> environments
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>
    >>
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Jun 27, 2008
    #4
  5. Charlie, I knew you were going to rejoice when I saw that one.

    "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Vista remote mgmt is out now, and vista is supported as a "guest"
    > (actually child partition).
    >
    > New in the RTM from previous RC's - support for XP x64 as a child
    > partition!
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >
    >
    > "Bender" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> When does the Vista client version come out? January 2010 ?
    >>
    >> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/default.aspx
    >>>
    >>> Download today, or wait till early July for WU/MU of your existing
    >>> environments
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> Charlie.
    >>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>
    >>>

    >
     
    Colin Barnhorst, Jun 27, 2008
    #5
  6. Colin - I notice a little MVP bug next to your post? You back? Well earned!

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

    "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    news:D...
    > Charlie, I knew you were going to rejoice when I saw that one.
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Vista remote mgmt is out now, and vista is supported as a "guest"
    >> (actually child partition).
    >>
    >> New in the RTM from previous RC's - support for XP x64 as a child
    >> partition!
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>
    >>
    >> "Bender" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> When does the Vista client version come out? January 2010 ?
    >>>
    >>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    >>> message news:...
    >>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/default.aspx
    >>>>
    >>>> Download today, or wait till early July for WU/MU of your existing
    >>>> environments
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>> Charlie.
    >>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>>
    >>>>

    >>

    >
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Jun 28, 2008
    #6
  7. Check your email for my comment.

    "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Colin - I notice a little MVP bug next to your post? You back? Well
    > earned!
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >
    > "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    > news:D...
    >> Charlie, I knew you were going to rejoice when I saw that one.
    >>
    >> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Vista remote mgmt is out now, and vista is supported as a "guest"
    >>> (actually child partition).
    >>>
    >>> New in the RTM from previous RC's - support for XP x64 as a child
    >>> partition!
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> Charlie.
    >>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Bender" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> When does the Vista client version come out? January 2010 ?
    >>>>
    >>>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    >>>> message news:...
    >>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/default.aspx
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Download today, or wait till early July for WU/MU of your existing
    >>>>> environments
    >>>>>
    >>>>> --
    >>>>> Charlie.
    >>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>

    >>

    >
     
    Colin Barnhorst, Jun 28, 2008
    #7
  8. Charlie Russel - MVP

    Bender Guest

    My main concern is in being able to use more than one processor that virtual
    pc currently is limited to. When the 8 core, with Hyper Threading for 16
    simultaneous threads comes out, only being able to use one core would seem
    very inadequate. I don't want to run a separate computer just to run server
    so I can use Hyper-V.
    I am assuming that Hyper-V will be the only option that allows multiple
    cores and a 64 bit guest. That virtual PC won't be rewritten when Hyper-V
    can do the job.


    "Bender" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > When does the Vista client version come out? January 2010 ?
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/default.aspx
    >>
    >> Download today, or wait till early July for WU/MU of your existing
    >> environments
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>
    >>
     
    Bender, Jun 28, 2008
    #8
  9. By [processor], MS usually mean [socket], if they didn't change requirements
    lately!


    Tony. . .


    "Bender" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > My main concern is in being able to use more than one processor that

    virtual
    > pc currently is limited to. When the 8 core, with Hyper Threading for 16
    > simultaneous threads comes out, only being able to use one core would seem
    > very inadequate. I don't want to run a separate computer just to run

    server
    > so I can use Hyper-V.
    > I am assuming that Hyper-V will be the only option that allows multiple
    > cores and a 64 bit guest. That virtual PC won't be rewritten when Hyper-V
    > can do the job.
    >
    >
    > "Bender" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > When does the Vista client version come out? January 2010 ?
    > >
    > > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in

    message
    > > news:...
    > >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/default.aspx
    > >>
    > >> Download today, or wait till early July for WU/MU of your existing
    > >> environments
    > >>
    > >> --
    > >> Charlie.
    > >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    > >> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    > >>
    > >>
     
    Tony Sperling, Jun 28, 2008
    #9
  10. I wouldn't assume that, personally. (And that is NOT based on any privileged
    knowledge of what's coming, just my SWAG based on the public evidence.) I
    would be very surprised if the next version of a client virtualization
    solution didn't support more than a single core. And I think 64-bit guests
    are a must.

    I might add that I think the days of hyperthreading are behind us. Multiple
    cores has really replaced the need for it, and the gains just aren't there,
    IMO.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

    "Bender" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > My main concern is in being able to use more than one processor that
    > virtual pc currently is limited to. When the 8 core, with Hyper Threading
    > for 16 simultaneous threads comes out, only being able to use one core
    > would seem very inadequate. I don't want to run a separate computer just
    > to run server so I can use Hyper-V.
    > I am assuming that Hyper-V will be the only option that allows multiple
    > cores and a 64 bit guest. That virtual PC won't be rewritten when Hyper-V
    > can do the job.
    >
    >
    > "Bender" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> When does the Vista client version come out? January 2010 ?
    >>
    >> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/default.aspx
    >>>
    >>> Download today, or wait till early July for WU/MU of your existing
    >>> environments
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> Charlie.
    >>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>
    >>>
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Jun 28, 2008
    #10
  11. Charlie, I believe Intel's next new microarchitecture, Nehalem, will support
    hyperthreading. It is about a year away. See the link:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehalem_(CPU_architecture)

    "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I wouldn't assume that, personally. (And that is NOT based on any
    >privileged knowledge of what's coming, just my SWAG based on the public
    >evidence.) I would be very surprised if the next version of a client
    >virtualization solution didn't support more than a single core. And I think
    >64-bit guests are a must.
    >
    > I might add that I think the days of hyperthreading are behind us.
    > Multiple cores has really replaced the need for it, and the gains just
    > aren't there, IMO.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >
    > "Bender" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> My main concern is in being able to use more than one processor that
    >> virtual pc currently is limited to. When the 8 core, with Hyper Threading
    >> for 16 simultaneous threads comes out, only being able to use one core
    >> would seem very inadequate. I don't want to run a separate computer just
    >> to run server so I can use Hyper-V.
    >> I am assuming that Hyper-V will be the only option that allows multiple
    >> cores and a 64 bit guest. That virtual PC won't be rewritten when Hyper-V
    >> can do the job.
    >>
    >>
    >> "Bender" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> When does the Vista client version come out? January 2010 ?
    >>>
    >>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    >>> message news:...
    >>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/default.aspx
    >>>>
    >>>> Download today, or wait till early July for WU/MU of your existing
    >>>> environments
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>> Charlie.
    >>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>>
    >>>>

    >
     
    Colin Barnhorst, Jun 28, 2008
    #11
  12. Oh, I'm sure it will. But given the overhead of handling extra CPUs, the
    actual _gain_ may not be all that much. Since HyperThreading isn't nearly as
    efficient as a full core.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

    "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Charlie, I believe Intel's next new microarchitecture, Nehalem, will
    > support hyperthreading. It is about a year away. See the link:
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehalem_(CPU_architecture)
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>I wouldn't assume that, personally. (And that is NOT based on any
    >>privileged knowledge of what's coming, just my SWAG based on the public
    >>evidence.) I would be very surprised if the next version of a client
    >>virtualization solution didn't support more than a single core. And I
    >>think 64-bit guests are a must.
    >>
    >> I might add that I think the days of hyperthreading are behind us.
    >> Multiple cores has really replaced the need for it, and the gains just
    >> aren't there, IMO.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>
    >> "Bender" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> My main concern is in being able to use more than one processor that
    >>> virtual pc currently is limited to. When the 8 core, with Hyper
    >>> Threading for 16 simultaneous threads comes out, only being able to use
    >>> one core would seem very inadequate. I don't want to run a separate
    >>> computer just to run server so I can use Hyper-V.
    >>> I am assuming that Hyper-V will be the only option that allows multiple
    >>> cores and a 64 bit guest. That virtual PC won't be rewritten when
    >>> Hyper-V can do the job.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Bender" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> When does the Vista client version come out? January 2010 ?
    >>>>
    >>>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    >>>> message news:...
    >>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/default.aspx
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Download today, or wait till early July for WU/MU of your existing
    >>>>> environments
    >>>>>
    >>>>> --
    >>>>> Charlie.
    >>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>>>
    >>>>>

    >>

    >
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Jun 28, 2008
    #12
  13. Maybe Intel has in mind leveraging the QuickConnect technology (instead of
    the FSB) to achieve some gain there.

    "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Oh, I'm sure it will. But given the overhead of handling extra CPUs, the
    > actual _gain_ may not be all that much. Since HyperThreading isn't nearly
    > as efficient as a full core.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >
    > "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Charlie, I believe Intel's next new microarchitecture, Nehalem, will
    >> support hyperthreading. It is about a year away. See the link:
    >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehalem_(CPU_architecture)
    >>
    >> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>>I wouldn't assume that, personally. (And that is NOT based on any
    >>>privileged knowledge of what's coming, just my SWAG based on the public
    >>>evidence.) I would be very surprised if the next version of a client
    >>>virtualization solution didn't support more than a single core. And I
    >>>think 64-bit guests are a must.
    >>>
    >>> I might add that I think the days of hyperthreading are behind us.
    >>> Multiple cores has really replaced the need for it, and the gains just
    >>> aren't there, IMO.
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> Charlie.
    >>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>
    >>> "Bender" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> My main concern is in being able to use more than one processor that
    >>>> virtual pc currently is limited to. When the 8 core, with Hyper
    >>>> Threading for 16 simultaneous threads comes out, only being able to use
    >>>> one core would seem very inadequate. I don't want to run a separate
    >>>> computer just to run server so I can use Hyper-V.
    >>>> I am assuming that Hyper-V will be the only option that allows multiple
    >>>> cores and a 64 bit guest. That virtual PC won't be rewritten when
    >>>> Hyper-V can do the job.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "Bender" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>> When does the Vista client version come out? January 2010 ?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    >>>>> message news:...
    >>>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/default.aspx
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Download today, or wait till early July for WU/MU of your existing
    >>>>>> environments
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> --
    >>>>>> Charlie.
    >>>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>>>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>

    >>

    >
     
    Colin Barnhorst, Jun 28, 2008
    #13
  14. Could be. But I've seen enough studies to know that it doesn't matter what
    you do with a "normal" OS and applications, at some point the addition of
    processors is counter-productive. (this assumes that both the OS and the
    applications you're running are not specifically written for HPC, which is a
    different kettle of fish.) Now in a Server environment, that's a bit
    different, but as a workstation? Even someone who multi-tasks as much as I
    do is pretty much maxed out at 4 cores. And honestly, I don't even push that
    fourth one if I don't do virtualization. Now, virtualizing? Oh, yeah, now
    we want some cores. And lots and lots and lots of memory.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

    "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Maybe Intel has in mind leveraging the QuickConnect technology (instead of
    > the FSB) to achieve some gain there.
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Oh, I'm sure it will. But given the overhead of handling extra CPUs, the
    >> actual _gain_ may not be all that much. Since HyperThreading isn't nearly
    >> as efficient as a full core.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>
    >> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Charlie, I believe Intel's next new microarchitecture, Nehalem, will
    >>> support hyperthreading. It is about a year away. See the link:
    >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehalem_(CPU_architecture)
    >>>
    >>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    >>> message news:...
    >>>>I wouldn't assume that, personally. (And that is NOT based on any
    >>>>privileged knowledge of what's coming, just my SWAG based on the public
    >>>>evidence.) I would be very surprised if the next version of a client
    >>>>virtualization solution didn't support more than a single core. And I
    >>>>think 64-bit guests are a must.
    >>>>
    >>>> I might add that I think the days of hyperthreading are behind us.
    >>>> Multiple cores has really replaced the need for it, and the gains just
    >>>> aren't there, IMO.
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>> Charlie.
    >>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>>
    >>>> "Bender" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>> My main concern is in being able to use more than one processor that
    >>>>> virtual pc currently is limited to. When the 8 core, with Hyper
    >>>>> Threading for 16 simultaneous threads comes out, only being able to
    >>>>> use one core would seem very inadequate. I don't want to run a
    >>>>> separate computer just to run server so I can use Hyper-V.
    >>>>> I am assuming that Hyper-V will be the only option that allows
    >>>>> multiple cores and a 64 bit guest. That virtual PC won't be rewritten
    >>>>> when Hyper-V can do the job.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Bender" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>>>> When does the Vista client version come out? January 2010 ?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    >>>>>> message news:...
    >>>>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/default.aspx
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Download today, or wait till early July for WU/MU of your existing
    >>>>>>> environments
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> --
    >>>>>>> Charlie.
    >>>>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>>>>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>

    >>

    >
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Jun 28, 2008
    #14
  15. I too think the octacores planned for Nehalem would be more than enough. By
    the time software catches up Intel will be down the road two more
    microarchtectures anyway. Image running Data Center on a 64 octacore box.
    "My Photoshop is too slow. What am I doing wrong?" :)

    "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Could be. But I've seen enough studies to know that it doesn't matter what
    > you do with a "normal" OS and applications, at some point the addition of
    > processors is counter-productive. (this assumes that both the OS and the
    > applications you're running are not specifically written for HPC, which is
    > a different kettle of fish.) Now in a Server environment, that's a bit
    > different, but as a workstation? Even someone who multi-tasks as much as I
    > do is pretty much maxed out at 4 cores. And honestly, I don't even push
    > that fourth one if I don't do virtualization. Now, virtualizing? Oh, yeah,
    > now we want some cores. And lots and lots and lots of memory.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    > http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >
    > "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Maybe Intel has in mind leveraging the QuickConnect technology (instead
    >> of the FSB) to achieve some gain there.
    >>
    >> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Oh, I'm sure it will. But given the overhead of handling extra CPUs, the
    >>> actual _gain_ may not be all that much. Since HyperThreading isn't
    >>> nearly as efficient as a full core.
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> Charlie.
    >>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>
    >>> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> Charlie, I believe Intel's next new microarchitecture, Nehalem, will
    >>>> support hyperthreading. It is about a year away. See the link:
    >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehalem_(CPU_architecture)
    >>>>
    >>>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    >>>> message news:...
    >>>>>I wouldn't assume that, personally. (And that is NOT based on any
    >>>>>privileged knowledge of what's coming, just my SWAG based on the public
    >>>>>evidence.) I would be very surprised if the next version of a client
    >>>>>virtualization solution didn't support more than a single core. And I
    >>>>>think 64-bit guests are a must.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I might add that I think the days of hyperthreading are behind us.
    >>>>> Multiple cores has really replaced the need for it, and the gains just
    >>>>> aren't there, IMO.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> --
    >>>>> Charlie.
    >>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Bender" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>>>> My main concern is in being able to use more than one processor that
    >>>>>> virtual pc currently is limited to. When the 8 core, with Hyper
    >>>>>> Threading for 16 simultaneous threads comes out, only being able to
    >>>>>> use one core would seem very inadequate. I don't want to run a
    >>>>>> separate computer just to run server so I can use Hyper-V.
    >>>>>> I am assuming that Hyper-V will be the only option that allows
    >>>>>> multiple cores and a 64 bit guest. That virtual PC won't be rewritten
    >>>>>> when Hyper-V can do the job.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "Bender" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>> When does the Vista client version come out? January 2010 ?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    >>>>>>> message news:...
    >>>>>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/default.aspx
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Download today, or wait till early July for WU/MU of your existing
    >>>>>>>> environments
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> --
    >>>>>>>> Charlie.
    >>>>>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>>>>>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>

    >>

    >
     
    Colin Barnhorst, Jun 28, 2008
    #15
  16. Yes. And until we get RAM that uses less energy (and produces less heat), we
    have a problem anyway. I'm now favouring Opterons again, just because I
    don't have to use FBDIMMs.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

    "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I too think the octacores planned for Nehalem would be more than enough.
    >By the time software catches up Intel will be down the road two more
    >microarchtectures anyway. Image running Data Center on a 64 octacore box.
    >"My Photoshop is too slow. What am I doing wrong?" :)
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Could be. But I've seen enough studies to know that it doesn't matter
    >> what you do with a "normal" OS and applications, at some point the
    >> addition of processors is counter-productive. (this assumes that both the
    >> OS and the applications you're running are not specifically written for
    >> HPC, which is a different kettle of fish.) Now in a Server environment,
    >> that's a bit different, but as a workstation? Even someone who
    >> multi-tasks as much as I do is pretty much maxed out at 4 cores. And
    >> honestly, I don't even push that fourth one if I don't do virtualization.
    >> Now, virtualizing? Oh, yeah, now we want some cores. And lots and lots
    >> and lots of memory.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>
    >> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Maybe Intel has in mind leveraging the QuickConnect technology (instead
    >>> of the FSB) to achieve some gain there.
    >>>
    >>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    >>> message news:...
    >>>> Oh, I'm sure it will. But given the overhead of handling extra CPUs,
    >>>> the actual _gain_ may not be all that much. Since HyperThreading isn't
    >>>> nearly as efficient as a full core.
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>> Charlie.
    >>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>>
    >>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>> Charlie, I believe Intel's next new microarchitecture, Nehalem, will
    >>>>> support hyperthreading. It is about a year away. See the link:
    >>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehalem_(CPU_architecture)
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    >>>>> message news:...
    >>>>>>I wouldn't assume that, personally. (And that is NOT based on any
    >>>>>>privileged knowledge of what's coming, just my SWAG based on the
    >>>>>>public evidence.) I would be very surprised if the next version of a
    >>>>>>client virtualization solution didn't support more than a single core.
    >>>>>>And I think 64-bit guests are a must.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I might add that I think the days of hyperthreading are behind us.
    >>>>>> Multiple cores has really replaced the need for it, and the gains
    >>>>>> just aren't there, IMO.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> --
    >>>>>> Charlie.
    >>>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>>>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "Bender" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>> My main concern is in being able to use more than one processor that
    >>>>>>> virtual pc currently is limited to. When the 8 core, with Hyper
    >>>>>>> Threading for 16 simultaneous threads comes out, only being able to
    >>>>>>> use one core would seem very inadequate. I don't want to run a
    >>>>>>> separate computer just to run server so I can use Hyper-V.
    >>>>>>> I am assuming that Hyper-V will be the only option that allows
    >>>>>>> multiple cores and a 64 bit guest. That virtual PC won't be
    >>>>>>> rewritten when Hyper-V can do the job.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "Bender" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>>> When does the Vista client version come out? January 2010 ?
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in
    >>>>>>>> message news:...
    >>>>>>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/default.aspx
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Download today, or wait till early July for WU/MU of your existing
    >>>>>>>>> environments
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> --
    >>>>>>>>> Charlie.
    >>>>>>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    >>>>>>>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>

    >>

    >
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Jun 28, 2008
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?Q2xheXRvbiBSaXBsZXk=?=

    windows xp rtm

    =?Utf-8?B?Q2xheXRvbiBSaXBsZXk=?=, Apr 10, 2004, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    13,289
    DalePres
    Apr 11, 2004
  2. meanoldman

    Server 2003 sp1 RTM

    meanoldman, Mar 31, 2005, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    515
  3. MBHC
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    896
    Ex_OWM
    May 31, 2005
  4. Dennis Pack

    Happy with RTM.

    Dennis Pack, May 13, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    741
    mickie
    May 13, 2005
  5. =?Utf-8?B?TGl0dGxlYmxvb21lcnM=?=

    Question(s) about RTM release

    =?Utf-8?B?TGl0dGxlYmxvb21lcnM=?=, May 18, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    1,187
    Antoine Leca
    May 18, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page