My four-and-a half year old Medion erazer laptop is unfit to install W11. Any attempt to install W11 failed. It has standard a 128 GB SATA M.2 SSD, next to a 1.5 TB 2.5 inch hard drive.
I replaced the M.2 SSD by a new WD Blue SATA M.2 500GB SSD. When I installed W10 on it, the installer started to install W11. The laptop now runs W11 fine. According to the Microsoft test software, the Intel Core i5-6200U CPU is not suitable to run W11. The laptop fulfills all other W11 requirements.
W11 possible with a new drive?
(2 posts) (2 voices)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
mikiem2
ModeratorGlad it worked for you, accidental or not. :) I'm about as agnostic as you can get re: Win11. The only part I found I really dislike is the new context menu, which lasts about the 30 seconds it takes to run "Windows 11 Classic Context Menu" -- sordum[.]org . OTOH, there's really nothing I've found that's been reason enough to upgrade. Maybe someday its Android support will be good enough to give me a reason, but with Google releasing their own software to run Android apps in Windows [10 & 11], I'm not overly optimistic. I'll continue running Win11 alongside Win10, but so far I really can't see much of a difference [I'm not one to be impressed by new icons or rounded corners].
Microsoft has been loosening the restrictions on installing Win11 on non-compliant hardware -- they lessened the initial requirement for TPM 2 to TPM 1.2, published the registry key you can add to disable the TPM check during setup, and if you install Win11 by booting to setup on a USB stick or optical disc, it will not check the CPU to see if it meets requirements. support.microsoft[.]com/en-us/windows/ways-to-install-windows-11-e0edbbfb-cfc5-4011-868b-2ce77ac7c70e
I think that Microsoft's hardware requirements for Win11 were always aspirational, based on what they thought they might possibly achieve regarding security, rather than any current need. I think they also overestimated [by a fair margin] the desire in the corporate world for more secure PCs/laptops. And I think with all the backlash they've gotten regarding Win11's hardware requirements, it's pushed them to silently back off a bit. It's kind of like the way the free upgrade to Win10 officially expired years ago, but you can still get it [ zdnet[.]com/article/heres-how-you-can-still-get-a-free-windows-10-upgrade/ ] -- while officially stating over & over that it's not supported, I think Microsoft is turning a blind eye to Win11 on any hardware where it'll run. The potential Gotcha is if someday in the future they add something to Win11 that *Really requires* a hardware feature they initially said you needed.
The reason for Win11 *requiring* the newest generations of CPUs is that with older versions you get a ~10-15% performance hit if you enable Virtualization Based Security... you still get a performance hit with current CPUs -- which is why I believe most leave it turned off -- but it's not as bad. Enabling TPM isn't a bad thing in the corporate world, where it helps secure network authentication, BitLocker, Windows Hello for use with smart cards etc., but outside that corporate world, the most likely advantage to having TPM is that it makes Win11 happy, if you care about Win11 being happy. Having UEFI BIOS so secure boot can be enabled is generally speaking a good thing, though having a UEFI BIOS means that it can be hacked, and malware can be installed, while secure boot itself is sort of over promised -- it's not a bad idea but not nearly as bullet proof as Microsoft might lead you to believe. Secure boot can also be a PITA... on a very quick side note, it doesn't hurt to run HWInfo to make sure it's enabled, regardless what it says in the BIOS, since it's all too possible for secure boot to be *On*, but not actually working. Google and you'll find all sorts of workarounds to really get it turned on that've worked for different people. neowin[.]net/news/hwinfo-716/
Posted 2 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.