Windows 7 Home Premium CPU Limitation

KeriJane

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Sep 26, 2009
578
0
ЧИКАГО!
Just for testing purposes, I installed a spare drive and put Windows 7 Home Premium x64 on my Mac Pro 1.1 last night.

All of the advice given here on MacRumors so as to install the 64-bit version and get the AHCI working properly went flawlessly with one exception: Boot Camp doesn't like to restart in OSX from Windows after the AHCI patch.

But the big issue is:

Windows 7 Home Premium continues Microsoft's policy of not supporting multiple processors on any "Home" variant of Windows. (XP, Vista, 7)

Task Manager reports only the two cores of the first CPU and ignores the second.

To me this isn't important as I intend to continue using XP Pro for my rare ventures into Windows but is important for Mac Pro users considering purchasing Windows 7.

If you wish to use Windows effectively on a multi-CPU Mac Pro, you must obtain the "Professional" or "Ultimate" versions.

Have Fun,
Keri

PS. ahhh... nevermind!
 

KeriJane

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Sep 26, 2009
578
0
ЧИКАГО!
Do people need to buy the "Professional" or "Ultimate" version of OSX too?
Haha! :D

That's (one reason) that we bought a Mac in the first place isn't it? ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dyl_HPukkGw

The whole "lets make 6 different versions in three levels each so as to extract the maximum amount of money from people" concept is one of the reasons I'm not going back to MS anytime soon.

Seriously, the R&D money is already spent and there's no additional media or distribution costs. Socking it to people that want just that one extra thing (like multi-CPU support or integrated backups) while making a stripped-down version with little functionality (so as to advertise a low price) is just a cheap marketing ploy that does more to annoy customers than boost profits.

Have Fun,
Keri
 

akadmon

Suspended
Aug 30, 2006
2,006
2
New England
Win 7 Pro will let you access all the cores on your Mac Pro. I can't think of a reason why anybody who's tech savvy enough to be on this forum would not get the $30 Win 7 Pro student "upgrade"! I put upgrade in quotes because there is 1000 ways you can install an upgrade (snort) version of Win 7 on a Mac (or a PC) without ever having owned a previous version of Windows. All you have to do is spend 5 minutes in google.
 

Dr.Pants

macrumors 65816
Jan 8, 2009
1,181
2
Task Manager reports only the two cores of the first CPU and ignores the second.
Weird.

OP, could you please do me a favor? On Task Manager, select the "Performance" tab, then go View->CPU History and tell me what it says on that menu.My curiosity is piqued.

EDIT - Is your problem something like what's described in this thread? Useful info there (sorta), the guy DID get his unit fixed, and (to the OP) if your Pro has similar readings on CPU-Z then the solution is most likely the one presented there.
 

Umbongo

macrumors 601
Sep 14, 2006
4,934
54
England
Haha! :D

That's (one reason) that we bought a Mac in the first place isn't it? ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dyl_HPukkGw

The whole "lets make 6 different versions in three levels each so as to extract the maximum amount of money from people" concept is one of the reasons I'm not going back to MS anytime soon.

Seriously, the R&D money is already spent and there's no additional media or distribution costs. Socking it to people that want just that one extra thing (like multi-CPU support or integrated backups) while making a stripped-down version with little functionality (so as to advertise a low price) is just a cheap marketing ploy that does more to annoy customers than boost profits.

Have Fun,
Keri
Are you suggesting they should charge consumers who want to just use the internet for business level functionality? Or do you just want multi-CPU on a cheap version because that is the only feature you want you don't have?
 

KeriJane

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Sep 26, 2009
578
0
ЧИКАГО!
Are you suggesting they should charge consumers who want to just use the internet for business level functionality? Or do you just want multi-CPU on a cheap version because that is the only feature you want you don't have?
Hi Umbongo

I'm not suggesting anything.
As far as I'm concerned Microsoft can (and will) do whatever their collective lack of heart desires.

I just happened across a copy ($49 pre-orderd upgrade) of Win 7 HP and was curious to see it in action and if it still carries MS's usual intentional crippling. (it does)
Like Vista, you can install a 30-day trial without the CD Key (which I did) and take it for a test drive kinda trial period.

So far, I'm not impressed enough to go buy a full-priced version or even spend the $89 for an "anytime upgrade".
I'll just stick with XP Pro for Boot Camp. It gets used maybe once every few months.

I thought that maybe it would be a good idea to point out that this "Premium" software is in fact quite crippled. Yes, I know that you can find out about the lack of features in 5 minutes with Google but I thought I'd see for myself and maybe post the results somewhere where people it could affect (Mac Pro users) could easily find it.

Microsoft doesn't go out of their way to tell people about CPU limitations. Either by saying "H.P. ignores multiple Processors" or by saying "Professional supports multiple Processors".
They were a little more clear about this when XP came out and at least they weren't calling significantly crippled software "Premium" at the time.

Another useless MS product for the collection,

Have Fun,
Keri

Weird.

OP, could you please do me a favor? On Task Manager, select the "Performance" tab, then go View->CPU History and tell me what it says on that menu.My curiosity is piqued.

EDIT - Is your problem something like what's described in this thread? Useful info there (sorta), the guy DID get his unit fixed, and (to the OP) if your Pro has similar readings on CPU-Z then the solution is most likely the one presented there.
Hi Dr. Pants

Oh, this isn't a "Problem" or Weird. It's Microsoft's way of splitting up One Operating System into Six Operating Systems.

I was just checking to see if MS is still crippling so-called "Premium" software. They are.
It would be nice if one of their comparison charts mentioned this but the common ones like this one don't:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/compare/default.aspx

You can't really "fix" this without buying a more expensive version. At least they made that process easier with the "Anytime Upgrade".

Which I'm not very likely to buy. So far as I'm concerned, Win7 is a toy that I don't need.

Have Fun,
Keri
 

tyr2

macrumors 6502a
May 6, 2006
806
106
Leeds, UK
I wish I'd known about this before I bought home premium. I don't rembember seeing this limitation listed anywhere. I'd always used XP Pro before so never had a problem before and never realised such a restriction even existed. Nothing is menitioned about this on the box or the info in the case.

The 'anytime upgrade' is £120 which seems somewhat on the steep side.
 

Umbongo

macrumors 601
Sep 14, 2006
4,934
54
England
I thought that maybe it would be a good idea to point out that this "Premium" software is in fact quite crippled. Yes, I know that you can find out about the lack of features in 5 minutes with Google but I thought I'd see for myself and maybe post the results somewhere where people it could affect (Mac Pro users) could easily find it.

Microsoft doesn't go out of their way to tell people about CPU limitations. Either by saying "H.P. ignores multiple Processors" or by saying "Professional supports multiple Processors".
They were a little more clear about this when XP came out and at least they weren't calling significantly crippled software "Premium" at the time.
I can see where the confusion, but it is called Home Premium. Multi-CPU systems are a rarity for non-professional use so I suppose they expect, fairly, someone using such a system to research before updating the operating system. Though I can also see if you in the Apple/OS X mindset the idea that the non-basic version (or any version) not fully utilizing your hardware wouldn't even occur to you, especially if it isn't even hinted at unless you dig for the information.
 

Dr.Pants

macrumors 65816
Jan 8, 2009
1,181
2
You can't really "fix" this without buying a more expensive version. At least they made that process easier with the "Anytime Upgrade"
Have you read around SevenForums? After using google I cam up with two answers that make it seem like the solutions been out for a while. (Reommended reading here and here.

It also gives me the impression that with an "upgrade" to a more expensive version you would have the same problems, since the same kernel would be interfacing with the processor in the same manner. Thusly, either a checkbox for enabling the other processors or (if that option is "grayed out", or whatever) enabling the hardware abstraction layer might do the trick from what I've read. Only glanced over it though, haven't had the problem, so YMMV with my suggestion, but I think I have something to at least start with.

Sorry you're having issues recognizing all of your CPUs. Several people have had the same problem, but I assume its fixable.
 

Infrared

macrumors 68000
Mar 28, 2007
1,680
56
Oh, this isn't a "Problem" or Weird. It's Microsoft's way of splitting up One Operating System into Six Operating Systems.

I was just checking to see if MS is still crippling so-called "Premium" software. They are.
It would be nice if one of their comparison charts mentioned this but the common ones like this one don't:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/compare/default.aspx

You can't really "fix" this without buying a more expensive version. At least they made that process easier with the "Anytime Upgrade".

Which I'm not very likely to buy. So far as I'm concerned, Win7 is a toy that I don't need.
Windows 7 is the "toy" that Intel will be using to design
future Mac Pro processors. Macs: designed on Windows ;-)

Only of Quicktime.
Yes, Apple also play this game. There are other examples.
Final Cut Express and Final Cut Studio. Logic Express and
Logic Studio.

Apple also differentiate their hardware. There's not just
one "ultimate" iMac or Mac Pro. There's a whole range of
models.

Product differentiation is so common across the industry
that it's probably futile to complain about it. I would tend
to agree, though, that Microsoft could be clearer about
the differences between the different SKUs. It's hard to
find one page that has a listing of all the differences.
Paul Thurrot's page is quite good but, alas, he gets the
processor limit wrong! :)

http://www.winsupersite.com/win7/win7_skus_compare.asp
 

KeriJane

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Sep 26, 2009
578
0
ЧИКАГО!
Hi any Microsoft Fans :)


I'd just like to make myself very clear:

I'm not complaining about MS's scheme to offer several variants of the same thing, just pointing it out and implying that Apple is better in that regard.
They can divide Windows 7 up into 128 different versions for all I care. I'm not likely to buy any more of them for my own use anytime soon.

Nor do I feel "cheated" in any way. $49 is a bargain, even for an MS product. I pre-ordered W7 months ago merely to see what all the fuss is about. I have no intention of permanently installing it on the Mac Pro, merely to test it out a little and to see if x64 and AHCI would install on my MP1.1 (they did, thanks to helpful posts on this forum)

If I do eventually get Win7 it will be for my next Mac Pro and of course I would get the Pro or Ultimate version.

At the start I was pretty sure W7 H.P. supported only single-CPU systems (it DOES support multiple CORES on a single CPU), so I started looking around to see.

Microsoft doesn't mention it on the box or on easy-to-find comparison charts.
Nor does the Win7 installer. At no point was there any mention of unusable CPU cores.

"5 minutes with Google" did reveal that Vista H.P. only supports single CPU, so it was a safe assumption that 7 H.P. does too.

Nowhere in the Mac Pro section of this forum did I find mention of Microsoft's crippling of Home Premium for multi-CPU systems, so I thought I's see for myself.
And put the results here in the Mac Pro threads where it may do some good for a Mac Pro user considering buying Win7.


Wondering why there are so many MS supporters in a Mac forum,
:confused:

Have Fun,
Keri

PS. Please understand: I don't like MS. That's why I bought a Mac. I ended up liking it a lot more that I thought I would. Which is why I'm here.
Win7 or 8 could turn out to be the bestest OS in history, capable of bringing World Peace, Universal Happiness and Well-Being and I still wouldn't like them and would continue to use vastly inferior OSX on a $6,000,000.00 Mac Mini if I had to.

That is not to say you shouldn't like MS. You can go right ahead and marry King William if you like. ;) I don't mind at all.
 

UltraNEO*

macrumors 601
Jun 16, 2007
4,057
12
近畿日本
IMO. You should of gotten the Windows 7 Ultimate RC for testing, while it was around.. Imagine, you could of saved yourself $49 ;)

Actually, I'm still using the RC1... anyone know when it's due to expire?
 

ZennZero

macrumors member
Mar 21, 2008
85
0
London
At the start I was pretty sure W7 H.P. supported only single-CPU systems (it DOES support multiple CORES on a single CPU), so I started looking around to see.
I was confused until I saw this, as I was certain I had threads executing in parallel on Win7 Home, but all fours cores reside on a single physical CPU, so that explains it. Upon further research, it looks like Win7 HP only supports 16GB RAM as well.

Had I been aware of these limitations I definitely would have opted for the professional edition...
 

gugucom

macrumors 68020
May 21, 2009
2,136
1
Munich, Germany
Actually, I'm still using the RC1... anyone know when it's due to expire?
They will start nag screens at the end of February and it will expire over the following months.

Seven really is pretty much Vista SP2 in disguise. Anybody who used Vista-64 Business knew you would need Seven Professionel-64 on a Mac Pro. Unless I'm badly mistaken there are some other relevant features missing from Home Premium like running 64-bit in hardware virtualization.
 

gugucom

macrumors 68020
May 21, 2009
2,136
1
Munich, Germany
Oops, got it wrong once again. I can't recall what it was that almost bogged me down the last time I made a 64-bit installation and found out it just worked on Vista Business, perhaps it was drive conversion to dynamic volumes.
 

UltraNEO*

macrumors 601
Jun 16, 2007
4,057
12
近畿日本
They will start nag screens at the end of February and it will expire over the following months.

Seven really is pretty much Vista SP2 in disguise. Anybody who used Vista-64 Business knew you would need Seven Professionel-64 on a Mac Pro. Unless I'm badly mistaken there are some other relevant features missing from Home Premium like running 64-bit in hardware virtualization.
Is there a timer? My machine is offline.
 

Infrared

macrumors 68000
Mar 28, 2007
1,680
56
From the Windows 7 Home Premium EULA:

2. INSTALLATION AND USE RIGHTS.
[...]
c. Licensed Computer. You may use the software on up to
two processors on the licensed computer at one time.
That could be misleading. I guess they might mean two logical
processors (i.e., cores). But that would rule out fully using one
quad core processor. Hmm.. what do they mean? :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.