# Failed Windows 11 PC Check



## tomohawk (Dec 29, 2009)

Out of curiosity, I decided to check if my dell Optiplex 3050 meets the requirements for Windows 11 and I got a fail.

The fail message (attached) states that my processor is the issue.

According to Microsoft, the minimum processor requirements are:-
1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster with 2 or more cores on a compatible 64-bit processor or System on a Chip (SoC) 

Here are the details of my chip (from Speccy):-
Intel Core i5 7500
Cores 4
Threads 4
Name Intel Core i5 7500
Code Name Kaby Lake
Package Socket 1151 LGA
Technology 14nm
Specification Intel Core i5-7500 CPU @ 3.40GHz
Family 6
Extended Family 6
Model E
Extended Model 9E
Stepping 9
Revision B0
Instructions MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, Intel 64, NX, VMX, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3
Virtualization Supported, Enabled
Hyperthreading Not supported
Bus Speed 99.7 MHz
Stock Core Speed 3400 MHz
Stock Bus Speed 100 MHz
Average Temperature 35 °C
Caches
L1 Data Cache Size 4 x 32 KBytes
L1 Instructions Cache Size 4 x 32 KBytes
L2 Unified Cache Size 4 x 256 KBytes
L3 Unified Cache Size 6144 KBytes

Any insight into this would be greatly appreciated?

Tommy


----------



## Corday (Mar 3, 2010)

Please don't worry yet. Everyday MS is posting a new "checker". You have until 2025 at least to upgrade. This list is approved CPUs List


----------



## tomohawk (Dec 29, 2009)

Thanks Corday.
Reason I ask is that I prefer to future proof wherever possible.
My chip is not on the list, but you're right that this will likely change.


----------



## sobeit (Nov 11, 2007)

also, things change. with all the feedback, microsoft could make changes to the compatibility list. Also there could be firmware updates from the computer manufacturers that could change some things too.


----------



## coldiron (Dec 4, 2011)

tomohawk said:


> Out of curiosity, I decided to check if my dell Optiplex 3050 meets the requirements for Windows 11 and I got a fail.
> 
> The fail message (attached) states that my processor is the issue.
> 
> ...


If you replace the "install.wim" file in the Source folder in win 11, with the install.wim file from a win 10 Source folder it will install on most any computer.


----------



## HavFun (Oct 26, 2009)

The computer has to be 64-bits including the processor. This seems to be one of the sticking points for Win11 that may not change. They also are saying that the hardware implementation of TPM 2.0 is required. My AMD-Ryzen 7-1700 processor on a MicroStar Bazooka motherboard does meet the 64-bit requirement, but the "tests" say there is no TPM 2.0 (or 1.2 for that matter). This seems like a requirement Microsoft could work around, but only time will tell. TPM is a hardware encryption module (likely on some chip somewhere on the motherboard).


----------



## Corday (Mar 3, 2010)

Just hold tight. Due to overwhlming negative replies, MS pulled the test and we hear is broadening the CPU list.


----------



## SoCalBryan (Jun 28, 2020)

Yes you can replace the install.esd in the the recent windows 11 iso that was released with the install.wim from a windows 10 iso. That is not an option yet as the currently released preview of windows 11 by microsoft is not offered with an iso format. You may be able to stop the installation and look for the windows install.esd in the temporary folders the the preview creates, but there is no ISO of the offering from microsoft at this time.


----------



## SoCalBryan (Jun 28, 2020)

One other thing I'd like to say is if everyone encrypts there data there's going to be a lot of pissed off people when there computer crashes and they can't recover their data.

The only true way to protect your data is to keep it stored offline via a usb hard drive or flash drive. No need for encryption then.


----------



## johnwill (Sep 26, 2002)

SoCalBryan said:


> The only true way to protect your data is to keep it stored offline via a usb hard drive or flash drive. No need for encryption then.


That's what the 2TB USB drive on top of my computer is for. Every week I get a prompt to turn it on and fire off the backup. After the backup, it goes back off. I also have a NAS that needs a login every time I access it, it gets a backup weekly as well. I figure at least one of these will be available after I tell the Ransomware guys were to stick it. 

Oh, and I have automated daily backups of all data to a separate physical SSD in the computer for the normal type of disk crashes.


----------



## SoCalBryan (Jun 28, 2020)

I installed 2 hot swapable bays in my pc for backups and for cloning. Just stick a sata drive in one and backup any files I recently added. Then keep store it in a safe place. If it's not connected it can't be accessed.

As far as the Windows 11 PC check it appears that after you run the installer and get the failed pc check dialog there is a registry fix I was reading about form the Windows Club Why do you need TPM? How to bypass TPM requirement and install Windows 11?

On unsupported devices, when you try to install Windows 11, you may see a message – *This PC cant run Windows 11*.

Now press *Shift+F10* to open *Command Prompt*. Use it to *open regedit.exe* and modify a registry key.













Go to the following path and create a new key *LabConfig*:


HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\Setup
In the LabConfig key, create two new DWORDs with the following Values:


BypassTPMCheck – 00000001
BypassSecureBootCheck – 00000001
Save and exit.

Now, retry installing Windows 11. Hopefully, you will be able to bypass TPM with these steps.


----------



## tomohawk (Dec 29, 2009)

Corday said:


> Just hold tight. Due to overwhlming negative replies, MS pulled the test and we hear is broadening the CPU list.


Thanks Corday.
Well there's a surprise, eh!
Tommy


----------



## tomohawk (Dec 29, 2009)

SoCalBryan said:


> One other thing I'd like to say is if everyone encrypts there data there's going to be a lot of pissed off people when there computer crashes and they can't recover their data.
> 
> The only true way to protect your data is to keep it stored offline via a usb hard drive or flash drive. No need for encryption then.


That's interesting SoCalBryan

Can you elaborate, as I have Bitlocker activated on my laptop.

Tommy


----------



## SoCalBryan (Jun 28, 2020)

The only question I have is why? What are doing that requires you to have that level of protection, secret corporate development work, secret government work?

Encryption sounds like a great idea until some computer glitch screws up your ability to access the data. If you need encrypted data put it on a usb flash drive and then make another version as a backup. No need to encrypt the whole laptop drive.

What happens if the TPM chip gets shorted out by a bad power supply while saving the encryption keys?

Most users will never need this level of encyption IMO.


----------



## tomohawk (Dec 29, 2009)

SoCalBryan said:


> The only question I have is why? What are doing that requires you to have that level of protection, secret corporate development work, secret government work?
> 
> Encryption sounds like a great idea until some computer glitch screws up your ability to access the data. If you need encrypted data put it on a usb flash drive and then make another version as a backup. No need to encrypt the whole laptop drive.
> 
> ...


The reason why is that I only use this laptop when travelling, so there is a danger of it being lost or stolen. Before travelling, I clone all my data from my desktop, so if any technical issues, I have a backup at least a few days old. My data contains a lot of personal financial data, and that is what concerns me.


----------



## coldiron (Dec 4, 2011)

SoCalBryan said:


> Yes you can replace the install.esd in the the recent windows 11 iso that was released with the install.wim from a windows 10 iso. That is not an option yet as the currently released preview of windows 11 by microsoft is not offered with an iso format. You may be able to stop the installation and look for the windows install.esd in the temporary folders the the preview creates, but there is no ISO of the offering from microsoft at this time.


I have down loaded Windows 11 in ISO form! I did the swap of the INSTALL.WIM and I did install it and it is working just fine. Could there be someone in Richmon who has put out an iso? ???


----------



## Dhawks45 (Jun 30, 2021)

tomohawk said:


> Out of curiosity, I decided to check if my dell Optiplex 3050 meets the requirements for Windows 11 and I got a fail.
> 
> The fail message (attached) states that my processor is the issue.
> 
> ...


My processor failed and I have a i7-6700K.


----------



## coldiron (Dec 4, 2011)

Dhawks45 said:


> My processor failed and I have a i7-6700K.


And??? Did you try what I posted?


----------



## SoCalBryan (Jun 28, 2020)

tomohawk said:


> The reason why is that I only use this laptop when travelling, so there is a danger of it being lost or stolen. Before travelling, I clone all my data from my desktop, so if any technical issues, I have a backup at least a few days old. My data contains a lot of personal financial data, and that is what concerns me.


If it was me I'd use a Live USB (linux) or Install Windows on a USB drive. That way even if the laptop is stolen all you data is on the usb drive. If it's a new laptop it has to at least have USB 3.0 or better. That should be fast enough to get all your tasks completed.

When done shut down and remove the usb drive and pocket it or put it on your key ring. If you leave the hotel the USB drive is with you not the laptop. If the laptop does end up missing all u need is another computer. Plug in the USB drive and boot it up.

May need to install some drivers but it should got u going if not you could at least get any new data off of it using another computer.


----------



## johnwill (Sep 26, 2002)

No need to install Windows on the USB drive, just point your documents link to the USB drive. I have all my documents on a separate logical drive for easy backup anyway. My Windows partition gets a once a week image backup, my data drive is backed up every day. For portable use, a tiny 128GB USB FLASH drive. Here's a 128GB model for $16.70.

SanDisk 128GB Ultra Fit USB 3.1 Flash Drive - SDCZ430-128G-G46


----------



## coldiron (Dec 4, 2011)

johnwill said:


> No need to install Windows on the USB drive, just point your documents link to the USB drive. I have all my documents on a separate logical drive for easy backup anyway. My Windows partition gets a once a week image backup, my data drive is backed up every day. For portable use, a tiny 128GB USB FLASH drive. Here's a 128GB model for $16.70.
> 
> SanDisk 128GB Ultra Fit USB 3.1 Flash Drive - SDCZ430-128G-G46
> 
> View attachment 331404


Humm, my document on my C: drive takes up 6 terabytes, which includes many ISO files in the 7 gig range.


----------



## johnwill (Sep 26, 2002)

What in the world do you have in the six terabytes that requires constant updated backups? I suspect that most of that bulk is static stuff that you just need a backup copy of. Consider the ISO files, do you really need to keep a ton of ISO files "at the ready" with constant updated backups? If so, you're one in a million, my advice works for the other 999,999 people with a computer.


----------



## sobeit (Nov 11, 2007)

[


johnwill said:


> What in the world do you have in the six terabytes that requires constant updated backups? I suspect that most of that bulk is static stuff that you just need a backup copy of. Consider the ISO files, do you really need to keep a ton of ISO files "at the ready" with constant updated backups? If so, you're one in a million, my advice works for the other 999,999 people with a computer.


I never heard of c drive being that big.


----------



## johnwill (Sep 26, 2002)

sobeit said:


> [
> I never heard of c drive being that big.


I can't even imagine what all the storage is taken up with! My pair of mirrored NAS drives are 2TB and 3TB, and they comfortable fit all my family's backups, including multiple image backups of the Windows drives, generations of the data, etc.


----------



## SoCalBryan (Jun 28, 2020)

Your My Documents folder should be on a USB hdd, not on the same drive as the OS. I stopped doing that with Windows 95.

That's way to may files on you boot drive.


----------



## 'Lor (Jul 2, 2021)

tomohawk said:


> Out of curiosity, I decided to check if my dell Optiplex 3050 meets the requirements for Windows 11 and I got a fail.
> 
> The fail message (attached) states that my processor is the issue.
> 
> ...


Kaby Lake processors are not supported. You need at least a Gen 8 processor.


----------



## SpareChange (Mar 7, 2019)

Dhawks45 said:


> My processor failed and I have a i7-6700K.


6700K is actually still a strong processor (with a strong OC) it's only now starting to show a decent bottleneck with the recent higher end GPUs in games that use a lot of threads but basically a 6700K has the IPC of a 2700x just less threads. I hope 6th and 7th Gen is eventually included with W11 compatibility.


----------



## coldiron (Dec 4, 2011)

johnwill said:


> What in the world do you have in the six terabytes that requires constant updated backups? I suspect that most of that bulk is static stuff that you just need a backup copy of. Consider the ISO files, do you really need to keep a ton of ISO files "at the ready" with constant updated backups? If so, you're one in a million, my advice works for the other 999,999 people with a computer.


Where did I say I need constant back-up? I do not do that. I do a lot of reverse engineering! My C: is 6 TB's.


----------



## SoCalBryan (Jun 28, 2020)

Man! So back in 1988 when I learned to use a PC the very first thing my instructor told us iis that there's 2 types of computer users -

1. Those that have lost data 
and
2. Those that are about too.

Absolutely no data goes on my C: drive. I reserve ti strictly to the operating system and important utilities, like anti-virus, firewall software, archiving utilities. I do this because in my 32 years of PC experience it's writing new files to the System drive that eventually cause a software crash. Yeah Windows writes regularly to the drive. But keeping my data on a seperate drive allows for a small system drive which can quickly be reimaged if the OS gets damaged somehow. Usually within 20 minutes.

Even dividing up a single drive is preferable to one huge drive. Although it's still one drive have at least 2 partitions, one for the os (C and one for the data (D would still allow for a fast reimaging.

Even if you have a 6 TB backup. That's a huged waste of utility having all your files on one drive.

Also using the C: drive as the work drive is just asking for it to crash. I have to of these hot swappable sata bays in my workstation Silverstone Hot-Swap Adapters

Specifically for a work horse drive. This keeps me from continuously writing to the OS drive during file operations. USB 3.0 is as fast as sata so even using a USB drive is better than having all that data on one drive let alone the C: drive.

Sorry OP for getting of topic but this is really important info IMO.


----------



## coldiron (Dec 4, 2011)

SoCalBryan said:


> Man! So back in 1988 when I learned to use a PC the very first thing my instructor told us iis that there's 2 types of computer users -
> 
> 1. Those that have lost data
> and
> ...


I see no point in running two drives, any drive can fail at any time, so what is the point? Two drives running all the time is using more resources than running one. Large drives have a much
lower failure rate than small ones, look it up.


----------



## johnwill (Sep 26, 2002)

coldiron said:


> I see no point in running two drives, any drive can fail at any time, so what is the point?


If the data is duplicated, i.e. backed up, on the second drive, you still have it when a drive fails. That's the whole idea of the mirrored drives in a NAS. I've had a couple of drive failures in my NAS boxes, but I've been able to stick another drive in and let the NAS rebuild the array and all is well.


coldiron said:


> Large drives have a much lower failure rate than small ones, look it up.


I did look it up, and I don't see the overwhelming evidence that you seem to think exists. AAMOF, I don't see much in the way of any evidence that suggests smaller drives will have a much greater failure rate.

Backblaze Drive Stats for Q1 2021
Backblaze Hard Drive Stats Q2 2020

This page has a report that seems to suggest failure rates are similar for various sizes. The only difference is, you lose a lot more data when a huge drive croaks.

This hard drive reliability report highlights why it’s important to back up your data

A quote from that page...

_The latest hard drive reliability report from Backblaze, a cloud backup company that routinely publicizes failure rates among the drives in its employ, noted some interesting trends in the first quarter. *For one, HDD failures as a whole have gone up.* At the same time, the reports shows that larger capacity HDDs in the range of 8TB to 14TB are no more prone to failure than smaller capacity drives._


----------



## SoCalBryan (Jun 28, 2020)

Wow John thanks for posting that. I was thinking his logic was not correct about smaller drives. I have HDD's as small as 80 GB 2.5inch laptop drive used in a usb caddy that still work flawlessly. I also had 500GB segate drives that failed to initialize. Data still intact just not way to read it of the disk..

Coldiron. You don't necessarily have to have a second drive, simply shrink the C partion then add an extended partition D for file operations. This minimizes writes to the boot partiton . So less chance of screwing up the boot drive where all the system files are. This is why we have the ability partition HDD's and why you should use this feature.

Store the files not being used offline. Use the D: drive/partiton as the working drive not the C: system drive. This at least would isolate the working drive on a section of the hard disk that's not the system drive C: this minimizes the writes to the system partition creating longevity for your system and more performance and faster boot times. Even better get Raxco Perfect Disk and use it's feature to stack the OS files at the front of the drive, sorted by which file is read first, second, an so on, while loading them at bootime, for another performance boost.

This is a relatively simple concept and can save you a lot of grief in the future. But alas some have to learn the hard way.


----------



## coldiron (Dec 4, 2011)

SoCalBryan said:


> Wow John thanks for posting that. I was thinking his logic was not correct about smaller drives. I have HDD's as small as 80 GB 2.5inch laptop drive used in a usb caddy that still work flawlessly. I also had 500GB segate drives that failed to initialize. Data still intact just not way to read it of the disk..
> 
> Coldiron. You don't necessarily have to have a second drive, simply shrink the C partion then add an extended partition D for file operations. This minimizes writes to the boot partiton . So less chance of screwing up the boot drive where all the system files are. This is why we have the ability partition HDD's and why you should use this feature.
> 
> ...


I use GPT format, which makes for three partitions, one of which has the boot records. It boots faster and shuts down faster. There is no limit to Part size which I like. Windows will not install to a GPT unless a bit of coding is done to it.


----------



## djbillyd (Jul 25, 2010)

coldiron said:


> I see no point in running two drives, any drive can fail at any time, so what is the point? Two drives running all the time is using more resources than running one. Large drives have a much
> lower failure rate than small ones, look it up.


Well, I guess that would kinda depend on how you use your device. I have 6 drives, 1 SSD (2TB) M.2, and 4-3.5" HDD's and an external with a 1TB 2.5 HDD. I have backups, for my backups! I have file types primary on certain drives, et al, Music, Photos, Videos, etc. And I have had 4 TB HDD failures as well as 1TB failures. Basically, it's a crap shoot. "You pays your money, and you takes your chance".


----------



## storm5510 (Mar 26, 2009)

tomohawk said:


> Out of curiosity, I decided to check if my dell Optiplex 3050 meets the requirements for Windows 11 and I got a fail.
> 
> The fail message (attached) states that my processor is the issue.
> 
> ...


There is nothing here about a TPM, (Trusted Platform Module). My i7 main board has a receptacle for one. It is 4 years old. I would think anything relatively new would have the same. Like mine, your CPU is 7th Generation. I am not sure, but I think the specs require 8th Generation.


----------



## coldiron (Dec 4, 2011)

If you are attempting to install Windows 11 and receive a message stating, "This PC can't run Windows 11," it is likely that you do not have a TPM 2.0 installed or enabled.
The good news is that Microsoft includes a new 'LabConfig' registry key that allows you to configure settings to bypass the TPM 2.0, the 4GB memory, and Secure Boot requirements.
Based on the name of this registry key, it is likely used by Microsoft or OEMs to set up a "lab" environment to test the Windows 11 on older equipment or when testing new features.
To bypass the TPM 2.0 requirements when installing Windows 11, please follow these steps:

Install Windows 11 via an ISO or the Windows 11 Insider Program. While installing Windows 11, if your computer does not meet the hardware requirements, you will see a message stating, "This PC can't run Windows 11."
*Windows 11 setup blocked due to missing hardware requirements*​
When you see the above message, press *Shift+F10* on your keyboard at the same time to launch a command prompt. At this command prompt, type *regedit* and press *enter* to launch the Windows Registry Editor.
*Opening command prompt in Windows Setup*​
When the Registry Editor opens, navigate to *HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\Setup*, right-click on the *Setup *key and select *New* > *Key*.

When prompted to name the key, enter *LabConfig* and press *enter*.

Now right-click on the *LabConfig* key and select *New* > *DWORD (32-bit) value* and create a value named *BypassTPMCheck*, and set its data to *1*. Now create the *BypassRAMCheck *and *BypassSecureBootCheck *values and set their data to *1* as well, so it looks like the following image.
*Configuring the Registry to bypass hardware requirements*​
Once you configure those three values under the LabConfig key, close the Registry Editor, and then type *exit* in the Command Prompt followed by *enter *to close the window.
You will now be back at the message stating that the PC can't run Windows 11. Click on the back button in the Windows Setup dialog, as shown below.
*Press the back button in Windows setup*​
You will now be back at the screen prompting you to select the version of Windows 11 you wish to install. You can now continue with the setup, and the hardware requirements will be bypassed, allowing you to install Windows 11.
*Hardware requirements are now bypassed
I have tried this a few times and it worked every time. Even on an AMD with limited BIOS.*​It is important to note that disabling these features could affect the performance or stability of Windows 11, so be sure to only use them on a virtual machine or test box that are you are ok with working in an unsupported environment. I saw no effect on the performance or stability of Windows 11, Pro, or Enterprise. Just love testing.


----------

