Talk:Windows 10

> In the lede: ... [Windows 10 ] is the last version of Microsoft Windows that supports ... and TPM 1.2

Windows 11 edition 24H2 for the x86-64 platform, predicted to reach general public by the end of 2024, reduces the long-held TPM 2.0 pre-requirement of Win11 to TPM 1.2, thus becoming the (supposedly) last version of Microsoft Windows to support TPM 1.2 84.236.41.150 (talk) 11:02, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

:You're right, that sentence wasn't exactly correct. I've now clarified the TPM 1.2 and also the BIOS reference. That being said, Microsoft has actually officially supported TPM 1.2 on select OEM systems (upon Microsoft approval) since the release of Windows 11. Although now possibly it seems like the installer requirement/check (clean installs only) for TPM 2.0 was silently reduced to TPM 1.2 starting with 24H2. The official requirement remains at TPM 2.0, however, on "proper" Windows 11 version 24H2, based on all currently available sources. Winderz IoT (talk) 21:24, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

{{Edit semi-protected|Windows 10|answered=yes}}

Add that its the last version to run on machines without SSE4.2/POPCNT since only the drop of x86-32 is mentioned for CPU requirement changes Unlikethesun (talk) 08:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

:{{Not done}}: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. A reliable source like a news article would also show that the detail is relevant enough to add to the article. FifthFive (talk) 00:33, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

:Going by official requirements, this is redundant, as all TPM 2.0 CPUs, along with the official list of supported CPUs, support SSE4.2/POPCNT. Going by unofficial, Windows 11 23H2 is the last version to support machines without SSE4.2/POPCNT. Winderz IoT (talk) 03:41, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

:I've gone ahead and added that Windows 10 is the last version to lack a CPU whitelist, since that was previously missing. Winderz IoT (talk) 13:48, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

:I decided to go ahead and re-add this back in, while adding necessary caveats and using your updated source, just so you know. Winderz IoT (talk) 01:22, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

When Windows 10 support ends, anyone change the screenshot on infobox to 1507 one? OOCJZ (talk) 05:54, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

{{Edit semi-protected|Windows 10|answered=yes}}

89.241.188.172 (talk) 21:02, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

:File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Sophisticatedevening ^(talk) 21:02, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

I am unable to edit this article so someone else fix this. In the opening section, it says "It was succeeded by Windows 11, which was released on October 5, 2021. It is the last version of Microsoft Windows that supports 32-bit processors (IA-32 and ARMv7-based) and the last major version to support 64-bit processors that don't meet the x86-x64-v2 (i.e., having POPCNT and SSE4.2) or ARMv8.1 specifications, across all minor versions." I think the second sentence that starts with "It" should be changed to "Windows 10". I'm pretty sure I understand what the sentence is implying but I rarely have to second guess myself on Wikipedia. This sentence looks like it might be implying that Windows 11 the version being mentioned. Mopspear (talk) 13:40, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

:{{done}}: Also moved the first sentence to the first paragraph, which seemed more fitting. Winderz IoT (talk) 15:39, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

I suggest getting rid of the sentence "They wanted it to be a 128-bit version." There were no 128-bit CPUs in 2009 (and there still aren't any in 2025). This may refer to Windows 10's (and Windows 8's) SSE2 requirement, but that's a SIMD extension, which doesn't make the CPU a 128-bit CPU. The sentence is extremely misleading at best, but at face value it's simply nonsensical. 87.152.202.196 (talk) 16:15, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

:I concur. I'm going to go ahead and remove the sentence, as the misleading nature of the statement is clear and obvious to anyone with any amount of advanced knowledge in computing. Tcrow777 ^Talk 20:08, 26 May 2025 (UTC)