Yeah, if you got over 3.2GB of RAM (effictively this will mean you got at least 4GB) you will need to get the 64-bits Windows as otherwise the memory isn't used (properly).
I'm also running Win 7 64 bits (Ultimate) and never ran in to any problems except sometimes you need to look a bit better to find 64-bits drivers.
i actually gained a bit of fps in Crysis moving strictly to 64 bit (OS and game) as the mapper for the texture files can natively go over 2GB for the file (iinstead of having to skip around and reset the counter every 2GB)
Am using Windows 7 Ultimate 32-bit patched running 16GB (4x4GB) of ram with +4GB patch for games to remove the 2GB limiter.
- All PC games are compatible on 32-bit even legacy games
- PC games were built on 32-bit what a lame excuse to say go 64-bit
Tell me what's great about 64-bit operating system in regards to computer gaming, when games where build on 32-bit?
I can't believe a lot of people still are buying the lies of Microsoft.
BTW: People want the patch google this “32 bit ram patch” select the link from unawave.
64 bit win 7 is the same price as the 32 bit one.There is really no reason to have to apply ram patches and not be able to use 64 bit applications when you can get the 64 bit windows and use that instead.If anyone has any compatibility problems with an old game,there are virtual machines on which you can install win 95 and up to game to your heart's contend.
Many would go 64-bit but when issues arises some would advise going to 32-bit.
i have heard that you lose fps on crysis 64 bit, is this the same with all games in 64 bit?
Many games perform well on 64-bit but more over than not more issues arise but this does not apply to all games just some, some of the good ones that is.
There is really no reason to have to apply ram patches and not be able to use 64 bit applications when you can get the 64 bit windows and use that instead.
Wait you've lost me where did the 64-bit applications come from when were talking about here are pc games. New pc games like Crysis that were developed using 32-bit assembly language that are being run on a 64-bit platform that encounter drawbacks.
If anyone has any compatibility problems with an old game,there are virtual machines on which you can install win 95 and up to game to your heart's contend.
Virtualization is the way I agree but would anyone bother to go through that whole process when they can just run it natively without the issues.
An example of an old game, lets say Fallout 3 and Windows 7 64-bit with its truck load of issues. Explain to me why on Windows 7 32-bit it doesn't have those same problems?
Dude it's absolutely cool to patronage of 64-bit but minimize the bashing of 32-bit when it gets upgraded and schools 64-bit on gaming.
I bet the OPs use of his compute won't be just gaming.So 64 bit will let him use other applications.About fallout 3,that game has so many issues and bug that it shouldn't be used as an example for issues with 64 bit games.And finally you can't run more than 3.5gb of ram natively with 32bit so you would have to bother to go through applying the patch you mentioned anyway.So why not use that time to make a VM instead?
Still I have to agree,for gaming only,32 bit windows can be more hassle free than their 64 bit counterparts.I wouldn't choose them though.
Indeed natively 32-bit caps at 3.5GB but setting up a VM takes more than 5 mins. on the other hand the flag removal only takes 2 secs. + a reboot. Then it tops at 64GB making it native on 32-bit just like the old schools Win2K, 2K3 and 2K8.
No offense but this is my preference like some who just don't jump when they say jump, my type takes the ratchet and if comes to adding new blocks it will be added to boost it beyond factory limits. Just like cars snap some aftermarket voids factory warranty, snap some turbos and tweak the ECU takes you to closer to stage 1 racing setup.
Going back . . .
Acceptable answer from your end, though in my case until Microsoft hammers down the 64-bit to be rock solid for gaming it'll be strictly for work environment. Still that won't be enough, the game developers would still move to using new code as base standard then that will be the day.
I went with 64bit Win7 because 1. I could 2. Wanted to see if the support for my games were there, and it was 3. I don't want to re-load my OS when some game comes out that requires it or takes advantage of the architecture.
Good points all around. It really comes down to preference more than "one is better than the other"
To each their own
Man Phy - are you STILL posting that 32-bit is "better" than 64-bit junk?
And it's not about "preference". Look at not only all the tests and benchmarks here at Tom's but other sites as well (ones that ACTUALLY don't rig their tests to "make" 32-bit "look" better). Straight up 64-bit will BLOW away 32-bit - period.
If you have an old game - and were talking 1990's now - that "just" won't play on 64-bit (because it's a 16-bit program), then dual boot if you want play it. There nothing that has come out in the last 5 years (probably closer to 10 now too), that won't run perfectly fine on 64-bit, and anything that's come out in the last two probably has 64-bit architecture built right in.
And I don't know where you get your info - but Windows actually has good solid support for 64-bit for the last few years. Gaming HAS been rock solid on 64-bit for YEARS.
Maybe if you'd get rid of some of your "tweaks" - your games might run better. Just a thought.
I have 3gb ram , 2.5 gb nvidia graphics card , 2.93 ghz intel cord due , win 7 pro 32 bit , is it recommended that i change to 64 bit , plz reply 0)
personally i would, but thats me, keep in mind if the key for your windows 7 key is retail all you need to do is get a hold of a legal 64bit disk to re-install it (as retail keys work for both 32 and 64bit)