Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Question about 64 bit and 32 bit Vista

Last response: in Windows Vista
Share
November 19, 2007 5:05:48 PM

I've been starting to do some research on Vista. I want to upgrade to Vista to utilize my 8800 gtx card and direct x 10 with games. i've been reading and see that 64 bit version has much more ram capacity and floating point operations? What else does the 64 bit premium version have over 32 bit version? Also, do I have to have a 64 bit CPU to take advantage of 64 bit Vista? I have an Intel E6600 2.4 Conroe and the EVGA 680i motherboard.
Thanks,

More about : question bit bit vista

November 19, 2007 5:33:36 PM

Think of it as a straw. a '32' bit straw of information flow compared to a considerably more efficient '64' bit straw of information being moved and processed by the system. 64 bit applications run a great deal faster on a 64 bit OS when compared to a 32 bit OS running 32 bit applications. Pretty simple really. The difference between the two is recognizable. For my personal system, I will never use a 32 bit OS again. Nothing wrong with 32 bit, but 64 is worth it to me.
November 19, 2007 6:54:39 PM

Badge is right about everything. 64 bit also lets you use 4GB of RAM.
Related resources
November 19, 2007 8:46:38 PM

Why does the Vista 64 bit info page say this:

"All editions of Windows Vista 64-bit provide increased memory support beyond the standard 4 gigabytes (GB) available with 32-bit editions."

They make it seem like 4GB works with 32 bit.
November 19, 2007 8:53:30 PM

32 bit OS will 'take' up to 4 GB, but the OS will 'appropriate' or designate or find if you will only approximately 3GB. 64 bit OS will appropriate or 'find and designate' 4Gb and well beyond. If you are talking VISTA 64 you aquire Superfetch explained here:

http://www.anandtech.com/systems/showdoc.aspx?i=2917&p=...
November 20, 2007 1:28:32 AM

I was looking on newegg.com just now and was very close to buying, but a lot of people were writing bad reviews and how they had so many problems with driver support. Did you or anyone else have this many problems?
November 20, 2007 3:05:57 AM

No. Only ancient software,outdated programs. A lot of software/drivers for 64 bit OS are available now. My Brother printer circa Windows 98 would not work. Pinnacle Studio 9 would not work with VISTA 32. Pinnacle has released ver. 11 which will work fine. Fairly typical of what to expect. Your system, MB, etc. should be recent. Old components may have driver problems, but not new MB's.
November 20, 2007 10:51:33 AM

valianes said:
Why does the Vista 64 bit info page say this:

"All editions of Windows Vista 64-bit provide increased memory support beyond the standard 4 gigabytes (GB) available with 32-bit editions."

They make it seem like 4GB works with 32 bit.



32 bit Windows does indeed have 4GB worth of addresses - 2 bytes to the 32nd power. But know that *EVERYTHING* on your computer that needs an address has to use the same pool. Your Mobo has Flash-ROM for the Bios, each device/connection on your comp needs a set of addresses, the cache on your Hard Drive(s) must be addressed, your Video RAM needs addresses, etc etc etc... All of that comes before system RAM because crashes, unusability of devices, and other user-impacting errata can occur if addresses aren't provided to other areas of your comp. Whereas if RAM lacks addresses, all that happens is the un-addressed areas simply don't get used. So the designers (rightly!) assign everything else first, and your RAM gets whatever's left over from the 4GB pool.

In actual usage, depending on configuration/devices, etc, you can see up to about 3.25GB of RAM and often less. There are endless posts on the forums bickering about this little bit of Practical Computing Reality...

The theoretical limit for 64 bit operating systems is upwards of 16 Terabytes (2^64 instead of 2^32), but Vista 64's limit is set by MSFT at 128 GB. Enough for a while, I think. At least until Crysis 2, anyways. :pt1cable:  :lol: 



Regarding drivers: You shouldn't have any troubles just so long as you use new hardware, and relatively recent software. Regarding people b*tching and complaining - That happens *every* time a new operating system hits the streets. If there's a problem in XP, people know what those look like, figure it out and fix it. But since Vista is new, people don't bother to do that. Instead they blame it on Microsoft and call the OS a POS.

This doesn't mean there aren't issues - There are. But having been an relatively early adopter of XP, I can say for sure that Vista at release is FAR FAR better than XP was. And that Vista now is better than XP was at the same stage of *it's* development.

Hope that helps.

Scott
November 20, 2007 12:09:00 PM

Yes, it does, I'm going to get vista ultimate 64. I also read on the forums that vista is faster. I have some guides for xp that explained how to go into the registry and change things and optimize the operating system. I'm it's also possible to do that type of stuff in vista right? Like turning off indexing and optimizing cache and things like that?? Or is it so advanced that it does a lot of that stuff for you. I read that you can turn off the aero skin in ultimate to free up resources as well, correct?
November 20, 2007 1:31:02 PM

Yah - Aero eats a little bit of power. The surprisingly greedy thing is the Sidebar/Gadgets. If you have a marginal system, you should shut that off. You can see my system details if you like - I have aero set full on, and don't notice any difference in usage. You can run that all full on on a decent system and be fine. The Peeps who like to run Fraps and count frame rates are the one's you see complaining about this stuff. Apparently going from 100 Frames per second to "just" 95 is some sort of life altering handicap, or something...

Indexing is annoying for the first week or two, but to my mind it's a GOOD thing. The Search function has been revised in Vista, and it's actually *very* good, easy, and usable. Just type in the name of the thing you are looking for. Done. Saves a lot of time navigating through folders and sub-folders.

Vista is more advanced about optimizing itself and VERY aggressive about handling system resources. It pre-caches commonly used programs in memory for faster launching, for example. This means you'll see larger "usage" numbers for RAM, which drives some people absolutely nuts. Same for the Indexing mentioned earlier - Lots of HDD I/O while Vista teaches itself where everything is. Makes some people crazy that their formerly inactive drives are spinning much more than they are used to. It is *not* as quick as XP is, since there is more in the way of background tasks. It is fatter, for sure. But Vista isn't quite the bloated pig many would have the world believe, either.

The tools you have available to you in XP are present in Vista. Plus some basic logging and data collection stuff in the advanced tools. Not as good as stuff you can buy, but it's free and more than is in an XP BOX irregardless. Menus and paths are somewhat the same, and settings are basically the same as XP - Check or un-check, set a number etc... The box on my desk has 4GB of RAM, so rather than the 2~3GB default I have the swap file manually set to 512MB. Simple. The boot manager is different, though Vista can use/reference the XP one if you have a dual boot setup. I haven't felt any need to visit the registry.

About the most annoying thing I've run into is that V64 has a pathological hatred of unsigned and/or expired digital certificates. You *used* to be able to disable that. USED to.... Gotchas? Certain RAID drivers aren't entirely compatible. Install KB929777 before installing over 2GB of RAM. And it's good practice to leave the network unplugged until after you have your local (Bios, chipset, etc) drivers installed. Otherwise Vista auto-configures the network, registers itself, and begins downloading/installing it's updates right away.

On the positive side - Getting the network up is/was as simple as plugging in the LAN cable. No manual addresses or d*cking around in Microsoft Networking.

I believe you can order Home Premium 64. I know if you have a retail licence for 32, you can ask for a 64 bit CD and MSFT will send you one for something like $10 handling fee. Microsoft hasn't delivered on a lot of the 'extras' they promised Ultimate users would get.
November 20, 2007 2:33:13 PM

I just installed Vista Premium 64bit. Only driver issue I had was for my Brother MFC 8440. While Brother has put out 64bit drivers for somethings, there wasnt an official one for me. But after a little research and some help from other forums dealing with just Vista 64bit, I found one that works.

And since no one has answered you question about the hardware, yes it will i support 64bit.

I recommend it.
November 20, 2007 3:04:36 PM

xringx said:
I just installed Vista Premium 64bit. Only driver issue I had was for my Brother MFC 8440. While Brother has put out 64bit drivers for somethings, there wasnt an official one for me. But after a little research and some help from other forums dealing with just Vista 64bit, I found one that works.

And since no one has answered you question about the hardware, yes it will i support 64bit.

I recommend it.


LOL. My Brother MFC-8300 installs, but the Mfg. website lists only Windows 98 drivers and the unit will not work on VISTA 64. It worked fine on XP and VISTA 32. Only problem I had.
November 20, 2007 3:58:28 PM

what kind of things did they promise for ultimate? So are you saying premium is the way to go instead? Will the HDD I/O subside after vista teaches itself where everything is? I'll definitely get the 64 version right away. I have a pretty good system.
EVGA 680i mobo
Intel E6600 2.4 CPU
2 GB Super Talent RAM
EVGA 8800 GTX
PC power and cooling silencer 750 W PSU
2 WD 36 GB Raptors running windows & 500 GB of additional SATA HDD
November 20, 2007 4:03:34 PM

Ultimate allows you create as many FREE 'Virtual PC's' as you want. Home Premium does not support Microsoft 'Virtual PC'. For example, with VISTA 64 ultimate or Business you can create a Windows XP Virtual machine 'inside' VISTA 64 and run any software from the XP installation 'inside' VISTA.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyI...
November 20, 2007 4:15:21 PM

Badge, check out these forums.

http://www.vistax64.com/

http://www.64bitdrivers.com/index.php

On the last one, I made a request and with in 24 hrs someone had a file posted to DL and it worked. I can now print. Now I am working on install the control center, but I cant seem to find just the program without the drivers.....
November 20, 2007 4:35:18 PM

thanks guys you've been a big help. I'll get the premium version then, and it has all the features of ultimate except the virutal pc? Now I have to decide if I want it soon or if I should order off newegg.com
November 20, 2007 5:20:51 PM

One last question. I read some reviews that also said vista is slower than xp when playing crysis (or any games in general) What does it mean by slow? My main question is why is it slower, because of the resources being used in the background? Is it possible to disable them before playing games and things like that? I'm an engineer and run some finite element software and I don't want it to take forever to solve some of my models if there is one complicated enough.
November 20, 2007 5:38:03 PM

Badge, there isnt an official 64bit driver for my printer either, but someone found something that worked. Wouldnt hurt to make are request off that last website.
November 20, 2007 5:42:17 PM

I tried a driver someone had listed for the MFC-8300, but it didn't work. I'll research it a bit more when I have time.
November 20, 2007 6:06:49 PM

faromic said:
One last question. I read some reviews that also said vista is slower than xp when playing crysis (or any games in general) What does it mean by slow? My main question is why is it slower, because of the resources being used in the background? Is it possible to disable them before playing games and things like that? I'm an engineer and run some finite element software and I don't want it to take forever to solve some of my models if there is one complicated enough.



Because of a couple things: Partially because Vista does use more resources. But also because PC Games are written for XP, then checked that they run on Vista. So at the end of the day they run a few percent slower.
November 20, 2007 6:23:20 PM

ah, i see
November 21, 2007 6:27:10 AM

Scotteq said:
32 bit Windows does indeed have 4GB worth of addresses - 2 bytes to the 32nd power. But know that *EVERYTHING* on your computer that needs an address has to use the same pool. Your Mobo has Flash-ROM for the Bios, each device/connection on your comp needs a set of addresses, the cache on your Hard Drive(s) must be addressed, your Video RAM needs addresses, etc etc etc... All of that comes before system RAM because crashes, unusability of devices, and other user-impacting errata can occur if addresses aren't provided to other areas of your comp. Whereas if RAM lacks addresses, all that happens is the un-addressed areas simply don't get used. So the designers (rightly!) assign everything else first, and your RAM gets whatever's left over from the 4GB pool.

The theoretical limit for 64 bit operating systems is upwards of 16 Terabytes (2^64 instead of 2^32), but Vista 64's limit is set by MSFT at 128 GB. Enough for a while, I think. At least until Crysis 2, anyways. :pt1cable:  :lol: 



A few pointers on that. 2^64 is the size of the virtual address space. The physical address space is smaller (on 32-bit systems it is the other way around, the physical address space is/can be larger than the virtual).

Not everything in the pc is part of the cpu's memory map, like cache on harddrives, L1/L2 cache (I've seen this mentioned before). But it's correct that many other things requires addresses
November 26, 2007 9:57:31 PM

hi guys, sorry if i am re asking something in this post but
is 32bit vista have more, same or less bugs than 64bit vista, just my local computer shop has advised me to stay away from 64bit for my new computer

help would be great :) 
November 26, 2007 11:52:05 PM

badge said:
Ultimate allows you create as many FREE 'Virtual PC's' as you want. Home Premium does not support Microsoft 'Virtual PC'. For example, with VISTA 64 ultimate or Business you can create a Windows XP Virtual machine 'inside' VISTA 64 and run any software from the XP installation 'inside' VISTA.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyI...

So could I use xp pro that I have on my other computer?
November 27, 2007 12:03:50 AM

I installled VISTa 64 about a month ago and I have absolutely no problems except an ancient win 98 era printer that I can't seem to find a driver for. So, I had planned to install a win XP Virtual PC for all the stuff VISTA 64 would not run. So far I have no need, but some day I may get around to it. Read up on Virtual PC. I'm sure you can.

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyI...
November 27, 2007 12:09:15 AM

warlord12345 said:
hi guys, sorry if i am re asking something in this post but
is 32bit vista have more, same or less bugs than 64bit vista, just my local computer shop has advised me to stay away from 64bit for my new computer

help would be great :) 


I would not build another 32 bit machine for my own use. Our offices still use many, many win xp machines I have built. The guys I know at the computer shop couldn't wait to get their hands on Win XP 64 when it was about to be released. In fact, I gave them my BETA copy when they had never seen one! My friend immediately built a 64 bit machine with it.
November 27, 2007 1:36:38 AM

Will I need to get another license???????
November 27, 2007 1:40:06 AM

Most likely you would have to call the 800 number and get a one time activation key.
!