VISTA HOME PREMIUM 64 bit vs 32 bit

Vista 64 user here.

Hmm.. If ever there was a home usage demanding of a 64 bit OS, it's heavy Video, even if only for the ability to fully address and use truly ridiculous amounts of RAM. There's other differences, sure. But most people make the switch for that reason. So many (most?) V64 users have 4GB of RAM or more on their systems. And with DDR2 prices falling as they have, there are some with 8GB on their 4 slot boards. Hell, I was thinking of swapping my (4 1GB) Corsair Dominators for a pair of 2GB modules now that I'm seeing tighter timings (4-4-4-12 versus the 5-5-5-15 I have now) and would have the option to go to 8 later on as well... Then I laugh, and remember that I don't fully use the 4 I have now...   For $130 a pair it's tempting, tho...


Regarding Vista 64 - For new hardware, compatibility issues are essentially a thing of the past. nVidia and ATI both have drivers for all of their newer cards, optical, mobo and buss/raid drivers have been worked out, and even Creative have finally made a reasonably good and reliable driver for their stuff. If you're building a new system, then you shouldn't have any real issues. <Hell - If a schmo like me can get V64 working reliably, then it should be doable by most anyone!!>  

Fact: Vista 64 includes the libraries necessary to run 32 bit applications, and considering the huge numbers of apps out there, these libraries are highly effective. Almost all of the apps I have on my comp are 32 bit, and from a user perspective you would never know the difference.

Caveats: Vista (both 32 and 64 bit) does not allow applications/services to directly access the kernel or hardware. Older applications written with these types of programming shortcuts may have issues. In V64 you can set a specific 'Compatiility Mode' for apps which may be having issues, and that often works. But not always.

The second big thing is that Microsoft completely re-wrote the communications stack - Older routers, network management apps, and (especially, it seems) wireless gear may not like what they see. I have an older wireless router not meant for Vista: V32 was fine when I ran that. But 64 didn't like the drivers for it at all. I mentally added that item to my list of things to replace. But for grins I plugged in a LAN cable and no device drivers - damned if it doesn't work perfectly. I did have to buy a new printer tho...

Third is shareware: If you use a lot of shareware, know that Vista 64 has a total and pathological hatred of anything with expired or unsigned digital certificates. You will not be able to run these types of apps at all. Early on, you could permanently disable the option in the security config and run that stuff anyhow, but that ability was removed from the OS. You may do so temporarily, but on restart the Certificate Nazi regains control. If you really want, you can download and install a software development kit. Then you can use the tool in the SDK to sign the apps yourself.

There's a couple things to check on: Since it's your primary intended usage, make sure your preferred video editing software are Vista 64 compatible. Best performance, etc etc... Same thing for any peripherals you intend to continue using: Printers/scanners, network devices, and the like.

Kind of "Meh" stuff - Resign yourself to dumping your existing security software for a version that made to run in Vista 64. Flash hasn't written a native 64 bit version of their plug in. So Explorer 64 ends up not being able to properly render Flash sites. But you can install/run the 32 bit version in the 32 bit browser of your choice and it works fine. I have Firefox, Internet Exploder 7, and Opera and Flash works fine on all three.

nice post scott, love the sig aswell.

Im piecing a system together at the moment, im sure its 64-bit capable so I wont bother the public (i bought 2gigs of ddr2 pc6400 ram but like you am feeling very tempted to boost that up, even though i'm sure 2gigs will surfice for my downloading, internet-exploring and rare counterstrike or worl-eleven game-playing)..

I think the 64-bit will be the one for me, i dont like the price-tag but i guess a lot of work went into producing it, and im going to be using it a lot!

The certificate nazi sounds very familiar. There are some naggling things like that on XP and can see what youre saying. Music verification, file verification... makes me want to try a linux system! (might partition my drive up and try a bit of linux lol)

I heard 64 bit is worth it if your an extreme gamer, i am i mild to mid gamer and i am gonna go with a 32 bit.Does anybody disagree with the decision i am going with?Let me know?

Avoid Vista 32 like its on fire. Its a dog. There is nothing you can do to improve its performance. Vista 64 runs just as good as XP out of the box and is more secure then 32. It also offers future gains as more and more titles are pooring in with 64bit clients.

I agree 64 bit is the way to fly  

Vista 32 will work just fine for what you want to use it for, the performance difference between WinXP Pro 32 and Vista Home Premium 32 are so close in their performance its not worth comparing, however since its been labeled a dog by jerseygamer, heres a direct performance comparison for you to consider.

I'm dual booting WinXP Pro 32 and Vista Home Premium 32, these tests were run at 1920 X 1200 resolution that I game at, all the graphics settings in the 3D Mark 06 tests are maxxed out, also both run in DX9 and run on the same computer same hardware except for the fact the WinXP installation does have an edge because its installed on a higher performing HDD, that said here are the test results.





WinXP did come out on top but comparing its performance to a dog is way out of line, I initially was dual booting WinXP Pro 32 and Vista Home Premium 64, of which the 64bit version was enough of a problem to go back to the Vista 32bit version, which by the way dual boots exceptionally well with 4G of system memory.

You don't need the 64bit version for gaming. Ryan

http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=5963