E6550 32bit or 64bit OS?

[hurrystream]

Simple question, just couldn't find a clear enough answer on google.

I know about the 64bit os has compatibility issues with alot of software so no need to mention this.

All I want to know is that if I'm losing processor speed/power because I use a 32bit os.

Core 2 Duo Processor E6550, LGA775 Pkg 2.33 GHz, 4MB L2 cache, 1333 FSB. To be specific about the model... The 4MB L2 cache is what caught my eye.

 

[hairycat101]

You would be fine with either. I have 64 bit Vista and 64 bit XP. As for loosing speed, I wouldn't worry about that at all. You aren't loosing anything. The only reason to consider a 64 bit OS is if you have 64 bit apps. The only benifet to 64 bit is its ability to use more memory. Again, only on 64 bit apps.

 

[huron]

You don't lose processor speed. Just like hairycat said, 64 bit OSs utilize 64-bit apps. My guess is that it won't be too long before most apps are 64 bit, but it really is more of a limit on RAM and applications, not as much your CPU

 

[geofelt]

You would be fine with either. I have 64 bit Vista and 64 bit XP. As for loosing speed, I wouldn't worry about that at all. You aren't loosing anything. The only reason to consider a 64 bit OS is if you have 64 bit apps. The only benifet to 64 bit is its ability to use more memory. Again, only on 64 bit apps.

There are other plusses to vista-64 bit.
I can't remember the source, but 64 bit vista had a much lower incidence if malware infections than the 32 bit vista or xp. It was about 10 to 1.
If you do lots of multitasking with 32 bit programs, the increased availability of ram will improve performance by keeping those tasks from interfering with each other.
With more ram available, Vista can preload your apps for faster launch.
Here is a study of the value of 6gb vs 3gb in gaming:
http://www.corsair.com/_appnotes/AN811_Gaming_Performance%20Analysis_6GB_vs_3GB.PDF

As to the original question on cpu performance, I don't think there is any meaningful difference in 32 vs. 64 bit performance.

 

[Scotteq]

...been running 64 bit for the last year and a half, and I've yet to run into these so-called 'incompatibilities'. From a user perspective, Applications simply run.

Why is this so?


On the processor side:

The CPU reads the actual binary code, which is presented in the form of instructions. These instructions are the "x86" and "x64" that you read/hear about. Understand that the X64 instruction set includes everything in the x86 - So any x64 processor can and will fully handle anything that's x86.

Therefore, as long as the (game) was compiled to the x86 (32bit) standard, the CPU can fully understand and run it because they are still 'speaking' the same language. The reverse isn't quite true: Imaging speaking to a grade school child with words and phrases an MBA can use. The kid (older standard) won't understand it. The MBA can fully understand the child, though.


On the side of the OS: There is a similar mechanic, though here it's called an "API" (Application Programming Interface). In very broad terms, it works like the instructions sent to a CPU: These are the commands and formats programmers use to talk to the Operating System, which they use to access system resources like memory and information on the hard drive. You can think of it like the teller window at the bank: It's your way to pass an instruction inside in order to get the result you want. When you go to the teller (API), you have to give her a message (instruction) that she understands, right? The OS wants to see some Function (Withdrawl), the location required (Account #), and some data set (how much). If you give the teller (OS) that, then you'll get your twenty bucks.

As long as the program (game, whatever) follows the proper API's then it will run on the Operating System.

So: Just so long as a given (32 bit) game is written to the proper Windows (Vista) API's, and compiled to run on an x86 processor, then it *will* run on 64 bit (Vista).


Generally speaking, when you hear about incompatibilities it's because the programmers who wrote a given application either did not adhere to the proper API spec when they wrote their code, or because they took short cuts (which may no longer work), or because the (new) Operating System's API set is different from the old one.

And I *have* found companies with incompetent developers writing drivers. - Yes, Creative, I'm talking to YOU.

 

[hairycat101]

There are other plusses to vista-64 bit.
I can't remember the source, but 64 bit vista had a much lower incidence if malware infections than the 32 bit vista or xp. It was about 10 to 1.
If you do lots of multitasking with 32 bit programs, the increased availability of ram will improve performance by keeping those tasks from interfering with each other.
With more ram available, Vista can preload your apps for faster launch.
Here is a study of the value of 6gb vs 3gb in gaming:
http://www.corsair.com/_appnotes/AN811_Gaming_Performance%20Analysis_6GB_vs_3GB.PDF

As to the original question on cpu performance, I don't think there is any meaningful difference in 32 vs. 64 bit performance.

The reason that 64bit OS's in general have fewer problems with malware is their incompatability with 16 bit apps. Lots of maleware are 16 bit

Most folks think that if you have 150 webpages open, then you are multitasking. This really isn't the case. If the programes are not active, then you really aren't using additional cpu power. Yes, in the case of this many web pages, I would rather have 4 gig then 2 gig, but I doubt in the long run, the difference would be that big of a deal... most of us don't keep that many items open at once. Antivirus programs are about the only good reason for ppl to have multi-core CPU's... that and the few programs that actually use more then one core.

Yes, vista can preload more if you have more ram... there is a real diminishing return here. I bet you couldn’t tell with the naked eye the difference between a 64 bit OS with 8 gig of ram and a 32 bit with 3 gig of ram loading word.

As for gaming goes, not many games use 64 bit. I think Crysis does have a 64 bit mode and I know that Half Life 2 does. In order to have a “Games for Windows” tag on the box, all the game has to do is be compatible with 64 bit OS, not support a 64 bit mode.

All boils down to weather or not he has 64 bit apps.

 

[hurrystream]

I was wondering the MSI 945GCM5-F V2 (mobo) some sites says that it isn't compatible with x64 and other sites says it is... Only thing I have to look at here is the chipset right!? In this case Intel 945GC, which is compatible according to;

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/compatibility/Details.aspx?type=Hardware&p=Intel%20Desktop%20Board%20D945GCPE%20-%20motherboard%20-%20micro%20ATX%20-%20i945GC&v=Intel&uid=&pf=0&pi=0&s=Intel%20945GC&os=64-bit

 

[hairycat101]

945 chipset? Why? Don't go that old. There is absolutely no reason for that.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010200280%2050001315%201070509908%204027&name=%2475%20-%20%24100

Don't do MSI. I like Asus or Gigabyte or EVGA or some other first tier manufacturer.

 

[hurrystream]

I'm not buying anything, and it hasn't failed me yet. And I do alot of OC on lower end equipment, doesn't cost me as much when I play with it a tad to much. Have another PC that get's all the good stuff...

Anyways cheers for all the info and help, helped alot in making an informed decision. Much much appreciated.