32 bit OS v. 64 bit OS

[elkatman]

Hi,

I am thinking of adopting 64 bit instead of 32 bit windows xp or vista or 7. My CPU is AMD 64 Athlonx2. Can anyone tell me if there is any advantage or disadvantages going with 64 bit system instead of 32 bit system?

 

[cappster]

You have the ability to use more than 3gig of ram if you have say 4gig of ram installed. I believe it is also meant to provide higher throughput in applications that take advantage of 64 bit computing.

 

[Scotteq]

Great Article on the Where’s Why’s and Benefits of a 64 bit OS and Memory:
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3602/sponsored_feature_ram_vram_and_.php


Why 64 bit Articles:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,1857478,00.asp


http://www.anandtech.com/gadgets/showdoc.aspx?i=3034

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3044

http://www.anandtech.com/systems/showdoc.aspx?i=3060

V64 Questions and Answers
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=511

 

[sminlal]

Yes, the most significant reason is to allow you to install and use more than 4GB of memory. If you're building a system today you may not need that much memory, but if you expect to use the system for at least a few years and if the motherboard can accommodate more than 4GB, you should probably use a 64-bit operating system so that you'll be able to add the extra memory in the future without having to reinstall the OS.

 

[Ausmus]

If I happen to have an x64 copy of Windows 7, even if my machine doesn't have more than 4 GB of memory, it should still do fine with the x64 copy? It should just run it as if it were the x32 version shouldn't it?

 

[geofelt]

If I happen to have an x64 copy of Windows 7, even if my machine doesn't have more than 4 GB of memory, it should still do fine with the x64 copy? It should just run it as if it were the x32 version shouldn't it?

A 64 bit OS will run just fine on a pc with 2gb or more. One advantage of 64 bit vista and windows-7 is that it is more secure. Individual programs are rarely are written to take advantage of more than 4gb. Still, when you multitask several such programs, a 64 bit OS and plenty of ram can make your system run better.

 

[sminlal]

I'd say 64 bit is going to be beneficial to us when Windows 4057438520345 arrives.

Ah, that brings back memories of the comments I heard back when Intel brought out the 32-bit 80386 CPU. "Who could ever need more than 16MB of memory?", they said...

 

[Prescott_666]

If you have specific software that will not run on Windows 7 64-bit, and not being able to run that 32-bit software is a deal breaker, well then install the 32-bit OS. Otherwise, why not try the 64-bit. I am amazed at the old ladies on this site who say why run 64-bit, I say why not?

Install the 64-bit OS. If it doesn't work out, you can always go to 32-bit.

 

[Zoron]

If you buy retail, you have both 32-bit and 64-bit in the box. If you buy OEM, you get either one, with the option to get the media for the other... usually for the cost of shipping it. Some of us know that 64-bit works properly as well... if you're using a program that has a 16-bit installer it's time to retire that program and use something else or simply stick with 32-bit. Compatibility issues as a result of 32-bit software on 64-bit Windows are rare. Leave some to blow them completely out of proportion, however... I always thought trolling was frowned upon in this forum.

 

[Zoron]

Hab... you've gone way past stating your opinion. You are blatantly trolling every single 32-bit vs. 64-bit or Vista vs. Win 7 thread. Posting inflammatory BS is known as trolling where I come from... especially when you're doing it on every single one of these threads. Try to deflect or redirect, but this is exactly what you are doing. Just know that if you insist on continuing with it, you will be banned.

State your opinion with facts to support it. Leave out the inflammatory comments. If you cannot do so, you will be dealt with.

 

[dc_webster]

+1 Zoron

I have the following advice:
1. If you have an older Athlon with only a Gigabyte or two of RAM then you are probably best loading 32bit win 7 - this is especially a good idea imho if it only has expensive DDR ram to upgrade or if the board only goes to 4GB total anyway (yea there is a slight benefit for 64bit with 4GB RAM, but for this user I probably wouldn't bother.)
2. If you have a more modern board that'll go to 8GB of DDR2 ram and you can do that cheaply I say go 64bit and get the extra RAM as multi-tasking (including having a lot more stuff running then running a big game at the same time [32bit programs can only use 2GB at once]) will be a lot better - especially if you wish to do, for example, encoding at the same time as backing up as burning a disc as running dozens of tabs in Firefox etc. Imho 6-8GB of RAM in 64bit Win 7 is the way to go for a very smooth experience that comes with all that extra ram for the multi-tasking and for caching as well.

My 2 cents.

 

[croc]

Hab... you've gone way past stating your opinion. You are blatantly trolling every single 32-bit vs. 64-bit or Vista vs. Win 7 thread. Posting inflammatory BS is known as trolling where I come from... especially when you're doing it on every single one of these threads. Try to deflect or redirect, but this is exactly what you are doing. Just know that if you insist on continuing with it, you will be banned.

State your opinion with facts to support it. Leave out the inflammatory comments. If you cannot do so, you will be dealt with.

I think I'll just patiently lurk and watch this thread.... I have a bet with myself on how many posts it takes to get this thread locked.

 

[Zoron]

No, there aren't a plethora of 64-bit apps available right now. Why does this surprise you? It makes perfect sense... as long as the majority of computer users are still stuck on a 32-bit OS, then creating 64-bit apps makes absolutely no sense. Once the installed base of 64-bit Windows increases beyond a certain point, we will start seeing more 64-bit applications. The only way to push software vendors to start creating 64-bit apps is to get more computers out there capable of running it. If we insist on sticking with 32-bit, then vendors won't see any point in creating more 64-bit apps.

Adobe has been dragging it's feet with 64-bit Flash, despite the increase in 64-bit Windows users and the already installed base of Linux x64 users. Does this mean we should stick with 32-bit forever and let Adobe continue to sit on their thumbs? Of course not. It's about time vendors like Adobe realize that 64-bit isn't just for techno-geeks anymore.

 

[dc_webster]

Habitat: It was only meant to be an opinion. I have been reading Toms Hardware since its inception in 1996 and have used many computers since 1987. My opinion is based on the use of 64bit Vista and 7 for a year now - and also the comments of several people regarding the usefulness and compatibility of the 64bit OS's mentioned. One of these people is a Windows MCAD programmer who doesn't seem to mind using a 64bit OS for 32bit stuff.

 

[Zoron]

No one said "huge". No one said there was "compatibility progression". What has been said is that 64-bit Windows isn't as incompatible as you like to make it out to be and that performance is on par with Windows XP. Why install an old OS on a new computer when it doesn't provide any clear benefit? While XP will continue to be supported for a few more years, Windows 7 will be supported until 2020. If you're purchasing a new computer now, there is no reason not to consider Win 7.

 

[croc]

No one said "huge". No one said there was "compatibility progression". What has been said is that 64-bit Windows isn't as incompatible as you like to make it out to be and that performance is on par with Windows XP. Why install an old OS on a new computer when it doesn't provide any clear benefit? While XP will continue to be supported for a few more years, Windows 7 will be supported until 2020. If you're purchasing a new computer now, there is no reason not to consider Win 7.

OK, I'll stick my 2p in here... I'll say huge improvements in some apps. In the latest release of ACad, going from a ~3GB RAM system running a 32 bit OS, to a 6GB RAM system running a 64bit OS yields a 66% improvement in redraw times alone. Same system just different OS. That's a FACT.

My Autodesk rep tells me that they are working on a 64bit version of their software across all of their products, that may release in late 2010 early 2011. That's a RUMOUR.

 

[0ptic0n]

Hi,

I am thinking of adopting 64 bit instead of 32 bit windows xp or vista or 7. My CPU is AMD 64 Athlonx2. Can anyone tell me if there is any advantage or disadvantages going with 64 bit system instead of 32 bit system?

Time to make a post that's more relevant and on topic. The first notable advantage of using a 64 bit os is the fact your pc can make use of 4gb of ram or more. Which is a good thing being that in the past we have all been stuck with much less ram which makes for a much slower overall experience. Another advantage is the price of ram itself its so cheap now it doesnt make sense not to install or have installed lots of it. And also any modern motherboard as well as other hardware devices now come with 64 bit drivers and support right out of the box. Windows Vista and Windows 7 include both flavors of either 32bit and 64bit. Performance wise between 32 and 64 bit versions of windows is virtually none if you have less than 4gb of ram installed in your pc. But other factors come into play such as the type of applications you run how many instances of multiple applications you have going. With less than 4gigs of ram in your pc the 32 bit version of windows just limits how many different things you can do at once same goes with the 64bit version but with an exception. Add more ram to a 64bit OS more work or play can be done.

Another notable factor is application compatibility almost all modern software at-least in the consumer sector now includes 64bit support. And if it doesn't and it is 32bit only windows x64 runs it in compatibility mode I could be wrong on what that exact feature is called but its something along that line. And with windows 7 x64 microsofts including an XP mode environment thats virtualized and allows use of those old applications that don't work on vista or windows 7. Other hardware requirements mainly cpu virtualization are required.

Windows XP is so old now I cant recommend it to anyone rather it be 32 or 64 bit It's only a matter of time before all application and hardware support for it is phased out. Not only that but its much more vulnerable to picking up virus's and spyware atleast the 32bit version that is I have never used the 64bit version of windows xp nor do I intend to.

 

[0ptic0n]

Saying that 64 is a lot better in terms of performance and saying that it has a lot to offer in terms of features and overall benefits the user is not huge claims? That's claiming huge because even xp didn't offer much over 2000, it's only because they totally stopped supporting it and pushed for XP support. Why don't they just do this for XP? Cause they can't. Maybe I was a bit too broad in the explanation that's about it, now your just trying to search for flaws when you should be clearing yours up. I also remember there was a discussion on how technology could be stuck at 32 bit for a while because of this.

It's not that incompatible because 32 bit is being supported on those Os's. I can give you a very good reason to install the previous os and you can't call it old yet. The reason is because you know it's going to work properly. Can you honestly say that for Vista? No. Why did it take buisnesses a while to adapt to XP and why did they eventually switch? Because 2000 was that good and XP was based on it but eventually they saw the benefits of XP and needed to switch. This does not hold as a fact as far as Vista goes.

I never said nothing about Windows 7 really. It's not even out yet either so how can you make such a comment without there being some kind of doubt about it.

I think maybe your a little off when it comes to business computing. Company's don't upgrade as often because they usually have specialized applications that only work on what they have and they keep it untill the support for the application is their then eventually upgrade or its replaced with something new when the pc die's..lol

 

[0ptic0n]

I'm just posting my opinion that's based on my real world experience not reviews if your really having trouble understanding my post and not just being critical I will post a valid response.

 

[croc]

I'm just posting my opinion that's based on my real world experience not reviews if your really having trouble understanding my post and not just being critical I will post a valid response.

"Please do not feed the trolls"

 

[0ptic0n]

Well before I went back to college I worked for a consulting company and during my time their I was often sent out to different company's to fix whatever was broke or not working right. At 1 lcation their was a server that was running nt4 a server and about 12 desktop clients with xp home/pro non domain type network none of the clients could access the accounting software that was setup on the server via mapped drives turned out to be simple ipconfig error I asked why the company had such an old outdated server and aging desktops. Response in turn was that their was no support for anything newer that the accounting software would run on. It was a much older 16bit application if i remember correctly. At another location our local courthouse the company I worked for was responsible for server/desktop and network management layout simple single domain server 2003 over 60 desktops mixed with windows 98 2000 and XP a few of the desktops where damaged by lighting/power failure when it came time to order new pc's it was made clear that the os had to be xp because the software used in tax commissioners office that's supported by the state doesn't work with vista. And those in trash collection had been using xp and the type of database software used hadn't been tested approved to work on anything other than xp. So for simply compatibility reasons everything that was ordered had windows xp. From what I have seen with company's its not about how new or old the technology is its all about will it work with what we need.

 

[aznguy0028]

"Please do not feed the trolls"

Couldn't have said it better myself. So how's the weather croc?

 

[0ptic0n]

I don't have time to list all the unique situations I have dealt with as i said I pulled my information from real world experience. Where have you gotten yours? Oh a review right no actual read world experience a review is simply meant to be informative. I tried to dismiss the ignorance but oh well just how some people are I guess.

 

[croc]

Couldn't have said it better myself. So how's the weather croc?

Getting closer to Spring Almost made 20C today, but could use some rain... Probably another bad fire season, by the looks of it.

 

[amnotanoobie]

Here's my 2cents and 2 pounds of salt.

Moving to a 64-bit Win7 isn't really a problem, unless you have some ancient or unpopular hardware that doesn't have drivers for 64-bit Vista or 7. I haven't had trouble yet with the typical apps such as, Firefox, Opera, Flash (32-bit), ATi's 64-bit drivers, MS Office 2k3. The only real problem I have with Win 7 64-bit, was when to my horror I discovered that my printer didn't have a Vista 32 or 64-bit driver.

Here's a scenario, what if Firefox, Opera, Chrome, MS Office, other Anti-Virus apps, FLASH, etc suddenly release their 64-bit apps and prove that they perform at least 2% and 10% on average faster than their 32-bit counterparts? What then with 32-bit users that have 3GB of RAM, are they screwed and need to reformat and reinstall just because they believed habitat whole-heartedly?


Win 7-64 is here, it is available, it doesn't have performance penalty, most of the apps you use would work, it functions still pretty much the same, popular hardware makers have their drivers available, so why not?