Curse

my2cent · May 02, 2008, 12:26 AM // 00:26

Just wondering wat effect/advantages/disdvantages with 32bit vs 64 bit OS in terms of
1) Gaming
2) compatibility
3) performance
4) normal every day work, web browsing etc
5) new drivers?

All i noe the is that 32 bit only registers up to 3gig of ram while 64bit = 4gig. So please fill me in on the rest ^^ planning to upgrade to 64bit OS.

Snograt · May 02, 2008, 12:43 AM // 00:43

Actually, with the 64bit OS, you can go up into the realms of 128GB if you really want to

("Only" 8GB with Home Premium though

)

I waited a long while before switching to Vista 64 - the problems with driver compatibility and 64bit are well known. The system has been going for long enough for most of these issues to be ironed out and, since installing 64 I have had zero problems.

Unless you have some very old or very unusual devices in your PC that have no 64bit drivers available, you should have no problems.

cebalrai · May 02, 2008, 01:00 AM // 01:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by my2cent

Just wondering wat effect/advantages/disdvantages with 32bit vs 64 bit OS in terms of
1) Gaming
2) compatibility
3) performance
4) normal every day work, web browsing etc
5) new drivers?

All i noe the is that 32 bit only registers up to 3gig of ram while 64bit = 4gig. So please fill me in on the rest ^^ planning to upgrade to 64bit OS.

Its not going to give you better performance/gaming/etc. At least not today. Maybe in 5+ years when it becomes more common for apps to benefit from huge RAM resources.

Brianna · May 02, 2008, 01:50 AM // 01:50

My brother has Vista Ultimate 32 bit, and I have Vista Ultimate 64 bit.

Our only differences are he is able to play games with less problems it seems (less weird bugs, hard to explain) and there is *Tons* more drivers/driver support for 32 bit, I find it hard to get certain things for 64 bit. Such as certain applications and such, they will only work on Vista 32 bit but not 64.

As far as actual game play itself (Aside from rare bugs, which may not always be related to 64 bit) it's good, and smooth, don't notice any differences.

And 64 bit has the advantage of going 4+gigs of RAM, that's why I got it.

If you don't have 4 gigs of RAM, and you definitely don't plan on getting 4 gigs, then don't get 64 bit, cause there's no real point other than that it seems. And from my understanding that is a moot/retarded limitation. I'm sure there's some super technical reason though, which I'm too lazy to look into.

cebalrai · May 02, 2008, 02:15 AM // 02:15

There's also the potential future advantage of 64-bit being able to better run applications that alone use several Gigs of memory. Nothing like that exists currently - at least nothing a home computer user would use.

Snograt · May 02, 2008, 06:23 AM // 06:23

By the time mainstream 64-bit applications and particularly games arrive, you will have probably changed your Pc half a dozen times and will be using Windows 15.

And it will be a 128 bit system

Quaker · May 02, 2008, 03:02 PM // 15:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snograt

By the time mainstream 64-bit applications and particularly games arrive, you will have probably changed your Pc half a dozen times and will be using Windows 15.

They (Microsoft) are already talking about replacing Vista in 2009, so yeah, 64-bit Vista is overkill now and obsolete tomorow.

chuxanator · May 02, 2008, 03:59 PM // 15:59

Its hard to find drivers for 64-bit.

Xp - supports 4gb RAM
Vista - 8gb RAM

Admael · May 02, 2008, 10:06 PM // 22:06

It's easier to find drivers for Vista 64, than it is for XP 64 :<

3 Reasons why people go 64: 1. Ram support, 2. 64-bit applications, 3. Because it's better than 32-bit.

Lania Elderfire · May 02, 2008, 10:13 PM // 22:13

The days of 32-bit is coming to an end. 4GB limit is becoming more and more of a problem for a lot of applications, and even some games can end up using tons of memory to the point it needs to use the swap disk. With Sp1 out for vista, there really is no reason not to go with 64bit vista.

cebalrai · May 02, 2008, 10:37 PM // 22:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lania Elderfire

4GB limit is becoming more and more of a problem for a lot of applications

What applications are choking on "only" 4 GB ram? You say there are a lot, so I'm expecting a long list.

Admael · May 02, 2008, 10:53 PM // 22:53

No application uses more than 4GB of RAM!

Remember it's the speed of the RAM that matters, not the quantity!

my2cent · May 03, 2008, 07:56 AM // 07:56

thnxs guys, that cleared up sum fog for me.

cebalrai · May 03, 2008, 11:59 AM // 11:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Admael

No application uses more than 4GB of RAM!

Remember it's the speed of the RAM that matters, not the quantity!

You keep saying that but it's not true. Speed matters, sure. But for multi-tasking, quantity is a huge factor. How can you say that the quantity of ram isn't an issue?

With memory-hogging vista, quantity is a major issue. Compare the same system running Vista with 1 GB versus 3 GB and you'll see what I mean.

cebalrai · May 03, 2008, 12:05 PM // 12:05

And unless you use odd/old hardware, it's not difficult to find drivers for Vista-64. This used to be a major issue for sure, but it's just not anymore. And it will continue to be even less of an issue in the future.

People come to this forum and make all kinds of baseless declarations, ie "it's hard to find drivers of 64". Heck, my 8-year old printer works fine on it, as does my webcam and all my other peripherals. Even my old joystick from 2002 that I use for Flight Simulator works perfectly.

You'll be fine with 64 driver support. If you have any uncommon bits to your computer, you can check compatibility before you buy.

Admael · May 03, 2008, 12:16 PM // 12:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by cebalrai

You keep saying that but it's not true. Speed matters, sure. But for multi-tasking, quantity is a huge factor. How can you say that the quantity of ram isn't an issue?

With memory-hogging vista, quantity is a major issue. Compare the same system running Vista with 1 GB versus 3 GB and you'll see what I mean.

I said no one needs more than 4. You can do well off 2. No one is talking about 1 and 3.

And "multi-tasking" is thrown around a lot. Same with "memory hog Vista".
I didn't say the quantity of RAM doesn't matter, but it doesn't matter as much as the speed of the RAM.

As above, once you have your solid 2GB, you don't really any more "quantity"

cebalrai · May 03, 2008, 01:12 PM // 13:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Admael

As above, once you have your solid 2GB, you don't really any more "quantity"

1) Do you have some sort of reference for this statement? Benchmarking to say that there's not much improvement over 2 GB? I'm not saying you're wrong (although I suspect that you are), but I think your statement needs to be backed up.

2) Considering that apps will certainly benefit from increased quantity of RAM in the future, I think it's unfair to suggest that there's no reason for people to be buying more than 2 GB today.

Lania Elderfire · May 03, 2008, 03:13 PM // 15:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by cebalrai

What applications are choking on "only" 4 GB ram? You say there are a lot, so I'm expecting a long list.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Admael

As above, once you have your solid 2GB, you don't really any more "quantity"

Have you tried opening multiple large poster sized images on photoshop to edit a whole bunch all at once? That easily exceeds 4GB, but even on a 64 bit system, photoshop can't use more than 4GB since it's a 32-bit app, leading to swapdisk usage and disk thrashing. That's why adobe is making a 64bit edition of photoshop which will be version CS4. Then there are other applications that can easily benefit from the 64bit memory space like 3Dstudio max, Maya, lightwave, video editing programs for HD video etc etc etc. Even the game Bioshock uses almost 3 GB of memory just on it's own, and even more on a 64bit system. This becomes even a bigger problem when you are using multiple programs like 3Dstudio max and photoshop at the same time to edit textures... especially big textures, and a complex scene in 3D studio max. Or if you have multiple pieces of HD video on premiere or other video editing program and also have a audio editing program to modify the audio a little bit. If you are out of memory it is a PITA to keep on opening and closing apps just to avoid hard drive thrashing.

Also different "speeds" of the ram only yeilds negligible performace. Look at all the benchmarks comparing DDR2 and DDR3 memory in real-world tests. YOu might get 1-5 FPS, 2-6 second shorter encoding... etc Definitely does not justify the costs of the DDR3 memory over DDR2. Take a look at this article. http://www.digit-life.com/articles3/...ddr3-1333.html

So no there isn't a huge list of apps, but enough of a list and enough of a reason as to why 64-bit is being pushed so much lately.

cebalrai · May 03, 2008, 04:20 PM // 16:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lania Elderfire

Have you tried opening multiple large poster sized images on photoshop to edit a whole bunch all at once?

The OP isn't saying he's doing any higher-end tasks like that though.

And I agree with you on the quantity thing.

Brianna · May 03, 2008, 06:25 PM // 18:25

Agree'd with Quality over Quantity.

RAM hog Vista is non existent, it just uses more than windows XP so everyone freaks out. I have 2 GB of ram and I've only ever used up to 60% while running Guild Wars, FireFox, and tons of other chat programs/small things on the side, for the life of me I can't see why anyone needs more than 2 gigs right now, maybe in the future..? But not right now it.