Vista: 32-bit or 64-bit?

[Hidavi]

I bought a gaming laptop (see sig ) and it comes with Home Premium 32-bit but its capable of doing 64-bit. I was wondering if I could see any significant gains in performance by going the 64-bit way. Or will it interfere with my gaming?

[Talon_262]

If you have a 64-bit processor and plan on putting 3-4 GB+ of RAM in your rig, there's not really any reason why you shouldn't go Vista x64....most recent hardware (within the past couple of years at least) that I've seen from most major component/peripheral manufacturers has 64-bit drivers available.

[Razeus]

Go Vista 64. It's feels different from the 32 bit verison. And it seems more stable. It's just rock solid like the Mac OS Leopard. I'm not sure if you'll see performance gains, but you'll get better memory management, stability and 64-bit wickedness.

[Hidavi]

lol I question the value of "64-bit wickedness" but to hear the resident Macboy pushing a Microsoft OS is wild enough for me to go for it.

I never found Vista 32 to be unstable, just incompatible with some things and an extreme memory hog.

[Taknarosh]

That's the only reason why in my mind.

[Hidavi]

My laptop only does a max of 4GB anyway

[caveman-jim]

That's the only reason why in my mind.

There are security reasons, and speed benefits for 64bit optimised applications as well.

[xxJACKxx]

I never found Vista 32 to be unstable, just incompatible with some things and an extreme memory hog.

Expect that Vista 64 will be less compatible and use more memory. Though I agree with the idea that unused memory is wasted memory.

[Crisler]

Unless you have specific software or hrdware you need to run that does not work with 64 bit, I would go 64 bit. Vista 64 has enhanced security over the 32 bit version, allows the use of more memory, has a core that is better able to use your hardware to the fullest.

While a lot of software is not yet made for 64 bit the OS is and thus all the base functions take place with 64 bit optimization in place. The overall effect is a smoother computing feel from those that have compared both.

[Hidavi]

So I should upgrade to 4gb and get Vista 64 then, assuming that all my proggies work on it? Is that the general consensus here?

[Serotonin]

I'm gonna go against the grain here.

I personally find 64-bit OS's useless, nothing really takes advantage of them yet, especially gaming. Yeah you may see a 2 or 3 fps difference here and there, but for the most part, it's extra power that you won't put to good use as long as they keep making 32-bit.

And since your laptop only goes to 4gb anyways, your not gaining much in the way of extra memory installation.

Ultimately, we're not seeing enough 64-bit specific software to justify paying for the upgrade imho.

Save yourself the cash and stick with vista 32-bit.

Windows 7 is where we will see if x86 is still supported, I hope not. As long as MS supports 32-bit os's, 64-bit will never get the focus it should.

Especially gaming wise. Notice how since amd64 cpu's, and the initial hype, games have quietly gone away from supporting 64-bit machines with exclusive builds or patches.

[IM_ShambleS]

te truth of the matter is you are Not likley to ever see 4gb of ram on a 32 bit OS, because of the shared ram space.

Given a simple example of.

4gb ram
2 Ide hdd's
1 ide cd rom.
1x 512mb Gfx card

Useable ram in 32bit os = 3.5 gb Max seen.
Actual useable ram = 2gb.
You can force the availabilaty of 3gb but given 32bit os's limiteds memory addressing, 32bit applications arent designed to use 2gb of ram letalone more.

The only issue there is with vista x64 would be the drivers. you can force it to use unsigned drivers so thats fine. But some tings wont work with the only drivers there are, even if you forced them. "zoom adsl usb modem wont work on x64 For now atleast"

32bit apps get installed to program files (86) and the registry has a special little section for 32 bit applications. so its not like xp 64 where 32 bit progs could be a pain to isntall.
32 bit apps work just fine.
also 64 bit has the potentia to be 2x faster than 32 bit guiiven the way it works. Provided you get 64 bit apps. They are as few and as far between as dx10 games are. But if you think your gonna buy vista just for dx10. You may aswell get 64 bit, You will actualy be able to use all 4gb of ram. And 64 bitt aps will be useable.
i dont know why you would buy 32bit os when this particulat x64 os works as well if not better. Unless you know you will have driver issues with some component in your system.

[Hidavi]

Well seems the only real advantage then is what Razeus said: more responsive. Enough for me to try it out at least.

[Hidavi]

Anyway, I got my copy of Vista 64 to demo

When my laptop comes in on Wednesday, we'll see how it goes.

[Razeus]

I've never been a Mac fanboy so let's be clear on that. An Apple fanboy sure. iPod/iPhone fanboy sure. But I just newly acquired my Mac and will be posting my review on it soon. I may become a Mac OS fanboy, but I can say, bot the OS's work just fine and like they are suppose to. You'll find most of this OS debates revolve around people's unwillingness to change and defend their purchase.

your'e 32-bit progs will work just fine as Vista 64 contains WoW (Windows on Windows, I think) and will run 32-bit progs as if they were on a native OS. There's simply no reason to use a 32-bit OS unless you need it for minor work (as I do on my Macbook White 2.4). Apple has always known that 64-bit OS's is where it's at and this is one of the reasons the OS is so responsive, secure and crash proof. MS is behind the times with 32-bit Vista. Vista is meant for 64-bits.

[caveman-jim]

te truth of the matter is you are Not likley to ever see 4gb of ram on a 32 bit OS, because of the shared ram space.

Given a simple example of.

4gb ram
2 Ide hdd's
1 ide cd rom.
1x 512mb Gfx card

Useable ram in 32bit os = 3.5 gb Max seen.
Actual useable ram = 2gb.
You can force the availabilaty of 3gb but given 32bit os's limiteds memory addressing, 32bit applications arent designed to use 2gb of ram letalone more.

The only issue there is with vista x64 would be the drivers. you can force it to use unsigned drivers so thats fine. But some tings wont work with the only drivers there are, even if you forced them. "zoom adsl usb modem wont work on x64 For now atleast"

32bit apps get installed to program files (86) and the registry has a special little section for 32 bit applications. so its not like xp 64 where 32 bit progs could be a pain to isntall.
32 bit apps work just fine.
also 64 bit has the potentia to be 2x faster than 32 bit guiiven the way it works. Provided you get 64 bit apps. They are as few and as far between as dx10 games are. But if you think your gonna buy vista just for dx10. You may aswell get 64 bit, You will actualy be able to use all 4gb of ram. And 64 bitt aps will be useable.
i dont know why you would buy 32bit os when this particulat x64 os works as well if not better. Unless you know you will have driver issues with some component in your system.

- the 2gb application limit is per application, not all applications; a 32bit system with 4gb of ram could host multiple applications that use 2gb of ram per app, or if the 3gb switch was enabled and the application 3gb aware, then 3gb per application.

[clerick]

Actually for games there is a reason to go 64 even if the game is natively 32: you can patch them via 4gb patcher. What this does is ups the limit for all applications from standard 2gb to 4gb. This means in heavy memory apps (photoshop, video editing, wahtever) or games (crysis, flight simulator) gets THAT much more memory to work with and allow for a smoother experience. Also on my format and reinstall of 64 I've noticed that even after putting all my stuff back onto the hard drivies the OS is much more responsive, takes no time to start up and shuts down almost instantly.

[The_KELRaTH]

Canon (CR2) and Nikon (NEF) only support Vista 32bit for Raw photo codecs.

[Hidavi]

Actually for games there is a reason to go 64 even if the game is natively 32: you can patch them via 4gb patcher. What this does is ups the limit for all applications from standard 2gb to 4gb. This means in heavy memory apps (photoshop, video editing, wahtever) or games (crysis, flight simulator) gets THAT much more memory to work with and allow for a smoother experience. Also on my format and reinstall of 64 I've noticed that even after putting all my stuff back onto the hard drivies the OS is much more responsive, takes no time to start up and shuts down almost instantly.

woooooo! REALLY? Cool

Vista boots in 40 seconds on my old Dell E1505, so it should boot instantly on my new ASUS G1S-X1

[clerick]

woooooo! REALLY? Cool

Vista boots in 40 seconds on my old Dell E1505, so it should boot instantly on my new ASUS G1S-X1

http://ntcore.com/4gb_patch.php

[badboy]

32bit will never ever ever ever use the full extent of the 4gb ram.

If you have 4gb ram or more then go 64bit.

And 64bit is so much smoother with 4gb ram

[Stingray]

http://ntcore.com/4gb_patch.php

Will this work in Photoshop running in 64-bit Vista?

[Crisler]

Apple has always known that 64-bit OS's is where it's at and this is one of the reasons the OS is so responsive, secure and crash proof. MS is behind the times with 32-bit Vista. Vista is meant for 64-bits.

First let me say I agree with the MS comment, Vista should have been released as a pure 64 bit OS with the option for 32 bit, not the other way around.

As for the reason the Mac OS does what it does, the reason is not the 64 bit or anything special other than the fact it is a game box OS, let me explain. With Windows the OS had to be designed to work on a near infinite number of possible hardware and software combinations. The Mac OS on the otherhand like a game box has a set profile when it comes to approved hardware and software and thus does not suffer from having to handle the combination hell that Windows must face.

I firmly believe that if the Mac OS was released into the wild people would abandon it in droves when it hit the reality of the PC worlds combinations and fell apart.

[caveman-jim]

There was no way in hell Vista could be 64bit only. Windows 7 has a better chance, but still will be 32 or 64bit. Windows 8 (2013?) I think 64bit, and Windows 9 (2017?) should be a hypervisor with special VM's for different execution contexts (gaming, web browsing, office applications, video playback, etc.).

[Crisler]

I never suggested 64 bit only, however I think it COULD be 64 bit primarily. What I mean is make 64 bit the main purchase model not the 32 bit. In a home with it getting a totally new PC, which means new software and hardware there is ZERO reason for the consumer to look at a 32 bit system and yet is all we have in the stores.

When I build a new pc for a client now I ask if they are going to use existing hardware and software. If so I check it and if it works in 64 bit then that is what I install, if the install is completely new then I go 64 bit by default.

[Hidavi]

Ok, so I got my lappy and loaded on Vista x64 (installed in 25 minutes ) and it runs well. Compatible with all my fave 32-bit apps. I have to go tomorrow morning to the UPS station near here to pick up my 4GB DDR2-800 so I can drop it in and see it really kick. I got a 3900 in 3DMark06. Lets see what happens if I patch it for 4GB

[IM_ShambleS]

Ok, so I got my lappy and loaded on Vista x64 (installed in 25 minutes ) and it runs well. Compatible with all my fave 32-bit apps. I have to go tomorrow morning to the UPS station near here to pick up my 4GB DDR2-800 so I can drop it in and see it really kick. I got a 3900 in 3DMark06. Lets see what happens if I patch it for 4GB

Glad you chose vista x64. I really dont think ul be dissapointed.
as you will have noticed by now. you have 2 os's tecnicaly in vista x64. you have vista x64, and WOW wich is like an emulated 32bit vista that works at the same time. so 32 bit applications work just fine. if yourlike me and play in the registry. 32bit progs get registerd to the wow section of te registry, and 64bit progs go to where ud expect all progs to be registerd.
hopefully you wont have any drivers that wont work, and your life will be nice and error free. apart from that i doubt u would have any sort of issues.

[Hidavi]

yah man, all my fave 32 bit proggies run fine on vista 64 sp1.

After installing sp1, ocing an avg of 23%, and patching 3dmark06 for 4gb, I got 4442 so all is fine AND I can run GRID @ 1280x768 with medium settings at 30-45 fps so Vista x64 iis hot. And yeah Raz was right, its very responsiive, but it takes 25 seconds longer than vista 32 did.

[top_gun36]

after reading this thread, Im convinced

when my new laptop arrives, ill be reinstallin WinVista x64 on it

[Satch]

do you know if autocad has an 64bit version ?

[Hidavi]

Yes, AutoCAD 2008 x64 is available.