Community Newsletter: Q&A: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system?
- 7/18/08 3:07 PM
32bit-system
by donwoodruff - 6/28/08 3:01 PM In reply to: 32 bits VS. 64 bits by Alain Martel1My recent purchase of a DELL XPS-720 has a 32-bit system.
Dell sells 'business' computers with a 64-bit system.
What Apps?
by Willbo17 - 6/23/08 10:26 AM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Jack,
I use a Vista 64 machine and I really like it. I didn't what to buy old 32 bit technology when I figure I'll get more out of the 64 bit machine for longer. But before you decide to go and buy a 64 bit box you need to look at what applications you plan to run. There are several resources (which I don't have handy) to check compatability. The biggest problem seems to be that the installation programs (16 bit?) may not run at all on the 64 bit platform. Yes, it has come with a few problems but I feel technology will catch up with me in the very near future.
Good Luck!
Programs that crash/freeze Vista 64 bit ....
by karlviehe - 6/23/08 11:01 AM In reply to: What Apps? by Willbo17Toshiba Notebook with Windows Vista 64 bit home premium, 4 GB ram, 400 GB HDD .....
First ...... almost all programs installed and function correctly ....
Two caused the system to crash and required reinstallation of the operating system ... which is a two hour process plus the 10 hours or more reinstalling all the software I had originally installed ....
The two programs are:
1 ) Ready Boost ..... I installed a Transcend 32 GB SSD Express Card drive ..... Ready Boost allocated a Gig to memory .... problem is the system already had 4 Gigs installed .... so this obviously caused the operating system to "freak-out" and crash .... necessitating reinstallation ....
2 ) Yahoo messenger in webcam mode creates the same problem .....
The problem is ... you may not know ... as I did not .... of these issues untilo its too late .... and you are faced with a huge headache .....
I have no idea of what other applications may cause the system to crash .... bit as I noted almost all 32 bit applications worked in 32 bit mode .....
Just be aware of the possibilities .....
kwv
Answer for Jack: 32bit vs. 64bit: processors and Vista
by dsweet350 - 6/23/08 2:07 PM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
64-bit is for accessing more main memory than 3GB. There are some trade-offs with 64-bit now, but it is the future of computing. The most important thing about 64-bit is DRIVERS, DRIVERS, DRIVERS. If you do not have 64-bit device drivers for every single hardware device in your computer now or attached to it, do not use 64-bit Windows. You basically need to take an inventory of all the devices you plan to connect to your computer, including printers, scanners, and USB devices and check to see whether a 64-bit Vista driver is available. You cannot use a 32-bit driver, period. You also cannot use unsigned, uncertified 64-bit drivers. The other trade-offs are:
1. You will have two separate Program Files folders.
2. You will have two Registries.
3. You will have two Internet Explorers.
Each is for 32-bit vs. 64-bit.
4. You cannot run any 16-bit applications, nor install 32-bit applications which use a 16-bit installer.
5. You cannot use 32-bit plugins in a 64-bit application, so you will need all-new 64-bit plugins for Internet Explorer, or Firefox. Many of the common ones in use today don't exist for 64-bit yet. And if you use both versions, you will need a separate set of 32-bit plugins too.
6. You will need 64-bit codecs for audio/video.
There is no performance increase for 32-bit applications running under a 64-bit operating system; in fact they will run slightly slower (to the tune of 1 fps on games), but you'll never notice it. However, the operating system does seem significantly more responsive even when heavily loaded with many concurrent applications, because it runs in native 64-bit land while the 32-bit applications run in a fenced-off 32-bit section. The OS just has more room to breathe by itself in 64-bit land, so to speak, and this is especially noticeable with Vista. Also gone is the 2/2 split - a design characteristic of 32-bit XP/Vista which allocates 2GB for the OS, and 2GB for applications - no exceptions (unless you use the /3GB switch, which splits it 1/3 but often causes driver problems). Large amounts of main memory can be utilized much more efficiently in 64-bit than in the 32-bit world.
Currently, 64-bit is still above the realm of even most power users for lack of drivers for many devices. But if you want to make use of more than 3GB of RAM, it is the only way to go.
Better Late Than Never
by geofbrewer - 6/23/08 8:44 PM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
64-bit is faster if you have 64-bit software. If you are emulating 32-bit software on a 64-bit machine, it can be slower. 64-bit software will NOT run on a 32-bit machine.
So, how much 64-bit software do you have? Probably, not that much.
Go for the best deal on the total package for the type of applications you use. If you think you might get into the power stuff, go for the 64-bit machine and don't worry about it.
I could bore you with the details of 8-bit vs. 16-bit vs. 32-bit, etc...
But I won't.
64bit vs 32bit
by sumithkumar - 6/23/08 10:49 PM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Hello jack.w
As far as i know the 32 and 62 bit shows the width of the data bus of the micro processors. If it is 32 it can transfes 32bit and if it is 62 it can transfer 62 bit through its databus. So the 62 bit is more fast. In case of vista 62bit will be better.
32 V 64,,,
by Bodhi Firestarr - 6/23/08 10:55 PM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Things to consider, what are the applications that require 32 bit speed or that of a 64 bit. If you are a video or audio editor working on lots of varied projects, yes the 64 bit Vista is the way to go for PC's that is. If it is just for personal use, web surfing etc, 32bit will be fine for a year or two more.
64 bit isn't always better
by jskrenes - 6/25/08 10:45 PM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
The obvious short answer is that 64 bit processors can do math at much faster speeds than 32 bit ones, so yes they are faster. However, unless you're part of a big business or school or you're doing lots of photo, video, or music editing, or gaming, you probably won't notice much difference in speed, quality, or overall performance. Furthermore, some programs that worked on your old computer might not work on your 64 bit one. Want the driver for your old printer (or digital camera or mp3 player, take your pick)? It might not be available in 64 bit form for a bit, if at all. Do you sync your Motorola Q with your computer? Moto won't be adding 64-bit support for a few years yet, if they'll even be around by then.
The nice part is that you can downgrade to 32 bit operating system if you get a 64 bit and it won't work. So here's the breakdown:
32 bit:
Pros: more universal, not much difference than 64 bit for the average user, works with more devices.
Cons: will eventually lose out to 64 bit.
64 bit:
Pros: faster, it is the future, can downgrade to 32 bit.
Cons: some devices and programs may not currently work for 64 bit, and may never work.
So it all depends. Bottom line, if you don't have a lot of stuff that you use with your current computer, and you're starting from scratch with a new printer, mp3 player, cell phone, etc., or you already know that most of these devices work with 64 bit technology, go for the 64. Otherwise, if you have lots of stuff and don't want to spend the extra $$ to buy 64 bit and then downgrade to 32, then get the 32 bit version.
32 bit vs 64 bit
by gvo - 6/26/08 5:12 PM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
When I upgraded my computer 2 yrs ago, I installed a motherboard and CPU that was 64 bit capable thinking that there was going to be quite a few 64 bit programs available and be faster. When Vista came out I paid the extra $10.00 for the 64 bit. I didn't see the extra speed with Vista64 nor were there any 64 bit programs available that I use. But who knows what the future holds. If the price is the same, I would go with the 64 bit because software is always changing.
32 vs 64 bit
by frankmv - 6/27/08 6:25 PM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
As far as I'm concerned, the main advantage to 64-bit is that the 4GB RAM limitation is lifted: i.e. a 64 bit machine can have up to 128 GB of RAM. If your needs require a great deal of RAM, then 64 bit is the way to go. However, as many have already said, finding all the necessary hardware/software drivers may prove daunting. I'm a musician, and I use many VSTi's (Virtual Software Instruments), so after loading an orchestra's worth of instrumentation, I frequently hit the 4GB ceiling - 8GB or better enables me to load as many VSTi's as my machine can handle...PROVIDED I have the necessary 64-bit drivers for all my software (sequencers, drivers, plug-ins, etc.). Other than that, there are no quantifiable advantages to using 64 over 32 bit, IMHO.
32bit vs 64bit
by jerkyboy - 6/27/08 7:04 PM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Sorry for being a week late and a few dollars short but here it is short and sweet. I work for a government installation, contractor on an ARMY base, and they are staying with the 32bit because it is already the more established version. Also stay away from VISTA as long as you can. The government is very reluctant in using VISTA and the few machines that they tried VISTA on had so many problems that they went back to XP. So in conclusion if I were you it would be 32bit and XP for me.
You paid for it....
by SDreamer - 6/27/08 7:04 PM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
You basically paid for a 64-bit processor so go ahead and use it. I was using Vista 64-Bit for a long time (till my computer died of hardware failure due to the motherboard), and I didn't really run into compatibility issues. You won't notice a speed bump though too much imo, unless the program itself has been optimized for 64-bit. 32-bit apps I threw at it 99.9999999% worked (I think it was Microsoft's HD Pro Photo beta that didn't work and specifically needed 32-bit, but that was the only one, and it was a beta). If you go 32-bit you're losing out on a rather large feature of your processor (I beleive all Intel and AMD processors are 64-bit compatible).
Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system?
by howardma - 6/27/08 7:59 PM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I have some extra information for you before you buy your computer. If you buy a retail version of Vista. (Not a pre-installed OEM version) You can go on Microsoft's site and order the 64 bit version of the OS you bought for $10.00.
Just a note: I have been running Vista since it came out and have had no problems and it runs very fast for me. I have a Core 2 Quad processor and 3GB RAM. I also want to say that I have run a number of programs on the 64 bit version of Vista and everything ran perfect. The only exception was Adobe flash player does not function in a 64 bit web browser. They are working on the issue.
Another Toshiba 64-bit Vista laptop user
by regenspan - 6/27/08 8:05 PM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Hi,
Like another poster, I too innocently walked into a store and purchased a new Toshiba laptop with 64-bit Vista Home Premium. At the time, I had no idea that the system was 64-bit and all that this implied. But never mind--I find that basically it is an OK system. The Toshiba comes with 4G of RAM and the 64-bit system fully takes advantage of it. That may be the main advantage. Is it faster? Well, there is only one major program on my hard drive actually written for 64-bit, and this is a 64-bit version of IE. Frankly, I can not notice a difference in speed. I have had no difficulty running OpenOffice, Firefox (2 0r 3) and any number of other programs. Only very old programs seem to fail with 64-bit and, of course, one needs anti-virus written for 64-bit. I did need to replace a laser printer not supported by 64-bit, but it was old and defective anyway. Certain games are prone to crashing, but others seem to work fine (I am not much of a gamer). The one and only frustration I have experienced is that Palm devices will not sync with a 64-bit system, and Palm has not bothered to write a new version of their desktop software. I need to enter appointments and phone numbers twice. In sum, it probably does not much matter which you acquire, 32 or 64 bit, though surely within the next two years there will be more and more programs that will take advantage of the latter. Good luck, and don't sweat it too much.
Real-world 64-bit - it's less than you think...
by wsalomon - 6/27/08 8:42 PM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I've read through all 65 posts and virtually everything I've seen has been "theoretical" benefits of 64-bit vs 32.
Here's my real-real world experience with 64-bit XP.
I have an ASUS P5WD2 motherboard with 4GB RAM and a single core Pentium 4 CPU. I've run this with both WinXP Pro 32-bit, and WinXP Pro 64-bit (which is actually a ported version of Win 2003 64-bit server). I've used this with three different 32-bit and 64-bit databases for development work and data reduction with databases up to 150 GB - Oracle 10g and 11g, SQL-Server 2005, and MySQL 5.0. My reactions...
1. Setting up 64-bit XP is a *REAL* pain.
a. Divers can be flakey - ATI video drivers have only recently become stable.
b. There is a totally different set of ODBC drivers for 64-bit as opposed to 32-bit. (Most 64-bit drivers will NOT work with 32-bit clients.)
c. Furthermore, the 32-bit ODBC Administrator is not even visible in Control Panel. You have to manually find this in C:\Windows\WOW64 and manually create a shortcut.
d. Speaking of WOW64 (Windows On Windows 64) - this is actually the 32-bit emulation drivers for the same ones in C:\Windows\System32 which are the 64-but ones. (Are you totally confused yet?? Like why isn't there a C:\Windows\System64 that has these??? Because it's Microsoft!!!!!)
c. Oracle 64-bit databases need a separate 32-bit client on the same machine for development work. This is virtually undocumented.
d. Virtually no Firewalls and Antivirus work for 64-bit. I use AVG 8.0 which is one of few.
2. Yes - I can address all 4GB of memory in 64-bit, when I can only address 3 GB in 32-bit WinXP (like - why did I just waste 1GB of DDR2 memory?) No - I haven't run formal metrics, but when doing procedures that can take up to 12 hours or more on a run - differences may be 20 min... sometimes shorter with 32-bit (go figure...)
3. BOTTOM LINE - I can see virtually *NO* improvement in database performance between the 3GB of addressable RAM with 32-bit XP and 4GB RAM with 64-bit XP, even though I am supposedly getting twice the CPU throughput from 64-bit.
In other words - at least in the XP world (and this is not Vista, which is even slower), I see no real benefit, and have wasted countless hours messing with XP to get it work.
Of course... your mileage may vary.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
