Community Newsletter: Q&A: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system?
- 7/18/08 3:07 PM
microsoft won't give us PAE for 32 bit
by Brons2 - 6/28/08 1:01 AM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I've run 8 GB configs on 32bit Server 2000 and Server 2003. In the 32 bit server product, you can put the /PAE switch in the boot.ini file, which enables Physical Address Extensions and allows servers to address more than 4GB.
Microsoft doesn't include this on their consumer OS'es because they want you to pay more for 64 bit, I guess.
As for me, I'm running 32 bit Vista Home Premium and 64 but Ubuntu 8.04 dual booted on this laptop. I like Vista, but it seems like most people don't. It is definitely a resource hog, 2GB of RAM is the bare minimum. I have 4GB installed since I got it on sale from Newegg for $74.99 with no sales tax and free shipping. Of course Vista only uses 3GB but oh well. Ubuntu sees it all.
I would recommend that Jack go to a computer retailer nearby and check out Vista. If he thinks it's ok, I would recommend going that route as Microsoft is phasing out sales of XP, and mainstream support will end in 2010. Of course XP can still be had, but it's getting more difficult. And IMO Vista is not really that bad, so long as you have at least 2GB of RAM.
You should definitely get 32 bit. 64 bit Windows is not for the faint of heart, or computing neophytes. It is not anyhwere near as well supported as 32 bit Windows is.
is 64 bit Windows Vista really necessary?
by iain12345 - 6/28/08 2:25 AM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
You refer to Windows Vista in your post, but if you bought a Mac OS X system this would be sorted for you. If you are running it on 32 bit hardware it becomes 32 bit yet if you are running it on 64 bit hardwaree it adapts to become 64 bit. No need to choose between versions. And I believe that all current Apple hardware is Core 2 which is a 64 bit processor. There are no compatibility issues with software between the two either
Here are some facts
by dagunny - 6/28/08 3:35 AM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I pondered that. A Dell T7400 dual Xeon processor with 16gb of ram is the control box. A SAS job that takes 30 minutes on x32 took under 1 minute on x64 - XP. Same data same program. Better memory management obviously. Vista is less than desirable. Stata flys on x64 as does Matlab. These are statistical packages that do intense calculation and lots of I/O.
Caveat - many x32 packages that have been compiled with x32 libraries will not work.
If you really want to fly use Linux. But I won't go there in discussion. My personal boxes all run Linux SuSE 11.0.
I am converting all my client desktops to x64 and I support 200 machines. I am running Dell Precision laptops on it as well.
x64 doesn't break as often which means less phonecalls for support.
x64 doesn't support Pointsec which is a disk encryption package.
You can always dual boot.
You can always load it first with x32, make an Acronis image, save it as a Virtual PC/XMware file, install the x64, run Virtual PC or VMWare and load the 32 bit image as a virtual machine (or vice versa).
My folks are happy with x64 XP. No one wants Vista.
Since Linux is free for the download, and Open Office (also free) is compatible with Microsoft Office, one needs to think - why?
Enjoy your PC whichever OS you use.
It must be the fully addressable RAM
by wsalomon - 6/28/08 3:54 AM In reply to: Here are some facts by dagunnyGreat post!
I assume the difference between my results and yours is the 16 GB of RAM vs 4GB. The difference between my 4GB and the 3GB addressable with 32-bit is small (1GB), but difference between your 16GB vs 3GB is profound (13GB).
I would also say that once I finally got 64-bit up and running, it has been stable.
Lastly, WinXP 64-bit service packs and updates are those for Win 2003 64-bit server (latest is SP2), whereas 32-bit is up to SP3.
No answer - but a follow up question
by punterjoe - 6/28/08 3:51 AM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Is there any advantage to virtualizing a 32bit OS on a 64bit system? It would seem that the possibility exists that it could leverage some of the advantages of 64 bit systems while letting better-supported 32bit software (& hardware with only 32 bit drivers) use as much of the system as they can. For instance, could you run a couple instances of say - XP on an 8GB box, giving each the 3+ GB it can handle & still keeping some RAM for the OS running the virtualization environment?
It's likely clear that I've never actually tried this, since I lack the kind of killer hardware that would support this, but I am curious about the possibilities.
32bit or 64 bit
by genifycom - 6/28/08 7:57 AM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Hi Jack,
Unfortunately, you have not told us the key piece of information which is "what is the intended use for this computer?". Without this, any answers here are only wild speculation.
It would be like me asking you "I want to buy a house, should I get a ranch or two story?".
The use determines the choice and not the other way around.
Cheers
32 vs 64
by petite1945 - 6/28/08 9:24 AM In reply to: 32bit or 64 bit by genifycomIt doesnt matter what Jack is going to use the computer for 32bit is the going thing that works!
32 vs 64 bit (in plain hillbilly!)
by cygnus9th - 6/29/08 2:44 AM In reply to: 32 vs 64 by petite1945Heya Jack...
Ok everyone here has told you from every reference in Wikipedia, (and some that aren't, but no one has quoted Seymour Cray yet.. 
I have a HP with a dual core 64 bit (Athlon 5000+) I bought 2 years ago. Came with windows XP (course It also came with 4GB RAM, which at the time was insane, considering I just bought a Dell inspiron laptop a month ago that came with 3GB)
January 2007, upgraded windows 32 bit Vista... No problems whatsoever..
Nov 2007.. upgraded to Vista 64 Bit home premium... My alesis IO|26 Firewire Digital mixer will not work, Alesis still writing 64 bit driver. Everything else worked fine.
Personally I like 64 bit Vista, as noted I usually go MONTHS before having to reboot the system. And also figure this... pay now or pay later.... spend $800 on 32 bit computer/software and then fast forward a couple of years, when you may need 64 bit, and have to pay again... I am not the richest SOB in the world and usually keep my rigs 4 or more years... so my recommendation is buy for the long haul. Do your research as many credible people on here (except for the Mac crowd.. Mac's are ok, but Mac users can be a lot like Patriot fans.. said, and go get it!
Vince..
P.s.
If you really care....
HP Pavillion dTS 5141 AMD 5000+ 2x64 Bit
4GB Ram
1.2 TB (4 internal drives)
Dual 32" Monitors
Nvida 8600 GTS
Yamaha MOTIF ES6
Alesis IO|26 Firewire IO (only thing that does not work in 64 Bit)
HP PSC 2350
Mac Users
by rashidtem - 6/29/08 9:04 AM In reply to: 32 vs 64 bit (in plain hillbilly!) by cygnus9thWe are not born mac lovers. PC has users, Macs have lovers for a reason. Macs are far better then OK. They are far better then PCs in so many ways. I was a windows user until I switched to mac and as many people they switched after me are in love with there machines. The reason we love our machines is very simple to understand.
We all have been through enough pain using PCs and never could really believe that our lives can be pain free until we switched to Macs and after sometime when we notice that pain and suffering that we got use to is gone and life can be peaceful, we just fall in love what has brought this harmony in our lives.
I wish you do your research online before you say anything regarding Macs.
Thanks.
Why I don't use a Mac notebook..
by feduchin - 6/30/08 2:45 AM In reply to: Mac Users by rashidtemI bought a Mac iBook May 1, 2005 for $1175. Pretty little white laptop. (My ex-wife got one too, loves it [seldom uses it], it just sits there looking pretty. [She occasionally checks her email.])
I have kept my personal accounts using Australian Quicken Personal Plus; currently 2008 version; for about 15 years, BUT they don't make an Australian version for Mac. (In May 2005 I tried to buy one, and looked it up again today: they STILL don't.)
So I imported the US version of Quicken for Mac, however I it found lacked some of the advantages that Reckon install in the Australian version such as cooperation with the ATO and a few other Aussie features, plus, unbelievably the Australian version is actually BETTER!! Maybe that's because the Quicken for Mac was completely keyboard-negative, for example how easy is it to hit Control-N for a new entry?? Doesn't exist in the US Mac version.
Yes, I know there are several Quicken substitutes for Macs, I tried some and a few were not bad, but NONE as good, and NONE with a full ATO package included. And I can see why Reckon/Quicken don't bother with Mac -- the market's too small!
I had a good multifunction printer, a model approx mid 2004. I NEVER found a Mac driver for it, although I tried hard. I really liked that printer, which I kept until May 2006.
I really found the fact that Apple/Mac have always insisted that the right mouse button is unnecessary to be TOTAL B-S. For anyone used to using a right-click, it's frankly a boon as it offers an additional easy-to-use menu for almost all software.
I also admit that although I can certainly use most Mac features (as prior to buying the Mac I worked at a graphics company for a year) but I still found Windows file manipulation made more sense.
I like to use a few very good programs, so I look around the Internet. Guess what: There is a dearth of programs for Mac compared to Windows, and I don't bother with second best 'clones'. I buy the best where I can and I pay for the licenses. (One of the few maybe..)
Nothing against Mac, wonderful reliability etc, but frankly I don't care about virus problems with Windows XP. I just maintain the best anti-virus anti-spyware anti-phishing software (ZoneAlarm), AND, by the way I seldom need to reboot..
WHY don't you need anti-virus for Macs? WHY bother to write viruses for such a small market? Not much bang for your buck there mate.
I purchased a Fujitsu Lifebook 6120 (used) in July 2005 (since updated.) I remember feeling HUGE relief when the Windows logo came up.
I sold the Mac iBook August 4, 2005 for $1100. The pretty little white laptop got me a good price. (My ex-wife's iBook still sits on her dining table, looking cute.)
You have my sympathy...
by rasmasyean - 7/12/08 6:49 PM In reply to: Why I don't use a Mac notebook.. by feduchin>> “I really found the fact that Apple/Mac have always insisted that the right mouse button is unnecessary to be TOTAL B-S. For anyone used to using a right-click, it's frankly a boon as it offers an additional easy-to-use menu for almost all software.”
Actually, there is a right mouse button on external mice. Not sure if it was always there, but it’s there “in function”, if not “in form”. You see, Apple decided to make their mouse look like a real cute soap bar so what you have to do is… Ready? Lift up your finger(s) off the left side of the mouse (so that the invisible touch sensor underneath that costs you prolly an extra $100 for doesn’t register your body’s electrical charge)…and then press the entire mouse downward. LOL Watch that context menu pop up every time you lift your finger off the mouse!
But for me I find the lack of support for 3rd party hardware more debilitating. I mean, I like a mouse with back and forward and programmable buttons on it. If I had the money, I would make a mouse with 5 scroll wheels and partner with Microsoft for device drivers, etc…even if it fails as a product too complicated and only a few “super games” with world class dexterity or something use it. I would even try to sell it to Apple but from word on the street, Steve Jobs would prolly throw me out the window for suggesting it! :P
>> “My ex-wife's iBook still sits on her dining table, looking cute.”
Funny you should mention. Most Mac owners I know…seldom use there macs as well. Not sure if they are simply light users naturally…or they just don’t find many reasons for using macs after the initial wow period. Maybe both. :shrug:
CNET Reviews has your answer.
by rashidtem - 6/29/08 8:58 AM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I don't wanna take much of your time and I'm sure you must have read about Apple Computers in your replies. All I would like you to do, research online OS X vs any windows ever. OS X is tons better then Windows. Please don't pay attention to, that its not compatible with software. Now, its more compatible to softwares then ever. You don't need 5 softwares to do the same task. It comes with most of what you need. Here I'm pasting a review of iMac from CNET
The good: Along with its best-in-class design and solid-feeling, thin keyboard, the new Apple iMac desktop offers more performance and features than many Windows-based PCs; robust iLife '08 digital media suite.
The bad: No word on means of upgrading to Apple's new Leopard OS when it's released; anemic phone support.
The bottom line: With its super-elegant new design and a strong configuration, Apple's new iMac competes with the PC desktop market better than perhaps any previous Mac to date. Unless you're a gamer or an upgrade enthusiast, we can think of very few reasons not to make an iMac your next desktop.
http://reviews.cnet.com/desktops/apple-imac-20-inch/4505-3118_7-32564364.html?tag=prod.txt.2
Last but not least search these terms online
Reviews of iMAc
Reviews of OS X Leopard
Reviews of iLife
Reviews of MacBook
You'll get your answers. I beg you not to make your purchase without research first. Thanks
go with 64-bit man
by medialover - 6/30/08 12:36 PM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
why not? the architecture allows you to do more. but what if you just want a 32-bit operating system? well, let me put it to you this way:
64-bit hardware can support 32-bit OR 64-bit operating systems
32-bit hardware can support only 32-bit.
I've got windows vista business edition SP1 64-bit
The easiest way to understand between 32 and 64 bit OS
by maxz lulun - 7/1/08 12:19 PM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Here is the detail
As we know in Machine Language, we use only binary no.0 and 1 for all processing works done. So 32 bit will usually take more time to complete a task as it's much less than 64 which has higher pin socket and more advanced. It's like alloting work for 32 and 64 person...guess who will finish first..64 right?
But problem occurs in case if the alloted process is less or obsolet as read by the high 64bit OS. Say if you give Rs.60 for 64 person in case if it has to be distribute at an amount of Rs.10 per person.
This is the simplest logic to understand.............................
maxz2008
My 64 Bit experience
by kjdinoc - 7/1/08 3:02 PM In reply to: Should I go with a 32bit or 64bit computer system? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I am a Business / Home User and purchased a HP Laptop with 64 Bit Vista Ultimate on it just after Vista was released. My machine rocks and i haven't had any of the Vista related trouble that I've heard people whining about for the last 1.5 years.
I run a little bit of everything on this PC and have only run into one compatability issue related to 64 Bit. We use a Shoretel IP phone system in my office and they do not offer a 64 Bit driver for thier desktop software. So crazy.
Everything else works beautifully. Office, Itunes, Zune, Nero, MSN, Opera, Firefox, Safari, Citrix Xenapp, Google Earth, Kodak Photo Editor.......Real Player, etc. etc. etc. Everything works beautifully. I have 4GB of usable RAM, beutiful graphics. It's been a great experience.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
