Search the archive:
YaBB - Yet another Bulletin Board
 
   
 
Pages: 1 
Send Topic Print
32-bit & 64-bit Vista...Which Is Better. (Read 1296 times)
Jul 22nd, 2007 at 1:39am
Triple_7   Ex Member

 
Probably a dumb question but oh well Undecided

Was looking into ordering a copy of Vista Home Basic for my new system.  Noticed there is a 32-bit retail with the option for a 64-bit version.  So whats the real difference between the two.  Everything in this system says its ready for 64-bit.  But why spend the extra if theres not much difference.  Main thing is performance and what the 64-bit version has over the 32.  Which version would be a good choice.

System specs:

Intel Core Duo E6850 processor, 3.0 GHz, 1333 Mhz FSB.  (Release is today so should be ordering it by next week.)
2 Gigs of PC8500 DDR2 Dual Chanel RAM.
512 MB PCI-E DX10 GeForce 8500GT 128-Bit GDDR2 Graphics Card.
THIS
motherboard.
160 GB SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive
430W Thermaltake PSU
DVD/CD Burner
Windows Vista...when version is selected.

System is very near completion.  With Vista and a processor it will finally be ready to fire up for the first time.  Hoping to have it running in the next 2-3 weeks Cool
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #1 - Jul 22nd, 2007 at 9:52pm

Ashton Lawson   Offline
Colonel
FS Water Configurator
Programmer
Phuket, Thailand

Gender: male
Posts: 1211
*****
 
At the moment, 32-bit and 64-bit are pretty much the same.  It's just that you need 64-bit if you want to use more than 3Gbs of RAM.  Currently you have 2Gbs, so go with 32-bit.

32-bit will do you well, because you're not going for large amounts of RAM, and most programs are written for 32-bit anyway.

As long as you have the option, you can change whenever you want. Wink
 

...&&FS Water Configurator+ has new modifications in the works, plus DirectX 10, Service Pack&&1, and Radeon HD 3+ Series support.
IP Logged
 
Reply #2 - Jul 22nd, 2007 at 11:25pm

Gunny04   Offline
Colonel
Who's Better than the
best when nobodys the
best?
Michigan

Gender: male
Posts: 2101
*****
 
Get 64 bit, I run it and have no problems, Windows Vista ultimate 64 bit. Sure no 64 bit programs yet, But they will come in time, I have no problems what so ever, and in the rare case that I do, XP is on the drive as well, you'll love it.

Gunny
 

AMD athlon 3800 Venice Socket 939 64 bit at 2.4Ghz, 6100K8MA-RS Foxconn Motherboard, 1gb (2X512) OCZ Platinum PC3200 Ram, EVGA 8800GTS 640MB OC, 500 Watt NZXT psu, and Windows Vista Ultimate Total hard drive space 530gb
IP Logged
 
Reply #3 - Jul 23rd, 2007 at 1:40pm

dcunning30   Offline
Colonel
This is me......really!!!!
The Land of Nod

Gender: male
Posts: 1612
*****
 
Well, I'd stick with 32 bit.  I've been hitting several 3rd party companies wondering when they'll be releasing Vista versions of their software for devices I currently own.  And every single company has stated they're planning/developing 32 bit Vista versions of their software.  Not one has announced any plans for a 64 bit Vista version.
 

TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS
IP Logged
 
Reply #4 - Jul 23rd, 2007 at 11:21pm

Ashton Lawson   Offline
Colonel
FS Water Configurator
Programmer
Phuket, Thailand

Gender: male
Posts: 1211
*****
 
well, just get 32-bit.  u hav no need for 64-bit,

untill u actually need it, stick with 32-bit.  whilst there is no significant difference between the two, u may as well stick with the tried, and tested, and most secure method (32-bit)...
 

...&&FS Water Configurator+ has new modifications in the works, plus DirectX 10, Service Pack&&1, and Radeon HD 3+ Series support.
IP Logged
 
Reply #5 - Jul 24th, 2007 at 9:53am

Gunny04   Offline
Colonel
Who's Better than the
best when nobodys the
best?
Michigan

Gender: male
Posts: 2101
*****
 
64 bit runs 32 bit apps, Saves you money in the long run and runs everything pretty well, and why not use it? Why keep on using 32 bit when you have a 64 bit software? Heck..... Why did MS Even Waste their time making a 32 bit version? To keep old technology from 5 years ago going? Seems like a propper waste to me. I run the 64 bit version and the only problem I really have is adobe flash won't work, one thing doesnt work and everything else does. If you have a 64 bit cpu, get the 64 bit version, it runs a lot better than my XP ever has on all three computers I had it on.

Gunny
 

AMD athlon 3800 Venice Socket 939 64 bit at 2.4Ghz, 6100K8MA-RS Foxconn Motherboard, 1gb (2X512) OCZ Platinum PC3200 Ram, EVGA 8800GTS 640MB OC, 500 Watt NZXT psu, and Windows Vista Ultimate Total hard drive space 530gb
IP Logged
 
Reply #6 - Jul 24th, 2007 at 10:15am

dcunning30   Offline
Colonel
This is me......really!!!!
The Land of Nod

Gender: male
Posts: 1612
*****
 
As I said before, it's all about software support.

http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/1426/vista_64_bit_or_32_bit_version_x64_vs_x86
 

TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS
IP Logged
 
Reply #7 - Jul 24th, 2007 at 12:06pm

Politically Incorrect   Offline
Colonel
Personal opinion given
free of charge!
Williamsport, PA

Gender: male
Posts: 3915
*****
 
Considering that the Vista DVD contains every edition of Vista made all you would need is the authorization code to unlock it. What your paying for is not the DVD itself but the authorization that allows you to run a specific version.
You could probably buy the cheapest version and purchase a upgrade of which ever key you need for what you want from MS.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #8 - Jul 24th, 2007 at 5:28pm

Nick N   Ex Member
I Fly Sim!

*
 

32bit is for boys
64bit is for men

If you dont want to deal with the little quarks that may arrise such as having to find a 64bit driver every now and then, stay with 32bit unless you want to have full 'true' support for memory mapping over 3.2gig.

You are not going to see any massive game performance change, although I find all MSFS versions run smoother on x64.

But when the new games and titles start being 64bit addressed, you will be missing quite a bit. that just wont be for another year or so.

So unless you are willing to deal with a few driver problems and workarounds, stay with what is easy for you.


 
IP Logged
 
Reply #9 - Jul 24th, 2007 at 5:31pm

dcunning30   Offline
Colonel
This is me......really!!!!
The Land of Nod

Gender: male
Posts: 1612
*****
 
Nick N wrote on Jul 24th, 2007 at 5:28pm:
But when the new games and titles start being 64bit addressed, you will be missing quite a bit. that just wont be for another year or so.


Only if the software developers see a market for 64 bit titles.  32 bit titles can run on both platforms, 64 bit titles will only run on 64 bit platforms.  Once they do that, they limit their customer base right off the bat.
 

TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS
IP Logged
 
Reply #10 - Jul 24th, 2007 at 5:35pm

Nick N   Ex Member
I Fly Sim!

*
 
dcunning30 wrote on Jul 24th, 2007 at 5:31pm:
Nick N wrote on Jul 24th, 2007 at 5:28pm:
But when the new games and titles start being 64bit addressed, you will be missing quite a bit. that just wont be for another year or so.


Only if the software developers see a market for 64 bit titles.  32 bit titles can run on both platforms, 64 bit titles will only run on 64 bit platforms.  Once they do that, they limit their customer base right off the bat.



Market?  LOL

Dont make me laugh. The market is already there. It comes down to how long are they going to try and overstuff the plumbing and suck up the gravy.

They have no choice they are running out of address space for dataflow

Phil Taylor even admits FSX would be better ported to 64bit but was under the gun to remain in 32 but the amount of data per millisecond is over the top for 32bit to run which is why the ground texture blur issues and stutters.

You may see a FS11 x64

EDIT: Let me rephrase... not 'under the gun', but the base code was already x32 and the amount of work to port to x64 would have been too much for the project so that, and the fact that the world is still not keen to x64, kept things as they were.

They have no choice. The need to move to x64 if they expect to continue to up the data flow for software such as a simulator or other very high bandwidth product.

Video encoding is the same and the better systems moved to x64 several years ago.

Its not a matter of if, its a matter of when

 
IP Logged
 
Reply #11 - Jul 24th, 2007 at 5:41pm

Nick N   Ex Member
I Fly Sim!

*
 

and BTW

its not game developers who stifled x64

It was INTEL

because they were behind AMD in processor technology and the one thing they could use to FIGHT BACK, was stifle the use of x64 

now things are changing

like I said, expect to see an FS11 x64


Professional system such as Adobe already use the base and have been using it. There is no comparison and it is going to happen in the next year or so.


 
IP Logged
 
Reply #12 - Jul 24th, 2007 at 6:22pm

dcunning30   Offline
Colonel
This is me......really!!!!
The Land of Nod

Gender: male
Posts: 1612
*****
 
Nick N wrote on Jul 24th, 2007 at 5:35pm:
Phil Taylor even admits FSX would be better ported to 64bit but was under the gun to remain in 32 but the amount of data per millisecond is over the top for 32bit to run which is why the ground texture blur issues and stutters.


And why is he under the gun?  Let me help you with this.  the technology folks always want to do the coolest and slickest apps, but it's the degree of success in the market that keeps the technology folks taking a paycheck.  The market drives what will be and what will not be released!  Currently, there's a whole lot of copies of FSX on the shelves and a whole lot of copies of FSX on ebay at cut rate prices.  Notwithstanding the enthusiasts here on simviation, FSX is not that big of a success in the market precisely because of it's steep hardware curve.  You start putting 64 bit apps on the shelves in the next year or so and they'll for the most part, remain on those shelves.

Quote:
You may see a FS11 x64


That makes sense, but that'll be a port.  There will be a 32 bit version first.

Quote:
EDIT: Let me rephrase... not 'under the gun', but the base code was already x32 and the amount of work to port to x64 would have been too much for the project so that, and the fact that the world is still not keen to x64, kept things as they were.


That makes twice you've make my point for me.

Quote:
They have no choice. The need to move to x64 if they expect to continue to up the data flow for software such as a simulator or other very high bandwidth product.


I agree.  But only when the installed base of 64 bit operating systems is sufficiently large, they'll know they'll sell enough copies where they can make a profit.

Quote:
Its not a matter of if, its a matter of when


I've never disagreed with that.
 

TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE 34 RR THE WORLD WONDERS
IP Logged
 
Reply #13 - Jul 24th, 2007 at 6:53pm

Nick N   Ex Member
I Fly Sim!

*
 
dcunning30 wrote on Jul 24th, 2007 at 6:22pm:
Nick N wrote on Jul 24th, 2007 at 5:35pm:
[quote]Its not a matter of if, its a matter of when


I've never disagreed with that.



Good then we agree, x64 is the future and will become streamlined in the next several years. but as I said, it is not for the person who does not wish to work with the OS for minor things such as drivers they may need to search down, or, a harware limitation because of that.

But, those limits are no where near as bad as they were a year or even 6 months ago. Just about eveything now will run in x64 and as far as I am concerned, just because the disk access is much, much better in x64, the advantages to the OS far outweigh any small disadvantage one may see.


dataflow is better in x64 regardless of the software being run which is why games tend to run a bit smoother.

However, the layman who thinks they can install x64 and just go, needs to stick with x32. You have to understand the OS to get the most out of it.

 
IP Logged
 
Reply #14 - Jul 24th, 2007 at 9:31pm
Triple_7   Ex Member

 
Well, the retail version is 32-bit.  Seem to only be able to get the OEM version in 64-bit right now.  But as of Sunday afternoon I managed to snag a brand new full retail version of Home Basic for $115 including shipping.  In fact the guy still has 29 copies on
Ebay
at the moment if anyones interested (Theres only about 16 hours left on it though.)  According to what I found there is information on how to get the 64-bit version included with the retail.  Depending on the extra cost, if any, I will probably go ahead with the 64-bit.  All the hardware is ready for it even if the softwares not.  Will probably get the disk in the mail within the next couple days.  Wont have a processor for a couple weeks yet so I have a little time to wait on a 64-Bit version to arrive if necessary.

Just figured I would ask before I got everything together and ready to install.  Didn't think there was to big of a difference but wanted to make sure.  Hopefully this new system wont be like my past and have to be wiped out every year, so once Windows is installed I don't want to mess with upgrading again later on.  So 64-bit it is unless they say it will take forever and a day to get the disk or the code Undecided
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #15 - Jul 24th, 2007 at 10:26pm

Ashton Lawson   Offline
Colonel
FS Water Configurator
Programmer
Phuket, Thailand

Gender: male
Posts: 1211
*****
 
Well, we can put it this way.  If you're not-so PC oriented, and you don't like dealing with occasional problems (which you're definately gonna get with Vista anyway) then go 32-bit Smiley, then upgrade whe you need to.  However, if you are ready for any challenges that will come your way, and we can help you with them too, then go with 64-bit Cool.

Personally, I'm gonna go with 64-bit (will be getting 4Gbs of RAM anyway).
 

...&&FS Water Configurator+ has new modifications in the works, plus DirectX 10, Service Pack&&1, and Radeon HD 3+ Series support.
IP Logged
 
Reply #16 - Jul 29th, 2007 at 6:54am

Ivan   Offline
Colonel
No, I'm NOT Russian, I
only like Russian aircraft
The netherlands

Gender: male
Posts: 6058
*****
 
You need 64 bit when:
You have (or want in the future) more than 512MB videocard memory
You want to have more than 4GB memory in the future
Your motherboard supports over 4GB (as your one does)

basically... get 64 bit if your processor can handle it. Will need some more attention driver wise at the start but it will result in a more stable system in the long run.
 

Russian planes: IL-76 (all standard length ones),  Tu-154 and Il-62, Tu-134 and An-24RV&&&&AI flightplans and repaints can be found here
IP Logged
 
Reply #17 - Jul 31st, 2007 at 9:13pm
Triple_7   Ex Member

 
64-bit version officially on its way, will arrive sometime in the next 10 days.  Cost a lot less then I thought it would, only a whopping $10.55 after taxes, free shipping.  Was expecting to pay more like $25+.  So a full retail version of Home Basic with both 32-bit and 64-bit DVDs all for a whopping $125.55 Grin  Originally was going to order it off Newegg...$159.99 just for the 32-bit version Shocked

Processor is waiting on a credit card payment to show up.  Figured it would have been credited to my account by now but for some reason its taking its time.  Processor also keeps dropping in price so might wait till at least Saturday to order it.  If things fall into order then the 64-bit DVD and CPU should arrive approximately the same time.  Hope to fire this thing up in the next 2 weeks Cool  Also have to make a run to the store and pick up a copy of FS9 before I can even fly on this new system.  But for $20 I think I can afford it Wink 

Going to be pretty nice to get off this old thing.  Kind of scary to think how technology has changed in such a short time.  I remember being the envy of all my friends in school (I think it was 2nd or 3rd grade) when I had a brand new computer with a built in CD-ROM and a COLOR printer Shocked  That was state of the art back then with Windows 95, a blazing 166 MHz CPU, 4 GB Hard Drive, and a whole 16 mb RAM Grin  Now over 10 years later I sit here on a AMD 350 MHz IBM and realize just how far things have come.  It has a whopping 100 MHz FSB...the new system will have 1333 MHz FSB.  64 MB RAM, new one at 2 Gigs. 

Also getting another toy to kick off the fun.  As of sometime next month my internet will be upgraded to 3.0 Mbps Cool...going to be a big step above the current 768 Kbps Smiley

Hopefully all goes well and will be back flying in a whole new world very soon Smiley
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #18 - Aug 1st, 2007 at 2:26pm

Nick N   Ex Member
I Fly Sim!

*
 
In order to run the nex gen video cards correctly the OS address needs to be able to handle the video memory mapping and the software needs to be able to work with more than 2GB, which can be done by editing the header of the FSX.exe file, although that does not make the software run as a x64 bit process.

64bit is not here yet in terms of games but they have no choice. By the end of next year they will need that address space to accomplish game visual and interactive upgrades. They need it now but are being stubborn about moving to it because the business end of their offices dont want to pay for the R&D to make the switch yet.

They have no choice, they are out of address space, especially for titles like FSX which should have gone x64 this time around.

Better video editing and other software technology has already made the switch

As for bus speeds, on the home systems I left DDR2 to move to DDR3 eariler this year. DDR3 2000 is already running and by the end of the year expect to see DDR3 2500, something DDR2 cannot ever reach.

Vista x64 and drivers are probably still a bit of a chore to deal with. XP x64 does just fine. Vista needs a service pack or 2 before I would find value in switching perminantly, (x32 or x64) other than to play around with it.


 
IP Logged
 
Reply #19 - Aug 8th, 2007 at 2:13pm

machineman9   Offline
Colonel
Nantwich, England

Gender: male
Posts: 5255
*****
 
32-bit

you have no need for 64bit
 

...
IP Logged
 
Reply #20 - Aug 8th, 2007 at 11:03pm

Kaworu   Offline
Colonel
Powell, Ohio

Gender: male
Posts: 812
*****
 
Its not about what is future-proof, it's about what your system can run. If you can run x64, go for it. But if you can't run it, I would wait for x64 to be more common, and then build a new system based on x64. I'm not into the idea of rebuilding just to use the newest, admittedly superior, OS. But thats just me.  Wink

 

AMD Phenom II X4 965 BE 3.6ghz, 4gb RAM, Palit GTX 460 1 gb, OCZ 750W, Windows 7 64bit
...
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 
Send Topic Print