vista home 32bit or 64 bit?

[keakar]

i was looking at vista and saw both oem versions for the exact same price

http://www.directdeals.com/category-windows-vista-home-premium.aspx

well what the heck is the difference between the two?

[Nemesis881]

Doesn't matter. You don't have a 64-bit processor anyway. 32-bit is best right now because more things are compatable with it.

[Ben Clarke]

Actually, it is 64-bit, his processor has Intel's 64-bit emulation thing, EM64T.

I'd recommend 32-bit because it has more compatibility, and Intel 64-bit isn't very fast, because it's really just 32-bit with just the added CPU memory gates or whatever they're called.

[Judas]

I'd go for the 32bit. Driver support for 64 bit is not so good

[keakar]

Actually, it is 64-bit, his processor has Intel's 64-bit emulation thing, EM64T.

I'd recommend 32-bit because it has more compatibility, and Intel 64-bit isn't very fast, because it's really just 32-bit with just the added CPU memory gates or whatever they're called.

so your saying the 64 bit is only for those quad core cpu's then?

[keakar]

STILL CONFUSED HERE.

what is in the 64 bit that doesnt come in the 32 bit version?

is 32 bit just vista basic without the "basic" in the name?

will i need to upgrade to 64 bit later on?

[ChaoticBlankness]

I'd go for the 32bit. Driver support for 64 bit is not so good

Driver support is quite good these days actually. I'd say the x64 version is more "future proof". After all, it's what I use.

[GLD]

I bought the 32 bit upgrade of Vista Home Premium. In it there is info to order the 64 bit version media only for ~ $10.00 US. www.windowsvista.com/1033/ordermedia I would say buy the 32 bit version and then get the 64 bit media from MS so you have the choice to install what ever works best for you. You will need a 64 bit cpu of course to run the 64 bit OS. The link can direct you to some 64 bit questions.

[scoutingwraith]

Get the 64-bit Version because the OS has all the drivers you need. Heck i can find a 64-bit driver for my 3 year old printer. Also go to 64-bit because the 32-bit version is limited to only 3.2x GB ram which soon will not be enough because seeing as how many people are buying new computers with 4Gb of ram and the prices are dropping because a lot of people are buying due to the fact that Vista is the cause. Simply put it like this. Go with the 64-bit edition because it is the future and it will run better (smoother)

[MarcusTaz]

STILL CONFUSED HERE.

what is in the 64 bit that doesnt come in the 32 bit version?

is 32 bit just vista basic without the "basic" in the name?

will i need to upgrade to 64 bit later on?

You only need 64 bit if you plan on using more then 3092mb of ram... 32 bit will only see this much. 32 bit driver support is better then 64 plain and simple for everyday use. Only people that 4 gigs or more, or in a server environment need it and it is not a performance for the avg desktop user. Most everyday programs use the 32 bit hexidecimal code to run anyway...

Get the 32 bit....

[keakar]

You only need 64 bit if you plan on using more then 3092mb of ram... 32 bit will only see this much. 32 bit driver support is better then 64 plain and simple for everyday use. Only people that 4 gigs or more, or in a server environment need it and it is not a performance for the avg desktop user. Most everyday programs use the 32 bit hexidecimal code to run anyway...

Get the 32 bit....

cool, now i understand what the real difference is. thank you very much.

that answer was short simple and to the point, exactly what i was hoping for.

[Grings]

i can see 4gb becoming a (high end gamers) requirement within a year, 2gb has been the common amount for a top end gaming rig for 2 years or so now, and judging by the usual progression of computers (plus vista's increased demands, and ram manufacturers selling 4gb dual channel kits) i think its safe to say 4gb will be the norm sooner rather than later.
I also remember when 512mb was the norm people saying 'hey, youll never need double that amount, then windows xp came along...

[ChaoticBlankness]

You only need 64 bit if you plan on using more then 3092mb of ram... 32 bit will only see this much. 32 bit driver support is better then 64 plain and simple for everyday use. Only people that 4 gigs or more, or in a server environment need it and it is not a performance for the avg desktop user. Most everyday programs use the 32 bit hexidecimal code to run anyway...

Get the 32 bit....

I have to disagree. 64 is going to be the replacement for 32 much as 32 replaced 16. However, we'll only have 64bit software and drivers if we (the consumer) support the 64 bit platform. Why make software for something people aren't using?

Simply put, Vista X64 has reasonable driver support and equal stability to the 32-bit version along side 32-bit AND 64-bit software support. Giving you more software support for your money. It's really a simple choice when you think about it.

[tkpenalty]

You only need 64 bit if you plan on using more then 3092mb of ram... 32 bit will only see this much. 32 bit driver support is better then 64 plain and simple for everyday use. Only people that 4 gigs or more, or in a server environment need it and it is not a performance for the avg desktop user. Most everyday programs use the 32 bit hexidecimal code to run anyway...

Get the 32 bit....

Correction, mainstream servers do not use 64 bit.

[MarcusTaz]

Correction, mainstream servers do not use 64 bit.


Your Exactly right most mainstream servers still use 32 bit with the PAE extension to see more then the 3gb of mem. But there are some out there using 64 bit albeit a small minority... I was mearly trying to point out that 64 bit is not necessary at this time for the avg user. We still run Windows Server 32 bit on our dedicated server to run all our games webserver TS etc even though 64 bit was available to us... In time there is no question that 64 will take over but I do not see it happening for quite some time..

Again for the avg desktop user and gamer it is just not necessary in my humble opinion...:)

[MarcusTaz]

i can see 4gb becoming a (high end gamers) requirement within a year, 2gb has been the common amount for a top end gaming rig for 2 years or so now, and judging by the usual progression of computers (plus vista's increased demands, and ram manufacturers selling 4gb dual channel kits) i think its safe to say 4gb will be the norm sooner rather than later.
I also remember when 512mb was the norm people saying 'hey, youll never need double that amount, then windows xp came along...

I agree, in time it will replace, but when will that time come? I think it will not be here for a while, and people like keakar and avg desktop user really do not need it. besides one day he can upgrade for a small fee is he so chooses. For the advanced user that wants to play and experiment with creative drivers :eek: then go for the 64 bit... BUt again at this time IMHO it is just not worth it...

[Atech]

Actually, it is 64-bit, his processor has Intel's 64-bit emulation thing, EM64T.

I'd recommend 32-bit because it has more compatibility, and Intel 64-bit isn't very fast, because it's really just 32-bit with just the added CPU memory gates or whatever they're called.
Eh-uh, wrong.

IA-32:
i386, 8 32 bit registers, 8 x87 32-bit fp registers.

x64:
x64, 16 64 bit registers, 8 64-bit MMX registers, 16 128-bit SSE registers (and fpops use these registers rather than dog slow x87 registers), plus no frame pointer, so it's basically 16 general purpose registers vs 7.

[ex_reven]

EM64T is in Core 2 Duo's if im not mistaken.

Keakar I recommend 32 bit. Your sitting on 2 gigs of RAM atm but your definately going to be upgrading your cpu, mobo and ram before you consider using 4 gigs of RAM.

Hell, if your gaming, you wont need more than 2 gigs of decent memory for at least the next couple of years (if you dont mind falling behind a bit). I myself am using XP 32bit even though I have 4 gigs of RAM. I'd use 64, but the compatibility issues with XP64 and my wireless reciever are too much for me. Most programs you probably use are only 32 bit anyway...

[Mediocre]

LOL had to post real quick - I think its funny this guy now thinks the difference between 32 and 64 bits is max RAM!? LOL thats true, but thats not THE difference...

I personally have never even seen 64-bit xp or vista, but one of the nerds i work with has it installed on his 6400. 64-bit apps run faster than their 32-bit siblings. 64-bit vista also has a compatibility mode to run any 32-bit apps in a 32-bit enviornment.

Supposedly, 64-bit is the future of computing (just like 32-bit was ~8years ago) IMO it would be silly to buy anything else, as 64-bit runs any 32-bit app, and is 'future-proof'

[ex_reven]

LOL had to post real quick - I think its funny this guy now thinks the difference between 32 and 64 bits is max RAM!? LOL thats true, but thats not THE difference...

I personally have never even seen 64-bit xp or vista, but one of the nerds i work with has it installed on his 6400. 64-bit apps run faster than their 32-bit siblings. 64-bit vista also has a compatibility mode to run any 32-bit apps in a 32-bit enviornment.

Supposedly, 64-bit is the future of computing (just like 32-bit was ~8years ago) IMO it would be silly to buy anything else, as 64-bit runs any 32-bit app, and is 'future-proof'

64 bit doesnt run ALL apps. I think thats the reason theres incompatibility.
According to Wile E, 64 bit offered him no increase in performance over conventional 32 bit. It would be great in a proper environment with a 64 bit processor, which makes me think towards video/graphics editing - Mac Stuff :roll:

[MarcusTaz]

Common there is no point in knocking people and putting them down... Sure we can all get very technical here about the core differences between the 2. It was a simple question by a simple avg user (no offence) with no prior knowledge of he 2 types of OS's available to him. he was mearly trying to find out which one suited him best and we anyswered that question without bashing or putting down others. We can all act like experts by looking up the subject using wikipedia and Plagerizing :roll: but I mean what is the point. Again Keakar's question was answered and that was the point of this thread was it not?

BTW I am no expert, but I have run both OS on a server and desktop platform and I personally find no performance increase whatsoever, and that is the fact jack! :toast:

[Wile E]

64 bit doesnt run ALL apps. I think thats the reason theres incompatibility.
According to Wile E, 64 bit offered him no increase in performance over conventional 32 bit. It would be great in a proper environment with a 64 bit processor, which makes me think towards video/graphics editing - Mac Stuff :roll:Yep, many video/graphics rendering apps offer 64bit versions, but here's the rub, most of the plug-ins for them don't. 32bit plug-ins won't run on the 64bit versions. Kinda defeats the purpose. It's starting to get better, tho.

In 32bit apps, there was zero performance increases. x64 also used more ram. Plus there's all the little incompatibilities in x64. Even some 32bit apps fail to run.

If we don't use it, they won't develop for it, but if they don't develop for it, we can't use it. It's a big catch 22.

I'll return to x64 sometime in the near future for a retest, but I'll dump it again in a heartbeat if it's not up to snuff. I'm not gonna sit around and wait for developers to get their x64 asses in gear. lol

If you want us to use it, make it worth using.

[Atech]

Common there is no point in knocking people and putting them down... Sure we can all get very technical here about the core differences between the 2. It was a simple question by a simple avg user (no offence) with no prior knowledge of he 2 types of OS's available to him. he was mearly trying to find out which one suited him best and we anyswered that question without bashing or putting down others. We can all act like experts by looking up the subject using wikipedia and Plagerizing :roll: but I mean what is the point. Again Keakar's question was answered and that was the point of this thread was it not?

BTW I am no expert, but I have run both OS on a server and desktop platform and I personally find no performance increase whatsoever, and that is the fact jack! :toast:
I find it very insulting that you think I need to look at the Wikipedia for things as simple as differences between the registers of IA-32 and x64. What do you think GCC users do all day? :rolleyes:

Edit: Or am I in fact being overly defensive? Perhaps you were referring to someone else ...

[MarcusTaz]

I find it very insulting that you think I need to look at the Wikipedia for things as simple as differences between the registers of IA-32 and x64. What do you think GCC users do all day? :rolleyes:


LMAO, common Atech, your a nut man.... :toast:

[MarcusTaz]

Yep, many video/graphics rendering apps offer 64bit versions, but here's the rub, most of the plug-ins for them don't. 32bit plug-ins won't run on the 64bit versions. Kinda defeats the purpose. It's starting to get better, tho.

In 32bit apps, there was zero performance increases. x64 also used more ram. Plus there's all the little incompatibilities in x64. Even some 32bit apps fail to run.

If we don't use it, they won't develop for it, but if they don't develop for it, we can't use it. It's a big catch 22.

I'll return to x64 sometime in the near future for a retest, but I'll dump it again in a heartbeat if it's not up to snuff. I'm not gonna sit around and wait for developers to get their x64 asses in gear. lol

If you want us to use it, make it worth using.

Wile E so very true about the catch 22 example.. I have installed it and uninstalled it myself a few times for the very same reasons... Hopefully they will focus on it fully one day soon. You know you would have thought the release of Vista would have focused them on 64 or simulated the developers a bit more, maybe it has maybe not, but it seems the they are stuck in the same conundrum as with XP. We need our 32 bit apps to work so 64 is secondary... When will it become primary? I assume when software developers force themselves to write only 64 bit apps...

[keakar]

ok so to recap all that was said,

64 bit is the future OS ev1 will be using but may not be fully ready to use yet (wait for sp1) because it still needs some tweaking, and it requires better CPUs and 4gb ram usage. some software may still need patching to work properly with this version.

32 bit will work and is perfectly fine for the next year or so and then i will have to be upgraded (at minimal cost for now at least) to the 64 bit version anyway. it works better on smaller CPUs with less ram and works with all software.

since i am in no immediate need to buy the OS right now (crossing fingers lol), my plan is unless i come accross a deal i can't pass up i will be looking to buy it at christmas or next summer.

so should i wait for the SP1 to come out before buying either vista?

[MarcusTaz]

You can wait if you choose, there really is not a rush. SP1 will come whether you buy now or wait... I bought it because I liked the interface,as I was a beta tester for it. Does it perform as smooth as XP, no way but I wanted to play and familiarize myself with the OS to help others... Also I wanted DX10 right away even though that has many issues to be worked out... If you have the extra money and do not mind spending it get, it now, SP1 will come... If you are happy with XP you can always install the Vista transformation pack just to play, it is certainly not vista but does give a bit of the feel of it and it is free...

[keakar]

well my budget is very very tight, i have no money to spare and as unreasonable as this comment is, i want to get OS that i buy just once. i have no plans to purchase anything again later on so i am thinking what will hold me for 5-6 years down the road.

i will be replacing my antique system (see my specs) i use now and will be getting a quad core next summer or xmas of '08 and my plan was to have a new OS ready for it or buy one then to go with it.

[bigboi86]

I just took the plunge to Vista x64 :toast:

[ex_reven]

I just took the plunge to Vista x64 :toast:

Good luck. Let us know how it goes :D

[bigboi86]

Good luck. Let us know how it goes :D

Yea, I'll need it.

So far only thing that has not worked right is MSN live messenger.