Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Can I run Vista 64bit With My Rig?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Can I run Vista 64bit With My Rig?

    This isn't a 'should I install Vista' thread. I've already read thru all those posts that I can take. Yikes. I want ta try it, as in a dual boot type thing. I am wondering if I should go 64bit or 32bit?
    With my Athlon 64 it seems I should go 64bit, but I'm not completely sure what the diff is. Anybody can clarify a little? Much pre-thanx.
    Oh, I just bumped my Athlon up to 2.5G. If that makes any difference. Runnin stable.

    #2
    WELL since you specifically asked for my help, here ya go:

    32bit & 64bit are almost the same... except:

    32bit can only recognise 3.0 / 3.5gb of ram whereas 64 bit can recognise 4gb of ram. for instance, if you had 4gb of ram with vista 32bit your computer will say you only have 3.5 / 3.0gb of ram installed on your computer. But 64bit would say you have 4gb on your computer and utilise the full 4gb.

    Comment


      #3
      Thanx for the ultrafast response Epickiller. And I'll take that as a 'Yes' it will work on my comp.

      Comment


        #4
        Yeah your welcome. Beware that 64 bit (I haven't looked into it) has some reliability or compatibility problems... you really don't want 64 bit Vista unless you plan on using 4GB of ram.

        Comment


          #5
          I been running XP 64bit and now Vista X64 for a few years now will no reliability issues. Most compatibility issues are limited to drivers or lame companies with fruits as a name (conflict of interest).

          X64 versions of games seem to run smoother then their x32 versions. UT2004 x64 is a good example.

          Comment


            #6
            APPLE! lol just got your joke...

            Comment


              #7
              Personally, I'm holding out on Vista until 64 bit is feasible. Until then, there is no real reason to upgrade from XP. Sadly, Vista is something of a mess, and 64 bit is QUITE a mess right now in terms of gaming.

              Comment


                #8
                I hadn't heard that you had ta use 4G of ram. I had just heard that it would recognize 4G of ram, as opposed to 32bit, which could only use 3.5 or something Gigs of ram.
                I don't wanna go 64bit Vista if my 2G of ram is not enough. I need ta research a bit more. I had planned on a dual boot with my existing XP.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Been running Vista64 for about a year now with no issues with drivers or gaming, not sure what these troubles you speak of are. Works just as good as any 32bit OS I've used.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    DarkOneX, how much ram do ya use?

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Wasted Time View Post
                      This isn't a 'should I install Vista' thread. I've already read thru all those posts that I can take. Yikes. I want ta try it, as in a dual boot type thing. I am wondering if I should go 64bit or 32bit?
                      With my Athlon 64 it seems I should go 64bit, but I'm not completely sure what the diff is. Anybody can clarify a little? Much pre-thanx.
                      Oh, I just bumped my Athlon up to 2.5G. If that makes any difference. Runnin stable.
                      Vista 32 would be a waste of money and slow your system down. Vista has more overhead than XP, uses more system resources, so obviously there is less left over for games. Vista 32 bit would be the biggest resource hog just due to the 32 bit architecture, so Vista 32 bit should have the biggest performance penalty, Vista 64 should be close to XP 32 bit in performance. XP_64 should be the fastest. I very much doubt there is more than a 15% difference just due to the OS itself. You probably best off spending your money on a dual core cpu to upgrade your current cpu. That would be resources better spent.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Epickiller View Post
                        WELL since you specifically asked for my help, here ya go:

                        32bit & 64bit are almost the same... except:

                        32bit can only recognise 3.0 / 3.5gb of ram whereas 64 bit can recognise 4gb of ram. for instance, if you had 4gb of ram with vista 32bit your computer will say you only have 3.5 / 3.0gb of ram installed on your computer. But 64bit would say you have 4gb on your computer and utilise the full 4gb.
                        32Bit OSs support more than 4Gig of RAM adress space. Dont say 32Bit OS only supports 4Gig of RAM. This is Bull****. Better say that Windows XP does not allow you to use more than 32Bit adress space for RAM and I/O adressing. If you have got a 64Bit- runable CPU your windows XP uses more than 32Bit adress space (pagefile will be adressed with the additional adress space). Windows XP internally supports 36Bit Address space, wich will theoretically give you 64Gigabyte of memory space, but it is disabled.

                        To get more RAM adressing space and a fast 32BIT os you may try to get a windows server 2003 enterprise or a server os wich will allow you to use virtual adress extension.

                        The reason that 64Bit allows you to use more than 4Gig of RAM is only a hype. Every x86 processor since pentium pro is able to get 64Gig of RAM running. Not as fast as 64Bit, but it works.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          I used Vista32 when I had 2GB then went to 4GB and could only get it to see around 3GB thus the reason I went to 64bit. Specs in signature.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by DarkOneX View Post
                            I used Vista32 when I had 2GB then went to 4GB and could only get it to see around 3GB thus the reason I went to 64bit. Specs in signature.
                            Most memory limits are either hardware, ie motherboard, or OS limited, at least the ones most hear or know about. For example, the AMD socket 939 Athlon 64 can address 40 bits or 128GB of memory address space. That is the limit of the CPU, that is not due to being a 64 bit chip, but what the design gives it. The Intel Xeon EM64T based chips could address only 36 bits, which was the same as the P4x86 chips of the time, just due to the design. It has nothing to do with 32 bit or 64 bit.

                            Now I digress. Some may remember back in 2003, when AMD was in much the same position as Intel is in today with a huge performance advantage. With one exception, AMD could not gain market share even with much better technology they had at the time. This was because of the Intel inside marketing blitz. The Intel Inside marketing, or more accurately propaganda blitz, drowned out the fact of the huge AMD performance advantage. Only techies knew the real story and built according to benchmarks and price. How many have noticed the absence of the Intel inside blitz since the C2D became king?
                            That is the power of big pockets, very big pockets.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Thanx for the input folks. I read over all this about 5 times, ok, ten times, and I believe I get what is being said. Its hard for me to understand things that are so technically foreign to me, then I'm like; Oh. I see what you're sayin. Cool.
                              All input helps me make a decision what I want/need ta buy. I'm goin Vista 64bit Home Premium, and adding 2G of ram for a total of 4G. Also gettin a Scythe Ninja Mini heat sink ta make sure my Athlon stays cool with possible extra Vista work load.
                              Much thanx to all.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X