[QUOTE=TheMadness;17637864]...why
there is no reason at all to get 32[/QUOTE]
I'm going to but 32 bit on most of the computers in my house since they will never see 4GB of RAM.
[QUOTE=Roast Beast;17646904]I'm going to but 32 bit on most of the computers in my house since they will never see 4GB of RAM.[/QUOTE]
I have 3 systems at home that are Socket 478 Pentium 4 systems, meaning no 64-bit for me. I only have 64-bit on my laptop and my gaming PC. My other 2 P4 PCs run Windows 7 Pro 32-bit. My third P4 system runs Linux Mint 7, and is not relevant to this forum whatsoever. [img]http://d2k5.com/sa_emots/smile.gif[/img]
Would there be any noticeable differences with running 64-bit on 2 GB of ram? I have no plans to get more RAM anytime soon.
[QUOTE=a2h;17651950]Would there be any noticeable differences with running 64-bit on 2 GB of ram? I have no plans to get more RAM anytime soon.[/QUOTE]
I don't see any reasons to run one or the other, but I always run 64-bit if the processor supports it...
...but that's just me. v[img]http://d2k5.com/sa_emots/emot-v.gif[/img]v
[QUOTE=a2h;17651950]Would there be any noticeable differences with running 64-bit on 2 GB of ram? I have no plans to get more RAM anytime soon.[/QUOTE]
Yes. I upgraded to 4gb from 2gb two months after having installed W7 x64, and things went faster after both.
I installed 64Bit multiple times on 32Bit processors, and it works fine, so there is no reason not to get it.
[QUOTE=TheMadness;17638937]it would've been a lot easier to invest in an external, especially for a laptop[/QUOTE]
Probably but oh well.
[QUOTE=kevkev;17653811]I installed 64Bit multiple times on 32Bit processors, and it works fine[/QUOTE]
Sure
[QUOTE=kevkev;17653811]I installed 64Bit multiple times on 32Bit processors, and it works fine, so there is no reason not to get it.[/QUOTE]
Physically impossible but whatever...
[QUOTE=Panda X;17667483]Physically impossible but whatever...[/QUOTE]
I don't think he realises that about every processor made after Pentium 4 (and even some of those) have 64-bit support.
[QUOTE=kevkev;17653811]I installed 64Bit multiple times on 32Bit processors, and it works fine, so there is no reason not to get it.[/QUOTE]
rofl.
^avatar fits with rofl
[QUOTE=Panda X;17667483]Physically impossible but whatever...[/QUOTE]
Don't ask me how, (Or it might be a 32 AND 64 bit DVD) but i can install it on 64 and 32 bit.
[QUOTE=zman115;17590633]Its cheaper but are there advantages to having Ultimate or Professional?[/QUOTE]
I'm getting Professional, but I'd be using all of the Pro features due to what I do at work.
[QUOTE=ica|kvantum;17670462]^avatar fits with rofl[/QUOTE]
Thank you kind sir.
[QUOTE=kevkev;17672295]Don't ask me how, (Or it might be a 32 AND 64 bit DVD) but i can install it on 64 and 32 bit.[/QUOTE]
Are you talking about software or an OS?
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;17678785]Are you talking about software or an OS?[/QUOTE]
OS.
[QUOTE=rieda1589;17590545]Haven't once had a problem with drivers, unsigned or not.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Ralbane;17590416]64 bit
you lose support for absolutely archaic pieces of software in exchange for more memory[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Pandamobile;17590409]Always get 64 bit.
If you have more than 3 GB of RAM, 64 bit is required to access more than 3 GB (plus GPU RAM or something)[/QUOTE]
This sums up the whole thread.
There's no reason that you shouldn't want 64-bit. It works perfectly fine, yes, it is compatible with 32-bit applications even though said application might say it will cause problems - and you don't want to waste memory.
You [b]cannot[/b] install a 64-bit operating system on a 32-bit processor.
[QUOTE=Plastical;17684266]You [b]cannot[/b] install a 64-bit operating system on a 32-bit processor.[/QUOTE]
Alright, sorry to have made my mistake :saddowns:
[QUOTE=Roast Beast;17646904]I'm going to but 32 bit on most of the computers in my house since they will never see 4GB of RAM.[/QUOTE]
If you have the chance to install and run the x64 version, do it. There is no downside using x64. Anyway, the change to x64 has begun. For example, Windows Server 2008 R2 (based on windows 7) is only available for 64 bit. And I'm quite sure, Windows for Desktop PCs will be 100% 64bit only for the next version. So better "go for x64 now" instead of in a few years when you are "forced too" and then find problems you could have solved now.
[QUOTE=aVoN;17708323]If you have the chance to install and run the x64 version, do it. There is no downside using x64. Anyway, the change to x64 has begun. For example, Windows Server 2008 R2 (based on windows 7) is only available for 64 bit. And I'm quite sure, Windows for Desktop PCs will be 100% 64bit only for the next version. So better "go for x64 now" instead of in a few years when you are "forced too" and then find problems you could have solved now.[/QUOTE]
I heard that programs take more memory under 64 bit, is this true / important? That's the main thing holding me back from installing x64 on the rest of the computers around here (I've been using in on my computer for a while).
[QUOTE=Nori;17590439]Just remember that in 64 bit unsigned drivers don't work or at least will give you a really hard time. I forget how I fixed it for myself.[/QUOTE]
It only applies to drivers with absolutely no type of signature, and can be bypassed by pressing F8 before/during the windows boot process and selecting "disable driver signature enforcement."
[editline]12:27PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Roast Beast;17708565]I heard that programs take more memory under 64 bit, is this true / important? That's the main thing holding me back from installing x64 on the rest of the computers around here (I've been using in on my computer for a while).[/QUOTE]
false
[QUOTE=Roast Beast;17708565]I heard that programs take more memory under 64 bit, is this true / important? That's the main thing holding me back from installing x64 on the rest of the computers around here (I've been using in on my computer for a while).[/QUOTE]
They do but it's not massive. Especially don't worry about it. If you have enough RAM to make 64 bit needed/worthwhile, you aren't going to have any problems
[QUOTE=Dr Egg;17708886]They do but it's not massive. Especially don't worry about it. If you have enough RAM to make 64 bit needed/worthwhile, you aren't going to have any problems[/QUOTE]
Most of the computers in my house have 2GB of RAM or less, but if switching to x64 won't change the RAM usage drastically then I'll probably put it on some / all of them.
Switching my order to 64 bit.
[QUOTE=Roast Beast;17708565]I heard that programs take more memory under 64 bit, is this true / important? That's the main thing holding me back from installing x64 on the rest of the computers around here (I've been using in on my computer for a while).[/QUOTE]
The registers of native 64 bit applications are 64bit wide. The executable therefore rises a bit in size and memory consumption too a little bit. On wikipedia, you'll find a better explanation.
[QUOTE=aVoN;17740191]The registers of native 64 bit applications are 64bit wide. The executable therefore rises a bit in size and memory consumption too a little bit. On wikipedia, you'll find a better explanation.[/QUOTE]
So only native 64 bit applications are affected, and not by much? Nice, in that case I'll switch all of our computers to 64 bit.
[QUOTE=Roast Beast;17740831]So only native 64 bit applications are affected, and not by much? Nice, in that case I'll switch all of our computers to 64 bit.[/QUOTE]
I guess they do have 4+gb of ram. If not, 64bit is useless.
[QUOTE=johanz;17741974]I guess they do have 4+gb of ram. If not, 64bit is useless.[/QUOTE]
It's not useless. Some programs can be faster.
The main advantage is accessing more than 4 GB of memory on non-PAE kernels, but it's not the only one.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.