32 or 64 bit vista ?

Dillinja · 9 Jul 2007 at 23:48

building new machine very soon and want (well dont want forced) to get vista because id like to run crysis in dx 10...whats best these days?? i know 64 bit was a pain when it come out i havent really followed it at all cos i was always happy with xp and 32 bit systems...its CRYSIS making me do it not me wanting this naughty hardware

system il be building is

bfg 680i sli
bfg ultra 8800
4 gig 1066 dominator corsair RAM
either q6600 or q6700 depends on what prices do end of the month
enermax 720 psu quad GPU and quad cpu rated
coolmaster 832
x-fi extreme pro gamer (Xram)

Any comments would help me out

Slogan · 9 Jul 2007 at 23:50

Unless you only want to use 3.2GB of your Ram in your machine, 64-bit.

mattyrigby00 · 9 Jul 2007 at 23:50

64 bit

marc2003 · 9 Jul 2007 at 23:55

vista x64 isn't compatible with that case. sorry.

Dillinja · 9 Jul 2007 at 23:56

yeah i did read that in the spec of the case :rolleyes:

haha

Dillinja · 9 Jul 2007 at 23:58

so know real big problems with 64 bit Vista now ?...

meghatronic · 10 Jul 2007 at 00:01

Slogan said:
Unless you only want to use 3.2GB of your Ram in your machine, 64-bit.

I was under the impression the other 800mb was still 'used', just differently.

Dillinja · 10 Jul 2007 at 00:05

ive heard that too...also ive heard that it was only 3 gig 32 bit systems could handle....i dunno conflicting info's great ain'it !!!

PhillyDee · 10 Jul 2007 at 00:10

32-bit can see a MAXIMUM of 4Gb. Then include in that your graphics memory . . . Assuming the ultra is 768mb, the 4gb of system memory then becomes 4096-768=3328Mb ram. I think anyway . . . bear in mind i only just understand it myself . . . . and im trying to keep it simple. (I use x64 myself)

Dillinja · 10 Jul 2007 at 00:15

how do u find the 64 bit os...much different?,any or many probs ?

gareth170 · 10 Jul 2007 at 00:23

Dillinja said:
how do u find the 64 bit os...much different?,any or many probs ?

64bit os is faster then 32bit... i don't have any problem with the vista 64bit..

i would say look for all your 64bit drivers first...

http://64-bit-computers.com/windows-vista-32-bit-vs-64-bit-benchmark.html

PhillyDee · 10 Jul 2007 at 00:25

I much prefer it to 32bit xp. Its perfectly stable, runs all my games, BF2142, CS:S, HL2, EP1, Lost Coast etc. on steam, CoD2, Sup Com. Not stalker though

unfortunately. But thats a well known problem.

The UAC feature is annoying, so thats been turned off. I dont like having to click YES I WANT TO RUN x PROGRAM 3 times before it runs. Plus, it doesnt like some startup programs (Such as Xfire, and sometimes Steam), and so it refuses to run them (Thinking that its malicious software). It should just ask me, and i would let it.

I Dual booted with XP first though, just to make sure that vista did everything i wanted, and i was happy with it. Its a better, faster install than XP (Including drivers).

Ive never ran 32bit vista, just couldnt see the point with a C2D.

stoofa · 10 Jul 2007 at 03:18

gareth170 said:
64bit os is faster then 32bit... i don't have any problem with the vista 64bit..

i would say look for all your 64bit drivers first...

http://64-bit-computers.com/windows-vista-32-bit-vs-64-bit-benchmark.html

What an absolutely amazingly random graph to convince people that 64bit is the way to go.
Don't get me wrong, I purchased Vista Ultimate Retail early this year and have only ever installed the 64bit version and that is the version I'll stick with.
However that graph could mean absolutely nothing and on its own...does.

gareth170 · 10 Jul 2007 at 12:20

stoofa said:
What an absolutely amazingly random graph to convince people that 64bit is the way to go.
Don't get me wrong, I purchased Vista Ultimate Retail early this year and have only ever installed the 64bit version and that is the version I'll stick with.
However that graph could mean absolutely nothing and on its own...does.

honesty 64bit feels faster then 32bit.

iCraig · 10 Jul 2007 at 12:33

gareth170 said:
honesty 64bit feels faster then 32bit.

How can you feel 10 bench-mark points worth of difference?

I think you're falling victim to the placebo effect.

gareth170 · 10 Jul 2007 at 12:41

its just faster..

simple as that

dirtydog · 10 Jul 2007 at 12:42

gareth170 said:
its just faster..

simple as that

9%.

iCraig · 10 Jul 2007 at 13:18

gareth170 said:
its just faster..

simple as that

It may well be faster, but it's not noticeable or if you can notice 10 marks faster, or a handful of FPS more, than you must have extra sensory perception.

Two cars, both the exact same apart from one having a 2 litre bottle of water in the boot.

Technically the one without the added weight is faster, but you're not going to notice it without very precise measurement.

gareth170 · 10 Jul 2007 at 13:31

iCraig said:
It may well be faster, but it's not noticeable or if you can notice 10 marks faster, or a handful of FPS more, than you must have extra sensory perception.

Two cars, both the exact same apart from one having a 2 litre bottle of water in the boot.

Technically the one without the added weight is faster, but you're not going to notice it without very precise measurement.

well i notice the different

Dillinja · 10 Jul 2007 at 13:44

Thanks phillydee and co for the replys..i plan on getting the sole 64 bit edition think its around 70 quid il always have Xp on dual boot anyway for 32 bitness ha...dont see why i pay 140 ish for both 32 and 64 when i think on a post on this thread as guy says "ive never even run the 32 bit install of vista.......anyway many thanks for info...