Windows 7 64-bit - What's the point?

darkcooleo said:
GPU does count towards your addressable memory.

So meatball would be right
Click to expand...

Whilst the GPU does account towards your addressable memory, people seem to think the entire GPUs RAM is mapped so a 1GB card on a 32 bit OS reduce the amount of memory available compared to say a 512MB card which isn't true.

I had a 512MB video card on XP, upgraded to a 1GB video card and had the exact same amount of usable memory, 3.25GB.
 
darkcooleo said:
GPU does count towards your addressable memory.

So meatball would be right
Click to expand...

It can be a little confusion because even sources which you would consider reputable often state; depending on how much VRAM is on-board the installed graphics card, if you subtract that value from the 4GB licensed limit of a 32-bit operating system, that's at least the maximum amount which Windows will be able to access, which isn't correct as Titaniumx3 and Broken Hope have already stated. If you would like a nice in-depth explanation regarding the 32-bit Windows physical limit, this article here is defiantly worth a read, as with anything which is written by Mark Russinovich. :)
 
Could it be argued that running a 64 bit CPU on a 32 bit OS is not using it to it's fullest possible extent and is therefore being wasted?
 
Memphis said:
Windows in-built firewall has always been perfectly good enough.
Click to expand...

I've always found sitting behind a router, and simple internet common sense to be good enough. I never use a firewall (I disable the native Windows one), and whenever I do my ~yearly scan, I find nothing.
 
Camoe said:
It Will have a x32 bit version i Gaurentee it. that would be bad for Microsoft, think of all thoes millions of people who still have x32 boxes.
Click to expand...

Yes, but the vast majority of those won't upgrade to Win 8. The vast majority of people on 7 are 64bit compatible.
 
I still get questioned by friends/family on if they should go x86 or x64. They ALWAYS bring up 'driver problems' but as has already been mentioned, unless you have really old legacy apps, periphs or something, those problems are a thing of the past.

Easy rule of thumb is that if you're offered an x64 driver, use it, otherwise, just use the one offered.
 
Tripnologist said:
I still get questioned by friends/family on if they should go x86 or x64. They ALWAYS bring up 'driver problems' but as has already been mentioned, unless you have really old legacy apps, periphs or something, those problems are a thing of the past.

Easy rule of thumb is that if you're offered an x64 driver, use it, otherwise, just use the one offered.
Click to expand...

Yeah thankfully that is the case now.

When Vista 64-bit was released the drivers for the brand spanking new 4870 (when it was first released it had 512MB) were utterly crap. It kept restarting the video so you'd get a nice blank screen for a few seconds or a game would completely crash and you'd have to restart the machine.

The 32-bit drivers worked fine when using the same card in XP. To be fair though, the issues could be tied to it being a brand new device rather than the driver memory addressing.

Printer drivers were difficult to find too. These were a surprise because XP 64-bit had been out for a while at the time.

Anyway, that was back then and we've thankfully got much better 64-bit driver support now.
 
Last edited:
uv said:
I've always found sitting behind a router, and simple internet common sense to be good enough. I never use a firewall (I disable the native Windows one), and whenever I do my ~yearly scan, I find nothing.
Click to expand...

Protection against incoming attacks aren't the only reason for a firewall.
 
Gunni Parker said:
I am annoyed that my xfi doesnt work anymore! Other than that I am made up I went to 64 bit.
Click to expand...

There has to be a fix for that sometime soon. My mate lost his ability to use 5.1 surround sound after the switch too, he posted on here to see if anyone knew of a fix but didn't get anything.
 
when you start doing more advanced things on your computer you will need more than 3.2gb. when you converting video from one format to another for example, 64bit has a performance boost.

but at the end of the day as this guy i know says. "oh yay word opens 9ms faster."

but if you spend a lot of time on your pc you will get annoyed with the slightest slowness. when i am on another pc i can get annoyed when it does not respond as fast as my pc at home. if you use photoshop or other such software you will need more than 3.2gb. there is no reason not to use the 64bit versions because that is the latest.

some benchmarks http://blog.tune-up.com/windows-insights/32-bit-vs-64-bit-more-bit-more-performance/
 
Last edited:
groen said:
when you start doing more advanced things on your computer you will need more than 3.2gb. when you converting video from one format to another for example, 64bit has a performance boost.

but at the end of the day as this guy i know says. "oh yay word opens 9ms faster."

but if you spend a lot of time on your pc you will get annoyed with the slightest slowness. when i am on another pc i can get annoyed when it does not respond as fast as my pc at home. if you use photoshop or other such software you will need more than 3.2gb. there is no reason not to use the 64bit versions because that is the latest.

some benchmarks http://blog.tune-up.com/windows-insights/32-bit-vs-64-bit-more-bit-more-performance/
Click to expand...

Yeah the problem still is a lack of 64-bit applications. Look at how many people browse the internet but do we see a 64-bit browser? The only one I can think of is I.E. which is possibly the fastest browser I've ever used... but I hate I.E. so I won't use it.

I had a video conversion suite which used multiple cores to convert, took the exact same amount of time as the single core version.

It's ok though, slowly but surely we're getting more apps able to utilize wider memory addressing and multiple cores. At the moment the only applications we see are from developers who can afford to, i.e. CAD, Photoshop, etc.

I think the biggest thing I found in here is by switching over to 64-bit you're encouraging more developers to move on.
 
Last edited:
After going on a Winternals course the other week for security alone I'd never go back to something like 32bit XP. x64 Win7 or 2008 R2 is what you want.

As a few have said here already, why not x64? Unless you have some legacy 32bit app or hardware that you absolutely cannot live with out then I can see no reason not to go 64bit if you are looking at Win7.
 
Lucero said:
64 bit driver issues are a complete thing of the past unless you have mega ageing hardware or peripherals. The question is, why should I not go x64?

It's the future and should be adopted as quickly as possible. As applications become more intense (such as VS2010) and even games in the future, why risk being left behind and having to install again when you can just future proof now?
Click to expand...

Quoted for truth. I've yet to find anything useful that doesn't work with 7 64bit
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom