Windows XP or XP x64 edition?

[Raumarik]

Hi peeps!

My new gear should be arriving at my house tomorrow and I was pondering something, as I'm getting core2duo E6600 etc would I be better off installing the X64.

I don't really want to run into compatibility issues though but my motherboard/graphics card are all brand new so hopefully that wouldn't be an issue! Having never used the X64 version I've no idea if there's any benefits.

P.S. Vista is a no, can't afford it and won't install it until SP1

 

[Digital Punk]

There wont really be any benefit using XP x64 unless you have oodles of memory .

I have 4gb of ram, and XP x64 works great for me.
Driver support is much better than it was, but its still worth looking into to make sure all your stuff will work ok.

If you have a copy of XP x64, then I say go for it, but there's not a huge difference between the two in normal everyday computing.

 

[FatRakoon]

Yeah, I find that you can go on a general rule with XP64

If you know what benefits it will give you, then you go for it...
If you don't know, then XP64 isn't for you!

I will tell you one thing though...

The other day, I upped my DS3 / Conroe PC to 4GB. Didnt need to, but I run a few VM's now and then so the extra would come in handy perhaps.

XP32 saw only 3.5GB of it! - Ok, not a problem, as this would probably happen anyway with XP32 and some mobos, but I thought stuff it... I need a fresh install anyway, so lets just have a peek to see if XP64 will indeed see the extra .5GB thats gone AWOL... The XP64 I bought abotu a year ago, has been installed on a couple of my machines but there has always been some reason that I went beck to XP32... Drivers used to be an excuse, but thats a poor one these days, and some startup apps still dotn go in too well, but in the last year, I have just bought XPHome for all my PCs now, so XP64 was just in the drawer doing nothing and has never been activated. ( Also got a Vista Business thats in there too cos its a pile of poo ).

Anyway, I threw XP64 on, it saw the full 4GB, and updated the system all fully and I had been playing about with it for 2 days when I decided to re-install, with SP2 intergrated into it ( Yes, XP64 is up to SP2 now ) so I re-done a custom CD, complete with the Drivers, SP2 etc etc etc and I am very impressed with how well XP64 has come on since I last played with it.

In fact, I have only just noticed an hour or so ago, that I have not actually installed my graphics card drivers, and yet, I am able to play Oblivion, Half-Life Source, FarCry ( 64Bit of course ) and the FPS is actually faster than I ever remembered it has been??? - Not bothering to install the CATALYSTS in case it slows it down LOL )

So, anyway, where was I?

Seriosuly, you will NOT benefit from XP64 unless you have loads of RAM. And even then, you wont benefit from having loads of RAM unless you actually use/need it.

So, unless you actually need XP64... You should stick with good old XP.

 

[this_is_gav]

Seriosuly, you will NOT benefit from XP64 unless you have loads of RAM.

That's just not true, but I agree entirely with the philosophy that if you're not sure, then x64 isn't for you yet.

 

[Rich43]

I have x64.. its a lot of hassle with drivers.. XP 32bit is the best windows IMO

Edit: My webcam and freeview card dont work on xp x64!

 

[NVIDIA_x64]

Bout the post above I have XP x64 and it is cool I have drivers for my webcam (Logitech Quick Cam Pro 4000) and I have drivers for my TV card (Hauppauge HVR 1100) and for my printer (Epson Stylus Photo RX500) and for my (Logitech Cordless Desktop MX 5000 Laser) and for my (Belkin Wireless G Plus MIMO USB Network Adapter)

You just have to look.

 

[FatRakoon]

That's just not true, but I agree entirely with the philosophy that if you're not sure, then x64 isn't for you yet.

No, not for 4GB or less no, but for more, XP32 just cannot use more RAM and so you will need at least XP64.

XP can only use 4GB MAX
XP64 can use up to 128GB

Benefits of using XP64 over XP32 with "Normal" ammounts of RAM...

Ok, there are a number of benefits...

Some games... HalfLife 2, FarCry etc have X64 patches and these patches can make the games look a little better, run a little better or whatever?
Some apps such as system cleaners, and disk manager apps and such simply dont work properly under XP64, and many can actually wreck the system.
Drivers have been an issue with many users and XP64... I have found that this has improved many times over in the recent past and many things that I assumed would still not work, have worked fine... TV Cards, Modems ( Who cares about modems these days? ), WebCams etc all didnt work last time I tried, now all run fine, so driver for me are no longer an issue.

So, generally, I still say that XP64 will not give you any real benefits over standard XP.

I think maybe as its based on Server 2003, it should in, ( theory at least ), be more stable than standard XP, but how can this be proved or disproved as they have both proven themselves to be rock solid.

 

[this_is_gav]

It isn't just the RAM mate... I've always found XP x64 to be the better OS, both in stability, and it has that same feel that came about when using Hyper-Threading on a single core CPU - just a much smoother overall experience. I'm only using x86 because MCE isn't available on XP x64.

 

[FatRakoon]

It isn't just the RAM mate... I've always found XP x64 to be the better OS, both in stability, and it has that same feel that came about when using Hyper-Threading on a single core CPU - just a much smoother overall experience. I'm only using x86 because MCE isn't available on XP x64.

I have not been able to crash any of my PCs for quite some time now, well, I have, but that can be explained by hardware issues such as PSU Failing or such like, but ever since Win2000, the PCs have been absolutely rock solid, so how anyone can say whether this or that OS is any more stable than another is beyond me... Ok, so XP32 obviously had issues for your PC, but in mine, as they dont crash no matter what OS I use, how can I tell if this or that is the most stable? ( Half a joke, but half truth that )

I know its not just the RAM... Hence a few examples in the post.

As for whether its any smoother, I would like to agree yes, but until I have 2 PCs that are 100% identical and get them to do 100% identical tasks and for me to run them both at the exact same time, I wont be able to fully tests this. It certainly does feel smoother though... I will give it that, but then so does Win2000 when its a relatively fresh install.

The big plus I will give X64 at this moment in time, is that I have not installed the Catalysts yet and I have been able to play all my games faster than I have ever played them??!?!??! - Oblivion, HalfLife Source ( Hey, why not ), UT & co, Quake 4, Doom3 are all playign far better now, than they have ever played. Im actually worried that if I do install the cats, the system will be poor again!!!

Im thoroughly enjoying my XP64 install. I bought it some time ago, and was kind of waiting for the support to improve, and I kind of just let it be... Never have activated it till a few days ago because its never been on a PC long enough for me to actually warrant the switch from XP32, but now, since the TV card, the WebCam and the GFX are all running fine, its staying on this one... Funny thing really... I never watch TV on this PC, and I have only ever used the webcam to let the kids piddle about flicking the V's while they are on TV, so they are a waste of time, but there you go!

Hey, I also got Vista Business thats also never been activated for the very same reason, but at least I have a real excuse to avoid that.

 

[this_is_gav]

I have not been able to crash any of my PCs for quite some time now, well, I have, but that can be explained by hardware issues such as PSU Failing or such like, but ever since Win2000, the PCs have been absolutely rock solid, so how anyone can say whether this or that OS is any more stable than another is beyond me... Ok, so XP32 obviously had issues for your PC, but in mine, as they dont crash no matter what OS I use, how can I tell if this or that is the most stable? ( Half a joke, but half truth that )

I haven't crashed any either (other than when testing overclocks), but there are always software instabilities, and x64 was less susceptible to them. XP x86 certainly doesn't have any issues, but the way some programs deal with it does.

Perhaps instability is the wrong descriptive, but x64 is better at dealing, or coping, with rogue programming.

 

[Digital Punk]

One nice thing about Xp x64 for me is that you don't have to go through all that Windows Genuine Disadvantage crap.

IE7, WMP11 just install without having to prove that you're not a nasty pirate to Microsoft.

 

[NathanE]

One nice thing about Xp x64 for me is that you don't have to go through all that Windows Genuine Disadvantage crap.

IE7, WMP11 just install without having to prove that you're not a nasty pirate to Microsoft.

Eh? My copy of x64 has definately done the WGA thing numerous times.

 

[BoomAM]

x64 afaik is more secure than the 32bit version because of how it works.
I got the impression that the x64 was the 'test platform' for some of the concepts in Vista64.

 

[FatRakoon]

Eh? My copy of x64 has definately done the WGA thing numerous times.

I think at first x64 did not have such things, but they are certainly in there now!

They have come in on the updates havent they?

 

[FatRakoon]

x64 afaik is more secure than the 32bit version because of how it works.

Possibly... Viruses etc are written to attack 32bit code apparently, and so 64bit code simply wont be affected?

I got the impression that the x64 was the 'test platform' for some of the concepts in Vista64.

Doubt it.

x64 is based on Server 2003

Although I dare say that they did run some tests for sure, but as a test platform, I dont think this is the case... I have also read other places though, the same thing, so ...?

 

[BoomAM]

Possibly... Viruses etc are written to attack 32bit code apparently, and so 64bit code simply wont be affected?

Possibly, but i think its more to do with how the OS seperates its different systems from one another as well.

Doubt it.

x64 is based on Server 2003

AFAIK, Vistas initial conception was based on 2K3s codebase/design ethos.
My point is that Vista64 compared to Vista32 has extremely high security between its components, preventing things like kernal hooks or drivers being installed unless they are 100% verified, for example.
XPx64 does similar, but on a less complex scale.

 

[FatRakoon]

Possibly, but i think its more to do with how the OS seperates its different systems from one another as well.

Yes, agreed.

My point is that Vista64 compared to Vista32 has extremely high security between its components,

So, Vista32 is unsecure then? LOL

preventing things like kernal hooks or drivers being installed unless they are 100% verified, for example.

But Vista32 does that too!

XPx64 does similar, but on a less complex scale.

Didnt know that?

I assumed that XP64 was exactly the same as XP Pro, but written with 64Bit code instead of 32Bit?

 

[BoomAM]

So, Vista32 is unsecure then? LOL

I havnt said that have i?
Vista32 has a lot of rubbish in it to let it run older windows programs.
Vista64 doesnt. The new security policys in it get rid of all the old chaff to make old programs work, in favour of security.
Admitadly it means less program compatibility, but with an eye to the future, its better imo.

But Vista32 does that too!

Not quite. Vista32 warns you and gives you an option.
Vista64 just wont let you at all. Add to that some other little tricks, and you'll find that Vista64 is the proper 'next windows', and that Vista32 was put out there to keep 100% compatibility with older programs/drivers.
Theres a good write up on this i saw a few weeks ago.

Didnt know that?

I assumed that XP64 was exactly the same as XP Pro, but written with 64Bit code instead of 32Bit?

Nope. Maybe some of the higher up bits of code.
Its not as simple as 're-writing in 64bit code' to make something 64bit, theres a lot more to it than that.

.

 

[Cob]

I assumed that XP64 was exactly the same as XP Pro, but written with 64Bit code instead of 32Bit?

x64 XP is based on the x64 Server kernel. In essence it's a completely different OS.

 

[Raumarik]

Hi guys,

well I banged all the new hardware in and put the x64 version of XP on, not had any problems at all! The only driver I had to get was for my EVGA graphics card, which took all of 5 minutes. Everything else was either autodetected (after SP2 which I'd already downloaded prior to install) or was included on my drivers CDs.

Faster, granted I can't really compare it directly to the 32 bit version as I've never run it on this box, but I'm happy. I've only got 2Gb RAM at the moment but intend to up that to 8GB within a month or so