Window XP 32 or 64? | Forums

[MisterMark]

I am finally building my new machine but at a crossroads on which of these two operating systems to get.

I know it's been covered and I've already did a search but a lot of the info is over a few years old. I wanted to probe the question again now that drivers have matured, etc.

Thoughts?

-Mark

[FoolTrottel]

Thoughts?

If you need to have more than 4GB of Internal Memory, then go for 64bit.

(Why not Vista?)

[MaxMhz]

Many more machines run 32 bit. Manufacturers of devices will concentrate on the biggest bunch of users. Drivers for 64 bit OSes will always lag behind 32bit. If you do not need large amounts of memory I would say go 32 bit for compatibility's sake.

[Urufu_Shinjiro]

Originally posted by MaxMhz:
Many more machines run 32 bit. Manufacturers of devices will concentrate on the biggest bunch of users. Drivers for 64 bit OSes will always lag behind 32bit. If you do not need large amounts of memory I would say go 32 bit for compatibility's sake.

I'm inclined to disagree in the case of Vista. I have yet to find a driver for Vista 32 bit that did not have a 64 bit counterpart. XP 64 bit is a different story but vista had 32 and 64 bit right from the start and everyone had to write a vista driver anyway so they wrote both at the same time.

[WTE_Galway]

Originally posted by Urufu_Shinjiro:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MaxMhz:
Many more machines run 32 bit. Manufacturers of devices will concentrate on the biggest bunch of users. Drivers for 64 bit OSes will always lag behind 32bit. If you do not need large amounts of memory I would say go 32 bit for compatibility's sake.

I'm inclined to disagree in the case of Vista. I have yet to find a driver for Vista 32 bit that did not have a 64 bit counterpart. XP 64 bit is a different story but vista had 32 and 64 bit right from the start and everyone had to write a vista driver anyway so they wrote both at the same time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Vista 64 driver support is still a bit dodgy if you are using old hardware especially scanners and barcode readers. It is however way better than Xp 64 driver support which was abysmal.

If you are happy with 2 Gb ram XP 32 beats Vista 32.

If you want more than 2Gb ram Vista 64 is the way to go, though be warned it really prefers 8Gb, with Vista 64 4gb is not quite enough.

[RAF_OldBuzzard]

Any new system you build will have a 64 bit processor. Don't waste it on a 32 bit OS.

Go with Vista 64 bit, and don't look back.

Newer applications are asking for more and more RAM, and a 32 bit OS just isn't going to be capable of running some newer applications because of that. Trust me, we are going to see applications soon that will be saying that they will not run in Vista 32 bit or the upcoming Windows 7 32 bit versions.

Anyone building a new system today, especially with gaming in mind, should go with Vista 64 bit and 4Gb of RAM minimum.

From my experience,and even though I am using 8Gb of RAM with Vista, I tend to disagree with WTE_Galway on the amount of RAM. I believe that 4Gb with Vista is adaquate. I've run Vista 64 with 2, 4 and 8Gb RAM, and Vista performed quite well with 4Gb. Going to 8Gb does give a bit of extra 'snappyness', by allowing Superfetch to pre-load more of your most used applications into memory, but it really isn't necessary.

[TX-EcoDragon]

If you have a higher performance machine and play BlackShark, get Vista - there are bigtime gains there. Other sims might lose a few fps in Vista, though it won't be much (anymore).

If you just want XP, well, I've heard there are quite a few issues with 64 bit XP, and that Vista is the way to go for 64 bit. I would either pick XP 32, or Vista 64.

I've been running Windows 7 64 bit, and haven't had any troubles with anything I've tried yet, including all my sim hardware (Saiteks, CH stuff, TrackIR, and Cougar drivers supposedly work too).


I've done some basic benchmarks comparing XP 32 to Windows 7 64 in Black Shark, FSX, and IL-2. Take a look at that thread here: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...9310655/m/5471001327

[Bearcat99]

Originally posted by RAF_OldBuzzard:
Any new system you build will have a 64 bit processor. Don't waste it on a 32 bit OS.

Go with Vista 64 bit, and don't look back.

Newer applications are asking for more and more RAM, and a 32 bit OS just isn't going to be capable of running some newer applications because of that. Trust me, we are going to see applications soon that will be saying that they will not run in Vista 32 bit or the upcoming Windows 7 32 bit versions.

Anyone building a new system today, especially with gaming in mind, should go with Vista 64 bit and 4Gb of RAM minimum.

From my experience,and even though I am using 8Gb of RAM with Vista, I tend to disagree with WTE_Galway on the amount of RAM. I believe that 4Gb with Vista is adaquate. I've run Vista 64 with 2, 4 and 8Gb RAM, and Vista performed quite well with 4Gb. Going to 8Gb does give a bit of extra 'snappyness', by allowing Superfetch to pre-load more of your most used applications into memory, but it really isn't necessary.

I agree... XP-64 is ok.. I use it now.. but it is more limited than Vista.. it is like the b@stard child of MS... Get Vista 64... and work it.. It will be more future proof... Had I kinown then what I know now I would have waited for Vista 64.. which was released @ 6 months after I got XP-64..

Tyhe problem with XP-64 is that it is not supported and there are a lot of things.. that just do not recognize it... Like my HP840 light scribe DVD player.. I had to get another one in order to make LS CDs.. my MP3 player ........ andf the thing it this stuff will be seen by my rig.. but the stuff just wont work.. even my DL for Win 7.. I had to use the 32 bit IE bowser to even get the DL.. and IMO 32 bit is dead... it is just still animated... but 2-3 years from now most of the newer stuff will probably be built for a Vista/Win 7 platform and 32bit XP-32 will be like running 95 when XP came out...

[WOLFMondo]

I've never had a compatibility problem with XP64 over the years I've used it. All major driver vendors bring out 64 and 32 bit version at the same time so driver support has never been an issue apart from the first 6 months after XP64 was released.

XP64 is more stable as well since its based on server 2003.

Originally posted by TX-EcoDragon:


If you just want XP, well, I've heard there are quite a few issues with 64 bit XP,

You heard wrong . It works like a treat, its quick and never falls over. All hardware I've ever used with it works. Only one game never worked with it (Rogue tropper) because it only had a 32bit capable binary.

Other than that I've never had an issue with it. I have a copy of Vista 64 Ultimate edition sitting at home but last time I reinstalled my gaming machine I went with XP64 again. I have a tricked out Dell T7400 with Vista 64 at work and its flakey as hell compared with XP64. Performance for some games isn't too great either, which is stupid considering the machines specs.

[B16Enk]

I have a multi boot system (XP64, Vista Ultimate 64, 2008 Server, Windows 7 and 2008 Hypervisor for VMs).

For work I use the 2008 boots, for gaming and general goofing off I use XP64, rarely do I fire up Vista now unless I want DX10.

I use 4Gb RAM.

Only issue I have so far had with XP64 is finding a good Security Suite, kaspersky fits the bill very well indeed.

I miss being able to program my Joystick (MSFFB2) but I know there are alternative software solutions.

IL2 runs faultlessly, as does TiR, TS and the CH Software.

Can't comment on downloading Windows 7 Beta, I got mine using Firefox via my Technet subscription complete with key..