ncWOLFsu Gottfather FTL 12586 Posts user info edit post |
Is the x64 edition better? It seems like it would be faster, but I've heard that it's no better than the regular 32-bit version.
any thoughts on this? 3/22/2006 5:09:35 PM |
smoothcrim Universal Magnetic! 18966 Posts user info edit post |
its not faster, no one writes 64bit apps, driver support is patchy at best, etc etc etc 3/22/2006 5:28:38 PM |
Petschska All American 1182 Posts user info edit post |
either buy regular XP or wait for Vista in 2007. 3/22/2006 6:17:11 PM |
ScHpEnXeL Suspended 32613 Posts user info edit post |
most of the stats i've seen show it being a decent amount faster with a decent 64 bit processor...I'm going dual core instead though for the reasons smoothcrim stated basically. 3/22/2006 7:25:44 PM |
ncWOLFsu Gottfather FTL 12586 Posts user info edit post |
well, i will be downloading either for free as a CSC student, so it's not like i'd pay extra for x64.
and here is the processor it will be used with:
http://www.newegg.com/product/product.asp?item=N82E16819103622 3/22/2006 7:34:38 PM |
dolcraith New Recruit 26 Posts user info edit post |
actually they've shown that the 64bit support does make some things faster. The only possible issue is that x64 windows does a conversion of 32bit code to 64bit on the fly which can possibly slow things down but not slower than 32 bit windows. 3/23/2006 7:41:57 AM |
ncWOLFsu Gottfather FTL 12586 Posts user info edit post |
so go with x64 then?
are most of the issues w/drivers and stuff like that resolved by now? 3/23/2006 11:10:21 AM |
MiniMe_877 All American 4414 Posts user info edit post |
just try the x64 version, you wont be using it long before you decide that it either does or doesnt work correctly with all the hardware drivers you need, at which point you can just download and install regular Windows XP Pro x86 and you're right back to where you started
most any 32-bit app will work correctly on Windows x64, the only catch comes with native x64 driver support 3/23/2006 12:22:34 PM |
darkone (\/) (;,,,;) (\/) 11610 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "...I'm going dual core instead though for the reasons smoothcrim stated basically..." |
The dual core processors are 64 bit. Reading comprehension FTW.... 3/23/2006 2:58:45 PM |
WMVlad007 All American 1212 Posts user info edit post |
i already posted this topic b4. i actually installed .x64 version and i could only find about 1/2 my usual programs available for that version. 3/23/2006 4:00:08 PM |
ncWOLFsu Gottfather FTL 12586 Posts user info edit post |
yeah but doesn't it run the original programs themselves as well?
so essentially you'd be upgrading half your programs by intstalling the x64 version?
so maybe it might not be worth the hassle to uninstall reg windows and upgrade to x64, but maybe it's still better if i'm starting from scratch on a new system? 3/23/2006 4:17:34 PM |
MiniMe_877 All American 4414 Posts user info edit post |
if you're starting from a brand new system, or doing a clean install, I suggest you give x64 windows a shot
Windows x64 will run your regular 32-bit apps about 95% of the time. That 5% that dont work correctly need 64-bit driver support. 32-bit hardware drivers will not work with 64-bit windows. Thats why you have to use 64-bit video drivers and such.
Windows x64 *DOES NOT* support running any 16-bit apps, so any software you might use that still has 16-bit code will not work at all.
Windows x64 runs 32-bit apps in a sort of emulation mode, called WOW64, or Windows on Windows x64. Regular Windows XP did the same thing for 16-bit apps (it was WOW32 then).
Last thing to know, 32-bit apps will install automagically to the "Program Files (x86)" folder instead of "Program Files". 3/23/2006 5:59:33 PM |
ncWOLFsu Gottfather FTL 12586 Posts user info edit post |
thanks for all the good info.
how do you tell if apps are 32 bit or 16 bit?
what major apps are still only 16 bit? 3/24/2006 12:41:45 PM |
MiniMe_877 All American 4414 Posts user info edit post |
heh, the only way you're gonna tell is if it dont work
you're gonna have a hard time finding anything that wont run under Windows x64 I'll bet 3/24/2006 3:15:52 PM |
bous All American 11215 Posts user info edit post |
there's no service pack out for x64 right? 4/13/2006 10:31:22 AM |
MiniMe_877 All American 4414 Posts user info edit post |
yes, there is, its the same shit as regular 32-bit windows
I'm currently running Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition x64 SP1 R2 right now
I also have a machine setup with Windows XP x64 SP2 4/13/2006 10:45:00 AM |
Raige All American 4386 Posts user info edit post |
There is. I'm running Windows XP 64 professional at home. I can't give you a good idea between XP and XP64 but it sure as hell is faster than 2000 on default loading settings. I was expecting there to be a lot of lack of support for 64 bit with drivers but so far nothing. I see occassional issues when I leave a game like Oblivion but nothing other than that.
I didn't want to wait for Vista because it's going to be like XP was in the beginning. Crashing, bad driver support, etc. Sure it might be great but if you can't use to play your games or run your software... well... eh. I'll wait until the support is better which is usually 6 months later.
As a side note, I got a free copy of Windows XP 64 from a conference I went to.
I do have another machine with XP running in my house and it's a 2.2ghz proc. My XP 64 is a XP 64 3700 San Diego Core. I notice a HUGE difference in time to open and close programs. There's lots of reasons why this could be a skewed comparison. 4/13/2006 10:46:35 AM |
Wolfrules All American 1880 Posts user info edit post |
the only problem I've ran into with x64 is the lack of printer driver support. 4/13/2006 11:07:33 AM |
jbtilley All American 12797 Posts user info edit post |
XP Pro is limited to 4GB of RAM x64 goes up to ?128?BG. Unless your home computer is a $5000 server I can't see a reason why you would want x64. We've reached a day and age in technology where just because it is newer doesn't mean you should go with it - that or I've reached a day and age where I've become one of those guys that hangs on to old tech. 4/13/2006 11:39:30 AM |
deez29 All American 622 Posts user info edit post |
theres nothing wrong w/ windows xp pro...if it isnt broken, dont change it 4/13/2006 2:37:42 PM |
drunknloaded Suspended 147487 Posts user info edit post |
x64>xp pro > apple 4/13/2006 6:15:34 PM |
bous All American 11215 Posts user info edit post |
so if i get windows xp x64 from my msdnaa then i have to also download sp2 for it? i thought it came out AFTER sp2 was released. 4/13/2006 6:43:39 PM |
Wolfrules All American 1880 Posts user info edit post |
sp2 is for XP 32bit..
the x64 iso on msdnaa is the last release for x64. No service packs have been released yet. 4/13/2006 8:06:26 PM |
bous All American 11215 Posts user info edit post |
cool. i took the msndaa cd and then used nlite at http://www.nliteos.com and merged all the updates and all my sata drivers so i don't have to use a floppy each time to install 4/18/2006 1:20:58 PM |
MiniMe_877 All American 4414 Posts user info edit post |
Just found out that Windows XP Professional x64 Edition is really Windows Server 2003 x64 with the XP logo slapped on it
dont believe me, run "winver" and look at the version number. Its 5.2 build 3790
... so now how the fuck do I figure out when I'm running WinXP x64 and Win2003 x64??? god damn Microsoft
[Edited on June 15, 2006 at 11:20 AM. Reason : fuck m$ for their complicated shit] 6/15/2006 11:18:27 AM |