Hi all, i have a question: i'm planning to buy the new win-7, but can not decide about 64 / 32 bit because i don't know the relative advantages/disavantages.
Please take note for a compatibility with Homeseer, and some (old , yet running in XP 32bit) games.
Thanks a lot.
win7 at 64 bit or 32 bit
-
Snelvuur
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 3156
- Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:01 pm
- Location: Netherlands
- Contact:
win7 at 64 bit or 32 bit
old games you can run on scumvm (thats really old games) and i would always go for 64bits, if you have a machine that supports it. I have a quadcore , which i want to run windows 7 on to. It will be 64bits, basicly because the impact of running some things is almost 0% if i start up something else. I had a vmware session open + some fancy new game and then i started up another game (forgot the other one was also running) and only then i noticed a slight drop in fps, but i could still play. Just funny.
// Erik (binkey.nl)
// Erik (binkey.nl)
win7 at 64 bit or 32 bit
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
Some operating systems reserve portions of process address space for OS use, effectively reducing the total address space available for mapping memory for user programs. For instance, Windows XP DLLs and other user mode OS components are mapped into each process's address space[citation needed], leaving only 2 to 3 GB (depending on the settings) address space available. This restriction is not present in 64-bit operating systems.
Memory-mapped files are becoming more difficult to implement in 32-bit architectures, especially due to the introduction of relatively cheap recordable DVD technology. A 4 GB file is no longer uncommon, and such large files cannot be memory mapped easily to 32-bit architectures; only a region of the file can be mapped into the address space, and to access such a file by memory mapping, those regions will have to be mapped into and out of the address space as needed. This is a problem, as memory mapping remains one of the most efficient disk-to-memory methods, when properly implemented by the OS.
Some programs such as data encryption software can benefit greatly from 64-bit registers (if the software is 64-bit compiled) and effectively execute 3 to 5 times faster on 64-bit than on 32-bit.
Currently, most proprietary x86 software is compiled into 32-bit code, not 64-bit code, so it does not take advantage of the larger 64-bit address space or wider 64-bit registers and data paths on x86 processors, or the additional registers in 64-bit mode
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
So basicly, do you need more than 3.6 GB of memory and/or need of using 64 bit applications? No? -> 32 bit
And don't forget, if you need drivers for hardware you are using, you better check first if there is a 64 bit driver otherwise you have a problem.
Alexander
Some operating systems reserve portions of process address space for OS use, effectively reducing the total address space available for mapping memory for user programs. For instance, Windows XP DLLs and other user mode OS components are mapped into each process's address space[citation needed], leaving only 2 to 3 GB (depending on the settings) address space available. This restriction is not present in 64-bit operating systems.
Memory-mapped files are becoming more difficult to implement in 32-bit architectures, especially due to the introduction of relatively cheap recordable DVD technology. A 4 GB file is no longer uncommon, and such large files cannot be memory mapped easily to 32-bit architectures; only a region of the file can be mapped into the address space, and to access such a file by memory mapping, those regions will have to be mapped into and out of the address space as needed. This is a problem, as memory mapping remains one of the most efficient disk-to-memory methods, when properly implemented by the OS.
Some programs such as data encryption software can benefit greatly from 64-bit registers (if the software is 64-bit compiled) and effectively execute 3 to 5 times faster on 64-bit than on 32-bit.
Currently, most proprietary x86 software is compiled into 32-bit code, not 64-bit code, so it does not take advantage of the larger 64-bit address space or wider 64-bit registers and data paths on x86 processors, or the additional registers in 64-bit mode
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
So basicly, do you need more than 3.6 GB of memory and/or need of using 64 bit applications? No? -> 32 bit
And don't forget, if you need drivers for hardware you are using, you better check first if there is a 64 bit driver otherwise you have a problem.
Alexander
-
Snelvuur
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 3156
- Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:01 pm
- Location: Netherlands
- Contact:
win7 at 64 bit or 32 bit
these days, my 64bits stuff works fine, in the beginning when i just had the quadcore it was a real horror..
// Erik (binkey.nl)
// Erik (binkey.nl)
win7 at 64 bit or 32 bit
Very clear ! and about Homeseer ? Is HS-PRo working well at 64 bit? Any experiences? Thanks
-
Snelvuur
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 3156
- Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:01 pm
- Location: Netherlands
- Contact:
win7 at 64 bit or 32 bit
i have a vmware image running windows XP 32bit for homeseer.. i have not tried 64bits (i want it to be rock stable)
// Erik (binkey.nl)
// Erik (binkey.nl)
win7 at 64 bit or 32 bit
It's not homeseer that gives problems (because Windows 7 runs both 32 bit as 64 bit applications), but interfacing with hardware. So what stuff do you connect to your pc ?
Alexander
Alexander
win7 at 64 bit or 32 bit
I use x10 HW , CTX35 interface , and blade's plugins sw. planning rfxcom in next days.