Windows 7 32-bit vs. 64-bit Comparison

[heidthebaw]

32 bit vs 64 bit

From what I am lead to understand (from CNET iirc) both 32 and 64 bit versions of Windows 7 will be available to me on the installation disk when Win 7-E arrives sometime at the end of October. I have a fairly low spec (1.7Ghz Athlon 64x2) processor and 3GB RAM (I will buy more RAM as necessary) on my main working laptop. I regularly use PS Elements 7 but my main use is music production apps such as FL8XXL, Ableton Live 8 and Reason4.

Should I go the 32 or 64 bit route when doing a clean intall?

What are the advantages and disadvantages of both?

 

[cybercore]

Install the 64-bit if your CPU supports 64-bit computing (if it doesn't, then your 64-bit installation won't start). You'll get an OS where you can run both x32 & x64 software (except certain drivers and antiviruses which you'll need x 64 only). The speed increase will not be significant, but it will use all the ram above 3 Gb. 64-bit is generally considered faster. Coding should be faster, don't know by how much though, e.g. 64-bit chess engines like "rybka" are 30 % faster, x 64 video drivers work only 10 % faster. Anyway, iif you install x 64 OS, you won't be deprived of anything that you could do in x 32.

 

[Radenight]

I know this isn't directly related to Windows 7 according to some.. but in my opinion it is indirectly related to Windows 7 because there is a lot more focus in 64-bit computing with Windows 7 then with previous Windows versions.. So that is why I am posting this in this section.. Well that and I know if it's in this section people might actually get a chance to read it..

So on with the information. I have noticed there are more and more questions regarding 64-bit popping up lately so I thought I'd get the ball rolling and find as many comparisons/explanations as I could (that actually have useful information in them)..

Before I do though I just want to make sure that all those people who are still confused as f*ck when it comes to 32-bit vs 64-bit know that your not alone and there's no need to panic and think that you'll have to get a new computer right away. You DO NOT have to rush out and get a new computer just because more people are switching to 64-bit (Not to mention most modern CPU's are already 64-bit compatible).. 32-bit not only still has plenty of time left in it's life cycle but is also VERY capable..

Here's the first article:

AMD Athlon64 - 64-bit vs. 32-bit Head On Comparison - PCSTATS.com

This one focuses on the AMD Athlon64 CPU (obviously).. It does a very good job of describing the differences and advantages of using a 64-bit CPU.. It is old but it's informative none the less..

I will post more as I find them, I encourage anyone else to also post any benchmarks or articles you find on this subject..

Here's another one, it's just an outline of the major differences between the two..

http://dynamicsuser.net/blogs/waldo/archive/2007/09/07/comparison-64bit-vs-32bit.aspx

** If this post sounds out of place it's because I merged the "32-bit vs. 64-bit" thread with the "32-bit vs. 64-bit: Comparison" thread and my post was at the first of the second thread.. **

 

[heidthebaw]

@Cybercore & Drew. Many thx, decision made.

 

[orlbuckeye]

I've recently purchased a laptop with 64 bit Vista Home Premium. This is the first 64 bit OS I have used and the system has a Program file and program files (X86) folder. I also have IE 8.0 32 bit and 64 bit. I tried got to a page that had a video running IE 64 bit and I got an error that Flash isn't compatible with 64 bit. When I went to the same page with the 32 bit the video played fine.

 

[cybercore]

Since you are using IE both x32 & x64, you need to install the flash player with the x 64 IE. You'll also need Java x 32 & x 64, and codecs x32 & x 64. All works fine on both my IEs.

 

[Super Sarge]

Flash Player is not yet compatible with 64 Bit Internet Explorer 8. This is a known problem. In W7 you can run the 32 bit version located in C;|Program File 86 or thr 64 bit located in C;|Program files either browse works, I am partial to Fire Fox. I run both IE and FF at times depending on what I am doing

 

[cybercore]

Super Sarge is right about the x64 bit adobe flash not yet fully working for IE8.

 

[DougW]

So I'm going to ask heidthebaw's question slightly differently.

64-bit computing is not exactly new on the computer scene, and yet there are still quite a few drivers and apps that have yet to be written for x64 (Flash has already been mentioned).

My question is this: is fighting to get the drivers and applications working on x64 worth it? Is there that much of a speed difference to warrant the hassle?

I have played a little bit with 64-bit and found the hassle so great I simply wanted to toss the PC out of the window.

I'm curious what you folks think about this.

 

[textureDnB]

So I'm going to ask heidthebaw's question slightly differently.

64-bit computing is not exactly new on the computer scene, and yet there are still quite a few drivers and apps that have yet to be written for x64 (Flash has already been mentioned).

My question is this: is fighting to get the drivers and applications working on x64 worth it? Is there that much of a speed difference to warrant the hassle?

I have played a little bit with 64-bit and found the hassle so great I simply wanted to toss the PC out of the window.

I'm curious what you folks think about this.

I personally had alot of trouble with my x64 AMD system under Vista but under seven it's problem free.I benefit heavily from the 64 bit processing when transcoding video and encoding video though not as much as transcoding which i can not get my head around. If you do a fair amount of this type of work or other memory intensive tasks you will see the rewards. If not you may not see any improvement.

The other angle to consider is that many believe we have reached a point where computers are powerful enough to be around for many years without major upgrading, there will be more powerful machines coming on the market always but i don't think upgrading will be as important over the next decade as it has been over the past two decades so it makes sense to be as future proof as possible. That being said I believe Seven is perpetually available in both flavors on one DVD so you should be able to nuke and reinstall with the other flavor if the necessity arises. Finally you should consider the memory requirments 64 bit is more memory hungry if only for the extra bits needed for addressing MS recommends not installing x64 with less than two gigs, I think most people on this board would up that to at least four maybe more considering the low cost of DDR-2 these days. Hope that helps your decision making.

 

[cybercore]

So I'm going to ask heidthebaw's question slightly differently.

64-bit computing is not exactly new on the computer scene, and yet there are still quite a few drivers and apps that have yet to be written for x64 (Flash has already been mentioned).

My question is this: is fighting to get the drivers and applications working on x64 worth it? Is there that much of a speed difference to warrant the hassle?

I have played a little bit with 64-bit and found the hassle so great I simply wanted to toss the PC out of the window.

I'm curious what you folks think about this.

1. The issue with the flash for ie8 x64 better not confuse you as you can always use the ie x32 present in the system along with the x64 version. You can no problem run other x32 bit softare versions as well. 1 thing may be worth to keep in mind that with x64 bit OS you'll be getting many softwares automatically installed both x32 and x64 bit versions, e.g. 3dsmax, photoshop, autocad, etc. Which will require some extra HDD space. Other than this, you needn't worry because x64 bit OS allows you to install and run x32 applications. DRIVERS, I've personally never had any problems with them widely available on support DVDs and official sites. If there should be a driver shortage for the x64, then consider yourself, I don't know.



2. Also, think about it this way:

x32 bit OS works only with x32 bit applications

x64 bit OS works with both x32 and x64 bit applications



3. Or if still in much doubt if you should go with x64 os, check how much RAM you got: < 4 Gb will be quite fine with x32 bit os, > 4 Gb should definitely get x 64 bit os in order to use all your ram installed.


4. Talking about productivity boost with the x64 os, it sure can be due to large amount of ram installed (4, 6, 8, 12, 16 Gb) which allows you to do multitasking and to load in ram and operate with large volumes of data, like chess databases when running a chess program.

 

[cybercore]

Drew, what's the idea behind having 7 both 32 & 64 intalled on your hard drive, a driver compatibility issue ?

 

[cybercore]

Crystal clear now, thanks.

 

[JDonner]

Flash Player is not yet compatible with 64 Bit Internet Explorer 8.

Isn't compatible with 64 bit period. Adobe is such a strange company at times, because not only have they not released one, they also never made a clear announcement. What we are now stuck with is 32 Flash 10 and trust me, that thing is buggly like hell and the cause of most FF and IE crashes.

I don't know about you guys, but I have seen Silverlight 3 in action and it just blew me away compared to flash. Microsoft also plans to integrate it in many of their products. It will be difficult to compete with Flash, but then again, that's also what people said about IE. At least you would expect Adobe to be more on their toes and at least bring out a working (I repeat...working and not like that buggy Flash 10) Flash 64 bit version, but for some reason I don't see that happen in the near future, which is especially strange considering that 25% of all Vista sales in November 2008 were 64 bit.

 

[djwayne]

I think when Windows 7 is released I'll be using the 32 bit version for awhile. My music sample, recording, and editing programs and sound card, all have minor problems with W7-64 bit. So until they are officially updated to be compatible with W7-64, I'll be sticking with W7-32 bit. That should be with in 6 months to a year, then I'll switch over to 64 bit if I want, but if everthing is working great in the 32 version, why fix it if it's not broke ??

The only major difference I've spotted between the 32 bit and 64 bit versions is 64 bit can utlize all of my 4 K memory. Having only 3.25 K memory utilized in W7-32 bit really ain't so bad, considering just a couple of years ago 1 or 2 K memory was thought to be a great improvement.

I also still be keeping one hard drive set up with XP just for backup.

 

[slavkec]

Been using x64 bit Vista for a long time, being sure it's faster and more reliable. On Windows 7 I used x64 from the day it appeared 'till just few days ago. I had to switch to x86 'cause of some driver issues and few program incompatibilities. As I've said, I thought 64bit is faster, but now, as I use this 32bit Windows 7 I'm unable to tell major, or in fact, any difference in performances. It's all smooth and I don't have to bother going through tortures of getting 64bit drivers, software and such.

I'm quite happy and I'll stick with 32bit 'till 64bit is accepted in full by all (in other words when it becomes standard as x86 is now).

 

[djwayne]

I've re-installed Windows 7RC-32 bit and most of my music programs that I was having problems with in the 64 bit version....so far they are all working like a charm and the problems I was having are all gone. I'll definitely be installing the 32 bit version of the store bought Windows 7. In the W7-64 bit version I was experiencing partial program working and parts of them not working. There were also a few glitches with my soundcard that have cleared up.

Maybe in a couple years when the 64 bit becomes common place, I'll switch back, but for right now, having my programs working 100% is important to me.

 

[JohnTheGreek]

I prefer 32bit edition of Windows 7. Windows 7 64bit edition wants 2Gb+ Ram to working. Also, all the new processors (for instance: AMD Athlon 64 X2) can "read" 64bit editions of Windows. Finally, 32 and 64bit are the same.

 

[Radenight]

I prefer 32bit edition of Windows 7. Windows 7 64bit edition wants 2Gb+ Ram to working. Also, all the new processors (for instance: AMD Athlon 64 X2) can "read" 64bit editions of Windows. Finally, 32 and 64bit are the same.

Windows 7 64-bit edition (or even Windows Vista 64-bit for that matter) can work on 1GB of ram.. It doesn't work that great but the fact remains that it can run on only 1GB.. I find if using a 64-bit edition of Windows, one should have at least 4GB's.. That way it makes it worth while to use the 64-bit and it allows you to install greater numbers of total RAM and actually be able to use all of the ram you install..

I'm a little confused by the rest of your statement.. You start out by saying that you prefer the 32-bit edition but then you make it sound like you like the 64-bit edition by saying "finally 32-bit and 64-bit are the same".. They are the same in a lot of ways but are also different in quite a few ways..

 

[penguin386]

32 vs. 64 bit

For me, I'm sticking with 32 bit. My motherboard only supports 2gb of RAM max. The main reason to switch to 64 bit is to address more than 3gb of RAM. Also, I've read that some programs and drivers don't work in 64 bit mode. Sure, 64 bit OS's can run in 32 bit mode, but that slows your computer down. My processor supports both 32 and 64 bit OS's. I've decided to stick with 32 bit for compatibility reasons.