Windows 7 Which version did you install? 32 or 64

[thecheat644]

? which did you install I went for the 32 to ensure compatibility, even though i have 4 gb of ram. My graphic card shares most of the other gig anyway.

 

[BigFeet]

Even though I only have 2 gigs of ram (for now), I had to see how many issues I'd have running the 64 bit version. I'm happy to say I haven't had any issues so far (knock on wood).

Ok Just for fun I thought I would try the 64 bit one for my machine I am going to assume that seeing that It has taken, no joke guys.. 3 hours now to install and is moving at a rate of snail it takes to cross the highway I think I made a big mistake here.
As I write it is still installing I have 2 gigs of mem, ya I know "DAH" but this is a test..I know better. So a warning if you have 2 gigs of ram screw the 64 bit. I just gave up it is stuck or something so I am now going to install the 32 bit. 3 hours or more give me a break. Should I try it on my lap top hehehehe

It hung for a few minutes at the beginning of the install (so did 7000 64 bit), but only took a total of 25 minutes to install.

 

[Totenglocke]

I have the 64-bit beta on my gaming rig (haven't taken the time to reformat it and upgrade it to the RC) and most of my stuff works fine, I have a few programs with issues. The other day I installed the 64-bit RC on my laptop and EVERYTHING I've thrown at it (including stuff that didn't run all that well before) runs amazingly. I can't wait to try it out on my gaming rig, which NEEDS to go 64-bit since I have 4 gigs of ram plus dual 512 MB video cards.

My laptop is a dual-core Turion 2 GHz with 3 gigs of ram and crappy Geforce 7000M video. My video ranks as 3.1 in Win 7 (it's not made for gaming), but my processor and memory both get 4.9 and my hard drive gets 5.2 -- pretty good ratings for a laptop that's a year old and cost only $500. Win 7 64-bit runs great and I'm definitely planning on buying a copy of Win 7 Ultimate when it's released.

 

[A3R0 760]

Firefox Problem

I went 64 bit because i have 4 gigs of RAM and my computer was running vista 64 bit and now i can only browse the internet with IE 8 64 bit which is a change since i despise it and love firefox

 

[banny7000]

i first went 32bit when i had 2gig of ram which ran fine....then i bought an extra 2gig of ram making it 4gig then i went 64bit...i did notice a difference 64bit is now my first choice.....compatability has improved a lot since the last time i tried 64bit....one thing though i cant make up my mind which browser to use i keep changing from chrome to firefox then back to chrome then minefield(no flash support)......chrome is the leanest but i miss my addons from firefox so i end up with two browsers open chrome and minefield....

 

[fjgold]

I have tried both 32 bit and 64 bit Win 7 RC.
In Win 7 64 bit there is no Logitech software available for my QuickCam 9000 pro webcam so I can't adjust the camera resolution to the maximum (2 megapixels). GoogleEarth won't load. At that point I quit messing with 64 bit Win 7.
Everything works with 32 bit Win 7.
Admittidly I didn't give 64 bit much of a chance but at least for me it ain't ready for prime time and besides who knows what other issues might crop up.

I do have experience with 64 bit OS's on this machine (Acer Aspire 5672WLMi notebook with a 2 GHz Core2Duo (merom)
64 bit processor with 4 GB of ram).
I have 64 bit Ubuntu Intrepid Ibex and Ubuntu Hardy Heron installed on this machine
and both perform well.

I wish 64 bit Win 7 performed as well as Ubuntu 64 bit.

 

[Bigcitycat]

Been using 64bit for 2 years now with no problems. It is prime time. The truth is. If you have a pc that is built for 64bit and your using 64 it will work great and if your machine is built for 32 and your trying to use 64 on it. Then it will run like crap. My laptop came 64 bit ready so it works great.

Also for me this win7 rc is far more stable than the Ubuntu 64 bit ever was, but I don't think that has to do with the architecture. The bland version of Ubuntu out of the box is good, but it was unstable when you start adding compiz and gtk themes.

 

[fjgold]

Been using 64bit for 2 years now with no problems. It is prime time. The truth is. If you have a pc that is built for 64bit and your using 64 it will work great and if your machine is built for 32 and your trying to use 64 on it. Then it will run like crap. My laptop came 64 bit ready so it works great.

Also for me this win7 rc is far more stable than the Ubuntu 64 bit ever was, but I don't think that has to do with the architecture. The bland version of Ubuntu out of the box is good, but it was unstable when you start adding compiz and gtk themes.

The fact is I too have a 64 bit ready laptop, it became that when I replaced the stock Core Duo (yonah) processor with my present 64 bit Core 2 Duo (merom) processor. I run 64 bit Hardy and Intrepid Ubuntu with all the bells and whistles. As a matter of fact the Hardy version I'm running is the Ultimate re-master. Compiz and all codecs etc work fine.

I use the the Logitech webcam I mentioned for video conferences with my daughter, son and grandkids. Without the Logitech software I'm stuck with the lowest resolution although my camera is capable of up to 2 megapixels.
Not being able to start Google Earth is another sticking point.

The funny thing is I tried the 64 bit Win 7 beta (build 7000) and both Google Earth and the Logitech (Vista version) software installed and ran just fine. I have no doubt these isues will be resolve by the time of the RTM, But for now I won't waste my time with the 64 bit Win 7 RC.

Besides I'm having a lot of fun with 32 bit Win 7 RC.

For me it is very stable and fast (booting in about 45 seconds) and working great with all hardware and software I've thrown at it.
Lets hope the trend will continue and the RTM will be the best OS M$ has ever offered 64 bit or 32 bit.

BTW, I stand by statement that 64 bit Win 7 RC isn't ready for prime time, with one qualification, it isn't ready for my
machine with my hardware.

At any rate I'm glad 64 bit Win 7 RC works out for you.

 

[carol_s]

I went 64-bit as I have been running 64-bit OS's since WinXP x64 was released - and as I have 12Gb of 2000Mhz RAM installed I wanted an OS which would keep pace with my machine. Also my main application (Photoshop) is 64-bit it just fits in nicely with everything. Runs great and the only thing that lets my system down is the Hard Drive score of a meagre 5.9 whilst the memory is pushing the limits of the performance tests.

 

[javadancer]

32 bit inherently limited

I am under the understanding that any 32 bit system in inherently limited to less that 4GB memory. At current prices 8GB of 1066 MHz memory is pretty cheap. So if the 64 bit has problems supporting the old reliable applications, I want to know now, not AFTER I have to buy it. To date I rate the 64-bit 4 on a scale of 10 and falling.
I'm perfectly willing to work with Microsoft, but here are a few of the GLARING deficiencies.
The Logitech WebCam my wife bought me as a birthday gift 3 months ago, is not supported! This is a BIG BLACK EYE!
(I understand that this is like the cheap Windows style 56kb modems! Basically a cheap piece of Junk, but that wasn't the impression the people who forked over their hard earned cash were told. It represents a PR DISASTER!)
The new 64-bit version of wavepad is what I would call Bimbo-ware. It looks great, but can't do much of anything and is pretty simple-minded.
The Windows backup software doesn't work and there is no sign that anyone is looking at it.
I have a 500GB network drive and a 500GB USB drive I can backup the measly 25-30GB of WIN7 but no JOY!
The error message says I may not have enough free space on the receiving drives! Like 20 times the files to be backed up isn't enough.
I think the problem is actually in the part Microsoft doesn't want to fess up to. The problem is with my source drive system.
It is a HARDWARE implemented RAID 0+1 system. So they can't sneak in under the covers and 'optimize' the process!
That means they have to work with NVIDIA. Ever hear of the '3rd party' vendor problem? It was a constant headache with IBM during the 60s, 70s & 80s. Now it's Microsift's turn at bat. So far, they are pretty good at fanning the air.

 

[BishopLord]

I am under the understanding that any 32 bit system in inherently limited to less that 4GB memory. At current prices 8GB of 1066 MHz memory is pretty cheap. So if the 64 bit has problems supporting the old reliable applications, I want to know now, not AFTER I have to buy it. To date I rate the 64-bit 4 on a scale of 10 and falling.
I'm perfectly willing to work with Microsoft, but here are a few of the GLARING deficiencies.
The Logitech WebCam my wife bought me as a birthday gift 3 months ago, is not supported! This is a BIG BLACK EYE!
(I understand that this is like the cheap Windows style 56kb modems! Basically a cheap piece of Junk, but that wasn't the impression the people who forked over their hard earned cash were told. It represents a PR DISASTER!)
The new 64-bit version of wavepad is what I would call Bimbo-ware. It looks great, but can't do much of anything and is pretty simple-minded.
The Windows backup software doesn't work and there is no sign that anyone is looking at it.
I have a 500GB network drive and a 500GB USB drive I can backup the measly 25-30GB of WIN7 but no JOY!
The error message says I may not have enough free space on the receiving drives! Like 20 times the files to be backed up isn't enough.
I think the problem is actually in the part Microsoft doesn't want to fess up to. The problem is with my source drive system.
It is a HARDWARE implemented RAID 0+1 system. So they can't sneak in under the covers and 'optimize' the process!
That means they have to work with NVIDIA. Ever hear of the '3rd party' vendor problem? It was a constant headache with IBM during the 60s, 70s & 80s. Now it's Microsift's turn at bat. So far, they are pretty good at fanning the air.

I've found little difference in between x64 and x86. The only major problem I have is that I can't install Cisco VPN on x64 (it installed just fine and worked great with x86). For example, I have an old HP 1415 printer. The drivers from HP aren't supported under W7, however, that was my mistake. I tried installing the driver before plugging in the printer. So, after the software install failed, I just plugged in the printer and W7 immediately recognized it and installed the built in drivers and the printer is working like a champ.

I had to weigh my needs and wants with x86 and x64. Sure, I would have a few more compatible software choices with x86, but I'd be limited on the amount of memory I could use. Overall, I decided that more memory is better and that I could work around the x86 limitation, and later found out that most x86 software installs just fine on the 64 bit OS. I also installed Virtual PC and XP Mode, but I haven't really had the need to use it because most software I use is compatible with x64. I honestly can't tell the difference. Even though I had 4GB of memory installed when I tested x86 RC and now have 8GB with x64 RTM... it doesn't really feel faster or more stable or anything. The only time I can tell the difference is when I run benchmark tests and compare the old tests with the new tests.

 

[Totenglocke]

I am under the understanding that any 32 bit system in inherently limited to less that 4GB memory. At current prices 8GB of 1066 MHz memory is pretty cheap. So if the 64 bit has problems supporting the old reliable applications, I want to know now, not AFTER I have to buy it. To date I rate the 64-bit 4 on a scale of 10 and falling.
I'm perfectly willing to work with Microsoft, but here are a few of the GLARING deficiencies.
The Logitech WebCam my wife bought me as a birthday gift 3 months ago, is not supported! This is a BIG BLACK EYE!
(I understand that this is like the cheap Windows style 56kb modems! Basically a cheap piece of Junk, but that wasn't the impression the people who forked over their hard earned cash were told. It represents a PR DISASTER!)
The new 64-bit version of wavepad is what I would call Bimbo-ware. It looks great, but can't do much of anything and is pretty simple-minded.
The Windows backup software doesn't work and there is no sign that anyone is looking at it.
I have a 500GB network drive and a 500GB USB drive I can backup the measly 25-30GB of WIN7 but no JOY!
The error message says I may not have enough free space on the receiving drives! Like 20 times the files to be backed up isn't enough.
I think the problem is actually in the part Microsoft doesn't want to fess up to. The problem is with my source drive system.
It is a HARDWARE implemented RAID 0+1 system. So they can't sneak in under the covers and 'optimize' the process!
That means they have to work with NVIDIA. Ever hear of the '3rd party' vendor problem? It was a constant headache with IBM during the 60s, 70s & 80s. Now it's Microsift's turn at bat. So far, they are pretty good at fanning the air.

All I have to say is either 1) you're doing something wrong with the webcam or 2) Logitech really does make junk webcams. I just bought a Dynex webcam and it works perfectly fine. I've been using 64-bit Win 7 since the beta (I'm now using the RC) and have had virtually no issues. I had some older programs that wouldn't work right with the beta, but worked fine once the RC was installed.


As for the backups...to quote Ghostbusters "Are you sure you're using that thing properly?. Not saying you're lying at all, just saying that you should double check your settings. Also, if you're using the beta, upgrade to the RC.

 

[rino]

That's not always true... My main pc which is listed here, has 4GB's in it and in Windows 7 32 bit edition I am able to see and use 3.5GB out of the 4GB total.. the other .5GB goes to my gpu.. I find every PC is different as to how much of a 4GB total you'll actually be able to see and use when it comes to a 32 bit OS...

how'd you measure or found that the remaining .5 GB goes to your GPU?

 

[rino]

i installed the 64bit version coz my lappy have 4GB RAM. also to test and try if the software world is ready for 64bit. turns out not all of them. flash, Y!messenger to name a few have no 64bit offering.

 

[stueycaster]

I've been using 64 bit for over 4 years now. I used XP x64 Edition and Ubuntu 64 now W7 x64. My XP x64 always ran great. It could encode video faster on an Athlon 64 single core processor than my wife's laptop with Vista Home Premium x86 on a Turion 64 X2 processor. Now W7 x64 does it even faster.

I have to say Ubuntu x64 was a bit of a disappointment.

 

[javadancer]

Was hoping RC was going to be better than it is turning out to be

Nice to hear from you Stuey, sorry to hear about Ubuntu. I think the point is that we are at a transition. 32 bits only addresses 4GB but 64 bits addresses a huge amount more. So much so that AMD doesn't implement more than 48 bits internally for very pragmatic reasons.
I think that the other point is that a huge amount of device drivers have to be totally re-written. And, I fear, Microsoft is not the organization which will have to write them. That will be the job of third party vendors, each of whom will have a different policy on how they will support the new standards. Oh, and did I mention standards? When did Microsoft publish their standards?
Have you ever written a device driver? Much of the silicon which these device drivers control not only don't implement 64 bit addresses, they probably don't even implement 32 bit addresses and have to implement interpretive code to support totally incompatible command sets and do it in real time to boot.
As for Mr. Ghostbuster Quoter, give me the manual on Shadow Copy and I'll tell you whether I'm using it properly. As it stands, it looks like an incomparability in the device drivers for the Nvidia 8300 chip. AVG virus scanner fails, then the USB controller or bridge locks up and acts like it is not there. Certainly looks like a promising way to introduce a rootkit. I see that I should have bought 6 or 8 500GB SATA drives just to trouble shoot this problem.
Also, just because a driver seems to work ok, may only mean you aren't pushing it hard enough. One of the better ways to check for memory leaks is to constantly load and unload functions or programs in random orders. Don't be afraid to load and then cancel things either. There is a Java fault I found in FireFox like that. Only seems to happen in Linux. Garbage collected systems tend to fail more frequently under these conditions because they can't keep up.

 

[JohnJ]

I installed the 64-bit version of Windows 7.

 

[Strangedogs]

32-bit here - I was under the assumption that since my new laptop came with 2-gigs of Ram I was supposed to go 32-bit? Heard otherwise in this forum - but will soon have 2 more gigs. I do a lot of recording (guitar, Bass, KB, etc.) and 32-bit seems fine so far + I wanted FULL COMPATIBILITY with my DAW software, plug-ins, etc... I use Sonar Producer 8 a lot and supposedly it's tuned for 64-bit though.

 

[CamInAust]

I had 32 Bit installed then went up to 64bit and the only problem i have is with Flash not being supported yet. Well last time i looked it wasn`t.

 

[cybercore]

64-Bit

To utilize all my memory, I installed x64. Even if I'd had less than 4 Gb, I would have gone x64 anyway just to see what it is.

True it doesn't run Flash in IEx64, but you still can run its 32 bit version just as well as you can run it in a 32 bit OS.

 

[TorrentG]

So you guys say you want 64 bit Flash?

Not a problem...here ya go:

Link Removed