Windows 7 Windows 7 - 64 Bit Version Experience

[Ed Dixon]

Ok, so I decided to try the 64 bit version as well. This is a Gateway 3 GHz dual core with 3 GB of ram and lots of disk. This is what I found:

1. Install process was much slower, taking probably twice as long
2. Way less stuff worked, both hardware and software
3. UAC was on, and the overall experience was very Vista like
4. Seems very slugish compared to 32 bit on same gear

This is my first experience with any 64 bit stuff, so it's all new.

Ed

 

[cybercore]

What's the build number ? Strange to here you say it's slower than x 32.

Exactly what software is incompatible?

 

[loathe]

I would try the whole process again, burn a new disk. Its my opinion, provided you are not running a dinosaur machine, that no one should have any trouble with x64 any more, with all the support available.

 

[Ed Dixon]

Win7 was clearly faster than Vista, but slower than XP. Install for Win7 32 was about 20-30 minutes. For 64, close to an hour. Same box. This was the same 7100 build as 32.

64 is very slugish for almost anything. It ran like Vista did on this box, slow and agravating. Drivers were more difficult and some software that worked in 32 doesnt work in 64. For example, the finger print stuff doesnt work, but does in 32. Havent tried a lot else, but the experience was disappointing to say the least.


Ed

 

[Radenight]

I find the 64-bit version of Windows 7 dances circles around Windows XP (so does the 32-bit version for that matter).. The install time was about 26 minutes for me (via DVD) and about 16 minutes (via USB Drive).. I find for 64-bit to work really well you have to have the hardware to back it up..

 

[Joe S]

My install time on actual PC and on Vmware workstation is in the 20-25 min range. No problems with speed here either. This is with 7000 and 7100.
Joe

 

[davehc]

I agree with Rade. Install speed can only really be compared on the same machine. I found 64Bit and 32Bit both installed in the same time(+/-) In most cases, dual booting, 64 had the edge on 32 bit very noticeably. All my hardware (64Bit computer) was found and installed, including one rather ancient Laser printer. I cannot compare with XP, as I have not used it for some time.
Fwiw. Since the Beta release, I have not experienced an improved install time (again, on the same machine), which many testers have reported.

 

[Ed Dixon]

Ok, we all know Ed's scenario is not making sense. If the CPU is 64 capable w/ the specs he has given (3GHz & 3G RAM) things should be FAST. And, as we all know & are saying, the 64-bit certainly faster than the 32 & both faster than Vista & maybe XP, as well. Point is something has to be amiss. The whole affair is backwards. Ed, either we are missing some info or something cus it just doesn't jibe right now.
Regards,
Drew

I think you are correct that something is amis, just no clue as to what.

Ed

 

[Ed Dixon]

Both 32 and 64 were 7100 builds downloaded from MS. Most were burnt to DVD media using Roxio software and same brand of media. Both were installed using boot from DVD. 32 went to E drive, and 64 to F drive. Both drives are same Maxtor brand and 250 GB each.

This is a Gateway dual core 3 ghz SD-5600 box with 3 GB RAMand 4 drives (160, 80, 250, 250). All the drives show DMA mode 5. Video is a new ATI brand 4770 card with 512 MB

Windows 7 Assessment Tool showed no issues with gear for either 32 or 64. I did a full defrag on drives before I started the Win7 cycle.

As a simple performance test, I ran a www.pcpitstop.com eval before and after. XP showed a value around 3500. Win7 32 a value about 2800. Dont think I ran a 64 one yet.

Ed

 

[JohnJ]

I've used XP 32-bit and 7 32/64-bit and I think that Windows 7 64-bit is the fastest out of all of them. I sometimes have problems with the installation speeds though, but that isn't an everyday thing.

 

[Ed Dixon]

Both DVDs were burnt the same way, but even then seems like that would only account for the slow install. It still runs slugish after boot. Noticeable slower than 32 and 32 seems no faster than XP.

Any suggestions for good performance eval tools for a better comparison between XP and W7?

Ed

 

[sm0ke42o]

My install time was also approx 25-30 mins.

How fast is the HDD on that machine? Is it SATA? If indeed that machine has all you say it has then I would think that perhaps your disk is part of the issue. I have never had a 64 bit OS run slower that a 32 bit. I did have hardware issues but only with Win XP 64 when it first dropped.

 

[Ed Dixon]

Yes, all SATA disks, with no known problems. Transfser rates are what you would expect both locally and network.

Ed

 

[sm0ke42o]

Other than sub par hardware I have seen a handful of other posts about this issue which were resolved by:

1. Making sure the BIOS is up to date
2. Disabling unnecessary hardware in the BIOS for the duration of the installation.

It sounds silly and you may have to install some drivers when you boot into Windows but its a common fix I have seen posted for slow 7 installs. One person was having problems with the CPU looking for a floppy where none was installed and as you can imagine disabling the floppy controller solved his problem. Granted it may not make a damn bit of difference but it also may be an avenue worth exploring.

 

[Ed Dixon]

One more oddity. With W7 32, it installed to E drive, and all drives were left unchanged. C still showed as C, etc.

With W7 64, it installed to F drive, which then booted as C Drive. E became D, and C and D became E and F.

Ed