Windows 7

[weirdlookinguy]

Re: Windows 7

This is a thread about Windows 7, not what variant of linux runs better on some old ass laptop.

[washu]

Re: Windows 7

i4004: 64 bit on X86 is generally faster due to more registers. In a few cases the larger data sizes can make things slower due to memory and/or cache issues. Also, some CPUs have a poor implementation of x86-64 (see below).

You can access more memory as weirdlookinguy said. Even some 32 bit programs can access more memory if they were compiled right. They are still limited to 4 GB per 32 bit program, but that is better than 2 GB in 32 bit Windows.

Most programs won't really benefit, but anything that needs lots of RAM will work better. The overall benefit is the more total RAM for the system.

If you have a key for Vista or 7 it works on both 32 and 64 bit.

Downsides, besides needing 64 bit hardware: Everything will use a bit more RAM. If you have less than 2 GB and don't plan to upgrade don't bother, save memory by using 32 bit. Also, 16 bit programs (DOS, Win 3.1) will no longer work. You'll need a VM if you really need to run that stuff.


ratdude: The P4 chips aren't very good at 64 bit, it's often slower. Use 32 bit unless you have more than 4 GB of RAM. Same goes for Linux or Windows

[NxB]

Re: Windows 7

Viruses also have problems with x64 when trying to do advanced stuff like install a service or device driver.

[kikkoman]

Re: Windows 7

Viruses also have problems with x64 when trying to do advanced stuff like install a service or device driver.

right. but the last time i checked, Adobe still hadn't released x64 Flash, which makes native x64 browsers pretty useless.
so, back to a 32bit browser with all its vulnerabilities.

backwards compatibility (by WOW64) is great but it sure doesn't accelerate software development.

[washu]

Re: Windows 7

NxB & kikkoman: 64 bit only stops Viruses that operate as drivers or hook into the kernel. Anything that runs in userspace, including 32 bit viruses, will run fine. Services are userspace and run fine on 64 bit Windows . Having a 64 bit browser will not help much unless it was specifically made more secure than the 32 bit version.

64 does usually imply you have the NX bit and other security features running which helps, but those can work on 32 bit as well.

[lucky13]

Re: Windows 7

I have been playing with the Beta versions on a Celeron 1.8GHz with 512M ram. It is quite usable compared to Vista.

I am waiting for my discounted preorder copy of the final release...

[Junk Parts]

Re: Windows 7

My windows 7 disc ended up with a big nasty scratch in it. I don't think that you can download the prerelease of 7 anymore. I'm half tempted to do the vista upgrade to my system today just to drive myself mental again. This depends on if my silly burner wants to work today and backup my files to DVD/CD.

[weirdlookinguy]

Re: Windows 7

JP man if you need a 7 dvd just let me know

[i4004]

Re: Windows 7

>i4004: 64 bit on X86 is generally faster due to more registers. In a few cases the larger data sizes can make things slower due to memory and/or cache issues. Also, some CPUs have a poor implementation of x86-64 (see below).
You can access more memory as weirdlookinguy said. Even some 32 bit programs can access more memory if they were compiled right. They are still limited to 4 GB per 32 bit program, but that is better than 2 GB in 32 bit Windows.
Most programs won't really benefit, but anything that needs lots of RAM will work better. The overall benefit is the more total RAM for the system.

not much video encoding difference here
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2280814,00.asp
or here
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...x2-3800_8.html

either software still not optimized for 64bit hardware, or you just can't get much faster video encoding just by widening the registers(which seems to be the case indeed)...

so it' doesn't seem i would gain much encoding speed by going with 64bit os...
probably much higher gains would be achieved by going with faster cpu (i7) which i won't do as it's too expensive.

that why i said i see no reason for 64bit.
more ram means nothing to me, 1gb suits me fine.
even on win2k and 512 and 768mb the only times i got it crashed were too many browser windows when i got greedy surfing the porn...hihi...

so overall what, only for those working on big pix with photoshop?

>Also, some CPUs have a poor implementation of x86-64 (see below).
The P4 chips aren't very good at 64 bit, it's often slower.

i guess that also kinda proves some tasks just can't benefit from 64bits: p4s are just slower chips and 64bits don't heal that at all.
otherwise 64 bits would yield speed increase even on p4, and they obviously don't.
not noticeable difference anyway.
not like it's gonna be 2x faster because now it has 2x more registers.
not at all.

[NxB]

Re: Windows 7

You need x64 executables and codecs to get the 15-20% gain. I don't really trust vista stats either.

P4 just did it wrong and that's why its slower, they were trying to compete with AMD which had beat them to the party.

90% of people don't need 64 bit, but if you have it why not use it.

[weirdlookinguy]

Re: Windows 7

90% of people don't need 64 bit, but if you have it why not use it.

That's how I see it.

[i4004]

Re: Windows 7

>90% of people don't need 64 bit, but if you have it why not use it.

because it's too small benefit (or better to say no benefit at all form above tests, im my opinion...it's just too marginal...there were 64bit versions of codecs there too you know) for me to install os anew...
installing os and all programs is enormous PITA.
it essentially takes months to tweak os and install everything i need.

[acstech]

Re: Windows 7

installing os and all programs is enormous PITA.

Not if you know what you're doing and plan ahead. I do it all the time on customer computers. I even save all their data, settings, right down to the auto-complete entries in word.

it essentially takes months to tweak os and install everything i need.

That's why we pay money to Microsoft. We don't pay 'em to sit on their asses. Well, maybe we do, but they're sitting on their asses in front of a computer working.

Right now 64-bit is of questionable use for most home users. Mainly limited to people running 64-bit programs. The thing is, as has been already pointed out, it will support over 4GB ram. Eventually software will bloat enough and / or take on enough new features that you'll need over 4GB of ram. Having things 64-bit capable now saves headaches down the road. Plus, with the cheap prices of memory now, why not load a system up with 8GB or more? If you do that, you need a 64-bit OS to use it all. Even with 4GB installed the situation becomes questionable, with only about 3.2GB or so being usable. The rest is assigned to addressing space for other system components (video card and so on).

In 5-10 years, trust me, we'll be glad we have that additional addressing space.

[Junk Parts]

Re: Windows 7

JP has a question here. If I have a 64 bit PC with over 4 gigs of ram with windows 7 64 bit can it still be a dual boot system with my 32 bit Xp Home on another partition or drive? I have a good deal offered to me on some new home built PC's and I need to know this answer before I buy...

[washu]

Re: Windows 7

JP: It will work fine. There is no reason why you can't dual boot. XP 32 will only see about 3.2 GB, but otherwise it will work fine.

If you have that much ram, why not run XP in a VM inside 7?

[Junk Parts]

Re: Windows 7

JP doesn't have anything yet."If you have that much ram, why not run XP in a VM inside 7?" I don't understand what you are saying here. I don't think that I would know how to do this. Maybe Vernon the builder would understand this better than I.

[washu]

Re: Windows 7

What I mean by run in a VM is to use XP in a virtual machine. Then you don't have to dual boot if you need XP.

If your CPU is good enough you can download the "XP mode" direct from MS and use that to run XP. You can also use Virtual Box or VMWare. You can even run XP in "seamless" mode where your XP applications look like they are running on 7 at the same time.

If you are not familiar with them, a Virtual Machine is a computer emulator. You can run multiple "guest" OSes on top of your "host" OS which runs on your real computer. Each guest thinks it is running on a normal physical machine, but it's really just software. If you've never used one, download Virtual Box and give it a try. It's pretty straightforward.

[Per Hansson]

Re: Windows 7

For me atleast 64bit is very nice
I game allot and games like Crysis and a multitude of others will simply crash when they try to allocate more than 2GB of Virtual Address space in a 32bit OS (not, this is not same as physical RAM, very important...)

Also at work I am in need of a 64bit OS, currently running 32bit XP with 3GB switches and stuff to get my CAD/CAM software to almost work, but as you can see in the attached picture it was using 3GB of virtual address space and finally crashed, I did get the data I needed from it before it crashed tho fortunantley, else I would have shot the PC seeing as you can see it took 46 hours to process!!!! (Note the reason a camera was used to take the screenshot is the computer would not allow me to use print screen even because it was out of memory!)

Granted this kind of prooves that who needs 64bit is only highend users, but in a few years it will be trickling down to mainstream aswell
And by then it is very nice if the user base has mostly switched to a 64bit OS so we are ready, that is my opinion anyway

[i4004]

Re: Windows 7

>Not if you know what you're doing and plan ahead. I do it all the time on customer computers

i'm a tiny bit(hehe) more demanding than most of customers anywhere...hehe...
no amount of planning will save you from doing it one-by-one program, and when you use a lot of programs it just takes time...
amount of stuff i have on 2k is mind boggling...a bit less on these xp, but it means i have to go to win2k from time to time as i lack some things...heh...
i really have no motivation to install everything i have on 2k on xp too...
it would be madness....

>That's why we pay money to Microsoft.

no, ms doesn't know what i'm doing with my pc...ms is just os provider, and i need to pick programs...

>Eventually software will bloat enough and / or take on enough new features that you'll need over 4GB of ram.

i can just as easilly see things revert to simpler stuff that uses less ram; take win7 for example...heh...

>Granted this kind of prooves that who needs 64bit is only highend users, but in a few years it will be trickling down to mainstream aswell

when i see program that's using 3gb of ram one thought crosses my mind instantly:
was it written by .net morons?
<wink>

as for games, yeah i need they're insatiable for speed and resources....but i dunno how much is that driving the industry...to some extent it does, it would be interesting to know exactly how much...ie how much pc users game.

cad/cam soft probably doesn't influence it much, as those buying have money so market adoption based on price/availability and other usual factors doesn't play much role.

[acstech]

Re: Windows 7

Oh well, I charge by the hour. Just means more work for me.