Vista 32 vs 64

[xXTOKERXx]

Can some one please explain the difference to me, as i am a little confused.

i remmeber back with the 939 was released with 64bit architecture, correct?

Then didn't hear much of it, other than XP 64.

now i recently bought a laptop with vista basic, Toshiba satelite L30 Core Duo 1.73

Which platform is better and why and can my lappy take it?

Just a bit of explanation would be good

[Ruciz]

XP is better.

Vista 32 if you want a somewhat usable OS.. Vista 64 if you only want to be able to use notepad, and possibly MSpaint.

Theres little driver support for vista to begin with, and no one is writing decent 64-bit compatible drivers...

[Jelly2003]

I tried Vista 64-bit on my laptop, you can do a lot more than simply use notepad.

Vista 64 runs most 32-bit applications. It seamlessly ran all my regular 32-bit applications, although playing games is a hit and miss affair, Battlefield 2142 didn't run, and Enemy Territory worked only without punk buster enabled.

Driver support was seriously lacking, I was able to get drivers for my sound and graphics card and printer but my web cam and a few other things had no drivers. That was 6 months ago, there are probably more drivers available now.

Also, there isn't really must performance gain to be had by running the 64 bit version, from a performance point of view 32 bit is pretty much the same.

Unless you're wanting to run more than 4GB or ram in your PC then I'd stick with the 32-bit version for now and perhaps consider 64-bit when the next version of Windows is released.

[Rupert]

On my modern hardware, I haven't had any driver or software compatibility issues. I run Office, Visual Studio, Adobe CS3, Source games, Red Orchestra, BF2, 2142 demo and loads of other stuff without any compatibility problems at all. Where there are issues, a simple Google search or trying the compatibility mode will fix it in seconds.

You can check and make sure all your software will work before you buy, but I would recommend 64-bit to get the most out of your processor and RAM.

[nXqd]

I'll wait for the time of 64 bit.

I'll use Vista just for 64 bit programs, 64 bit period.

Now 32bit XP is better for me.

Sorry for my bad esl

nXqd

[MrBear5587]

I have absolutely no issues running Vista x64 on my machine. Hardware in signature.

Latest games such as Supreme Commander, Shadowrun run superbly. The majority of older games do work fine also.

No performance issues either.

Sure, there are a few things that aren't nice to use, or don't work at all on x64, but they're few and far between. I use Vista x64 as my daily OS and am more than happy.

[StandingInAlley]

If you are using more than 4 gigs ram, then go for Vista x64

[AltecXP]

XP is better.

Vista 32 if you want a somewhat usable OS.. Vista 64 if you only want to be able to use notepad, and possibly MSpaint.

Theres little driver support for vista to begin with, and no one is writing decent 64-bit compatible drivers...

WOW, that post is SO full of utter crap its amazing.

I run Vista x64 on 3 machines and have ZERO usage problems. HAve you ever used the software because you act like you are just going off of what other idiots have read then retold you.

Hell I'm in Vista x64 as I am typing this. I found all teh x64 drivers for my machines in under 10min of looking for ANY OF THEM.

LEARN WTF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT BEFORE YOU POST!

[Popcorned1]

Vista x64 has no issues with me and vice versa.

Ruciz, have you actually tried x64?

[+Biscuits Brown MVC]

I only had one issue with Vista 64 and that was DVDFab isn't x64 compatible (yet). Actually hte main DVDFab application is but it's VSO system driver isn't so I had to go back to the 32 bit for now.

[Nicholas-c Veteran]

Hey guys, i have just finished installing 64bit vista and i have to say its very nice and a bit faster... however now my PC gets a lower score ?

Ram used to have a score of 4.3 but now in 64bit it has 3.1? how odd ?

also does anyone know if there is a 64 bit version of firefox 2.0 ?

[Jelly2003]

Can anybody here run Enemy Territory on x64 yet?

[BoDEAN]

No to firefox question

[Fred Derf Veteran]

also does anyone know if there is a 64 bit version of firefox 2.0 ?

You can get firefox-3.0a6pre.en-US.win64 (2007-06-12):

http://www.mozilla-x86-64.com/download.html

[Threads Merged]

I had no troubles running applications with Vista-64. Perhaps you might run into issues with older games or something but it did not affect me.

[tao muon]

XP is better.

Vista 32 if you want a somewhat usable OS.. Vista 64 if you only want to be able to use notepad, and possibly MSpaint.

Theres little driver support for vista to begin with, and no one is writing decent 64-bit compatible drivers...

Well, I see one of the Elmer "FUD" crowd has replied. People 'IN THE KNOW' will ignore that.

64 bit Windows gives you some advantages over 32bit.

Most Windows virii are of the 32 bit variety and you should 'theoretically' have a bit more immunity from because of the nature of the code: the virus expects 32 bit addressing and even if it does manage to corrupt 64 bit files, the memory pointers and such will be off and the virus will crash... and Vista x64's 32 bit subsystem (which the virus will run under) will crash as well... maybe... instead of the whole system.

Intel and AMD processors usually run 32 bit code in x64 mode nearly as well as a 32 bit processor running it. That means that 32 bit programs run almost as well on 64 bit processors as they do on 32 bit processors. A lot of development was put in by AMD to make sure it worked that way, and Intel adopted a similar strategy.

As for drivers- I've installed 64 bit Vista on my primary home computer, after running 32 bit Vista since beta 1... and it ran XP Pro SP2 before that (for about a year). SO that gives you the idea that my hardware is about 2 years old. And 64bit Vista had drivers for my entire system.

Gigabyte (my mobo maker) doesn't list anything for Vista 32 OR 64 bit... but Microsoft nailed it down and installed drivers.

It works like a charm- every piece of software I have to run- mostly office-type stuff works fine. Even the specialty software I have to use (from Anritsu- cellular test equipment) runs fine.

I don't game on it much- I've got Tron 2.0 and some older games like Obsidian and others. But they work fine.

Maybe newer games that were in development while Vista was being worked on won't work... YET... but I have no complaints.

[Mordkanin]

XP is better.

Vista 32 if you want a somewhat usable OS.. Vista 64 if you only want to be able to use notepad, and possibly MSpaint.

Theres little driver support for vista to begin with, and no one is writing decent 64-bit compatible drivers...

Wow. That's utter crap.

If you have the hardware, and the plans to go above 3gigs of RAM, go with 64. Otherwise, stick with 32.

[DoubleThink]

If you are using more than 4 gigs ram, then go for Vista x64

I would say "If you have 4Gb of RAM or more and don't play games" then go for Vista x64.

[Impact]

vista x64 has been fine for playing games. I play bf2, bf2142, flat out, and oblivion on it fine with no noticeable performance hit.

[Jelly2003]

It seems that gaming support has been vastly improved, because when I tried it I couldn't play any games on it.

Has anybody tried Enemy Territory?

I'd be really interested to know if that runs on Vista x64 (when I tried punkbuster wouldn't work).

[+mram Subscriber²]

Lets not mix Vista driver support issues with 64-bit issues, please.

Vista driver support is coming. 64-bit driver support is coming slower, but it's coming too.

Application support is the slowest, but there really is negligible difference between 32-bit apps and 64-bit apps unless you're dealing with really high-end stuff (databases, virtual machines, etc). A 64-bit version of Firefox for example is largely pointless not to mention useless -- you'd need 64-bit plugins. Granted it would offer some protection (still, placebo), but really, there's a reason why even the 32-bit IE7 is default on Vista-64.

I've had no problems with various games, but can't answer to specific ones listed in this thread. Currently I'm working on getting MAME working, but haven't spent too much time on it.

[MtnDewCodeRedFreak]

I have Vista Ultimate 32-bit and 2 GB RAM, and it ran smoothly. Apps load as fast, if any faster, as XP.

Just a thought but I'm surprised that my P4 with HT is supported when the Vista reqs came out.

[veegun]

I run x64 vista on my main machine (amd x2 4200+). I can run the latest mame (actually I use the unofficial mame32 plus build; but mame32 works fine too) on it without any problems. I don't play alot of pc games. I just like playing games from yester year via emulation (I love the speed up feature of some emus; it's so great to speed through stuff like intro movie). Most of the PC games that I've tried works (Oblivion, Doom 3, GTA3:SA, Titan Quest, C&C 3, Morrowind) without having to use compatibility mode. Gothic 3 ran really slow for some reason but that game is buggy to begin with (Gawh, when will they release a patch to fix all the bugs?). I used to run x64 windows XP before vista x64. What can I say? Once you go 64-bit it's hard to go back to 32-bit. 32-bit is soooo yesterday (or make that 5 years+ old technology). :)

I did have to wait forever for VIA to release their 7.1 audio drivers for x64 vista. That was the last driver missing for me.

So, for me, x64 vista is the only way to go.

[echo]

XP is better.

Vista 32 if you want a somewhat usable OS.. Vista 64 if you only want to be able to use notepad, and possibly MSpaint.

Theres little driver support for vista to begin with, and no one is writing decent 64-bit compatible drivers...

I didn't read the rest of the thread yet, but i'm sure someone has corrected you!

I have my specs in my sig and i am running Ultimate x64 with only ONE problem....my 5.1 surround only works in Winamp with a special surround sound plug-in...everything else i have NO problems with. Every program I ran in Xp Pro runs PERFECT in vista x64. So basically your comment is useless and worthless....

Maybe it might hold some truth if your hardware is outdated as all hell!

Do a little research before you post that comment. If you tried it and it didn't work for you then say "i personally have tried it and my experience wasn't that great"....because i'm running it as my main OS now without dual booting anything else....no problems what so ever....there are a couple little glitches but there has been a work around for EVERY single one of them that takes a minute TOPS to complete.

[Kainz]

XP is better.

Vista 32 if you want a somewhat usable OS.. Vista 64 if you only want to be able to use notepad, and possibly MSpaint.

Theres little driver support for vista to begin with, and no one is writing decent 64-bit compatible drivers...

You're prolly thinking of XP64 there. Vista x64 is just as usuable as x32 is, even when dealing with games. I've seen two of my mates running that OS without a glitch so far, even playing the latest games, which has prompted me to consider it now as I've got 4GB.

[Barney T. Administrators]

XP is better.

Vista 32 if you want a somewhat usable OS.. Vista 64 if you only want to be able to use notepad, and possibly MSpaint.

Theres little driver support for vista to begin with, and no one is writing decent 64-bit compatible drivers...

Not my experience at all. Vista 64-bit works just fine..... on 3 different computers of mine!