Breakthrough Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 (edited) I'm just curious which would have better performance - Win7 x32/x64. I did take notice that the x64 version has a larger ISO size... Hmm... Any thoughts? EDIT: PERFORMANCE WITHOUT ADDITIONAL RAM (I know of the 32-bit limit) AND "ADDITIONAL SECURITY FEATURES". Edited March 24, 2009 by Breakthrough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannydeman Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 x64 is only for the people with more then 2GB of ram. Windows 32bit can use 3Gb ram, but applications can't use more then 2GB. In the x64 version you can have more then 3Gb of ram, and the system/applications (which are capable) will use more then2GB as well. X64 also have some downsides, however some people might say there are not. There can be some driver problems with some devices. x86 always comes first, and x64 comes second. But 99% is perfectly fine today. (example is the AMBX system which has some issues with x64, and so have many other devices). Conclusion: x64 is faster for people who have more ram then 2GB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevember Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 side-by-side performance is not that much difference, but when you start considering you can have extra RAM with the 64-bit version of course that will make a difference, 64-bit programs will of course run faster especially when they are doing a lot of processing. Personally, I feel the 64-bit version is more snappy, it seems to have less of the little one second hangups every now and again if you know what I mean. The 64-bit version will of course have a bigger footprint, that is perfectly normal. If you have a choice, and all your hardware and software you use works in 64-bit then you should use it. It is as simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToneKnee Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 32-bit applications can utilise more than 2GB of RAM in Windows 64-bit with a command switch (if it supports it) but they'll be limited to 2.7GB's or something, so you can get benefits with going with 64-bit and big games. 2GB is a nice spot for Vista/Windows 7, so I don't see the benefit going with 32-bit, even 3GB will be nice. But if you have 4GB's or more (like me), you'll want Windows 64-bit since it's nice making use of that extra memory. :) The Windows 64-bit ISO size is bigger because of drivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdood Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 The 64-bit version performs marginally better (regardless of how much RAM you have, 2GB is fine), but generally the difference isn't that huge. The ISO is bigger because the 64-bit has to include an emulated 32-bit environment so you can also run 32-bit software. It's essentially a mini version of 32-bit Windows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevember Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 x64 is only for the people with more then 2GB of ram. Windows 32bit can use 3Gb ram, but applications can't use more then 2GB. In the x64 version you can have more then 3Gb of ram, and the system/applications (which are capable) will use more then2GB as well. X64 also have some downsides, however some people might say there are not. There can be some driver problems with some devices. x86 always comes first, and x64 comes second. But 99% is perfectly fine today. (example is the AMBX system which has some issues with x64, and so have many other devices). Conclusion: x64 is faster for people who have more ram then 2GB. albeit, you are correct when an individual programme cannot use more than 2 GB of RAM in 32 bit, you have to bear in mind even at 64 bit it is very unusual for a single program to use more than 2 GB of RAM of course there is the exception. So yes of course Windows 32-bit will use around the 3 GB limit because there is lots of programs using the RAM and not just one. There is a massive difference. Then you have the same problem with a 64-bit machine, most programs running 32-bit mode therefore they will still have the 2 GB limit but remember that is just that program! Ask yourself when the last time you seen a program used more than a gigabyte of RAM in a single process? Exactly. I would like to point out that should not be the deciding factor, if you are purchasing for today and tomorrow than 64 bit is the way to go, what if you upgrade your RAM? (yes I know the same key will work for 32-bit and 64-bit, but do you really want to download another version). Of course the retail comes with both! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majortom1981 Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 The 64bit versions of vista and 7 also have more security features then what the 32bit versions have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breakthrough Posted March 24, 2009 Author Share Posted March 24, 2009 What security features? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdood Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 albeit, you are correct when an individual programme cannot use more than 2 GB of RAM in 32 bit Technically they can use as much RAM as they want (as long as it's there) even on the 32-bit version, but it requires more work (you have to map pages manually) and is not very relevant anymore. Then you have the same problem with a 64-bit machine, most programs running 32-bit mode therefore they will still have the 2 GB limit but remember that is just that program! If the 32-bit program is marked as being large address aware, it can use all 4GB of its address space when it's running on 64-bit Windows. Of course, there's not much chance of this if the program is designed to be running on a 32-bit OS with a 2/2GB address space, which makes this pointless nitpicking I guess. I agree that memory shouldn't be the deciding factor though. Windows 7 x64 runs superbly with 2GB! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToneKnee Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 What security features? The Kernel is locked out, and it's great with Intel's DEP feature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdood Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 DEP works fine with 32-bit Windows as well. It just needs a 64-bit page table (the last bit in each entry controls if the page is executable or not), which you get with PAE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevember Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Adding to the list: Not to mention the driver signatures, which should in theory make the system more stable. (before somebody gets smart yes I know it can be turned off) To hdood: I agree with all your saying that we are talking about a normal user, that is why it is better not to complicate things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majortom1981 Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Kernel Patch Protection (PatchGuard)This feature is not available in 32-bit versions of Windows Vista.This feature is available in 64-bit versions of Windows Vista. Kernel Patch Protection helps prevent a malicious program from updating the Windows Vista kernel. This feature works by helping to prevent a kernel-mode driver from extending or replacing other kernel services. Also, this feature helps prevent third-party programs from updating (patching) any part of the kernel. That is one of the security features in 64bit vista thats not in 32bit. Also as other people stated the signed drivers. Also DEP in 64bit uses hardware not software. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuttle Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 side-by-side performance is not that much difference... Not true. In some professional environment, like 3D modeling, rendering, video editing and photo retouch - you can have a considerable performance boost. I've a 30/35% boost in OGL viewports and a 15/20% in rendering operations. Of course you need of x64 native apps on x64 hardware. Ciao. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakumo Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 (edited) Windows Vista Feature Focus: 64-Bit (x64) Support You could also take a look at the Windows Vista Product Guide Edited March 24, 2009 by yakumo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevember Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Not true. In some professional environment, like 3D modeling, rendering, video editing and photo retouch - you can have a considerable performance boost. I've a 30/35% boost in OGL viewports and a 15/20% in rendering operations. Of course you need of x64 native apps on x64 hardware.Ciao. Ummm read rest my reply I do say that.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjrambo Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 32bit version of Windows 7 is a waste of time and money. I hoped Microsoft will just abend 32bit OS all together. Windows 7 64bit will run most of 32bit apps + 64bit apps. I really see no place for 32bit OS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha_omega Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Also as other people stated the signed drivers. Also DEP in 64bit uses hardware not software. On my Server 2008 32-bit system it does use hardware-based DEP though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbba Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 32bit version of Windows 7 is a waste of time and money. I hoped Microsoft will just abend 32bit OS all together. Windows 7 64bit will run most of 32bit apps + 64bit apps. I really see no place for 32bit OS. v. unlikely given that just avout every atom based netbook(not nettop) has a 32bit only cpu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjrambo Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 v. unlikely given that just avout every atom based netbook(not nettop) has a 32bit only cpu. I know, stupid Intel is holding it down. First they did with 32bit dual cores for laptops and now with netbooks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToneKnee Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 On my Server 2008 32-bit system it does use hardware-based DEP though. Yes it does, but there are DEP features that aren't enabled on the hardware level that are only available in x64. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdood Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 No. It only requires that the hardware supports it and that PAE is activated (which it is by default on hardware that supports it). It doesn't have to be a 64-bit OS. What's known as "software DEP" is something else and unrelated to execution prevention. Both are available on a 32-bit OS. PatchGuard, like someone says, is only available on x64. That's more about increasing stability than security though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakumo Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 "The 64-bit editions of Windows Vista work with the 64-bit processor?s DEP feature to help protect computers against buffer overflow attacks. (Note that some 32-bit processors also contain built-in hardware support for DEP and that the 32-bit editions of Windows Vista will support DEP on such 32-bit processors.) " Page 250 of the Windows Vista Product Guide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha_omega Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Yes it does, but there are DEP features that aren't enabled on the hardware level that are only available in x64. Such as? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Co-ords Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Well I have noticed that Windows 2008 R2 Server which will be coming out soon is only 64bit... Apple's Snow Leopard is also going that route; it supprises me that M$'s consumer OS is still 32 bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts