PDA

View Full Version : Windows Vista 64-bit Crap Still ??



BraveHeart
23-01-2009, 04:25 AM
Just wondering what peoples thoughts are nowdays on windows vista 64bit.

we all know its been around for years, and 64bit was around for a long time even before that, years n years infact.

Anyway, is it still the same waste of time its always been, i mean, theres literally no applications or games etc that can take full advantage of the 64bit platform ??

Some people tend to get mixed up with terms like "supports 64bit" as apposed to "64bit enhanced" etc etc, big difference.

Anyways, your thoughts on this would be appreciated if you know what your talking about and not just talking pants as its something you heard from a mate, hehehee.

cheers.

Sicilian
23-01-2009, 07:02 AM
Most 32 bit games & apps will run on a 64bit os. There might not any difference performance wise though unless specifically written for 64bit os.

CPU intensive apps normally run faster on a 64bit os, such a video editing etc..

Chimaera
23-01-2009, 09:17 AM
64 was a good idea but is very under supported by most games etc, i cant comment on vista but i ran xp 32 and 64 and cant really say there was a lot of difference

little_pob
23-01-2009, 02:11 PM
Essentially it still holds true that if going for a 64bit Windows OS go for Vista - there is much more driver support than for XP64. If going 32bit stick with XP SP3. But to counter a few points...

There is a 64bit version of Half Life 2 (runs automatically on a 64bit OS) and the recent PC version of GTAIV claims to be 64bit enhanced. Although I think most devs are working more towards multi core CPU support than they are 64bit support.

The most recent Windows edition of Adobe Photoshop has a 64bit version (no 64bit version for Mac OSX until CS5).

Whilst there are 64bit versions of IE and Firefox, the 64bit version of Flash Player 10 is only in alpha - so most people stick with a 32bit browser.

Chimaera
23-01-2009, 03:20 PM
64 bit came around at just the wrong time on the roadmap of history, just after it was implemented dual core and other processor enhancments sorted of shunted it to the back of the queue and i think more attention was payed to them hence we have dual core and multi processor atm.

They were trying to better processing power with 64 to be fair but the easier solutions where everyone dosent have to rewrite all their software gained favour

little_pob
23-01-2009, 03:58 PM
64 bit came around at just the wrong time on the roadmap of history, just after it was implemented dual core and other processor enhancments sorted of shunted it to the back of the queue and i think more attention was payed to them hence we have dual core and multi processor atm.

They were trying to better processing power with 64 to be fair but the easier solutions where everyone dosent have to rewrite all their software gained favour
Agreed. It helps that the 360 is multicore, as MS have apparently made it much easier than it used to be to port from the 360 to 'games for windows' and vice-versa.

BraveHeart
23-01-2009, 05:31 PM
did they (microsoft) ever sort out the problem with 32bit vista where it cant see more than 3gb ram ?

i had heard ages ago they were trying to sort this out, but i lost track ?

If not, i would surley imagine that windows 7 can cope with this ?? not that most of us need more than 3gb ram of course, lol

DavC
23-01-2009, 05:56 PM
did they (microsoft) ever sort out the problem with 32bit vista where it cant see more than 3gb ram ?
i had heard ages ago they were trying to sort this out, but i lost track ?
If not, i would surley imagine that windows 7 can cope with this ?? not that most of us need more than 3gb ram of course, lol
no mate. that is a (major) limitation of the "32bit" where by windows cannot see or use more than 3.5gb of RAM. its the same from windows 2000 and will be the same when windows 7 comes out.

i have 4gig of ram at home and at work (xp32 sp3 on both) and including ram allocated for video it's limited to 3.5gig.

i've got the job of testing a new pc at work soon and one of the things there will be comparing performace of xp32 pro with vista64 buisness. should be interesting to see on a brand new pc (not only the performance but compataility side of things too)

Diablo13
23-01-2009, 05:57 PM
I have been using Vista x64 for ages and do not have a problem with it. I find drivers are now well supported for most things and 32 bit drivers work well for the odd few things that do not have true x64 support.
XP x32 still only supports up to 3 gig of ram, so no they still have'nt sorted that and probably never will now.
I use 4 gig of ram dualled and do quite a lot of media encoding, so it is useful for that. The newer i7 os is an updated and streamlined Vista x64 and I hear very good reports about it's speed, though I personally have not had chance to try it yet, but I will on my second rig.
If , as I suspect, your main priority is just to use your pc for gaming then you may not see many advantages, but that is really the fault of lazy games developers not taking full advantage of the advances available to them, not the operating system?
For gaming with great graphics and simple plug and play just buy an Xbox 360 or a Playstation 3. It will probably be cheaper for gaming in the long run, with no worries about drivers , enhancements or compatability.
I hope you find this PERSONAL experience helpful thomson?

BraveHeart
23-01-2009, 08:28 PM
no mate. that is a (major) limitation of the "32bit" where by windows cannot see or use more than 3.5gb of RAM. its the same from windows 2000 and will be the same when windows 7 comes out.
i have 4gig of ram at home and at work (xp32 sp3 on both) and including ram allocated for video it's limited to 3.5gig.
i've got the job of testing a new pc at work soon and one of the things there will be comparing performace of xp32 pro with vista64 buisness. should be interesting to see on a brand new pc (not only the performance but compataility side of things too)

So, vista 32bit still doesnt see more than 3.5gb ram ?? (for some reason i thought it was 3gb?).

So, let me see, if you had say 6gb ram in a system thats using 32bit vista, vista would only see 3gb or 3.5gb, correct ??
Also, i think you mentioned even video ram, so does that mean if you have 1gb ram graphics card and 4gb system ram, vista will still only see 3 or 3.5gb ??

Does it still use the extra ram but just dont see it, or does it not even use it at all ??

BraveHeart
23-01-2009, 09:15 PM
anyone ???

Diablo13
24-01-2009, 12:54 AM
It is something to do with the bandwidth capacity of the slots I think? Just like the difference between PCI and PCI express, or usb 1 and usb 2. You can plug things in but it does not have the ability to use them fully.
So no if you put 12 gig of ram in a system x32 bit will only see 3 gig.
Please correct me on any of these points if I am wrong, but I don't think I am about the ram?

BraveHeart
24-01-2009, 01:42 AM
Dont know about correcting you mate, lol, but if a motherboard can support loads of ram, lets say 10gb just for talks sake, then thats that, nothing to do with the slots or bandwidth, i think your meaning if a motherboard cant support the extra ram, or faster ram for that matter too, thats a hardware issue, not software (windows), please dont jump on me if i was pickin ya up wrong, lol, its drunk,oclock at night, heheee. :lol3:

But as for the amount of ram windows vista 32bit can see, i know its either 3gb, or 3.5, i can remember reading about it some years ago when i was tinkering with 32/64bit, not really a big deal anyway give or take 0.5gb, lol.

Anyway, the thing iam still not sure of is what i was asking earlier, even though 32bit can only see 3gb ram, if you had say 10gb system ram installed and a 1gb graphics card, would vista 32bit only be able to use the 3gb's or could it use the whole lot but will only display that it can see 3gb ??? hmmmm. thats loads of brain drain that, eh, lol.

p.s
i have just about every other version of windows here, looked through my stuff and i dont have vista ultimate 64bit, grrrrrrr...!! i was sure i had a copy, looks like i need to get a ""good, fully activated, tried and tested"" copy, does anyone have a link to a trusted one on torrents please, i hate taking a chance with ones that are dodgy, might not be advisable to post the link up in the open forum here, but you could pm me with it please, cheers.

little_pob
24-01-2009, 11:50 AM
Forget that its a limitation of the 32bit versions of Vista; its a limitation of the whole 32bit system. No 32bit OS - whether that's Vista, XP or Linux etc - can use more than 4Gb of memory address space (regardless of what the /PAE supporters tell you).

This is because the other 'buses' (PCI, USB etc) come out of that address space first. So if you have a 1Gb graphics card and 4Gb of system memory a 32bit OS would only see 3Gb at most. Even if the 32bit OS could see it (which is what the /PAE switch does in XP) the OS couldn't use it anyway as it would still be out of the address range.

Chimaera
24-01-2009, 12:07 PM
Forget that its a limitation of the 32bit versions of Vista; its a limitation of the whole 32bit system. No 32bit OS - whether that's Vista, XP or Linux etc - can use more than 4Gb of memory address space (regardless of what the /PAE supporters tell you).

This is because the other 'buses' (PCI, USB etc) come out of that address space first. So if you have a 1Gb graphics card and 4Gb of system memory a 32bit OS would only see 3Gb at most. Even if the 32bit OS could see it (which is what the /PAE switch does in XP) the OS couldn't use it anyway as it would still be out of the address range.

Agreed thats why 64 was designed to go beyond the current address spaces and open the the higher end to allow access to bigger memory space etc

Its simple guys you want to use your memory properly go and download a 64 bit o/s.

like i said before i didnt see much difference between them....its because i wasnt exceeding the memory limit, in that instance their is really no difference.(that is visible on the surface anyway)

For me ive just grabbed a nice 64 bit gaming edition of vista (stripped down) but it wont really matter to me cos i only have 2 gig of ram

At the end of the day all the details in the world wont help you go and get a 32 bit and a 64 bit o/s format and install them one after another and find out what your system does with them, a lot of this is hardware dependant as well as o/s so trail them and find out what works best

Diablo13
24-01-2009, 03:14 PM
@ thomson don't worry about correcting me, thats how I learn as well.
Looking at little_pobs post, which explains things much better than I did. I was essentially right but I wrote it down wrong, :sh:I really meant busses and not bandwidth, but I did say about PCI and usb connections, so I'm only half a pillock this time.:D
Thanks to little_pob and Chimaera for explaining things better than I did and helping with my education.

As far as downloading a x64 bit OS, just look on Pirate puddle or similar torrent site and you will find one. Your right not to put links to other sites they would be removed by the mods as it's not allowed. ;)

BraveHeart
24-01-2009, 07:20 PM
Cheers mate, yea iam downloading one just now, dont know if it works or not though, this is the name of it (not a link) > microsoft.windows.vista.ultimate.x64.sp1.integrate d.ja nuary.2009.oem.dvd-bie

i think it can simply be found in the microsoft.windows.vista search, does it ring a bell with any you guys who may have tried it ?

p.s
diablo, how'd you get your text big and bold ?? you use a word program or summit to type message first ?

Chimaera
24-01-2009, 08:15 PM
the bie ones are usual fine m8 and its integrated with sp1 etc

good luck

big text options are in post reply not fast reply m8

BraveHeart
24-01-2009, 08:20 PM
Ahh, i see, lol

Collider
24-01-2009, 08:34 PM
Well i have a zx spectrum and it runs me toaster so there :)

Diablo13
25-01-2009, 12:10 AM
:lol:buttons awarded to both thompson and Collider.
So we all learnt something here today.
AMD Duron cpu's used to be good for crumpets, do the AMD's still run as hot? Been a long time since I used ancient technology. :p

Collider
25-01-2009, 12:14 AM
So we all learnt something here today.
AMD Duron cpu's used to be good for crumpets, do the AMD's still run as hot? Been a long time since I used ancient technology. :p



LMAO Intel all the way baby ;)

BraveHeart
25-01-2009, 12:19 AM
:lol:buttons awarded to both thompson and Collider.
So we all learnt something here today.
AMD Duron cpu's used to be good for crumpets, do the AMD's still run as hot? Been a long time since I used ancient technology. :p


buttons ??? eh ? chocolate buttons, lol.

BraveHeart
25-01-2009, 12:21 AM
wooops, i meant to put it in big text.

buttons ??? eh ? chocolate buttons, lol.

Diablo13
25-01-2009, 12:40 AM
buttons ??? eh ? chocolate buttons, lol.

:lol:just in case you missed it; quite a while ago I started a thread requesting that we get a :lol:button on WOD, which would be at the bottom of posts, next to the thank you button. The idea was that members could click on it to show approval of a post that amused them. The difference being that some posts may not be particularly useful, but they are funny, like your large font one.
I put a poll with it which got unanimous approval as a good idea and Gazer was looking into it for me, but were still waiting.
I bet he wishes I would STFU about it now? :lol:
Thats what I meant in the post. :rolleyes: :teacher: