My review of vista

zaroba · 01-09-2008, 01:21 AM

glad to see you like it and have joined the ranks of people who aren't afraid to upgrade etc.

also, this is just more proof that most of the people who use vista with 2gb or more of ram don't have any trouble with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DirtyD86

WOW.... this is completely not what i was expecting as I opened this thread.

heh, i have to agree to that.

PC eye · 01-09-2008, 02:02 AM

The problem with 4gb of ram has to do with the 3gb barrier seen with 32bit versions of Windows altogether not just Vista. http://www.dansdata.com/askdan00015.htm

Even Microsoft has addressed the problem of errors seen when installing Vista with 4gb installed for the 64bit as well as 32bit editions of Vista. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929777

Vista has been running just as well on 2gb here as is XP while first seeing 3rd party drive problems and the obvious changes between versions. Like any version it still sees it's ups and downs depending on how you look at it. The crash control and improvements with the DisK Management tool as well as better tools on the installation disk are the ups while the UAC, gadgets, and other clutter are some of the down sides there.

zaroba · 01-16-2008, 05:43 AM

erm...huh? don't know what made you think of that stuff

nobody said anything about vista seeing less ram or having errors when installing it on PCs with more then 3gb of ram.

i just notice that all the people who complain about vista being slow etc have less then 2gb of ram.
whereas all the people who have no speed issues/crashing with vista all have 2gb or more of ram.

it has nothing to do with the 32bit limitation, or errors coming up when installing vista on a pc with more then 3gb of ram.

GSAV55 · 01-16-2008, 05:49 AM

So does the 64-bit version recognize all 4 gb of ram?

zaroba · 01-16-2008, 05:55 AM

yes, 64bit vista (and xp) will see more ram then you could put on any modern motherboard.

Motoxrdude · 01-16-2008, 06:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GSAV55

So does the 64-bit version recognize all 4 gb of ram?

Yes, 64bit will recognize up to serveral hundred (or thousands) terabytes. I'm too lazy to give you the exact number, but it's in the terabyte or petabyte range.

GSAV55 · 01-16-2008, 06:01 AM

Wow, but 32 only sees 3.5ish?

**mep916** · 01-16-2008, 06:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Motoxrdude

Yes, 64bit will recognize up to serveral hundred (or thousands) terabytes. I'm too lazy to give you the exact number, but it's in the terabyte or petabyte range.

Please, don't give us that number again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GSAV55

Wow, but 32 only sees 3.5ish?

That's right.

Motoxrdude · 01-17-2008, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GSAV55

Wow, but 32 only sees 3.5ish?

Yes, it is exponential. The equation is 2^bit, so 32bit would be 2^32 and 64bit would be 2^64.

PC eye · 01-17-2008, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Motoxrdude

Yes, it is exponential. The equation is 2^bit, so 32bit would be 2^32 and 64bit would be 2^64.

You'll be happy to know thet the 32bit version of Windows Server 2003 sees upwards of 32gb of memory there. And there are problems seen with the 64bit editions of Vista when installing the new version on a system with 4gb installed. 64bit still isn't invulnerable at this time to seeing errors.

Despite the complaints here about some changes now seen in Vista I haven't seen indication of running any slower then XP. More memory needed?

Gee nothing new there since XP needed 128mb upgrading from 98 only needing 16mb! Each new version is often found a little larger with additional items. But you certainly don't need 16gb to run Vista while new boards see that capacity but lack the chipsets to support over 4gb.

01-09-2008, 02:02 AM	#12 (permalink)
PC eye Diamond Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Inside a pc Posts: 20,267	The problem with 4gb of ram has to do with the 3gb barrier seen with 32bit versions of Windows altogether not just Vista. http://www.dansdata.com/askdan00015.htm Even Microsoft has addressed the problem of errors seen when installing Vista with 4gb installed for the 64bit as well as 32bit editions of Vista. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929777 Vista has been running just as well on 2gb here as is XP while first seeing 3rd party drive problems and the obvious changes between versions. Like any version it still sees it's ups and downs depending on how you look at it. The crash control and improvements with the DisK Management tool as well as better tools on the installation disk are the ups while the UAC, gadgets, and other clutter are some of the down sides there. __________________ Turning the Tongue into a Device Controller http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Sma...ory?id=5647175 Is EBay going out of the Auction Business? http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=5626840&page=1

01-16-2008, 05:43 AM	#13 (permalink)
zaroba Platinum Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Hereford PA Age: 27 Posts: 609	erm...huh? don't know what made you think of that stuff nobody said anything about vista seeing less ram or having errors when installing it on PCs with more then 3gb of ram. i just notice that all the people who complain about vista being slow etc have less then 2gb of ram. whereas all the people who have no speed issues/crashing with vista all have 2gb or more of ram. it has nothing to do with the 32bit limitation, or errors coming up when installing vista on a pc with more then 3gb of ram. __________________ The Universal - the internet's most unique and enjoyable game. Mobo: Asus P5N32-E \| CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @2.4GHz \| PSU: Coolmax 650watt Case: Lian-Li PC-V2100plusII \| OS: XP Professional - 64bit \| Monitors: Dual 19" Hanns-G 2ms LCDs HDs: 3x320gb, 3x500gb, 2x750GB \| Disc Drives: 16x DL dvd +/- rw Ram: 6 gb ddr2 \| GPU: 640MB GeForce 8800GTS Last edited by zaroba; 01-16-2008 at 05:52 AM.

01-16-2008, 05:49 AM	#14 (permalink)
GSAV55 Platinum Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: FL Age: 18 Posts: 634	So does the 64-bit version recognize all 4 gb of ram? __________________ Acer 24" wide screen 2ms 1920x1200 Asus M2N-E nForce 500 SLI 2x XFX GeForce 7900GTX SLI 2gb OCZ DDR2 RAM AMD 64 x2 5600+ 3.02Ghz 550watt X2 Ultra modular PSU 250gb Seagate Barracuda G15 Gaming Keyboard

01-16-2008, 05:55 AM	#15 (permalink)
zaroba Platinum Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Hereford PA Age: 27 Posts: 609	yes, 64bit vista (and xp) will see more ram then you could put on any modern motherboard. __________________ The Universal - the internet's most unique and enjoyable game. Mobo: Asus P5N32-E \| CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @2.4GHz \| PSU: Coolmax 650watt Case: Lian-Li PC-V2100plusII \| OS: XP Professional - 64bit \| Monitors: Dual 19" Hanns-G 2ms LCDs HDs: 3x320gb, 3x500gb, 2x750GB \| Disc Drives: 16x DL dvd +/- rw Ram: 6 gb ddr2 \| GPU: 640MB GeForce 8800GTS

01-16-2008, 06:01 AM	#17 (permalink)
GSAV55 Platinum Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: FL Age: 18 Posts: 634	Wow, but 32 only sees 3.5ish? __________________ Acer 24" wide screen 2ms 1920x1200 Asus M2N-E nForce 500 SLI 2x XFX GeForce 7900GTX SLI 2gb OCZ DDR2 RAM AMD 64 x2 5600+ 3.02Ghz 550watt X2 Ultra modular PSU 250gb Seagate Barracuda G15 Gaming Keyboard

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Vista Software Compatibility	The Astroman	General Software	61	04-22-2008 05:30 PM
Making Windows XP look and feel like Vista	PC Hobbyist	Operating Systems	5	02-05-2007 12:46 PM
Windows Vista Gaming Review!	P11	Computer Games and Consoles	4	09-01-2006 02:06 AM
superzooms fuji s9000 vs panasonic fz30	automaton	Digital Cameras, Webcams and Scanners	0	01-28-2006 09:00 PM