Difference between 32bit and 64bit

M

Matt234123

New Member
Ok 2 questions for a gaming computer

1. Is there a big difference between windows vista 32bit and 64bit or will it not make a difference on how i play games.

2. Is there a difference if i play games on windows vista ultimate and home edition or is there just minor changes that can be ignored.
 
Hi,
I suggest you get the 64-bit, it has more space and could save an enormous amount of data. yet, the pc runs easily and fast with it :)
 
The main difference is if your CPU is 64 bit capable. Applications and windows will work much faster then 32 bit.

Main problems is not all applications are 64bit capable. Don't get 64 bit on vista you will have problem after problem to run drivers and software.
 
If you have got a modern (one of the later ones) Sempron or Pentium 4, it may support 64 bit.

AMD Athlon 64 chips and (i think) all X2 chips support 64 bit. Older athlons dont.

The core2duo supports 64 bit too. The CoreDuo does not. Neither does the Pentium M.

Most pentium Ds do.

I dont think any celerons do?
 
Well I ran Vista Ultimate x64 for 6 months and I only had 3 programs EVER refuse to work for me.

They were fixed by "disabling" the UAC via F8 on boot up and after that it worked very sexy. Shame for me I got lazy and wanted to try XP SP3 out since Vista was taking 20gbs for itself ~-~

Those programs would be
Peer Guardian (vista beta)
PC Alert 4 (MSI software)
nvidia software (kept disabling it)
 
Actually 32 bits and 64 bits is no different. Only 64 bits can support 64bit register in processor. And with having 64bit the data transfer also will be a little bit faster. That alls i know.
 
HAK said:
Hi,
I suggest you get the 64-bit, it has more space and could save an enormous amount of data. yet, the pc runs easily and fast with it :)
Click to expand...

Bit processing power has nothing to do with how much data can be saved.

tossy said:
The main difference is if your CPU is 64 bit capable. Applications and windows will work much faster then 32 bit.

Main problems is not all applications are 64bit capable. Don't get 64 bit on vista you will have problem after problem to run drivers and software.
Click to expand...

That is quite debatable. They have the potential to work much faster, however few even show a marginal increase. Also, you're claim about 64 bit compatibility is true with XP, and was to a point true with Vista when it was first released, however it is no longer true. I challenge you to find me a piece of hardware or software that is not completely obscure and is compatible with Vista 32 bit and not Vista 64 bit.
 
the main reason there waqs problems with xp 64 wasnt due to the fact it was 64 bit, it was due to the fact that it was based on server 2003, not XP, so used a slightly different method for third party drivers, and many people were ignorant of this and tried using XP drivers with it, which failed.
 
jdbennet said:
the main reason there waqs problems with xp 64 wasnt due to the fact it was 64 bit, it was due to the fact that it was based on server 2003, not XP, so used a slightly different method for third party drivers, and many people were ignorant of this and tried using XP drivers with it, which failed.
Click to expand...

Again, not sure what you're shooting at here. I'm talking about how 32 bit XP was much more widely supported than 64 bit XP, and you're talking about people trying to use 32 bit XP drivers with 64 bit XP. Also, 64 bit XP was so rare, I am really doubting whether anyone who would install it would really not know what it was.
 
thats why XP 64 wasnt supported, because you needed to use server 2003 drivers for it, which were not widely available.
 
jdbennet said:
the main reason there waqs problems with xp 64 wasnt due to the fact it was 64 bit, it was due to the fact that it was based on server 2003, not XP, so used a slightly different method for third party drivers, and many people were ignorant of this and tried using XP drivers with it, which failed.
Click to expand...

Ok, when I first read this, I got the impression that you were implying that I thought that 64 bit XP was problematic just because it is 64 bit, which is just circular logic and doesn't make any sense at all.

However you clarified:
jdbennet said:
thats why XP 64 wasnt supported, because you needed to use server 2003 drivers for it, which were not widely available.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that 64 Bit XP was problematic because the drivers were hard to come by, which is what I originally said. Semantically what you were saying made very little sense, however I now know what you meant to say, so essentially we were just agreeing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And besides,you don't have to stop at 4gb of ram. 64 bit os will handle as much as your motherboard has. My motherboard is equip for 8gb.

I have 6gb running. And I run the Windows xp pro x64. The only problem I really have is my web cam, logitech will not update their drivers. They want me to buy a new camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top