Upgrading to Windows Vista 64-bit... Worth It?

Status
Not open for further replies.

creepindeth04

Moderator
So I got a fairly decent eMachines PC this Christmas and it has Windows Vista 32-bit. This PC does have an AMD Athlon 64 processor, so I was wondering if I would see any benefits upgrading to the 64-bit version besides being able to install more RAM.

Basically, what I'm doing is turning this machine into a stripped down HTPC.
 
Honestly... I don't think you would benefit. BUT... I will be honest, there was a big difference (IMO) between 64 Bit XP with 6 gigs of ram and 32 bit Xp with 4 gigs of ram.

Vista does run a but slower than XP... and file transfers from PC to PC have a slower transfer rate in Vista... this might be fixed with Service Pack2. I do not know the full details of Service Pack 2, but I believe I read something about changes that effect file transfers. Don't go by my word on that.

ANYWAY... if you do go to 64-bit Vista, I do recommend 64-bit Vista Ultimate due to the Media Center.



†B†V† :hat
 
Yeah, if I were to upgrade it would but the Ulitmate Edition.

I was just wondering if it was enough to warrant the extra $300. Personally, I'm fine with Vista Home Basic. I can always use XBMC to be my Media Center.
 
Npeo, because none of the software you would be using would be 64 bit so the system would have to emulate 32 bit to run them. It's a waste of money. Trust me 4GiB of memory is enough.
 
Polygon said:
Npeo, because none of the software you would be using would be 64 bit so the system would have to emulate 32 bit to run them. It's a waste of money. Trust me 4GiB of memory is enough.

That's very true. I totally forgot about that.

Yeah, I'm sticking with 32-bit until Windows 7 comes out. We'll see how that goes.
 
Yeah, I just got Vista business not too long ago, and there has been speculation 7 will be out later this year. I'm looking forward to it.
 
The Only reason to go to Vista is DirectX 10 (IMO)... and 64 bit would be for more memory and better allocation. And if you wanted to do the Media Center... definitely do Vista Ultimate.
Polygon is right... you probably wouldn't use 64Bit with your programs. BUT if you want DirectX 10... I recommend 64Bit Vista Ultimate and at least 6 Gig of ram.

†B†V† :hat
 
Bluevoodu said:
The Only reason to go to Vista is DirectX 10 (IMO)... and 64 bit would be for more memory and better allocation. And if you wanted to do the Media Center... definitely do Vista Ultimate.
Polygon is right... you probably wouldn't use 64Bit with your programs. BUT if you want DirectX 10... I recommend 64Bit Vista Ultimate and at least 6 Gig of ram.

†B†V† :hat

So does Vista Home Basic not support Direct X10? I have a Direct X10 graphics card (EVGA GeForce 9400 GT).
 
Strubes said:
I haven't heard anything good about Vista myself.

here is one thing, Code geass vista theme = Epic win

i prefer vista than XP because i feel is more organized and easier to handle.
 
Hinesmdc said:
What's the difference between 32 bit Vista and 64 bit Vista? I got the 32 bit one for Christmas.

Think of it this way, it's like adding more lanes onto a highway. A 64 bit OS allows more to be done at the same time given the program you're running is 64 bit as well. Running 32 bit programs in a 64 bit OS will yield no speed increase. The only reason to move to 64 bit right now would be if you had 64 bit programs you wanted to run or if you wanted to run more than 3.25GiB of memory.

Strubes said:
I haven't heard anything good about Vista myself.

It all depends on the person you ask. If you're trying to install Vista on an older machine they will have all sorts of issues because of driver incompatibilities. Also, people that don't have any patients that run some off the wall software might have to tweak them to get them to work, I did, and it was not a big deal. Now the last group are people running old software. Some works and some doesn't. All in all Vista is a good OS but 7 will be even better. If you're thinking about buying an OS, wait for 7 to come out. It's being dubbed Vista SE.
 
I'll keep that in mind. Thanks for clearing that up Polygon. I'm not looking at buying a new computer for a couple years anyways, so I'll just wait for that.
 
I've been using 64-bit operating systems since right around when the 64-bit edition of Windows XP was released. XP seemed to have a bunch of driver issues initially, but they were sorted out as time passed by and hardware manufacturers realized more people were using the software (and, thus, started making drivers). I also have been using 64-bit Vista since well before Beta 1 was released, and that was pretty good with compatibility as well. I then moved to 64-bit Windows 7 ever since the builds were available, and again I'm fully impressed.

I've only had a few random compatibility issues I couldn't easily work my way around (one of which was a 16-bit console application given to us by a professor as an example for our assignment, but a quick install of DOSBox fixed that issue; another is that Alcohol 52/120% and DAEMON Tools don't yet work in 64-bit Windows 7 due to the wraparound SCSI driver not yet supporting the new operating system, but PowerISO achieves the same effect) but overall have loved using these operating systems. Anything not natively 64-bit runs just as fast as in 32-bit Windows, and 64-bit applications are accelerated for extra performance.

The reason you haven't heard anything about Vista is because most people have no idea what they're talking about (no offense to anyone here). When it first came out, the internet exploded with stories about how it ran horribly, or took up too much RAM, or whatever other excuse you've probably heard. That's because XP was able to run on antiquated hardware and be slimmed down even more to the point that it could practically run on a wristwatch. With modern hardware, Vista runs equivalent to or better than XP, and Windows 7 seems to run even better than that. Vista uses RAM efficiently, with a process called SuperFetch that loads the most commonly used programs into RAM to accelerate loading them when the time comes to do so. It only takes a nanosecond or two to clear the RAM for whatever needs it, such as your favorite game, so it's not degrading to performance at all.

or if you wanted to run more than 3.25GiB of memory.
Not entirely true, but close. 32-bit operating systems can only access a total of 4GB of RAM, which includes the system RAM, VRAM on graphics cards, cache in hard drives, XRAM on sound cards, etc. So once you calculate how much RAM is taken up by other things (GPU, sound card, etc.) you get the total amount of system RAM you're able to access. Processors from the Pentium Pro onward allow for PAE, or physical address extension, which sets some extra bits to allow for a total of 64GB RAM, but consumer versions of Windows disallow this for driver compatibility issues.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top