No more 64-bit in the future

***edit***
Looks like I was right when I thought Dell was either having issues with their 64-bit links or changing their site. We should see it back up within a few days. Also, Ubuntu is down for these changes as well.
*********

It seems that there has been enough complaining about moving to 64-bit that the technology world is officially moving backwards now. There's so much demand for 32-bit that the demand to move to 16-bit is now on the horizon. I'm not going to justify how silly that is.

http://neowin.net/news/main/07/10/24/dell-no-longer-supports-vista-x64and-other-rants

I have posted enough benchmarks in the past to show 64-bit systems performing at near double the speed of the side running 32-bit while others post benchmarks on 64-bit systems that tests the 32-bit side and say that my benchmarks are wrong, not applicable, or better yet, designed to test the 64-bit side.

Anyhow, this will only last until Microsoft forces 64-bit moving in the way of Macintosh, totally killing support for any legacy programs. That means software and games will run on only one generational system, much like console systems.

 

x64 has always been a pain with resource hogging 32bit shells. Come one there are no 64bit apps, 32bit apps run slower due to the shell. What do you expect? Just because your 32bit processor support EMT64 extensions, doesn't make it some kind of supahcomputah..... If you still believe in x64 then just grab a Linux distro (no real world apps there either though)...

 

Just like above.

My 32-bit apps do in fact run faster on my 64-bit processor because the GUI is run through 64-bit drivers. 3D games run around 2-5% better over 32-bit vista and XP. 2D benchmarks run around 75-90% faster, while 2D games run at the same speed because they are already running at max fps. 2D game benchmarks show 75-90% faster. All RAM Functions (read and write, small and large) run ~30-50% faster. Disk write runs about 5-10% faster, read runs ~25% faster, random seek RW run around 2% faster. Programming, encoding, encrypting, compressing, expanding, all runs from 75%-150% (yes 150%) faster.

For those of you who care to do your own benchmarks and your own work may check out one of my benchmark sets to show you that what I say is true:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=158277

 

Ehmmm, i happen to be an MSDN subscriber, where i have access to all versions of Vista. I've done extensive (beta)testing of both Vista X64 and x86

x64 is slower period! look at your system resources, even when the system is idle, about 3x as high....
All real world apps like Office 2007 are slower on x64. the x64 extensions in WMP11 and MCE even run x64, TS and VC1 with higher utilisation.
tried to play Farcy on x64: allmost made me cry..... pathetic game performance, wasn't even able to play without hickups because of emulation.
So don't try to sell me pooh.....

 

Thats stupid... So when somone wants 4gb of ram which is much more common now, then they cant utilise all of ti because were moving "back" to 32 bit...

I dont see where it says 16 bit , but that aint gonna happen so...

Driver support for 64 bit need to be brought back up again then... Last time i chcked it was still all there.

 

Grown-up applications, not kiddy stuff like games, run faster on 64-bit.

Visual effects houses use 64-bit 3D rendering because it's faster and handles bigger scenes (you wouldn't get Battlestar Galactica without LightWave on Win64 'cuz the Galactica model kills Win32). Research laboratories use 64-bit for running scientific code because it's faster and handles more data (you think modeling climate change is a walk in the park?)

 

That's something different: x64 allows you to scale when you need to go above and beyond (which non of us do), but when doing "normal" day to day applications in a "like for like" x64 is slower in doing the same stuff as x86 with 32bit apps......

 

I am sure x64 support will be resumed at some point in the future & Microsoft will force people to use x64 before they drop the technology (they haven't spent $ millions on creating a x64 version of Vista for it to be unsupported).

I would also like to say that the only drivers my x64 Ultimate Installation needed were not even from the Dell site! everything else installed perfectly from the x64 disc, so x64 drivers will continue to be supported, prehaps not by Dell, but when you don't need their drivers all the time anyway who cares?

EDIT

Sorry you do need to AHCI x64 drivers from Dell but that's all I can think of.

 

M4300 still has 64bit driver listed there.

 

Well, they'll have to move to 64-bit if they ever want to run more than 3GB of RAM

I just don't get why MS didn't make Vista 64-bit only, forcing hardware and software developers to create 64-bit drivers and apps. This would quickly turn the tables on 32-bit vs. 64-bit.

 

64Bit Slower? Ok Raphie...my suggestion is to stop throwing your beliefs in front of you and see for yourself. X64 runs, on everyday operations, at about a 10-15% boost from normal X32 whether you are using 32Bit software or not. Its been documented over and over and over here.

In fact, perhaps you might want to check for yourself. You are the absolute first person to claim that it runs slower that I can find, contrary to many X64 users that have enjoyed the trip and now swear by 64Bit because of performance and reliability.

And your a MSDN subscriber? Congrats bretheren!!! Can you elaborate on what exact testing you have done because Ide like to compare notes.

In closing, it seems like you jumped the start line a bit quick on this one. You won't last here throwing opinions without substance that so many have already sat for months and months and proven totally wrong. My suggestion for now is to backup and read up on the topic before jumping in by saying your game doesn't work so it must be slower.

Sorry to be so blatant but, you get what you give big guy.

EDIT: And for the rest. Im sure glad I got Vista Ult now. My Complete PC Backup is tucked away for whenever I need to reinstall my 64Bit system at its best again, if ever.

 

Agreed 100%!

I for one am one of those users who will never be going back to 32 bit... I installed 64bit "just to see" as I saw all the negative press and figured I'd be back on 32bit before the night was out. To the contrary it runs sweet and performs just as sweetly so I'm not moving!

If the neowin link to MS hardware logo requirements website is right MS should be suing Dell and revoking their Logo privileges to get 64bit back on track. As without proper driver support software makers will neglect movign to 64bit...

Also, why are they shipping the 1520 with 4GB of RAM if they won't support 64bit on it? I think that is a case for a class action against Dell for selling you something you have no power of using...

 

I use 64 bit Gentoo and it works great. I have also noticed D2X-XL run significantly faster when compiled for 64 bits.

No, I just used the kernel's built in AHCI drivers and they work fine.

 

I have not seen any official press to say that Dell is moving away from 64-bit, I've seen them drop the 64-bit links once and bring them back. I'm going to keep my fingers crossed, though most of the drivers I can find directly from the hardware component manufacturer's sites.

Thanks for all your support guys, especially Flamenko who has struggled with me getting our m1330's up and running completely in 64-bit!

 

Dell sucks. It's simply true by default. But also being someone using his head I can also say that Dell doesn't have it's own specific chip to require Dell drivers. All the drivers that Dell has on their page is from other players like Intel, Broadcom, nVidia, Realtek, ATi and others, so get your facts straight. You'll just have to look by yourself to find the newest drivers. You have to be stupid to install a stock video driver from Dell. If you're smart you use something from a real website, like TRU or LaptopVideo2Go.
That **** being said, time to move to the real discussion: x64.
I like x64 better because I want my hardware running at it's best. Old technology can't compare to new technology (let's face it, x86 is at least 15 years old on Windows). I believe that some reviews don't favor x64 because of old hardware which is now unavailable for purchase and blame Microsoft instead of the hardware manufacturer for not making drivers. My computer is 4 years old. I have yet to have a single piece of hardware not working because driver support. The only company that made my transition to x64 delayed was HP. I hate the fact that they force users to upgrade their printers just to get x64 drivers. It's simply stupid. Thankfully Microsoft included the drivers. Even my 5 year old NIC has x64 drivers.
I don't see why people ask about compatibility issues. I believe there are issues only with old software that requires kernel hooking and stuff like that, which isn't something any software would need. Name me a program (a new one) or a new piece of hardware that doesn't work/doesn't have drivers for x64 Windows. Don't name old piece of software, antiviruses, firewalls and such because these programs have had problems even with the transition from XP SP1 to SP2.

 

Ummmm.... Fade to Black... Every notebook manufacturer out there uses drivers supported AND SUPPLIED by the hardware manufacturer themselves. Can you tell me any that have a specific chip and then relate what software they use for a ...say UPEK Fingerprint Reader?

 

I don't know the manufacturer, but is this the driver?

 

NO what I was trying to say is that , maybe you didnt get out quite what you wanted to say.

You faulted Dell for not having their own specific drivers when, I dont believe, no other manufacturer has their own specific drivers themselves.

They are all based on the original software supplied by the hardware manufacturer. All notebook manufacturers do the same thing.

There is a question of keeping up with the drivers but I dont think Dell can be centered out for doing the exact same as every other manufacturer.

 

another for x64 here, installed it after removing x86 and never looked back. I also fail to see how Dell can single handly stop Intel, AmD and Microsoft from developing x64 products & technologies so this attention grabbing thread title isn't IMO neccessary.

 

I never said that. All I said is that Dell doesn't have it's own chips to require Dell drivers, so people can look for drivers somewhere else. Sorry for the confusion.

 

Just to change the topic slightly, what is driver support like for XP Pro 64bit? Better or worse than vista?

 

I believe it's about the same. I've used Windows XP x64, Windows Server 2003 SP1 x64, Windows Server 2003 SP2 x64, Windows Vista Business x64 and Windows Vista Ultimate x64 and I believe that the driver support is about the same, but don't count the drivers Microsoft gives you. Driver support coming from Microsoft is better for Vista than XP.

 

Yeah, so I don't see the driver issues. AHCI drivers are made by Intel and I believe that Intel has them on their site. So what does the CPU's idle state have to do with the test? I tested x86 and x64 and the difference before and after and I can only say that x64 is faster and nicer and better build than the x86 version, which is nothing more than an end of life.

 

Ok, I seem to be alone here
But no probs, let everybody just enjoy what he/she likes best

 

Huh?

ACHI drivers for 64bit are available from Intel and directly on the Dell Driver DVD... So I'm not sure why you're making its seem as if ACHI is a 32bit only thing...

I don't see any performance depredation in HL2 on Vista 32bit over Vista 64bit... The performance is so high already that I'm not sure how large the gains are without empirical testing, but there is no noticeable loss.

What performance hit are you seeing in Office? I run Office 2007 on my box... Faster than it was on Vista 32 and from what I'm told 2007 is more of a beast than 2003...

Have you actually ran Vista 64? Or are you just spewing F.U.D.?

 

Raphie you're not alone. I have seen such reports from users from various forums.

 

Raphie...

One needs to know when its time to take a bow and politely exit.

We have neen here working on creating the perfect 64 Bit environment for months. Its constituted finding drivers, trying drivers from other than Dell to see if they work (i.e IBM FPR), fine tuning things such as AHCI, testing several angles of the system to ensure it is working properly and then finally comparisons by several.

This site, thanks to many, is probably the only where the common computer user and grab an article and have his 64 bit vista system running perfectly within days. If there are problems, there is support.

To this day, we have found all native 64Bit driver and software for all but two things which are Soundblaster Audigy and the full ability of the fingerprint reader to access internet and folders that are secured.

You may have had some bad luck with 64bit but, your a Canadians Fan in Maple Leaf Gardens on this one. (a truly Canadian relationship here)

 

Maybe you're right and i just had a bad induvidual experience and should give it another go. so on the XPS-M1330 the only thing that doesn't work is the Fingerprint scanner?

 

It works for logon but thats it at the present time.

Look up Trebuins article and follow it. We are still here to help you out.

 

Raphie you seem to be reasonable. That's nice.
Also, please remember to install the patches Microsoft released concerning laptops (you can find some threads here) and performance. Maybe it will help you more than you think.

 

Vista 64-bit support is far better than XP 64-bit support, especially when you're talking about newly released graphics drivers. XP 64-bit was just too late to the table with Vista just around the corner and so noone is really using it that much in comparison. I built a new desktop a few months ago that I was running with XP 64-bit on it and it seemed to run pretty well for me. XP 64-bit is based on Windows Server 2003 so it's a little more stable of an OS actually than the 32-bit version. If i was going to run 64-bit now though I'd stick with Vista.

 

Does anyone know if there are 64-bit drivers that will work with the video cards in the M1730? (Note that it is SLI.) I've been meaning to try out Vista 64-bit, especially after reading the thread on the M1330 & 64-bit.

 

Bull****...why not? I'm sure there are drivers. The same ones that work for Vista x86 work in Vista x64 (of course, I was meaning the number, not the same driver; just get the x64 version).

 

more on the M1730, im seriously debating x64
but after all the bad press im a bit frightened to put my monsters life on the line.......
but i want it too be functional
also i heard itunes wont run x64...is that true?

 

x64 is the creme of the creme so to speak, so it woun't ruin your monster. This will help you run iTunes in x64. I'm not sure that it doesn't work. I've heard that the iPhone doesn't work though. Too bad for Apple.

 

Yeah I'm also planning on trying x64 like Lucidburner on my m1730, but flamenko, you mentioned that Sounblaster Audigy isn't supported? My m1730 has Soundblaster Audigy HD. Does that mean I should stay of the x64 for a while?

 

Isn't that the software upgrade or so?

 

There are sound drivers supported so your sound will work fine however, its the Audigy specifically that will not work. The software (Audigy) is not supported; hardware is.

And I have to suggest something else. If you have any drivers or X64 thoughts (ie IPOD drivers), go to Trebuins X64 guide here

Im surprised people haven't repped the heck out of that thread because he did an immense amount of work putting it together. He succeeded in doing what not many others had previously and it was decent being a part of it.

 

Exchange only runs on 64bits in production mode.

When mainstream software move to 64 bits, you will see the real benefits, but first, make sure you system has at least 2GB of RAM. Memory requirement will be higher because of internal fragmentation.

 

so, heres the deal, dx10 cards, x64, vista ultimate, whats the crash rate like?

 

Same as with x86 .

 

TY All, i really wann use x64, does it enhance the interface at all?

 

Most of the x86->x64 improvements are in the background services and capabilities of the machines. Vista32 and Vista64 look alike, and are pretty much identical from my experience.

 

Sounds really good. I think I'll give it a shot, and hopefully I'll take to keeping it

 

My advise is to make sure you locate all the drivers before you go whipping that disk in.

 

Oh yeah, I definantly will!

 

And that's where you'd be wrong. Games are not the only reason why people buy computers these days.

 

We can ease up on Raphie a bit. Not only did he concede a few things but hes interested in trying things out once again to see if it works.

 

Will x64 do better than x86 on Pinnacle Studio 11 rendering, or does x32 have the advantage? This is on an M1330 with 4 GB of RAM.