32bit laptop owners to get treated like a third world country

I don't think 64 bit will be a big deal until atleast the end of 07 at the earliest. No body seems to the rushing to get 64 bit stuff out there. But I think mostly because... well. How many people are actually going to run out and buy Vista, stand in line outside of Office Max, like it's Barnes & Noble during when the final Harry Potter book is released? The people who truly care about 64bit are already using Linux.

 

Yes, like i said in this post before, or another one, i think the market will wait for the intel´s 64 bit for notebooks before pushing towards it.

I totally agree to you methamorphical.

In my case, as i only plan to change it in 4 or 5 years, i am probably going for an 64 bit. Maybe if MSi can release a dual core turion by august, i will go for it.

 

I have the strangest feeling I'll end up jumping ship and going to MAC if some of the stuff I've read about Vista proves to be true.

Maybe it's time for a poll on who's going to actually go out and buy Vista. Stop me if it's been done before. I'm sure it has and my memories broken. But... yeah. x.X;;;

 

But . . there seems to be more than that.

I never said there were any negatives to getting one. You have a ton more choices with a perfectly good '32-bit' laptop.

These terms, 32- and 64-bit, are irrelevant to most people , and most will never see the benefit.

Also, most people will be getting a new computer before '64-bit' is necessary.

If you find a 64-bit laptop that suits your needs, then great! go for it. But, when I bought my laptop, and even today, a 32-bit laptop offered more than a 64-bit by a good amount.

 

It depends what your uses are. If you get a dual-core processor now (Core Duo) and realize a wealth of performance gains if your software is geared towards multiple cores (as many video editing, image editing, and 3-d rendering programs are). Then, when 64-bit computing has matured and the entire industry has caught up to it, you will be ready to upgrade. By that time, both Intel and AMD (presumably) will have processors out that are both 64-bit AND have multiple cores.

That appears to be the prudent decision to me.

 

O.K. - as of now, 64-bit technology should not influence the notebook you buy unless you need it now - if you so happen to find a 64-bit notebook that suits your needs, great for you! However, I believe that it will take at least 4-6 years before 64-bit technology becomes mainstream, so buying for the future now isn't a good idea, especially if it's at the expense of now (I really doubt you want to take your 4-year old Turion, Athlon, or P4 and have it try running all of the software out then). Currently, Core Duo offers much more than any Turion/Athlon/P4 CPU out there in terms of performance.

 

this troll is still around?

 

Yes i agree that the intel offer better performance, but i am still worried about the future proof thing.

I need a laptop to satay with it for 4-5 years, so i am kinda thinking about it.

And i choose 64 (right now, maybe i change my mind in agust) cause i expect to run some prograns in 2009-2010. I know it won´t be the best thing ever, specially for games, but if i can have a minimun playbility and hability to run office prograns, it would be great for me!!!

I really doubt the 32 bits would run everything i want that time, specially games...

And i think it would be harder to sell my 32 notebook instead of a 64bit one in 2010 trough ebay, or at least the price would fall even more. Just a guess...

 

I predict 64-bit technology won't overrun 32-bit for at least 4 years after its release (Vista 64-bit is actually supposed to be released sometime *next* year). If you don't need a notebook now, then by all means wait - better technology in the future. However, if you do need a notebook now, Core Duo seems the best way to go.

 

i don´t need a very powerfull cpu, just a strong gpu (x1600) and good ram would be suitable for me.

And as stated before i am deeeply hoping that msi will release the first dual turion notebook by june/july with ddr2 and the other improvements.

So i think i would go for a 64 bit... (mult-task, battery life, etc... is not very important)

 

The end.

I hope...:/

hahaha

 

blah blah blah, I'm going to delete what I said in hopes of stopping this debate

awww dang... already quoted? oh well at least it didn't include the second comment

 

Definitely. There is no contest in the desktop platform UNLESS someone is building a workstation that is geared solely toward video editing.

 

Come on these debates are funny

 

If you're that concerned, just go with the Turion. I'm sure you will not be disappointed, especially if you don't need a powerful processor to begin with.

 

Yes, they're fine as long as they are unbiased. (Not saying you are, don't worry hahaha)

 

LOL qwester, I didn't think you had it in you, because usually you're so proper.



Seriously disillusioned he/she is. They will eventually phase out 32-bit systems, but we are WAY too early into 64-bit systems for this to happen at Vista's release.

As others have said the market is full of 32-bit systems, NO WAY would a company like Microsoft leave them out, as it is disadvantageous for them.

Even if they do leave us 32-bit users out in the dust, would we really be at a disadvantage? What can you do with a 64-bit OS that a 32-bit OS can't do? Teleport you to your destination or something? Come on now, grow up.

I could do everything I can now on my old Pentium 2 233mhz computer or my Pentium 3 733mhz computer, just that everything looks nicer now with a colorful GUI and everything is slightly faster.

I say slightly faster because my P3 733mhz was blazingly fast. P3 architecture was better than P4, only problem with P3 architecture was the temperature limitations, so they couldn't get the speeds higher than, what was it 1.0ghz? Mhz for mhz, P3's are faster than P4's.

These discussions about 32-bit vs 64-bit seem to keep being brought up by uninformed youth who like to brag about a new TOY they have received from Santa.

Sorry for being so harsh, but holy crap I'm sick of this talk about 64-bit doubling this and doubling that, blah blah blah. It just certainly isn't true, so keep your mouth shut because your daddy's Ferrari can't fly okay? Okay~!



Cheers,
Mike

 

He doesn't even own a 64-bit processor, so far as I can tell...yet.

EDIT: Added two periods and a word.

 

I don´t think this is the same discussion as p3 / p4. It´s not a mere discussion about the performance improvement. I might be wrong, but i don´t think that 64bit programs will run in 32 bits. Maybe an emulator? i don´t know, i am not an expert for that.

You didn´t had compatibility problens in the p3/p4 in software terns...

I didn´t say that the marketis full of the 32 bits...i said the market sees it as a profit oportunity. And it will move towards that, no doubt about it.. The stock holders demand it.

It´s a economical issue, not an tecnical one.


UPDATE: i don´t have a 64 bit, only 32, but as it is economical issue, i think i can talk about it...

 

I'm not really sure what you're getting at, but 32-bit versions of programs are going to be available for some time now.

 

Okay I've read most of the thread and sorry to get all roudy, but I can't help it.

64bit, ARE YOU ON CRACK?

Everything you are saying is utter BS except for the fact that yes 64-bit processing will be faster, blah blah blah, but this is like comparing two cars and saying one is crap because it doesn't have a specific programmable ECU in it for FUTURE PROOFING.

Listen here crackhead, do you know the actual performance gains from going to 64-bit from 32-bit? DO YOU DO YOU DO YOU? DO YOU have vista and have all those awesome 64-bit programs? YOU WILL NOT NOTICE A FREAKIN' THING~!!!!!!!

Sure run your benchmarks and programs that TELL you and compute differences in seconds, blah blah blah, but will YOU notice a difference? You will say you do when you get your system setup, but helloooooooo, you will notice those kind of differences by installing a fresh copy of windows and/or defragging your computer~!!!!!!

Making such comments like such and such sucks because of this and that is just utterly stupid. Real life differences in computing performance and processing is so small these days it's just a matter of personal preference and cost of certain products.

Now I'm going to stoop to your level and bet you're one of those gaming freaks who don't know squat and gloat about a huge 200point jump in 3dmark (any version) and say it's because of this and that and this.

Remember those are ARTICLES you are reading, not official statements or reports from these companies. Don't come onto public forums and voice your crap as if you had world renowned credibility.

Sure there are lots of benefits to 64-bit processing, but we're not at 64-bit processing yet, as in, not every system requires 64-bit capabilities. 32-bit processing does not "SUCK" because it's not 64-bit. Do you even know what the move from 32-bit to 64-bit entails? Nothing more than the processor being capable of more calculations and having more instruction sets.

So that's like MMX in the past and ISSE2 and all that. Were they FUTURE PROOFING our computers? NOOOOOOO, just another feature to help improve computing speeds and such.

To those who have said 64-bit processing will double your performance are on crack. Is it because 32x2 = 64? Oooooh you can add.

Sorry for being psychotic for a second moderators, but I couldn't help myself. These kinds of people tick me off to the extreme. Throwing in meaningless comments and facts just for the sake of argument. BLAH

Cheers,
Mike

 

yes i never said diferently i just think that in 3 years you wont be able to play all games in a 32 bits.

 

My two questions.

My current computer does everything I need it to, it runs my video editing software, it runs my photo editing software, it runs office and IE,

My question to 64-Bit is what does he expect to come out that will force me to upgrade? Up until now every computer I've had would not run some piece of software (main two are video editing and photo editing as they are fairly intense processes), now that my computer runs everything I don't see any reason to upgrade, Microsoft will still support XP for many years to come (at least 4 or 5) by which time I would guess my laptop might have died anyway.

 

Out of interest Iskander, can you run all games now? The major component I've always found of gaming is the graphics card, and if you could get a quad 64-bit processor right now, I guarantee in three years you STILL wouldn't be able to run the latest games because the graphics card isn't upto it (at least if the current trend for graphics cards is anything to go by).

 

Shampoo, please don´t confuse me with 64-bit guy... i never said it will double anything... I even said it would get close not equal!!!

My point is ECONOMICAL, not TECHNICAL...

 

Yes...Arla... 7 posts ago i said i just care about video card right now... for game the dual core and the 64/32 bit doens´t matter that much

 

Arla, nothing will force you to upgrade until your computer dies or your current operating system is just obsolete, as in not supported by anybody and you can't share files with anyone or something like that.

You are fine.

Iskander why do you believe in 3 years, yes 3 years, we won't be able to play 32-bit games? Why 3 years? Are you in touch with all those companies who are in the process of developing new technologies? It's just a guess right? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight a guess, like guessing the world is coming to an end in the next few years.

You're guessing 3 years is based on NOTHING. Even established online review sites within inside news can't predict things, so how can you?

Remember back in the 486 days going to pentiums and onto P2's to P3's and how they kept saying in magazines and online forums that if you upgrade to the latest P3 533mhz you will be fine for many years to come and so on? Well they were all completely wrong. If you look at charts that reflect the growth of current technology and its progress you will see it's exponential. Things keep changing, even though they say we're at a stand still because of technologies of transistor sizes, manufacturing limits of cpus, blah blah, but somehow they always find a way. Sure we will hit a wall sooner or later, but you can't take a shot in the dark and say 3 years man.

We're also talking about 64-bit in general not GAMING, as I thought you were one.

Most of these kinds of people are GAMERS people, gamers, who know nothing. This is the new generation of the "My SNES is better than your Sega Genesis." kids.

Rawrrrrrrrrrr~!

Man I hope I dont get banned for all this heated discussion.

 

ARLA can you run HALO 64 bit only in the dual core 32 bits????

 

I know you're not the 64bit guy, but you seem to be equally misinformed.

 

AGAIN... DID i say that?????? nooo i said SOME games..........

DUde you really should read exactly what i say... you are making big compreension mistakes....

UPDATE: I am using gamming as an example...

 

He's not as misinformed. He's just assuming that programs and games will start to wane from the 32-bit world in a few years and, I assume, is guessing at the number of years in which this will happen. Am I correct, Isk?

 

kinda... and its based on economical issues not technical...

like i said before my 486 with win 3.11 was tottally suitable for my text typing...

 

Right.

But what exactly is the economical issue?

If you go with a 32-bit computer now, you will be fine with it for at least 4-5 years and, by that time, you will want to upgrade before you use the newest software, even if they were 32-bit.

 

yes, my 486 is totaly fine for typing text, i used it, did many good works.

In fact i think that word 2.0 was great!!!

 

I am quoting my post in the 3rd page:

" I really think that the corporative world is going to do a big push to the 64bit universe, for the pure reason of making profit, as the companies can resell all their products again. Do you think companies are going to stay with the same products?

Now, think about microsoft, why do i need to buy a new office version? the one I have is good, i don´t need to buy a new one just because it has a new small feature that almost noone will ever notice.

So I think that the market and Microsoft are going to push all the consumers to adopt the new system as it is a big chance for profit."

And the article says in one part that microsoft is going to pressure the 64 bit into mainstream.

Not that you can´t use a 32 bits then, but.... you won´t be able to reach everything, and i still want to have this freadom to choose."

This is not everything, i posted more in other threads.

 

I'll say this one more time...and then I'm not posting in any more of this troll's threads.

No one's abandoning 32 bit software. I don't care how much faster 64bit software will be...most end users out there have 32 bit computers and that will dominate the market for at least 2-3 more years, minimum. It will be that long before the majority of systems in the North American consumer market(just North America....cause other markets don't transition as quickly typically for economical reasons) are 64 bit. Due to the way a lot of users work...if the software producer releases a title in 64bit only...most businesses and home users will NOT run out and buy a new 64 bit computer just to run the new title, unless they are in a position that requires it. Businesses will continue to use the older version of the software if it still fulfills their needs. Home users will do the same, or choose an alternate software vendor.

No software company can afford to alienate the majority of 32bit users out there.

I'm not anti-64 bit processing...but right now there's not a tremendous benefit to it. There will be in the future...but in some instances, some computers that are 32bit are better choices for some people than some of the 64bit options.

If people can't understand this...then they're never going to.

 

Sure not! I agree with you tullnd.

But i honestly can´t say that no one should go for 64 bit.

Of course they will still be around for quit some time. But you have to agree that if someone, like me and many others in this forum, who don´t plan/can change a laptop earlier than 4-5 years, and LIKE to have some actual stuff, like games, graphical programs as option by that time, EVEN if not at full capability, you have to at least think... that 64 bit should be interesting...

Like i said, in 4 years there will still be many 32 bits around, both hardware and software. but it would value less (my opnion) if you wnat sell it on ebay, and it will not be able to play all the programs around.

So i am going for 64 as soon as i can. My father and sister have 32 bit ones, they are great and will probably be around in 4 years, but they are just for text typing, printing, and web surfing.

For that, a P3 - 500mhz (in a laptop) with linux does pretty well today. Remeber the MIt and Brazil´s goverment are going to release one like that by the end of this year.

And the guys from MIT (teachers and researchs) keep saying that for that you can use a p3 500mhz.

It will cost U$ 100.00!

 

True...but most people who need/want the most powerful systems, will purchase a new one by the time 64bit emerges as truly beneficial(beyond just a handful of applications for the consumer market like now). Most people I know who task a laptop won't use it for much beyond 3 years.

My last computer as built in late 1999 and I used it until October of 2005. I am even a former IT person, who spent years building computers with the latest and greatest. Then I got sick of them. But I know my length of ownership was much longer than is usual.

 

this thread isn't closed yet? wtf mate?

i think it might be time for a poll who thinks 64bit's threads are completely irrelevent! yay!!!!!!!!!!!

ばか！！！！！！！！！！！

maybe you shouldn't ban 64bit, just put a disclaimer on all of his posts ^_^

Warning!-The information posted here is most likely misinterpretated or not logical. Please request a second opinion.

 

One thing that I haven't seen mentioned much is while 64 bit capable processors are out today, how exactly are they going to compare with 64 bit processors 2-3 years from now.

Clock speed, cache sizes, # of cores, etc is going to vastly change. 64bit capable is only one part of the equation.

Think of it this way, remember those first of the line 32bit CPU's when 16 bit was still king? Do you think ANY of those today are even worth a ****? No, they are incredibly slow by today's standards. Just because they might have an extra capability, doesn't mean they are faster at a given task, or even in the same ballpark as other processors.

 

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/02/10/ms_halo_2_windows_vista/

Halo2 is going to be released for WINDOWS VISTA only. There is no mention of whether it will be 32 bit or 64 bit and since all versions of vista will come in 32 bit it is safe to assume that halo2 will also be released in 32 bit. The point is, games will not be released in 64 bit only versions for many years to come. Software companies make games because they want people to buy and play them; companies are very much aware that if consumers don't own a computer fast enough to play their games then they won't buy them.

Doom 3 recommends the user have a 2.0 ghz processor. Keep in mind that this is geared towards desktop users and that the average desktop processor today runs at around 3 ghz. Even the newest games don't demand the users to have the newest technology since no one would be able to play/buy the game if that were true.

Bottom line, games will be released in 32 bit for far after the graphics card dies in the laptop that you buy today.

 

I have a PentiumM(Compaq V4000,725A Dothan 1.6ghz, Sonoma chipset,newer just 2 months ) and AMD 64 Laptop(Compaq R3000,1.8ghz,Nvidia chipset, 1yr old) performance comparison AMD may be a bit faster but i really cant use the full potential of this CPU cause there's no freaking drivers for my AMD Laptop. 2 or 3 yrs from now I'll end up just buying a newer laptop for the future applications (Vista etc...) but for current generation software a Pentium M with a good amount of memory is perfectly suited for the next 2 or 3 yrs. Future proofing for me is not that important we all have our product cycle where we buy new gadgets every 2 or 3yrs. But hey 64bit cpu is here..buy it or ignore it..its a user preference.

For me this debate is like a debate 5 yrs ago when running a 386 with Windows 3.1 and a 486 running DOS hehhehe..you have the best and newest cpu but you cant use its full potential if you dont have the correct drivers.

 

I might add that when the CPU's reach the GHZ mark there's very few application that really need those extra GHZ beyond 1GHZ much less 64bit. Games only need a fast GPU so that leaves scientific application that need 64bit application and super fast processing beyong 1GHZ. To tell you all the truth going to 64bit is just a way for lazy programmers to speed up their programs. Please dont quote me with those score's from 3dmark or other performance checkers, cause they dont really mean much on everyday usage.
I like slow cpu coz i have more time with my coffee break in between compilation hehehehe..just joking...

 

LOL circa86

dietcokefiend I totally agree with you. Going with what he says you put him down.

I am done with this thread.

CLOSE IT PLEASE...isn't this the SECOND one that this 64bit has created? with the same title?

 

Closed by popular request.