Vista 64-bit or XP 32-bit on a 4 gb RAM laptop

Hi all - excuse me for reasking what I'm sure has been asked before. I got a new laptop (PowerPro 12:16 from Power Power Notebooks) and I installed Vista 64-bit on it. The laptop is 2.53 ghz and has 4 GB SDRAM. Everything seems nice and fast, etc. etc., but I was just wondering if it may be even faster to just use Windows XP 32-bit which I can buy cheaply.

I know that to use the full 4 gb I need a 64-bit desktop, but also that Vista is a RAM hog... RAM-wise, would I actually get more out of a 32-bit XP than a 64-bit Vista?

I know there's not a simple relationship between RAM and speed, or anything, and I excuse my fuzziness on all these computer related topics. But please share your views. (Note: I don particularly hate Vista although in general I like XP more. But I can live with either; I just want to know if it may actually be better RAM-wise to use the 32-bit XP)

 

Keep Vista.
Vista uses more memory but that's also due to it loading more items into memory for faster access. What's the point of buying so much ram if it's not being used?

 

Goofball writes well... Vista is a much better resource manager. It actually frees up the RAM it can take up when you need it. Free RAM is wasted RAM.

Apart from that it is stabler, safer, easier to use, much more intelligent and self-optimizing. XP is old and obsolete and installing it in modern computers is a complete waste.

 

Thanks so much.

Any countervailing views?

 

Depending on the software you use, you may not want an operating system to be taxing the resources that can be used for the software.

There is also the issue of harddrive space between XP (750 MB) & Vista (15 GB).

I use the smallest harddrive possible for my operating system & programs, store all my files on a bigger drive.

 

You're comparing almost best case scenario of XP install vs almost worst case scenario of Vista. XP isn't 750MB unless you run nlite to remove the install from putting alot of unneeded components on. And 15GB Vista is with page file also. XP would be almost no page file at 750MB.

 

The only reason to leave _Vista 64-bit would be because of serious incompatibility issues with some old 32-bit apps you need to run, in which case you'd be best served by dropping to 32-bit _Vista instead of XP - the only real reason to prefer XP over _Vista in this (or any other) situation is cost - if you must shift to a 32-bit OS (and you don't want to go to a linux variant), and you'll have to pay for a new license for whatever new 32-bit OS you get, then go with the least expensive; otherwise, go with _Vista 32-bit.


EDIT: re-read the OP, and felt compelled to add this: the rumors that _Vista is a RAM-hog is a slander, largely based on a misunderstanding of what the superfetch functionality in _Vista is doing. _Vista does use more RAM than XP to run its own internal processes; however, that doesn't take so much RAM as to be characterized as a RAM-hog. However, unlike XP, _Vista also makes much, much better use of what would otherwise be idle, unused RAM by prepopulating it with code and data that, based on its adaptive algorithms, you are most likely to be using next. As a result, it will appear that _Vista has filled up a lot more RAM than XP has, but it's a mistake to assume that that additional RAM has been allocated to _Vista's own uses - that RAM has for the most part been put at your disposal even more effectively than in XP because it's already prepopulated with the stuff you're most likely to be using next. If, however, superfetch gets it wrong, or you just change your usage habits, that prepopulated RAM will be turned over to whatever other app you fire up next, quicker than you can say "Gimme my RAM back!"

 

I have not seen any 32bit programs that cannot be run on Vista64.

 

Hard disk space requirements for Windows XP Service Pack 3

System requirements for Windows Vista

 

A lot of CAD / CAM programs are now 32-bit or 64-bit specific only.

This means you cannot install a 32-bit version of AutoCAD on a 64-bit operating system.

Running CAD / CAM programs on a virtual machine is not a good option either due to the lack of drivers optimized for CAD / CAM on the virtual machine.