Which Vista, 32-bit or 64-bit

Which version of Windows Vista Ultimate is better for gaming, multimedia, and word processing (I do know that MS word is effected very little by OS). I have been told that 32-bit Vista is better for gaming, but also that the 64-bit version give better processing and RAM performance. Should I use the 32-bit version for now, and then upgrade to 64-bit when it becomes more useful, or is it already better? What is the truth in all this?

Any advice is much appreciated, thank you.

 

The main reason people are upgrading to 64bit is if they want to use more than 3gb of memory, there are other features in the 64bit version, but to most people, it wouldn't make a difference. 32bit offers better compatibility with older software and hardware.

Basically, if you aren't using over 3gb of memory, stick with 32bit.

Greg

 

First, I have 4GB or RAM, second, is 32-bit really a better OS for gaming, or is it just claimed to be because of better driver compatibility than 64-bit. Should I go 32-bit now, and then with to 64 when it gets better drivers?

 

Go with the 64 bit. You can use your 4gb ram. People only like 32 bit because of the driver compat. 64, you just have to look around for them

 

I "game" occasionally, for the most part just HL2 & CS:S (same engine) and I have had nothing but pwnage with Vista x64. Long story short, I went from XP to Vista x64 and at first I did the dual boot thing...now XP is gone forever and I am happy as a clam. If you're worried about something not working, you can always run XP virtually in Virtual Box or Virtual PC...it runs VERY well.

My 2 cents = imparted

 

X64 is great, but if you are are not an advanced users I'd suggest sticking with 32bits for now

 

Hi, JCMS. What do you mean by "advanced users?" How advanced does one have to be in order to be able to operate X64? What "extra" knowledge does one need to possess in order to know what he or she is doing with X64? I've heard a few people talk about this but don't know what they mean.

 

Just computer literate, really. Tech-savvy.

 

Depending on what you use your computer for, you might encouter some problems that you wouldn't on the 32bits version.

 

Thank you both very much for the information.

 

Its not only about the x64 OS, you will have to possibly deal with drivers and program incompatibility, and if you dont know the workarounds for this then its definately gonna be a big issue in x64

 

Yeah, the more information I get, the more that I see where everyone is coming from. What I was planning on doing was running a dual-boot where one OS would be 32-bit (probably XP) and the other would be 64-bit (Vista). What do you think about that idea?

 

Not much...IMO it would be a total waste. I dual boot with Linux, but that's an entirely different animal. I just can't see why you would need XP if you have Vista, but I know other people do that and have different opinions.

 

Aren't XP and Vista different operating systems?

 

A few other things to consider:
64-bit Vista is slightly faster than 32-bit Vista... even with less than 3 gb RAM: http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=1354 ...but 32-bit Vista has faster boot times (same link).

64-bit Vista also has better security and stability than 32-bit Vista, since it has kernel protection (requires signed drivers) and hardware-based Data Execution Prevention, and because most viruses aren't yet 64-bit compatible.

The main advantage of 32-bit Vista is better hardware and software compatibility. If you don't want to have to worry about whether a certain device or program is compatible with 64-bit Windows, then go with 32-bit.

 

Yes, very true. I went myself with 32 bit because for me it's all about compatibility anymore. I did use Vista 64 on my former laptop, liked it, but at the time had to search a little harder for drivers. No gaming problems though.

 

Its up to you if you wanna dual-boot but personally id rather settle with one OS specially if its just between xp and vista.

I havent had any problems with 64bit so far, its running exactly the way my 32bit was. The only issue i encountered was with RMclock, which needed a program to bypass the driver signing requirement in 64bit. Though i was well aware of this before i switched over

 

I hear you. Thank you, Flipfire.

 

I would probably stick to 32-bit for now.

 

Why? What reason?

 

Because he thinks it's best and he's wrong.

 

Besides software compatibility (drives, etc), is there any reason not to switch to 64-bit Vista. Any decreases in ANYTHING from 32-bit Vista. Also, is there really even a shortage of compatible driver for 64-bit, for high-end games (Crysis, COD4, etc)?

 

It's not so much the games as it is unsupported hardware and specialty software. The ONLY program I've had problems with (and had to run XP in VirtualBox) is Photoshop Elements 3, which is REALLY old. Also, I had to load my schools remote printer drivers on XP b/c the drivers are unsigned.

Other than those rare instances, you shouldn't have too many problems. It is really solid if you ask me. That's why it's still on my lappy.

 

I seem to remember hearing that 64-bit uses RAM slightly less efficiently... but I don't know if this is really true or not.

And as I mentioned before, 64-bit has slightly longer boot times, according to the link in my previous post.

 

The memory usage is different, but it's irrelevant to any performance benchmark.

 

The compatibility isn't really a big deal. It's just that some people heard from others a couple of years ago that there weren't many drivers available for 64-bit Windows back then, and then they *assume* that it must still be true, and recommend everyone use 32-bit. Yes, there are still a few missing drivers for 64-bit, but on the whole, for most hardware, it's no problem. *If* you encounter any problems, you can just revert to 32-bit anyway. But compatibility is pretty good these days.

Other than compatibility, there are no reasons not to run 64-bit.

 

That's what I always suspected but was not too sure about. I can't imagine why there would still be rampant compatibility issues this late in the game.

 

the only compatibility issues with x64 is the signed driver requirement.

rmclock was the only program that ran into this problem, lucky there was workarounds to bypass it

 

I'm assuming the signed driver requirement still exists, right?

 

yeah not a big deal to bypass though

 

They also diminished it in SP1

 

sry if its like im Jacking the thread but I decided to try 64bit on my Vostro 1500 and was wondoring if I had to do anything specific before i blank the hard drive? Change any settings etc. I up UPGRADING using full vista ultimate 64bit, from WINDOWS XP. so is there anythign that must be done in bios etc for it?

 

Don't upgrade, do a full install.

 

thats the plan.

but do i need to do anything to bios or anything? on vostro 1500? originally and currently running xp home and im wondoring if i have to do anything for a clean install of vista X64.

also is it better to have drivers on a dvd or download them after install or use the dell dvd?

 

It's best to already have the drivers before you install, so you don't have any headaches afterwards. You don't have to do anything special to install.

 

Agreed... go to Dell.com for your specific hardware drivers, Intel for the AHCI driver and then go to www.x-drivers.com for anything else you need. Actually I think everything is at x-drivers.

Make a DVD with all the files and make sure the AHCI file is expanded so when you install, it is a simple and quick process of directing Vista to that driver.

Dead on Fade...

 

THANKS one more question, Im getting ram in a week or so (4GB) currently online on 1GB but will it run? I was thinking of temporarily using a USB Memory (4GB) stick with ready boost till then?

So do I have all files unzipped on the dvd i burn it too? (Drivers)

 

I do...I unzip everything to the disk to save me time. Its great to have a driver disk as such.

The 1Gb will run but you will notice alot of hd activity as it does alot of swapping to pagefile...The 4Gb will be great.

 

One GB will suffice for a while. I've had it running on one GB and I lived...four is great.

 

Yes, it'll run fine, especially since you'll be doing a clean install and will avoid all the bloatware it will normally come with.

I got my ThinkPad T61 with only a 1GB DIMM and upgraded it to 4GB (2x 2GB DIMM). I used it for a few hours on the 1GB DIMM and it ran alright and that was well before I did a clean install.

 

============

 

Ok sounds good! THANKS

 

I actually am only switching to vista since I have to clean install anyways... tip... NEVER install window blinds... installed it (bought it first) and even unloaded, or uninstalled (reg keys as well) .. Dropped my 3D Mark 06 score by 1250 points -_-..

 

1. Clean Install as per below(even for 64bit);
2. Tweak as per below; and
3. Enjoy...

 

Thanks, btw I LOVE your guides, especially your "How to buy a notebook" one

awsome!

 

Thank you. That is a compliment.

 

even gave you rep... just plain genious

 

And to think it was done anonymously to boot! Now THAT's contributing!

 

as for partitions do I keep the recovery partition or scrap it? I was told by Dell japan as a recommendation for all Dell systems to remove Dell Media Direct, and also encourage the use of 3rd party video drivers ... just not sure waht the recovery partition does..

thanks

 

If you dont have Vista Ultimate, download Acronis Disk Image 15 Day Trial and make a backup of your system. The backup is bootable and has no time stamp on it so you can tuck it away and use it if ever you want to get back to where you are now.

Next, use the Clean Install and delete the partitions; it will do it automatically in any case. I keep and recommend all to keep MD as it keeps a function for that button. Theres nothing worse than looking at a useless button each time you open your lappy. MD only takes up 3 Gb anyway.

The Clean Install will walk you through it.