windows 7 ultimate 32 or 64 bit?

Hi I've just upgraded my laptop to Penryn T8300 C2D from T2390 DC and Have been using win 7 Ultimate 32bit. I have 2gb of ddr2 pc5300 installed but will be upgrading to 3gb in the next couple weeks.

Which win 7 would be better suited for my new setup?
would I gain more by utilising the 64 bit architecture from my Penryn chip on overall performance?
Or should I just stick with 32 bit?
pros and cons?

Any advice appreciated
Def

 

Go with 64 bit unless you have a specific need to have 32 bit (app compat). 64 bit is the main line OS, 32 bit is essentially legacy support. 64 bit gets 95% of the development and testing effort from MS, so you can expect it to be higher quality.

 

Sounds promising I've never used any 64 bit OS only winxp 32 bit then jumped to win 7 32bit.
So your saying MS are favouring the 64 bit on support and future improvements...
I guess 32 bit going to be obsolete soon as most the cpu's produced now are 64 bit, so whats the point in making 64 bit chips if there not going to utilise it.
I think it's time for me to switch to what my cpu was made for.
Thanks
Def

 

if you have a 64bit cpu and 2gig+ ram
use 64bit
i have been using 64 bit since march 07 with very little problems
its crazy to stay with 32bit these days

 

64-bit all the way.

Look at this person who loves his 64-bit Win7, after being recommended to pick it.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showpost.php?p=5464526&postcount=32

 

^^^^lulz.

64 bit Ultimate..Tis very awesome.


Cin...

 

Lol I stumbled on his thread after I opened this 1
Thanks every1 for the advice I'm going to backup some files I need then install win 7 ultimate 64 bit.
cheers
Def

 

Trebuin...Finally.... Our job here is done!!!

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=158277&highlight=64+bit+vista

 

Had Win7 x64 never any problems

 

installed now runs better than win 7 x86 seems to lag less where at times 32bit ver paused for a split second here and there, 64bit seems like has a slight edge on performance in general and thats only with 2gb ddr 667mhz installed going to upgrade 3gb soon see how that goes. Theres only 1 problem I have when I run cod4 with latest x3100 64bit driver ver....1930 I can't get widescreen stays at 4:3 rather than 16:9 the game is set on 16:9 by default plus I reset in console to make sure. It was fine on win7 x86 with x3100 drivers ver....1930 but can only get 4:3 in win7 x64 with black borders on side of screen, any1 else having this problem?

 

Close your game, then open your video card control panel, and add a custom resolution, with the resolution of your screen at 60.001Hz (that .001 is important). Now try, COD 4

 

added new scheme on cod4 through my graphics control properties but could'nt config anything but when I launched the game everythings fine now thanks. Is this due to intel's x3100 x64 driver release? still abit buggy.....

 

It's silly NOT to use the 64bit OS. Smoother, faster, better resource usage are just some of the benefits. These days it's actually getting more and more difficult to find 32bit drivers lol.

 

Hmm I could do with some advice on this as my Windows 7 experience has not been so plain sailing:

I have an M1330 with 4gb of ram and Vista 32bit installed. Whilst it was far from quick, everything worked perfectly. I have now replaced the hard drive with a 160gb Intel X-25M (with TRIM firmware) and then installed Windows 7 64bit. Whilst the install seemed faultless I have noticed one or two issues:

1) Some of the gadgets I use are not sidebar x64 compatible so I am having to use sidebar x86 - They now work perfectly
2) IE8 x64 does not seem compatible with all plugins installed from the websites I use so I have reverted back to IE8 x86 - This now works perfectly (well as good as it has ever run ).
3) Most if not all of my installed applications are 32bit....although they do all seem to work....apart from Launchy that does not have a proper 64bit build.
4) The Ricoh R5C833 card reader has stopped working for memory stick pro duo cards. I have now tried loads of different drivers including ones that are supposed to work with windows 7 64bit but it either tries to reformat the card (early drivers) or hangs when you try and view it (newest) drivers.
5) Dell do not look like they will be releasing Windows 7 drivers for the M1330 even though they are still selling this laptop. It also seems that the 32bit drivers do tend to work better than the 64bit ones....although I have not tried the 32bit drivers on Windows 7 or the 64bit drivers on Vista 64bit to see if this is definitely the case.

Taking all of the above into account I am wondering if I have really made the right decision to install Windows 7 64bit. Yes I get an extra 700mb of useable RAM with the 64bit OS but this has been at the expense of my card reader, which I used to use all the time. Also some of my favourite apps (Launchy) now only partially work.

Considering the fact that I have a quick SSD, will installing Windows 7 32bit really slow things down that much? and is it likely that the Vista 32bit drivers are likely to work better than the Vista 64bit drivers? (I can imagine the 32bit drivers have been tested more than the 64bit versions as this was the core business for the M1330)?

 

That is because the sidebar gadget that YOU use require Flash, and Flash is currently is only in 32-bit. Blame Adobe, or get gadget not mode in Flash.

By default it's ALREADY on 32-bit Internet Explorer. And again, Flash currently only exists in 32-bit, so it doesn't work with Internet Explorer 64-bit. However, Java exists in 640bit. You need to get it if you want to use Java in IE and any other 64-bit web browser. for Windows. Blame Adobe!

How is that a problem? Your application won't magically be converted in 64-bit, because you use a 64-bit operating system. 64-bit versions of you software will come in time... we are STILL in a TRANSITION. Making 64-bit program is not a click of a mouse button, it's more complicated that that.

Some games, some Adobe software, Video/audio codec, drivers, and many other software are already in 64-bit. Others will come with time. Not happy? Then complain to them.

Contact Dell and RICOH for assistance. This is not a Windows 7 fault. Be patient and wt will be fixed (unless you don't complain to them, so they may never know, as your are probably the only person using this Sony propitiatory memory cards)

Your laptop is discontinued. So Dell won't provide you with Dell tested drivers for Windows 7. The XPS series has been replaced with the XPS Studio. In other words, Dell suggests that your system is not Windows 7 ready. Before getting Windows 7, Microsoft says countless number of time to use their Upgrade adviser software to ensure that your system is compatible, and that if you have a OEM computer (Dell, HP, Acer, etc...), to contact THEM BEFORE purchasing Windows 7, to see if the system is Windows 7 compatible.

You don;t need Launchy. Win key + i + Enter > Open internet Explorer. If it doesn't open internet explorer select on the start menu - after you hit your 'i' key - and it will go up to the top (highest on the list is the most ran program based on your search), as it reaches the top most most, that is teh one that is selected by default, which mean the one will run when you hit ENTER key.

Another trick, is that you can set keyboard shortcuts to shortcuts file, check the properties of a shortcut file.

Furthermore, you can do Win key + #, where # represent a number from 1 to 9 (0 is 10, you can use that as well), to launch any pinned taskbar icons.


Considering the fact that I have a quick SSD, will installing Windows 7 32bit really slow things down that much? and is it likely that the Vista 32bit drivers are likely to work better than the Vista 64bit drivers? (I can imagine the 32bit drivers have been tested more than the 64bit versions as this was the core business for the M1330)?[/QUOTE]

 

Thanks for the detailed...if not a little abrupt reply. The only question you did not answer is whether I would "really" notice the difference between an M1330 with 4gb Ram loaded with Windows 7 32bit and one loaded with 64bit?

 

I ran Windows 7 Ultimate RC (x86) from the time it was released until October 22. It ran well. I found all the ASUS drivers and apps needed to configure my notebook well. When October 22 finally came, I installed Windows 7 Home Premium (x64). I found all the ASUS drivers and apps needed to configure my notebook well. However, I lost the use of my Sony Digital Voice Recorder (ICD-ST25) because Sony will not develop a 64-bit driver for this device.

Is the 64-bit install faster? I'm not sure I notice any difference. But this is a good thing because the 32-bit RC was good for me. And now the 64-bit final is great for me.

I feel that there is more of a future in using this 64-bit OS. However, like many others, I do not see many 64-bit apps coming out that I absolutely need. With 64-bit Windows 7, I'll be ready... but probably still waiting.

Jeremy

 

"Considering the fact that I have a quick SSD, will installing Windows 7 32bit really slow things down that much? and is it likely that the Vista 32bit drivers are likely to work better than the Vista 64bit drivers? (I can imagine the 32bit drivers have been tested more than the 64bit versions as this was the core business for the M1330)?"
I tested W7 RC 32bit on both my D600 and D820 Latitudes and was pleasantly surprised how MS found the drivers that I needed as Dell did not have them. Vista and XP would not have. I am staying with XP on the D600 but went with W7 Pro 64 Bit on my D820 which is a few years old and has a 4GB of ram max. I also upgraded my software and a GPS stick so everything is Win7 compatiable. I could have saved a couple hundred bucks by staying with 32 bit, but I'm a geek I cannot honestly say that I gained anything by jumping from X86 to 64 bit as my software does not warrant 64 bit. IE8 comes in both 32 & 64 bit, but I can't tell the difference. If I was running processor intensive software that was pure 64 bit such as some of the video rendering programs, then yes I would have noticed and so could you. If I had a system with programs that could utilize more than 4GB of ram, then yes go to 64 bit. If not, save yourself some money and headaches by staying at 32 bit. 64 Bit is the future, but we are not there yet 100%. My gaming PC will be shortly receiving 32 bit Windows 7 Home Premium and it will be much happier than it is with Vista just as my notebook is.

 

We ARE there yet with 64-bit. Microsoft Windows 8 will be ONLY in 64-bit. Vista was originally 64-bit only, at the last minute Microsoft made a crappy unpolished junk of 32-bit version which some people loved to install and complained. Because Windows Vista was not greatly adopted, this made push the 32-bit OS to WIn7. For Win8 I would not get my hopes up for 32-bit.

32-bit has A LOT of limitation, I include also operation code to execute all received instructions, so sometimes to do simple task, it require a lot of power as it can't do them directly, it needs to perform a work around. In addition, it lacks of critical security system required in today's world. The memory limitation is the only limitation that is visible to the end user. To allow future innovations in trying to make software interfaces more and more fancy, to make things more understandable to the average user, introduce new features, more demanding, features in software require more power. And as any developer will tell you, to do this, computers need to be more powerful.

Already if we look in teh laptop world.. 64-bit CPU's (used with it's 64-bit Operating System) allows to execute longer and more complex instruction on the CPU in 1 cycle instead of splitting it in 2 or more for a 32-bit CPU. This results of gaining battery life, and increase performance. A free overclock,, with any of it's downsides, and longer battery life just for going 64-bit.
Of what I am saying is on theory, as if you run 32-bit application under a 64-bit OS, well it won't be very visible... but assume everything is well optimized in 64-bit, then yes.

Saying "I'll wait for more 64-bit applications", is kinda silly... because companies follows market share. If everything stays in 32-bit.. then their is few reason to spend in making a 64-bit version, so we end up in a loop, which means developments and technology advancement in that area will simply stop until a push arrives.

Another thing... you PURCHASE a 64-bit CPU, and you may have 4GB of RAM. Why not use what you purchase. The way I see it, is like if you buy something and leave in the box. Or even better, you buy a wireless phone but dont' pass the half a meter distance you and the phone ever, or you buy a fancy menchy HD TV, and you play VHS on it and watch standard definition TV, and don't even have a gaming console to even justify anything. It's called wasting money. If all you do is surf the web and rarelly e-mail on a 64-bit CPU computer, at LEAST you can have your operating system use the power of your CPU as it's big enough to push it.

 

Intel and Microsoft have been ready for 64 bit for quite sometime as the last of the Intel Pentium 4 processors could even incorporate 64 bit processing. Microsoft's 64 bit XP was them just getting their feet wet, but I agree that they would have loved to have only written 64 bit code for Vista and Seven, but they can not get the hardware guys to write 64 bit drivers for all their hardware, and the software companies have been dragging their feet. Direct X 10 came out with Vista and we are now at DX11. Even the game software companies are dragging their feet with integrating DX10 let alone 64 bit My Dell D820 has the Nvidia chip which shares some of the 4GB of memory and is maxed out. Vista 32 bit showed just over 3GB available. Windows 7 with 64 bit also shows just over 3 Gb available because of the sharing. With a motherboard limited to 4GB and also shares ram with the video card, it appears that I did not gain in that department. If the PC could handle 6GB or more, then yes. The hardware drivers for the PC and the accessories such as printers and scanners can cause the biggest problem in switching over to 64 bit without replacing everything. Each individual has to do some homework in deciding to jump to 64 bit.