Sorry for the lot of questions, but it's not quite easy to get my head around this stuff.

Obviously Win7 32bit will still not be able to use more than 3, maybe 3,5GB of RAM for itself and applications. Conflicting sources say different things, but it seems Vid Card memory is also included in that total, so if you have 4GB RAM and 1 GB VRAM, you end up with 3.5 out of 5GB actually available.

OTOH 64bit OS needs more memory just for addressing, so the conclusion seems to be that 4GB on 64bit are not that much better than 3GB on 32bit.

Even if you add 6GB RAM in a 64bit OS, many applications still will only be able to use 2GB max. unless they have the "Large Adress Aware" property set.

So, what good does 64bit actually do? Would 6GB (of which max. 2GB go to a game) allow Windows to completely deactivate the pagefile on the hard disk? That is, even if the game can only address 2GB RAM, will Windows itself make good use of the other 4GB?

Or is 64bit just not there yet? All my photo editing and similar applications are also 32bit, so even in that area I can see no immediate benefit.

There are just tons of articles on the 32bit vs 64bit.

But I quote "For pros it matters, for normal people it is more of a marginal performance difference."

Adobe has already introduced 64bit support with their CS4 release on Windows. Mac and OS X are requiring a full rewrite but according to Adobe Photoshop product manager John Nack full 64 bit well be available on all platforms in subsequent release's.


The point is that large software developers are committing to the transition for full 64bit operations.

A year ago I would have suggested future proofing for 64bit for those building PC's for anything other than basic computing (surfing). At this stage of the game, IMO, it would be foolish to go with 32bit Win7 for all but the most basic users in which case they wouldn't even need to really upgrade to Win7 at all unless it came preloaded on their proprietary system.

I think the interesting question now is how many more OS's will microsoft put out that support 32bit options before they drop it all together....my guess would be 2 at most.

Yeah, I googled around and literally got killed with information overload. Yet I didn't really find my specific questions covered.

Yesterday, going 64bit seemed a sure deal. The one thing I learned today though is that I'll likely need 6GB instead of 4GB RAM to really make a difference from XP with 2GB (my current setup), since of the 4GB in 64bit a lot more would be used up for the larger adress indexes (up to 10%, so 400MB already gone, which brings it close to the 3.x GB you can get in 32bit anyway).

Now I'm also finding out you can't and shouldn't disable the page file in turn for more RAM. And it doesn't seem like any applications or windows will benefit, but okay, if you have apps with "Large Adress Awareness" using up to 3GB, Windows will have a better puffer.

I'm not gonna buy CS4 for a while, or any other 64bit production software so that's out too.

Suppose if there are really no know negatives of going 64bit I might as well (Drivers seem to be available for my fairly standard stuff, including Nvidia, TrackIR, HOTAS COUGAR) I just don't want to find out I'm causing myself problems later on with gaming for no gain. Especially since the SB License I'm eyeing (less than 200 bucks for Ultimate) only allows to select one or the other, not both variants.

I wonder how elegantly Win7 x64 with 8GB handles the XP virtualisation, if it's even an issue...

I'm a huge gamer and have been using Vista64 for around a year on quad-core with 4g RAM. I haven't had any issues with any of my (excessive amount) sim gear (wheel, controllers, TIR, etc, etc) or any memory issues.

Hardware support has matured to the point that it's really not an issue.

I do dual boot between Vista64 and XP Pro (32bit), but I'm finding myself booting into XP less these days since for what I do 64 just performs better.

I don't want to toss anymore money into my current build but on my next build I'll probably go with 8GB RAM.

As far as the XP mode in Win7, I haven't tried or followed it enough to know how it performs.

If I remember correctly, I read that the Windows XP mode was for business users (to maintain compatibility with business software systems). At the time, it was reported it will only be available with the Business version of W7.

Based on my experience with Vista 64b and W7 64b, 64bit should not be a problem on a new system.

However, only programs written to make best use of 64bit will actually work better (most aren't yet). Heck, even my CodeGear RAD Studio 2009 Professional (a premium professional application for writing Pascal and C++ programs for commercial use and sale) is only 32bit -- and that's a problem for an application I happen to be writing -- as 64 bitness would improve its speed. Moral, some developers may not even have the tools to write good 64 bit code, yet.

Okay, thanks for all the feedback. Since I'm only going to buy the OS once (170EUR is enough...) and W7 will be with us for the next 4 to 6 years, I suppose buying 64bit makes sense, if not performance-wise then at least as a future-proof investment.

As long as it doesn't cause unnecessary hickups (I checked my current games and hardware for combatibility) that will be fine.

Colonel, if you go 64-bit, just be sure to get at least 4 GB RAM and 6 or 8 is even better. Needed right now, no. Needed within the next year, yes.

I'm aiming for six, since rumour is (likely exagerated, but still) that the additional adress space needed for 64bit makes 4GB behave like 3.5 on XP, so to really see a gain six are the least.

I was given to understand that Win 7 came with both versions of the operating system, 32 and 64, so if you go with 32 bit, it's not an issue to upgrade later on as you already have it.

The license I was offered (170EUR for Ultimate) is some System Builder or OEM Deal which supposedly only comes in one flavor. Both included mean the full box for more than 300EUR. If you look at Amazon, even Vista OEM is always sold in one version only.

Besides I suppose if I really need a true Legacy 32bit system, I can always dual-boot XP, for which I have a valid OEM license around.

It works very well.

From what I read the virtual XP has a S3 Graphics driver though - total business related, no real gaming possible.

As a Vista 64bit user of 8 or so months, this is what I have to say:

Works great accept for a few programs.

1) Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory's patch did not work. The game itself worked fine, but I could not update it.

2) Raven Shield: Iron Wrath (free expansion) won't install. I found a way around it.

3) A couple of other small freeware programs.


Aside from that, I have had no issues related to 64bit. I am sure there will be many games and programs in the future that use more RAM, so I think it is a logical choice to go 64bit.

Hi,

I've noticed that f.i. Mat Manager wont work. But I'm sure ther is a fix around somewhere

Honestly I don't really see why you wouldn't go 64 bit on a new build these days. Really since Vista SP1, 64 bit has been mature enough for general use such that the only reason to stick with 32 bit is/was if you had some specific program or device with issues. I would expect that within the next year you'll see games released which can only reach their full potential on Win64 - may as well be ready for it.

Hmmm, that's interesting. I was previously under the impression that a 32 bit system was better.

I'm getting a new system in the next month or so and was wondering what to get - Windows 7 32 or 64. Seems a 64 system is getting the votes. My pc would be used pretty much for gaming, more sims/rpgs than fps. Occassional use for MS Office applications, itunes, surfing etc. I also have a lot of legacy games since my current system is 6 years old a p4 3.0ghz 1mb ram. I tend not to buy newly released games and am generally behind the curve, which won't change when I upgrade. Is there no advantage (other than cost) of going 32?

I have games like:
Mechwarrior 4
EECH
il2 1946
F4:AF
GTR2
GTL
Oblivion
football manager 08
Total War games
SP:WaW

I'm thinking of a midlevel core i7 system, mid nvidia gtx card. Do you think I should go with the 64 recommendation too?

Be warned, F4:AF from what I heard doesn't like Win7 at all.

Otherwise, not sure if a Core i7 is really worth the money for your selection of games, which as you say are behind the curve on requirements. Maybe wait for i5?

For the 64bit question - the advantage of keeping with 32bit certainly is a bit of improved combatibility with very old stuff. May also be that certain older peripherals have no 64bit driver around - as far as I know you can't run 32bit drivers on a 64bit OS, so if you have an older printer or something else exotic, check if there are Vista 64bit drivers out.

The games I'm looking to bring over onto the new rig are mostly from last year or the year before, so I found they all work on 64bit without problems. If you are more of a legacy gamer, maybe one or the other might require some tweaking or fiddling on 64bit, but ultimatley it seems the jump to a new OS is much bigger a hurdle for bringing games over, while 32/64bit presents comparable minor issues.

Yeah, I end up going for i7 simply because I'll keep the new system for 5 years and so need to future proof a bit.

For 32/64 compatibility - what about the virtual machine OS emulators in windows 7? I was thinking of getting the ultimate edition just to get the emulator software to play win95 and XP games and ensure compatibility. Is that a silly thing to do? Would that eliminate any 32/64 compatibility issues?

I'm not really up to speed with the windows virtual machine programs - I've read a bit on them but not quite sure how they work. I think there is a version for xp now that is free. Last time I really needed it was a few years ago (for powerslide) when it wasn't free and I didn't pursue it further. I've lived without for a while now. I think most of my games now either aren't played by me anymore or would be 7 compatible. Hopefully a work around will work on F4AF.

Five years? Wow. Personally I wouldn't bet the farm (or the i7 money) on the idea that a motherboard will last that long, if you are unlucky and have a damaged component you'd be rebuilding in 3.

The virtual XP environment which comes with Ultimate uses some outdated S3 Graphics Adapter chipset driver (virtually), so it's strictly for business and office applications. I don't think it will handle games well, or at all.

Generally W7 seems to do pretty well with older software - yesterday I tried some stuff in FS9 and it worked out of the box, despite violating some rules that W7 encourages (for example programs aren't supposed to write .cfg files into their own directory anymore - but it worked just fine).

F4:AF is the only thing I heard to have issues - maybe worth a mail to the devs.