Changing from Windows 7 32 to 64 bit

Why is it greedy to use all of the ram you paid for? I use 64bit win 7 to play Crysis 2 with hi ress pack :)
 
Rickster said:
Bosch ESI Tronic V1.0.....and thats about it.
Click to expand...

A friend of mine works a lot with engine management and tuning software. Most of it has problems running in Windows 7. Makes no difference if its 32bit or 64bit Windows 7. It works in 32bit XP perfectly fine.
 
Actually forgot to check back in this thread!

I installed it, but then I realised I have all the disks for all the programs we need to use so I formatted it and did a clean install.

It certainly feels a lot more responsive :love:
 
kingrob said:
hehe....he doesn't know there is a X64 folder on the Office 2010 disk. :D

If you insert the Office 2010 disk into a pc, it will install the 32-bit version by default. ;)
Click to expand...
Now you tell me! :D

Guess I'm going to have to reinstall it later :)
 
Out of interest, from an architectural POV why wouldn't 32 bit applications work on a 64 bit OS? I can understand that a 64 bit program won't work on a 32 bit machine because of addressing issues, but not the other way round
 
I cannot use a 32-bit OS anymore, as I use Oracle VirtualBox extensively & have four Windows Server 2008 R2 servers running on my Windows 7 Home pc at the same time. My RAM normally hovers on 6.5GB in use.

Internet Explorer is actually one of the few 64-bit internet browsers out there.
 
YingYang said:
Out of interest, from an architectural POV why wouldn't 32 bit applications work on a 64 bit OS? I can understand that a 64 bit program won't work on a 32 bit machine because of addressing issues, but not the other way round
Click to expand...

Msot 32bit applications do work. Couple don't. Drivers were the big issue in the past. 64bit is much more mainstream now.
 
YingYang said:
Out of interest, from an architectural POV why wouldn't 32 bit applications work on a 64 bit OS? I can understand that a 64 bit program won't work on a 32 bit machine because of addressing issues, but not the other way round
Click to expand...

The size of your unknowledge of 64 bit architecture is a canyon! Problem is not only 64 > 32, but way deeper, see there "Removal of older features" section.
 
Vincent_Thorn said:
The size of your unknowledge of 64 bit architecture is a canyon! Problem is not only 64 > 32, but way deeper, see there "Removal of older features" section.
Click to expand...

You Google search was pointless. First hit was some nonsense about Flash which works perfectly fine in Windows x64.

Your further comment about the removal of features is even more useless. It talks about the removal of system programming features and goes on to state that these features are still remain fully implemented in "legacy mode,". So besides that, it seems as if the canyon is between your ears.
 
vinodh said:
You Google search was pointless. First hit was some nonsense about Flash which works perfectly fine in Windows x64.
Click to expand...

I know that making program x64 from x86 is not so simple, that's why people talking about "x64 compatibility" - not just "recompiling". So if you're pushy about happy x64 world, leave that sh*t for yourself, I don't listen anymore.

vinodh said:
Your further comment about the removal of features is even more useless. It talks about the removal of system programming features and goes on to state that these features are still remain fully implemented in "legacy mode,". So besides that, it seems as if the canyon is between your ears.
Click to expand...

I thought you're smarter, but you're just "story believer". Tell me, smarty, why the hell Windows has all that x64 troubles at all? Are they less smart than you and cannot just use "legacy mode"? Point is, you're lamo who don't know what a sh*t inside a windows. THAT's why x86->x64 is not just "start legacy mode". Windows has a lot of hardcoded compatibility tricks, of course not all of 'em so easy to move in 64-bit world.
If people use modern hardware and MS Office only - go ahead, install that x64 piece of windows. But since I use A LOT of different software and old hardware, I still recommend to keep in x86 world. At least if you don't render movies, hardly you need more than 4 GB.
 
What troubles? I've built many 64 bit systems and upgraded lots of computers to Windows 7 64 bit and never had any issues with drivers or software that didn't work. If there was a software issue, it was because of an incompatibility with Windows 7 as a whole, not just the 64 bit version. Since you claim to use lots of different software, I ask again, give me a list of software that is not compatible with Windows 64 bit.
 
Last edited:
I personally had only x86 version, but my friend (sysadmin) said he used x64 Office on x64 Windows and office had problem, so he reinstalled on x86 office. Don't you think it's good sign that x64 is "not ready yet"? (note that it's the same vendor!)
Many other companies say "no x64 version yet, use x86" - is it so hard for 'em to recompile? Of course not! Problem is code itself, which have to be written VERY careful to be "recompillable" for x64.
As a programmer I had issue with .NET: I have x64 add-in (x86 tested as well) on x86 Office uder x64 Windows with x64 .NET; System didn't work at all, while full x86 line worked perfectly. In FOSS world also a lot of issues recompiling programs for x64 - they crash due to careless code.
All of that is not enough? OK, everybody is free to select his own rakes! :) I just warned YingYang that if don't want to risk, use x86.

PS
From now I'll specially concern about x64 issues and post here, if you wish. But I think it's enough to google (and read not only the first link, huh?)
 
I've owned 6 different computers over the past few years and ran Windows 7 64bit on them with no problems with drivers or software. I built a Ubuntu server with 64bit Ubuntu and it worked fine. I own a Mac Mini, a MacBook Pro and my wife has a MacBook Air and all 3 run OS X 10.8 which is 64bit. Also, no issues. 64bit is ready, just about all CPU's that are available now and over the past couple of years are 64bit capable. When Windows XP 64bit was released, it was useless because of poor driver and software support. That changed with Vista 64bit and then Windows 7 64bit took it to a whole new level. Your argument about x64 not being ready was valid a few years ago. Technology has moved on since then.

I run 16GB RAM on my laptop. It allows me to virtualise 3 different OS's excluding the host OS with no problems. That would not be possible with a 32bit OS. People that have 8GB RAM and want to actually make use of it are not greedy, as you said earlier. Maybe they have a use for it.
 
I'd go with Windows x64 any day. Even if you don't use all your memory, you could always make a RAM drive, set your temp folder to that drive which in turn speeds up the system.

The only issue I have is in Visual Studio it doesn't allow me to Edit & Continue, but I've learnt to live with that.
Other than that, Office x64 has some issues with add-ins so rather install Office x86, especially if you want to use apps the sync contacts / calendar items with Outlook.

Other than that, x64 is becoming the norm. Some of our clients are already only installing Windows x64 on their workstations. Unless there is a specific legacy application that you're using that you know isn't compatible, go with x64. I myself however have not come across such an application or game for that matter.

I have 20Gb RAM. 4Gb is for a RAM drive and my overall memory usage normally sits around 10-15Gb, sometimes more... Would never have been possible on x86.
 
Last edited:
Win XP 64 bit

vinodh said:
When Windows XP 64bit was released, it was useless because of poor driver and software support
Click to expand...
NOT so fast

I am using XP 64 bit on my desktop as well as my laptop

Works 100% even on laptop with 3G card , 802.11n WiFi , Gigabit NIC , full HD on movies , etc etc

M$ still regularly send updates -- so it cannot be that bad ............
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X