Why 64 bit??

T

Taqyon

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
Messages
234
Reaction score
18
Location
Milnerton
Hi Guys

Can anyone tell me whats the attraction to 64bit Windows in the office?

I have a very specialised driver that's not working on some 64 bit installations.

- As far as I know, unless you have > 4gb ram and working constantly with 4gb+ files (which no-one does) you will see a small performance DECREASE because it takes and extra cpu cycle to handle the additional registeres required for 64 bits.
- Will you really see improved performance on 8gb vs 4gb? Don't think so.
- I've yet to see a PC or notebook that ships standard with >4gb RAM. So whats the point.
- Sure, some games claim they perform better with more ram. But this is hardly a reason to upgrade an entire corporate's IT.

Sorry just frustrated with ppl duped into buying "new" tech to boost sales which they will never use. And now I need to build a 64bit driver.
 
Use the 32-bit version, then. Retail versions of Windows 7/Vista allow both 32-bit and 64-bit installations.
 
Depends on what your "driver" does?

CAD guys have no option, but to go for 64bit.
Normal office use, no you don't need it.
 
Because 64 bit is better.... if you have the hardware and application support.

Otherwise stick with 32 bit. It's really not a big deal.

Ask yourself... five minutes after death... will I still be worrying about this?
 
@rudi: Unfortunatley Win64 requires 64 bit drivers. 32 bit apps is fine like you say. But 16 bit apps is no longer supported. I have a few of those which I still need. Upgrading to the new versions are R90k plus. And I'm fine with what i have.
@Sharkbait: Agreed. Driver does printing.
 
Sorry just frustrated with ppl duped into buying "new" tech to boost sales which they will never use. And now I need to build a 64bit driver.
Click to expand...

Long and short of it -- you will have to build your driver for 64bit at some stage; can just as well take the dive sooner than later.

Also maybe have a look through http://lifehacker.com/5431284/the-lifehacker-guide-to-64+bit-vs-32+bit-operating-systems

In summary ...

64-Bit Computing—Pros

More processing power: In very basic terms, 64-bit means that it can handle twice as many bits per clock cycle.

More memory: The 32-bit consumer version of Windows is only capable of addressing 3 to 3.5 Gbyte of RAM; therefore, when you use more than 4 Gbyte, the additional RAM goes to waste. Hitting the 3 to 3.5 Gbyte limit only occurs if you work with several memory-hungry programs at the same time.

Performance advantage: Practically speaking, applications can make use of the 64-bit architecture to process huge data operations more quickly. This is especially important with advanced programs, such as video editing suites, games, or encryption software.

More security: The 64-bit versions of Windows Vista and 7 contain Kernel Patch Protection which prevents malicious programs from changing the Windows kernel. The operating systems also boast a Data Execution Prevention which uses a special processor feature to prevent an application from running code from a memory region where it’s not supposed to run. Overall, the 64-bit edition is more secure than its 32-bit counterpart.

64-Bit Computing—Cons

Possible driver issues: 32-bit drivers are not supported; hardware manufacturers have to provide special 64-bit versions. However, this is not as much of an issue anymore, as nearly all of the hardware that has been released over the past three years has shipped with drivers right out of the box. If not, these drivers will come via Windows Updates or download from the company’s support Web sites.
 
Last edited:
I meant: Why do you (or whoever you are talking about) have a 64-bit installation of Windows in the first place? If you bought the retail version of Windows, then you can just install the 32-bit version.

If it was pre-installed 64-bit, then it is likely Professional or better, and you could load on XP mode, if the processor supports virtualisation. If it is pre-installed 64-bit Home Premium, then you are out of luck unless it is a SLIC-enabled bios.

I honestly haven't seen any performance issues mentioned, nor experienced any myself. I also can't see why a native 64-bit processor would need an extra cycle, since extended 64-bit registers would still only require a single instruction.
 
64 bit does not use more processing power, it actually uses less as more can be done in a single clock cycle.

64 bit uses more storage space as the pointers are bigger.
 
@bin3: Thanks, all your points are valid. Except maybe Data Execution Prevention. XP had DEP two years ago. I've been mistaken about 32 bit binaries being faster than 64bit. I could've sworn I read it on MS' web site somewhere back when I tried it.
@rudi: It's the city of cape town. They've upgraded all their laptops to 64bit windows with 2gig ram. This is my pain.
@ponder: The libraries supplied by my supplier is only 32 bit. I also need to write a thread based driver now because of the new splwow64.exe intemediary process. It's technical.
@Syna: No problem with that, I just feel it's too soon and causing problems right now with no benefits right now for 99% office users.

I've tried Win7 64bit when it was released (last year I believe?). I upgraded to 8gb RAM just for the occation. I found that some drivers where not available, after downloading about 1.3gb of .net and other upgrades, I still could not install SQL Server. I also found with about 15 apps open (including Delphi, Dreamweaver, Corel, Office), my RAM used was ~ 3gb. So this whole 64 bit thing is just a pain with no benefit to me or my customers. At least for the next 5 years.

For those in the CAD or Media editing world, 64 bit makes absolute sense. But for the civil servant with his brand new 2gb ram laptop, 64bit is just another problem he and I should not have.
 
1 reason for me... memory:

Each process on a 32bit machine is limited to 2GB memory . This is not sufficient for some apps I write that need to work with large amounts of data as quickly as possible... granted, they aren't office apps, but rather special case software for some rather custom tasks. I could run the apps with half a gig if need be, but they can perform SO much better when given sufficient RAM for churning through large amounts of data (hundreds of gigs).

For average office applications, I still don't see much value.
 
Either reload the pc,or if you'd get hassled for that

Virtualbox with a XP installation ( takes about 3 gigs space ),install the 32 bit driver and go to town on that app :)
 
Taqyon said:
@Syna: No problem with that, I just feel it's too soon and causing problems right now with no benefits right now for 99% office users.
Click to expand...
No I'm glad Microsoft are on the ball. It's an optional choice and I think most people will choose the 32-bit option. Personally I've had no problems with Windows 7 64 bit or Mac OS X Snow Leopard 64 bit whatsoever, except my old TV Card isn't supported.
 
It all depends on what line of work you're in. Anyone who deals with graphics in any form will benefit a billion times more than someone who say, uses Excel all day.
 
bradrap said:
It all depends on what line of work you're in. Anyone who deals with graphics in any form will benefit a billion times more than someone who say, uses Excel all day.
Click to expand...
The only benefit that springs to mind are massive databases or huge operations in Excel (eg Scientific work)
 
Yeah there will be exceptions, but you get the gist of my point :)
 
I do a lot of virtualization research, so 32bit is simply out of the question. You don't need to update your driver to 64, but you also don't need to cater for your client's future needs. Heck, why did you bother writing a 32bit one if 16 could probably work as well?
 
Lot's of misinformation here, for example:

64bit can do more in a single instruction than 32bit. That is false! An integer type in a 32bit OS is 32bits wide, whereas it is 64bits wide in a 64bit OS. As a programmer I can tell you that the only types of applications that require such large blocks are for example, encryption, compression, etc. algorithms that work with blocks for the purpose of compressing or encrypting (IE. AES works with 128bit <-> 256bit blocks, having a 64bit Integer will significantly boost your performance, compression can also benefit because they will undoubtedly work with integers in the same manner). Auto-cad also employs such algorithms hence the need for 64bit.

That is the ONLY benefit other than larger memory space. Don't fool yourself, there is none of this fewer instructions nonsense. It is only when dealing with very large number arithmetic that it becomes faster.

However there is a penalty, in 32bit environments the pointers are 32bit addresses to positions in memory, in 64bit the addresses are 64bits wide. Hence pointers use more memory. People who say it is insignificant don't completely grasp the situation, the OS must keep track of every thread and process running, those threads and processes have memory spaces, those memory spaces must be paged in and out of virtual storage, memory needs to be allocated and deallocated, etc. (go and track the amount of page faults an application generates in Process explorer and you'll grasp how significant it is). The OS manages the memory using a data structure, used to be that the data structure worked with 32bit addresses. Now it's expanded, it is such an issue that most operating systems don't support nearly the entire theoretical memory space of 64bit because memory management would be far to space and computationally expensive. Anyone who has programmed can tell you that you use pointers all the time (in Java every single object is actually a reference which is essentially a memory address). Those pointers and memory addresses have expanded in size. It takes up more memory and the memory management becomes slower because of the larger numbers. The solution has thus far been as I said for 64bit OSs to not allow access to the full 64bit memory space, even the current Amd and Intel CPUs don't support the entire space. So it's not that much slower than 32bit but it is slower.

The truth however is that the 4gb limit is fast becoming an issue, don't be surprised if in 2 or 3 years 4gb RAM is standard. In that time 32bit OSs will probably start being phased out IMHO.
 
Last edited:
As a poor dev I've been on 64bit for over two years already, simply because my machine can and does grab large amounts of Ram for compilations and SQL. Been on 8 Gigs for two years and now running 12Gigs, the board I've purchased can go to a maximum of 24Gigs. Win Server 2008 R2 is only 64bit, give some thought to poor terminal server users who have to use certain peripherals.

I can't believe that companies haven't yet worked on 64 bit drivers, worst culprit for me is Cannon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X