64 bit vs 32 bit

[Stocker360]

What really is the differences, advantages, and disadvantages between them?

[Corona]

One thing I do know, 64 bit systems are most compatible with 'puters that have more than 4GB of ram. But I'm jumping the gun. Please forgive me.

Let me set you straight. As you may know, most 'puters that incorporate 64 bit systems are major corporations, NASA, government, education (MIT), and serious server puters. The remaining private sector that uses 64 bit systems are pimply nerds from the 9th circle of Hell who have Daddys' money permission to support their god awful online MMOs & FPSs.

[larry39]

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946765

[Corona]

that uses 64 bit systems are pimply nerds from the 9th circle of Hell who have Daddys' money permission to support their god awful online MMOs & FPSs.

 

Don't deny it.

[CTskifreak]

64 bit is definitely becoming more mainstream, and I'm glad that it does. With access to greater than 4Gb's of RAM, it should force coders to make their programs 64 bit. Windows 7 should be 64 bit only, but obviously that will not happen. My Core i7 system will have 6 GB's of RAM when I start it, and I'll eventually move to 12 GB's when it is cheaper. I'm either using the Windows 7 Beta or buying Vista Ultimate.

 

AJ

[jeff_windows_team]

Hey Everyone- Jeff here with the Windows Outreach Team. Here is a solid explanation Gizmodo provided in a recent article- ?To keep it simple, the whole bit thing (16-bit, 32-bit, 64-bit) refers to how much data the computer can keep track of, or talk to, at once, and that's what determines how much memory it can handle. A processor with 32-bit memory addresses can basically roll with 4GB of RAM. A 64-bit system can rock, on the other hand, 16 exabytes of RAM. That's 16.8 million terabytes. Of RAM. You're not going to get that kind of memory, not anytime soon; for now, from a user standpoint, this means there's simply no ceiling to memory expansion.?

I hope this helps explain what the difference is. Here is a link to the article too if you are interested: http://i.gizmodo.com/5076473/giz-explains-...me-about-64+bit

Cheers,

Jeff

Windows Outreach Team

[Corona]

16.8 million terabytes of ram. That's exactly what Norton requires to run, isn't it?

[CTskifreak]

16.8 million terabytes of ram. That's exactly what Norton requires to run, isn't it?

 

 

Quite the contrary. MaximumPC reviewed the newest version, and it is A LOT better. They gave it a 9 out of 10. They hadn't reviewed it in a while, and were thoroughly surprised. They had rewritten the code to scan much faster and run a lot more efficiently. My parents have run Norton throughout the years, and have liked it a lot more than McAfee by a long shot.

 

You might need that much memory to run Crysis at full settings though .

 

AJ

[glok]

64 bit better, thats all

for example 64bit xp

This edition was discontinued in early 2005, after Hewlett Packard, the last distributor of Itanium-based workstations, stopped selling Itanium systems marketed as 'workstations'.[22] As of July 2005, Windows XP 64-Bit Edition is no longer supported, and no further security updates were made available.

 

Windows XP 64-Bit Edition wasn't marketed as the Itanium version of Microsoft's other Windows XP editions but was a separate edition made solely for the Itanium processor and its 64 bit instructions. It is mostly analogous to Windows XP Professional, but numerous older technologies such as DAO, Jet database, NTVDM and Windows on Windows are no longer present so support for MS-DOS and Win16 applications is absent. The original version also lacks most media applications such as Windows Media Player, NetMeeting, Windows Movie Maker, and integrated CD burning, although WMP and NetMeeting were added in the 2003 version.

 

Unlike previous alternate architecture ports of Windows (Windows NT 4.0 for PowerPC, MIPS R4x00, and Alpha) Windows XP 64-Bit Edition can run standard x86 32-bit applications through its WOW64 (Windows-on-Windows 64 bit) emulation layer. While the original Itanium processor contains an on-chip IA-32 decoder, it was deemed far too slow for serious use (running at about 400 MHz), so Microsoft and Intel wrote a software 32 to 64 bit translator dubbed the IA-32 Execution Layer. It allows real time translation of x86 32 bit instructions into IA-64 instructions, allowing 32 bit applications to run (albeit significantly more slowly than native code).

use wikipedia!

[CTskifreak]

Thing is, XP Pro 64 bit was terrible for the longest time. Terrible driver support basically. Vista 64 is much better. However, I got a friend with a Q6600, 8GBs of DDR2, a Radeon 4850, with harddrives and what not, in an Antec 900, and he uses XP 64 and it is fine. I think it was basically that printer drivers were terrible in the long run.

 

AJ

[1984]

I've got a 32 and a 64 bit system, each with vista on them. 64 bit is a bit snappier, but it is a better computer overall. i havent had any problems with compatibility for the most part either.