I'd argue that 64-bit versions of Vista are more stable and secure due to mandatory driver signing.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
32bit vs 64bit - Why should I consider?
- Thread starter StarsFan4Life
- Start date
Well that depends on whether you (when using 32-bit) like to get drivers from strange places. I think for all intents and purposes, the 64 bit and 32 bit versions are about identical when it comes to stability.
PrincessFrosty
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 6, 2009
- Messages
- 5,905
There is just no reason to use 32bit over 64bit now a days, for a good rig like that with a 1Gb video card you're looking at 2.5Gb of RAM max compared to all 8Gb in a x64 system. There has been performance benefits shown from apps/games well coded for x64 as well.
Honestly they shouldn't have bothered with x86 version of Win7
Honestly they shouldn't have bothered with x86 version of Win7
For Windows 8 I will agree, but until then, netbooks aren't x64 compatible yet. That is the ONLY reason someone should be buying an x86 version of Windows 7.
Yep -- and Windows 7 is a savior for netbooks. I'm loving it on my S10.
StarsFan4Life
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- May 29, 2008
- Messages
- 472
Wow.....think that up all by yourself?
StarsFan4Life
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- May 29, 2008
- Messages
- 472
I think what I am going to do (to verify that it is NOT hardware) is format and install Windows XP Professional 32bit. We all know that drivers are stable for that OS. I'll test it out for a day or two....then move on to Windows Vista 64bit.......do the same with that OS.....and see where I stand after that.
Well to be frank, all the parts you have are fine in a 64 bit environment -- i.e. if they are all working properly (not faulty) then they work fine in a 64 bit environment. Beyond netbooks (and other 32-bit only processors), I can't think of a part that is incompatible with 64 bit Windows released in the past few years...
If you are able to get an OS running, I would run Prime95 + furmark (or something similar like RTHDRIBL) simultaneously to check stability (memtest 86 is something you can do prior to this). I would put money on it being a hardware issue.
This is definitely nothing to do with 32 vs 64 being better/worse. Just to clarify: you should definitely run 64.
TheBuzzer
HACK THE WORLD!
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2005
- Messages
- 13,025
Benefit of using 64 bit os compared to 32 bit os is because it is 32 bit more!. I wish microsoft stop releasing 32 bit os and force people to move to 64bit. Main thing about 64 bit is that calculations could be computed faster if the problem is huge. However many calc are just tiny calcs which will not benefit much. There shouldn't be much difference in coding a 32 bit and 64bit program most of the work is done by the compiler itself.
StarsFan4Life
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- May 29, 2008
- Messages
- 472
Hardware issue being bad drivers or hardware issue being faulty hardware?
Well I am assuming that you're installing the latest 64 bit drivers from your hardware manufacturer's website (keeping in mind that for Windows 7 you'd be looking for Vista 64 drivers, and there is obviously a much larger potential for issues with 7 just because it isn't going to be released for a while, so manufacturers may not address issues with it just yet).
What types of issues are you having?
StarsFan4Life
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- May 29, 2008
- Messages
- 472
BSOD Message:
atikmdag.sys - Address FFFF8800463BFCC base at FFFFF88004629000, Datestamp 4a0e3895
Physical Memory Dump
Same thing every time...
atikmdag.sys - Address FFFF8800463BFCC base at FFFFF88004629000, Datestamp 4a0e3895
Physical Memory Dump
Same thing every time...
Well it's definitely an ATi driver issue (which I'm sure you worked out by now). You're using the latest stable catalyst drivers?
There appears to be a number of users with the same issue: [link]
Your problem could be related to theirs, but either way it's definitely something to do with your ATi card/driver. It would be worth looping something like Furmark with Prime95 though and monitoring temperatures.
You DO know that 32bit apps in a 64bit OS don't run any faster, right?
And yes to all those asking, I've used both 32bit and 64bit Win 7 builds and through my use I've found 32 bit to be more stable.
Compatibility is a given, everything is guaranteed to work in 32bit, you don't necessarily have that guarantee in 64bit (as evident from the OP)
This is yet more FUD...
The OP definitely has other issues, this isn't "oh noes, i don't have a 64 bit driver." The woes of transitioning to 64 bit are a thing of the past, as long as you're running REASONABLY up to date hardware.
FYI OP: I think this thread has served its usefulness -- if you want help working out the issue, feel free to hit me up via PMs.
Nice try avoiding the major points of having 32-bit apps on a 64-bit OS. It's not to take advantage of >4gb RAM (duh, bonsai). It's to allow you to also have 64-bit apps that DO take advantage of it as well.
Unknown-One
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 8,909
Some motherboards require you to flip a few options in the BIOS for 64bit operating systems to work correctly. Have you checked this yet?
Something like "64bit ACPI Table" may need to be enabled, and you might have to change the memory hole remapping mode.
If these aren't set correctly, you'll get all kinds of strange issues.
Something like "64bit ACPI Table" may need to be enabled, and you might have to change the memory hole remapping mode.
If these aren't set correctly, you'll get all kinds of strange issues.
Neither of these should be an issue on a 780G motherboard, but perhaps worth a look.
StarsFan4Life
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- May 29, 2008
- Messages
- 472
Ok....a bit of an update.
I reformatted and installed Windows 7 RC1 Build 7100 straight up....let it sit for an hour or so (since the majority of the time my computer BSOD on me, it was sitting idle)...and no BSOD's. This is with all Windows 7 drivers for everything. No updates, no drivers downloaded.
I am going to download the 9.6 ATI drivers in just a sec, install them and see how they work out. Any other suggestions?
Now, after looking at this page (http://www.amd.com/us/Pages/AMDHomePage.aspx) if I select either my video card or the motherboard / chipset (onboard HD3200) they both point to this page (http://game.amd.com/us-en/drivers_catalyst.aspx?p=win7/windows-7-64bit). So, apparently I did it this way before and downloaded drivers from Gigabytes page too....which could have screwed up everything from the beginning.
I am going to install the 9.6 drivers WITHOUT ccc (catalyst control center) and see how this does.
Update in about an hour!
I reformatted and installed Windows 7 RC1 Build 7100 straight up....let it sit for an hour or so (since the majority of the time my computer BSOD on me, it was sitting idle)...and no BSOD's. This is with all Windows 7 drivers for everything. No updates, no drivers downloaded.
I am going to download the 9.6 ATI drivers in just a sec, install them and see how they work out. Any other suggestions?
Now, after looking at this page (http://www.amd.com/us/Pages/AMDHomePage.aspx) if I select either my video card or the motherboard / chipset (onboard HD3200) they both point to this page (http://game.amd.com/us-en/drivers_catalyst.aspx?p=win7/windows-7-64bit). So, apparently I did it this way before and downloaded drivers from Gigabytes page too....which could have screwed up everything from the beginning.
I am going to install the 9.6 drivers WITHOUT ccc (catalyst control center) and see how this does.
Update in about an hour!
StarsFan4Life
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- May 29, 2008
- Messages
- 472
So far so good. Installing my Steam games as we speak! Anyone suggest any other drivers/software to install?
What conditions lent 32-bit to being more stable?
Presumably you've installed your chipset drivers, audio drivers, etc. I look forward to hearing how things are going now.
His mind.
So you think that 64bit has better compatibility than 32 bit?
Small things mostly, a few random crashes, Explorer seizing up, programs starting slower on occasion, random errors, none of which I've experienced on 32bit. Not saying 64bit is a bad experience, I've just found on my particular hardware, with my particular drivers that 32bit is a bit more reliable. I've only got 4gb of RAM, and I don't have any 64bit hungry apps, so it's no real loss for me. Hopefully the issues will be sorted out for RTM, I'd love to support 64bit more fully, but until I have native 64bit apps I really don't see the point.
StarsFan4Life
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- May 29, 2008
- Messages
- 472
Actually, what I have found in another thread is that I was downloading the video drivers from ATI (Windows 7 64bit) but had previously downloaded the chipset drivers from Gigabyte and they were Vista 64 drivers. I believe that was my problem.....as I didn't install any other drivers this time other than the ATI video drivers. Windows 7 took care of all other drivers. Also, no Windows Updates either.....its running rock solid.
So you think that 64bit has better compatibility than 32 bit?
Small things mostly, a few random crashes, Explorer seizing up, programs starting slower on occasion, random errors, none of which I've experienced on 32bit. Not saying 64bit is a bad experience, I've just found on my particular hardware, with my particular drivers that 32bit is a bit more reliable. I've only got 4gb of RAM, and I don't have any 64bit hungry apps, so it's no real loss for me. Hopefully the issues will be sorted out for RTM, I'd love to support 64bit more fully, but until I have native 64bit apps I really don't see the point.
Sounds like you definitely need to let other people install your OS for you.
What's your system consist of?
Seriously, just ignore bonsai.
What Criccio said -- Bonsai is definitely just spreading FUD. It's always so tempting, but we have to stop feeding people like that.
To the OP: I'm glad things are running well for you. When running a RC or Beta OS with few official drivers it's not unlikely that you will run into issues like that, so I'm happy things are solved. Enjoy the new build.
StarsFan4Life
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- May 29, 2008
- Messages
- 472
Alright....I take it back....we are still having an issue.
I downloaded and ran Furmark 1.7.0. On 1900x1080 running defaut stability test, it ran decently, the temp reached 75c and then CRASH within 30 seconds.....screens went blank but no BSOD.
Ran again at 1280 x 1024, it lasted 116 seconds and same thing happened.
Can we now say "hardware issue" or is it still the lack of good drivers for Win7 64bit?
I downloaded and ran Furmark 1.7.0. On 1900x1080 running defaut stability test, it ran decently, the temp reached 75c and then CRASH within 30 seconds.....screens went blank but no BSOD.
Ran again at 1280 x 1024, it lasted 116 seconds and same thing happened.
Can we now say "hardware issue" or is it still the lack of good drivers for Win7 64bit?
If the screen went blank and you were running Furmark, it's definitely possible your videocard is overheating or there's an issue with your powersupply. Unfortunately it looks like you have some stability troubleshooting to work on, but this sounds more like a hardware issue.
OmegaAvenger
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2007
- Messages
- 3,240
New computers from HP/Compaq are all x64, both laptops and desktops. If they as a company are brave enough to do it.. you can do it too.
When I built this computer (and rebuilt with a q6600 later) I was on x64 vista from day 1 and I have never had any major issues at all. They well all minor, like no drivers for a webcam from 3 years ago (later fixed by logitech)
There is no reason not to go x64 unless you are installed vista/windows 7 basic, in which case you are just shooting yourself in the foot anyway.
When I built this computer (and rebuilt with a q6600 later) I was on x64 vista from day 1 and I have never had any major issues at all. They well all minor, like no drivers for a webcam from 3 years ago (later fixed by logitech)
There is no reason not to go x64 unless you are installed vista/windows 7 basic, in which case you are just shooting yourself in the foot anyway.
I would suggest making a new thread in General Hardware if you don't believe yourself to be savvy enough in troubleshooting the issue -- make sure the thread title is specific, and they will be more than helpful. Four or five pages deep into a thread with a different topic in the "wrong" sub-forum won't get you many people reviewing it.
stop!theradio
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 3,523
I've been using Vista Business x64 for the past 4 months or so, and I am 100% happy with it. My no-name brand PCI wifi card was up, running, and downloading updates before the OS was even fully installed. Everything worked, and still works - perfectly. I've had no program compatibility issues, no hardware driver issues, nothing. There's no reason, really, to NOT be using 64-bit right now. Might as well be set for the future. My Photoshop CS4 and Lightroom 2 64-bit .exe's definitely like the extra RAM they can use, and so will any other programs when they have 64-bit executables. There are decent 64-bit drivers for pretty much any hardware out there. Windows update found everything I needed before I even had to try. I say now is the time to switch if you're thinking about it.