So, VISTA 32 or 64 bit version?

D

Darth Bobo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 6, 2007
Messages
1,057
Basically I'm lost here as I see that there will be both 32 and 64 bit versions of all Vista releases. What are the pros and cons of each? What should one choose provided they, like me, just want to game, watch movies, do a bit office applications and maybe a little photoshop?

Thanks for any input that is either funny or helps me get an idea of the differences of these two (besides the extra 32 bit... :D ).
 
32bit - better support, only 4gb of addressable memory space. (Includes things like gfx memory, so people are hitting this already in desktop machines)
64bit - lackluster support that is improving, terrabyte range memory support.
 
If you take into account the future though it might be better to get the 64-bit version. Once apps and games start taking advantage it might actually end up being worth it. But who knows when that will be.
 
I was under the impression that 32 and 64bit versons would be included in all retail packaging of Vista, each on a seperate DVD.

Maybe this has changed.
 
digital_exhaust said:
I was under the impression that 32 and 64bit versons would be included in all retail packaging of Vista, each on a seperate DVD.

Maybe this has changed.
Click to expand...

No, you are absolutely right, however this does not extend to the OEM version where you'll have to choose between the 32 and 64 bit version.. (Everything I have seen indicates this anyways)

The reason that I want to know is that in a month or two I'm going to get myself a new rig and by then I will have to choose which version of Vista I want...
 
I ran all the Vista beta's in 32bit, so I have no actual experience with 64 bit Vista, but from what I have read from those who have, I cannot see any reason not to go with 64 bit. It may be a little sketchy at first, but I'm sure that by the time sp1 is out everything should be fine.
There are a few people around here who have been running 64bit, and I don't really recall anyone complaining about it too much.
Apparently, it is a much better product than 64bit XP has proven to be.
 
Go with the 64bit. I'm currently using Vista RTM x64 and its been a lot better then I expected. I have drivers for all my hardware and the only thing I'm really missing is temperature monitor software, but I can wait on that.
 
if you are into little lesser known apps, 64bit sucks as many times small devs do not make 64bit compatible apps.

If you only use the main stuff (office, CAD, adobe stuff, etc.) 64bit is great.
 
neeyo said:
64 bit chews up a buttload more memory.

http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64/archive/2006/11/25/memory-for-64-bit-windows-vista.aspx
Click to expand...
From reading that I can't tell if this person knows what they are doing, because the memory graph in task manager shows ram useage along with the graphics caching, you can get a much more accurate reading from the management console. I also saw no comparisons to the levels of 32bit vs 64bit, and I had no problems at all while running pre RTM on x64 as far as memory use goes. In fact it was barely more than x64 windows xp.

I got all of my memory readings from the management console, because it shows a more accurate reading minus the caching from areo. Please forgive my sloppy explination while poking holes in what he said, all I am trying to point out is there might be more here than meets the eye than according to that link.
 
That person doesn't know what he's doing or what the hell he's talking about in that linked article. Scary when so-called "experts" don't have a god damned clue, bleh.

Anyway, Vista does not and will not come with two DVDs in the retail packaging, and it will not come on one single DVD; it can't because you can't fit the 32 bit version and the 64 bit version on the same single layer DVD, and Microsoft isn't going to pony up the additional expense to release Vista on a dual layer DVD.

All versions for retail sale will be a single DVD with the 32 bit version of Vista on it - all editions are on the same DVD, the product key you get with the purhase merely unlocks the specific edition you want to install (and paid for). After you acquire a 32 bit version, whichever edition you choose, you can then request the 64 bit version from Microsoft for a nominal (that means relatively small) shipping & handling charge, and give 6-8 weeks shipping time, probably less.

My take on it is this: if you've got a 64 bit capable CPU, one you might even have just bought recently (in the past 2 months or so) for the intentions of building a Vista machine, I say go for 64 bit and never look back. At first you may have some issues, most notably drivers - "It's always the drivers..." - and possibly some software.

Let's face it: if you've got old DOS games, forget it. If you've got old Win95 games, forget it. If you've got stuff written for 98/98SE, forget it. Ya need to get with the program and move on, I say. Windows can only be backwards compatible up to a point and then it's just ridiculous.

Let's face it part deux: It's always the games. People care more about games it seems on their PCs than anything else they seem to use them for, typical computer owners so I can't fault them for that. What I can fault them for is continuing to use old outdated software because "Well, I really like that game..." If that's the case, why not drop into a Salvation Army Thrift Store and buy an old Celeron 500 machine or something like a P3 machine for a discount and turn it into a dedicated "old games" machine.

I'm not picking on anyone here, just saying that this thread - and all the others like it - will probably just turn into a "Vista sucks for gaming" thing like all the others, and I get really sick of seeing it because I've answered this question - from my own point of view - like 80 times now around here and it gets old - and I'm not the only one that keeps contributing the same valid points of view.

There's a ton of wealth floating around at this forum, the Search feature can help locate it rather quickly instead of seeing the same questions asked for the umpteenth time.

Vista 64 bit is the way to go... that's my opinion, and I'm... stickin' to it...
 
bbz_Ghost said:
Let's face it part deux: It's always the games. People care more about games it seems on their PCs than anything else they seem to use them for, typical computer owners so I can't fault them for that. What I can fault them for is continuing to use old outdated software because "Well, I really like that game..." If that's the case, why not drop into a Salvation Army Thrift Store and buy an old Celeron 500 machine or something like a P3 machine for a discount and turn it into a dedicated "old games" machine.
Click to expand...

Primarily because most monitors don't come with with 2 DVI ports, and I don't have the room for an extra monitor.

In short: they can pry Baldur's Gate 2 from my cold dead hands. Or, if they prefer, produce a new RPG with 200 hours of gameplay and a 2d 3/4 view and great storyline and characters.
 
bbz_Ghost said:
Anyway, Vista does not and will not come with two DVDs in the retail packaging, and it will not come on one single DVD; it can't because you can't fit the 32 bit version and the 64 bit version on the same single layer DVD, and Microsoft isn't going to pony up the additional expense to release Vista on a dual layer DVD.

All versions for retail sale will be a single DVD with the 32 bit version of Vista on it - all editions are on the same DVD, the product key you get with the purhase merely unlocks the specific edition you want to install (and paid for). After you acquire a 32 bit version, whichever edition you choose, you can then request the 64 bit version from Microsoft for a nominal (that means relatively small) shipping & handling charge, and give 6-8 weeks shipping time, probably less...
Click to expand...
Can you please point me to the microsoft source on this. I've heard so much back and forth. I understand I might have to order the stupid thing from them, but that is going to blow having to wait all of that time. You would imagine at almost 400 dollars for a full version dvd for ULT, they could afford 2 dvd's. CHRIST.
 
I have a FX55 so ...would be safe to say that unless you are really using apps 64 is the way to go. if you're a gamer /casual internet whore get the 32?
 
I'd say stick with XP32 for a year or two and get the Vista64 when the support matures. If some day upon a time there will be a need for something only Vista / 64bit memory addressing can offer then it's worth the money. Right now there's absolutely no reason to migrate to Vista. That's N and O as in NO reason.
 
I am going with the 64 bit version because - If im spending 400$ on an operating system... it better last me a long long long time. And im already needing more ram that my 2GB's i have now... i can only immagine in 3 years when Vista SP2 is out... I will want 8 + GB... etc..
 
USMC2Hard4U said:
I am going with the 64 bit version because - If im spending 400$ on an operating system... it better last me a long long long time. And im already needing more ram that my 2GB's i have now... i can only immagine in 3 years when Vista SP2 is out... I will want 8 + GB... etc..
Click to expand...

Here's a better idea: Save the $400, buy yourself an upgrade with that money. Because Vista will not bring anything but problems to you at the moment, especially the 64-bit release. Or can you say XP is not working for you now? With Vista64 you _will_ run into serious problems. Guaranteed.
 
Finn said:
Here's a better idea: Save the $400, buy yourself an upgrade with that money. Because Vista will not bring anything but problems to you at the moment, especially the 64-bit release. Or can you say XP is not working for you now? With Vista64 you _will_ run into serious problems. Guaranteed.
Click to expand...

I dont know if you can see the sig in my system, but i dont need an upgrade. Plus vista is a new toy to play with.
 
Thank for the input people :)

While I can certainly understand that 64bit is the future, I'd like to game now (main reason for getting a new PC anyways, most of my work is done on a Mac.). I guess that means that I should go for the 32bit version?
 
Eh, to each their own. I'd opt for the 64-bit, but then again I'm not upgrading to Vista until I have a damn good reason to..... like Crysis.
 
If you're gonna buy it, then buy it. That entitles you to the 64 bit version for shipping and handling, and then you can just install BOTH of them more than likely in a dual boot situation: 32 and 64 bit versions on the same machine at the same time. All sorts of possibilities - and from what I've seen the same key is used for 32 or 64 bit versions, sooo...

As for finding an actual Microsoft source for the information about the single DVD and not two DVDs in the box, you won't find one. It's word of mouth, leaked out to several people in the know over the past few months. It's nice to have friends in Redmond sometimes... :D
 
Im running vista 64 bit right now. other than some missing drivers (minimal now) and
the occasional broken program, you would never know a difference. It doesnt even seem faster at all.

One strange thing is that I use software called chemdraw 10.0 that I use for school, it is made for XP, and does not work in 32 bit vista, but in 64 bit it works fine...:confused:
 
bbz_Ghost said:
As for finding an actual Microsoft source for the information about the single DVD and not two DVDs in the box, you won't find one. It's word of mouth, leaked out to several people in the know over the past few months. It's nice to have friends in Redmond sometimes... :D
Click to expand...
HRM. Well there are several results on google from several sites all quoting sources as well saying that both the 32bit and 64bit would be in the same box. I don't know what to believe until I break into the damn package.
 
convexion said:
Eh, to each their own. I'd opt for the 64-bit, but then again I'm not upgrading to Vista until I have a damn good reason to..... like Crysis.
Click to expand...

Im kind of on the same boat as you. Crysis will be the very first reason for me to go to Windows Vista. I will be going the 64 bit route myself. I think it's a good idea to wait till that point cus then I'll have enough in my checking to build my new rig all at once. On top of that, all the new procs will be out, the R600's should be out, & other hardware which should hopfully show to be 100% compatible with the OS. This is one of those times where it is good to wait =).
 
Note though, that if you do choose to go with the 64 bit edition verify that all your drivers are WHQL certified. 64 bit editions of Vista Require Certified Signed drivers. You can install the driver, but soon as its done, 64 bit Vista will disable it and the hardware will not work.

You can get around this by Pushing F8 during startup and running Vista without Driver Authentication, but in order to do this you must hit F8 every time you boot your computer.

So, take that for what you will. In the end it means safer, more stable drivers. But, it also means you need to hope all your hardware and software manufactures who implement drivers have them signed.

The only problem software I have come up to was orginally my Audio Driver, and then my VPN Driver. Both have been fixed. =)
 
i'm going with the 64bit version and i will be trying my best to get everyone else to do the same. It is time that we go 64bit. I'm a 3d animator and i deal with large amounts of data that win32 can not handle due to its 3.5gig limit.

Its just time we switch. Now is the best chance we have at changing the industry for the better, new os for all, so lets all go 64bit
 
I'm using xp x64 already, but as much as I would like to tell everyone it's great, some games just *wont* work. And publishers dont care if it's not on their supported operating systems list. I've had some games fail to install on any operating system other than xp 32, even though it worked fine in win2k and winxp 64bit.
 
I'm running 64bit Vista on one machine. Driver wise, my only problem has been with Creative, their support site seems to be down and their auto-update keeps sending me to the page for Mexico, go figure. I don't even know if they have Vista 64 bit drivers ready yet.

Software wise, I can't get Mcafee Virus Scan Enterprise 7.1 or my older version of Perfect Disk to work. Looks like I'm in for some forced software upgrades.

I haven't tried installing any games on that machine yet.
 
I thought AMD was all jizzing away when the Athlon64 was first released all about the 64bit this and that and how it would change our lives Well WinXP64 never took off, and now I here there are both 32 and 64bit version's of Vista ? Are not all gamer's running 64bit cpu's today either Athlon's or Core2Duo's ? So why is there even a 32bit version at all ? Why did AMD cram this whole 64bit revolution down our mouth's if no OS is even ready prime time for it, to give us the better and faster performance 64bit was touted as
 
I could see x64 bit in few years from now ! but no way right now .Look how long it's going to get DX10 and software going let alone X64 .I think it'a wasted money .
 
Why did AMD cram this whole 64bit revolution down our mouth's if no OS is even ready prime time for it, to give us the better and faster performance 64bit was touted as
Click to expand...

How did they cram it down our throats? Athlon 64 processors were better than the Pentium 4/Itanium processors, while being both 32 and 64 bit compatible. They were cheaper or equally priced, too.

Vista 64 has been running great so far, other than a few software incompatibilities that I mentioned earlier. I'm having some trouble with video codecs in Media Center, but everything runs fine in Media Player 11.
 
i've been on x64 vista for about a week. I'm very happy with it. The only driver I don't have installed is an RTM creative driver for my x-fi. Everything else is great. I don't game mind you. Otherwise, the only problems i've seen have been aero kicking out when using a skype video window that's too big, and some com surrogate problem in windows media player when i added videos to the library. Otherwise, i've been happy with 64 and i'll certainly stay here. I'd rather move forward than back.
 
LOL well I may sound strange saying this but...

I like to get the 64 bit versions always because I like to feel like I have the potential for some uber power!!! I like to think Im getting performance differences, and there are a few 64 bit programs here and there that have performance differences.

I am definitely going to be aiming for 64 bit from now on, the more people who say "screw it, Im goin 64 bit" the quicker it becomes more wide-spread and widely used.
 
So will any new games coming out run better on the 64bit version ?

I read an interview from like two years ago about how the Unreal3 engine was designed to run like 30% faster under a 64bit code, but I have not heard much about that since then ? That interview was right around the time the Athlon64 released
 
Man this fight leans so far either way its absurd. People feel like whatever they choose to do should just be the defacto standard when it comes to anything. Security, 64bit, raid etc blah blah blah. I use xp pro x64, and when I tested vista I used the 64bit version. Personally I ran into no problems, and all of my hardware had 64bit drivers available. If this is your situation then most likely you'll be happy with it. You won't be missing anything by running on 32bit though, not unless you have 4gb+ of memory. So really its up to you, and whatever you decide nobody can fault you for. Its not a waste of money to go either way because the cost of having both versions of vista is apparently trivial.

As far as games coming out in 64bit versions.. I don't know about the future but there are already 64bit binaries for some games such as farcry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top