cyco Posted August 23, 2007 Share Posted August 23, 2007 Well I'm looking to buy a new computer, but I've heard a lot of stuff doesn't support 64 bit currently, is this true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_to_fall Posted August 23, 2007 Share Posted August 23, 2007 Anything worth doing will support 64 bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeDaStudd Posted August 23, 2007 Share Posted August 23, 2007 Without the programs you are planning on using have 64 bit support, I wouldn't bother just use the 32 bit version. As there is a lack of drivers for the 64bit version when compared to the 32 bit. [hide=Drops]Dragon Axe x11Berserker Ring x9Warrior Ring x8SeercullDragon MedDragon Boots x4 - all less then 30 kcGodsword Shard (bandos)Granite Maul x 3Solo only - doesn't include barrows[/hide][hide=Stats][/hide] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iamdan Posted August 23, 2007 Share Posted August 23, 2007 I would go with 32 bit for the compatibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted August 23, 2007 Share Posted August 23, 2007 All 64-bit processors for home desktop PC's are backwards compatible. So why not buy a 64 bit processor machine for the future proofing not to mention it's just as cheap if not cheaper. Backwards compatible means that everything will work the same on a 64-bit processor as it would on a 32-bit one. Your only real worry should be deciding over single or dual core processors. Which in my opinion is also an easy decision. Dual core all the way. Notoriously Trollish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsavi Posted August 23, 2007 Share Posted August 23, 2007 32 bit, unless you're into CAD, in which case I applaud your bank account. Hardly anything supports 64 bit. Yay now I'm a scorpion pit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iamdan Posted August 23, 2007 Share Posted August 23, 2007 All 64-bit processors for home desktop PC's are backwards compatible. So why not buy a 64 bit processor machine for the future proofing not to mention it's just as cheap if not cheaper. Backwards compatible means that everything will work the same on a 64-bit processor as it would on a 32-bit one. Your only real worry should be deciding over single or dual core processors. Which in my opinion is also an easy decision. Dual core all the way. Dual core isn't that good imo, I'd go for core 2 duo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blade995 Posted August 23, 2007 Share Posted August 23, 2007 All 64-bit processors for home desktop PC's are backwards compatible. So why not buy a 64 bit processor machine for the future proofing not to mention it's just as cheap if not cheaper. Backwards compatible means that everything will work the same on a 64-bit processor as it would on a 32-bit one. Your only real worry should be deciding over single or dual core processors. Which in my opinion is also an easy decision. Dual core all the way. Dual core isn't that good imo, I'd go for core 2 duo. Dual core means means a processor with 2 processing cores. A core 2 duo has this. Core 2 duo is a name of a processor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyco Posted August 23, 2007 Author Share Posted August 23, 2007 Is there a noticeable difference between the two? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faux Posted August 24, 2007 Share Posted August 24, 2007 Is there a noticeable difference between the two? Between one core and two cores? Definitely :: Guess the Movie Contest Champion: pfilc23 :: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyco Posted August 24, 2007 Author Share Posted August 24, 2007 Is there a noticeable difference between the two? Between one core and two cores? Definitely I know that lol, I meant 32 and 64 bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iamdan Posted August 24, 2007 Share Posted August 24, 2007 Dual core means means a processor with 2 processing cores. A core 2 duo has this. Core 2 duo is a name of a processor. Dual core is the name of a processor also. I guess it depends what context you take it in with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sixxtoes Posted August 24, 2007 Share Posted August 24, 2007 most processors you buy now are 64 bit. They work with 32 bit, or 64 bit software. I have a 64 bit AMD 3500, i am running windows xp pro 32 bit. My brother has a core 2 duo e6850 , he is running windows xp pro 64 bit. It took him 3 days to get all his drivers installed, because every driver he had he had to download it seperately from the manufacturer's website. Yes, 64 bit is compatable with just about everything. But it will take a lot longer to get all your drivers installed, and it is a pain... now, is there a difference between them performance wise. I would say no, nothing noticable, my comp runs things just fine with 32 bit software. sorry for all the spelling errors, its 3am :-s my advice is, get a decent core 2 duo processor, and put normal windows on it (32 bit) I was goona put something really cool here...but then I put this :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doomster Posted August 24, 2007 Share Posted August 24, 2007 http://www.anandtech.com/gadgets/showdoc.aspx?i=3034 One suffestion is that 64 bit mode (Vista 64 bit running a 32 bit app) can be used to get round the 2GB virtual space problems that some applications may suffer. In Windows XP, the /3GB switch could be used to change the App/System division from 2/2 to 3/1 Using the Vista (32) option "IncreaseUserVa", they were unable to get reliability at more the 2.6GB user / 1.4 system. http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/sh ... spx?i=3044 The situation was more managable under XP, with lower virtual space usage http://www.anandtech.com/systems/showdo ... i=3060&p=1 There is now a Vista patch to assist with the excessive virtul space usage, so the need for 64 bit as a "hack" to give more virtual space to applications recedes for now. NB. You do not need to have more than 2GB RAM, to hit a 2GB or even 3GB limit, since this is virtual space - combining the actual RAM used, mapped space of devices, video card etc. and the virtual space used in swapfile - though with 1GB or less, any application in danger of hitting the virtual limit would probably be getting choked by swapfile activity as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
das1330 Posted August 24, 2007 Share Posted August 24, 2007 the difference in compatibility and performance in negligible. The biggest difference is that 32 bit operating systems can only handle a maximum of 3gb of memory, while a 64 bit os can handle some crazy number, like 16 trillion gb or something. The days of crappy compatibility, from xp 64 bit, when 64 bit was only designed for high end intanium workstations is over. The only applications that have major compatibility issues are really old hardware (win95 era) and viruses. Bottom line, get 64 bit. Most reports of poor compatability refer to xp 64 bit, designed for high end intel intanium workstations. Here is a link that explains all this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m4tty Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 every processor now supports 64 bit os's, just get 64 bit if its vista dont listen to people saying "stay 32bit", you cant use more than ~3gb of ram with 32bit and 99% of stuff works, although some old, expensive software (some CAD programs) dont work with 64bit but if thats not an issue, 32bit is a waste. xp 64bit had issues because it was so rare that people used it not many people wrote drivers and with the systems out when xp was the os for new pc's, 64bit was overkill except for professional use where they will only use 64bit if they are 100% sure all apps work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WutangFlu Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 64 bit is mainly for developers and people who do alot of HEAVY stuff.. graphic rendering 3d modeling video editing ect ect. the average consumer can get by with 32bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m4tty Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 tru, its just 90% of the arguments of why to pick 32 bit over 64 bit in an OS when both are the same price are now wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blade995 Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 tru, its just 90% of the arguments of why to pick 32 bit over 64 bit in an OS when both are the same price are now wrong. People who suggest or pick a 32bit OS aren't wrong, they have reasons just for 32bit just like people have reasons for 64bit. 64bit OSes are getting more mature everyday but the software and drivers for all products are still not there. Most hardware today will have 64bit drivers but not all will and then you will have problems. All modern hardware today has 32bit drivers so it's a safe bet with Vista 32bit that everything will work correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now