32Bit VS 64Bit OSes

Aguiluz · Post by **Aguiluz** » Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:55 pm

What are the advantages and disadvantages of them?

Post by **Skyone** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:05 am

64-bit [processors] handle 64-bit values, 64-bit operating systems are built on top of said processors to work with them. This gives for faster calculations, and the ability to expand hardware (UNLIMITED RAM OMG).

Due to technology's need for more power, we've decided it necessary to upgrade to 64-bit. Everyone will merge to 64-bit soon enough.

Harshboy · Post by **Harshboy** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:19 pm

Skyone wrote:

64-bit [processors] handle 64-bit values, 64-bit operating systems are built on top of said processors to work with them. This gives for faster calculations, and the ability to expand hardware (UNLIMITED RAM OMG).

Due to technology's need for more power, we've decided it necessary to upgrade to 64-bit. Everyone will merge to 64-bit soon enough.

What he said.

If your machine can run a 64-bit OS, do it! The performance is much better than 32-bit.

Even while having Fallout 3, aim, firefox, etc open, I still have more than 3GB free which is higher than any 32-bit machine can address and use.

Rape much?

DK · Post by DK » Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:30 pm

Also it means we'll avoid the 2038 Bug

Kyo · Post by **Kyo** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:37 pm

Oh, I'm not the only one who knows about that?

Well, it depends on the program.

Harshboy · Post by **Harshboy** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:41 pm

Kyo wrote:Oh, I'm not the only one who knows about that?

Well, it depends on the program.

I knew about that too, I was doing some surfing on new years about y2k and other computer related stuff. What will we all do in Year 10000? Oh noes!

We will all nuke each other and kill off the human race in a few years. Looks like we don't need to worry about that silly bug. We really dodged a bullet this time, for well, missiles and nuclear explosions! Neato!

nitro2k01 · Post by **nitro2k01** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 1:28 pm

DK wrote:Also it means we'll avoid the 2038 Bug

64M320N3 · Post by **64M320N3** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:36 pm

I'll start with the advantages:
Pretty much what everybody else has said above, in a 64-bit OS (such as Ubuntu x86, or more widely known, Vista64) your machine can now address 4 gigs of ram, vs. 32's 2gig. 32 bits systems just use the remaining ram as virtual memory, which some applications may maximize to run at higher speeds
Disadvantages:
Hardly compatible with any native 32 bit apps (including xp, 2000, me, etc., older versions of ubuntu, etc.) the few compatible programs will sometimes read-->you do not have enough virtual memory to run this app, which is a pain when you really have enough ram to run the app.
Also, you'll have to get later-stepped proccessors, which is becoming less of an issue now. Intel's 64 procs support both 64 and 32, or, if you're an AMD fan, then you must get at minimum an Athlon 64 proc.

In short, it's worth it in the log run, but now i want more native 64 bit apps!
What's the good of an OS that has no programs written for it?
For newer games, it's already programmed for it, but for slightly older games, it's just a matter of patching.
Last thing, native 32 bit programs that can run in a 64 bit schematic cannot maximize the 64 bit advantages, and most of the programs out there are written in 32 bit. Personally, i haven't seen many programs fully use the x86's potential.
The question is: are you an early adopter or not?
If no, then stay with 32 bit systems just a little bit longer; it's definitely not worth it
(yet...)

Post by **bicostp** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 10:17 am

64M320N3 wrote:I'll start with the advantages:
Pretty much what everybody else has said above, in a 64-bit OS (such as Ubuntu x86, or more widely known, Vista64) your machine can now address 4 gigs of ram, vs. 32's 2gig.

No, 32 bit has a cap of about 4 gigs. 64 bit processors can address up to 16 exabytes of RAM. (That is, 16 MILLION TERABYTES.) Mind-boggling, isn't it?

(But it looks like most 64 bit OSes cap it off at a couple hundred gigs.)

32 bits systems just use the remaining ram as virtual memory, which some applications may maximize to run at higher speeds

No, they can't use the surplus memory at all because they can't count that high.

Hardly compatible with any native 32 bit apps (including xp, 2000, me, etc., older versions of ubuntu, etc.)

That's a misconception. The 32 bit emulation layers work fine now, just like running 16 bit apps on 32 bit OSes.

Also, you'll have to get later-stepped proccessors, which is becoming less of an issue now. Intel's 64 procs support both 64 and 32, or, if you're an AMD fan, then you must get at minimum an Athlon 64 proc.

I think basically every processor made since 2006 is 64 bit.

Kurt_ · Post by **Kurt_** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 1:37 pm

This is making me want to switch to a 64-bit operating system.

Care to recommend some that don't end in the words "Vista", "Mac", or "Linux"?

Kyo · Post by **Kyo** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 1:55 pm

freeBSD?

timewarp · Post by **timewarp** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 3:13 pm

Kurt_ wrote:This is making me want to switch to a 64-bit operating system.

Care to recommend some that don't end in the words "Vista", "Mac", or "Linux"?

That's like asking for cars not made in North America, Europe, or Asia.

lifeisbetterwithketchup · Tue Jan 13, 2009 3:16 pm

Kurt_ wrote:This is making me want to switch to a 64-bit operating system.

Care to recommend some that don't end in the words "Vista", "Mac", or "Linux"?

How about "7"?

Kurt_ · Post by **Kurt_** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:31 pm

I like XP.

I have a C2Duo 2.6Ghz, 3 gigs ram, Nvidia 8800 NVS, with a 1440 x 900 14.1" screen. I want to make the best of it.

ghosstt · Post by **ghosstt** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:57 pm

You were just asking for a 64 bit OS though..

benheck.com Forums

32Bit VS 64Bit OSes

32Bit VS 64Bit OSes

Re: 32Bit VS 64Bit OSes

Re: 32Bit VS 64Bit OSes