The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Hey guys, right now I'm looking to make the transition from XP to Vista, but I have a quick question. Currently my rig is set up with an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200, and I was wondering if it would be more beneficial to go with the 64 Bit version or the 32 bit version.
I've heard that there are problems with the 64 bit version and gaming, but I wasn't sure of how concrete those were. I play a really wide variety of games, so I want to go with the one that would be most beneficial to gaming.
64 bit if you plan on using more than 4GB of ram. Otherwise, 32 bit. At the 3-4gb memory range you might end up with lower (or at least, equitable) performance with x32 or x64 because while it can do some things faster, it will use more memory to store things in 64 bits instead of 32 bits.
You might run into some compatibility issues with older games and a few newer games with developers that suck. I'm a big fan of Vista x64, but would recommend not leaping into it before you look.
With 2gb of ram, you want to use 32 bit. You could use x64 with what you've got, but you'd basically be sacrificing compatibility for no performance gains.
Dehumanized on
0
acidlacedpenguinInstitutionalizedSafe in jail.Registered Userregular
edited August 2008
for the record there's very few compatibility issues with 64bit vista compared to the 32bit version.
Wouldn't only 64-bit vista let him run specific 64-bit executables?
Games are still 32-bit but some might have 64-bit versions available.
negative.
Vista 64 can run 32 bit applications with no problem. Issues can come up for device drivers, but for a vast majority of device drivers if vista is supported then chances are both 32 and 64 bit are supported.
That's strange because I was playing World In Conflict and I have Vista 64, I recommend you check out your computer. Might be due to Vista 64 but might not be.
The only time that Vista 64 has been an issue for me was one anti virus program didn't support it but in the end I went with a better program so it was hardly a bad thing. Vista 64 for me has run better than any other program I've had be it Vista 32 or XP, I never had one crash or BSOD. Had it for several months now.
Some might rag on Vista but overall the 64 bit version has been the smoothest running version of them all for me.
Well I see that a lot of you are really enjoying Vista with no problems so I thought I'd let you know that it hasn't been so smooth for me. I got a new PC about 3 weeks ago and thought I'd try Vista x32. I have 2 gig RAM currently but am thinking of getting 2 more and hoping it might solve some of the issues I've been having.
Every game that I have tried so far has been having issues. For the record those games are:
Mass Effect
Grid
Half Life 2 and all Orange Box variations
Kotor
It seems to be the same issue across all titles (maybe?)
They all run fine for a while but sooner or later they all crash to desktop. Mass Effect has been most stable, followed by Grid and all HL2 based apps frequently crash. Annoying considering I play a fair bit of TF2.
After 3 weeks of googling and my brother's expert tech support I think the most likely reason for my woes is related to RAM and DX9/10.
I'm surprised no one else in the thread yet has mentioned anything because it seems to be a fairly widespread issue. It's early days though, I guess.
"Who's in Charge Here? DirectX 10? DirectX 9 Games? Pick Two
The problem is that while DirectX 10 manages memory address allocations for GPUs and applications, virtualizing video memory address space allocation, most games still use DirectX 9 (or earlier versions). DirectX 9 and earlier DirectX versions do not manage memory address space allocations, but leave the management task up to individual games. Consequently, when you play DirectX 9 games under Windows Vista, Vista's DirectX 10's busy managing virtual memory addresses, but meanwhile each DirectX 9 game is also managing virtual memory addresses. DirectX 10 and each DX9 game are unaware of the other's activities. Sooner or later, thanks to this 'double-dipping' of address space, the virtual address bucket is empty - and your system heads off to Crashland!"
Also, I just did a BurnInTest and got 77 errors allocating RAM. That confirms my suspicions, doesn't it? Or do I just have bad RAM? It's brand new. Like the rest of my system.
This is all a shame because I actually quite like Vista and the things it improves on over XP. Maybe those things should have been in XP in the first place but that's another matter. It's a little frustrating.
First off, the hotfix for the issue your describing was in service pack one, which was released almost 5 months ago, if you don't have it yet..well...your doing it wrong o_O secondly, quite a few game installers (for games released after vista launched naturally) checked if you had the hotfix, and prompted you to go download it if you didn't, so its not like it was exactly hard to search out, annoying? yes (even though it never affected me) but at least easy to fix. Its sad that you spent three weeks trying to fix it, but having automatic updates turned on would have automatically downloaded SP1 and installed it for you anyway.
The_SpaniardIt's never lupinesIrvine, CaliforniaRegistered Userregular
edited August 2008
I have 32bit, only because I built this PC about 8 months ago and 64bit was still having some issues. I have 4 gigs of ram in this thing and will eventually upgrade to 64bit, but when I do I'll have to get a new scanner because it doesn't support 64.
Well I see that a lot of you are really enjoying Vista with no problems so I thought I'd let you know that it hasn't been so smooth for me. I got a new PC about 3 weeks ago and thought I'd try Vista x32. I have 2 gig RAM currently but am thinking of getting 2 more and hoping it might solve some of the issues I've been having.
Every game that I have tried so far has been having issues. For the record those games are:
Mass Effect
Grid
Half Life 2 and all Orange Box variations
Kotor
It seems to be the same issue across all titles (maybe?)
They all run fine for a while but sooner or later they all crash to desktop. Mass Effect has been most stable, followed by Grid and all HL2 based apps frequently crash. Annoying considering I play a fair bit of TF2.
After 3 weeks of googling and my brother's expert tech support I think the most likely reason for my woes is related to RAM and DX9/10.
I'm surprised no one else in the thread yet has mentioned anything because it seems to be a fairly widespread issue. It's early days though, I guess.
"Who's in Charge Here? DirectX 10? DirectX 9 Games? Pick Two
The problem is that while DirectX 10 manages memory address allocations for GPUs and applications, virtualizing video memory address space allocation, most games still use DirectX 9 (or earlier versions). DirectX 9 and earlier DirectX versions do not manage memory address space allocations, but leave the management task up to individual games. Consequently, when you play DirectX 9 games under Windows Vista, Vista's DirectX 10's busy managing virtual memory addresses, but meanwhile each DirectX 9 game is also managing virtual memory addresses. DirectX 10 and each DX9 game are unaware of the other's activities. Sooner or later, thanks to this 'double-dipping' of address space, the virtual address bucket is empty - and your system heads off to Crashland!"
Also, I just did a BurnInTest and got 77 errors allocating RAM. That confirms my suspicions, doesn't it? Or do I just have bad RAM? It's brand new. Like the rest of my system.
This is all a shame because I actually quite like Vista and the things it improves on over XP. Maybe those things should have been in XP in the first place but that's another matter. It's a little frustrating.
You've got bad ram
or your motherboard doesn't like the ram you got very much... unless it was something you got from a reputable PC manufacturer
First off, the hotfix for the issue your describing was in service pack one, which was released almost 5 months ago, if you don't have it yet..well...your doing it wrong o_O secondly, quite a few game installers (for games released after vista launched naturally) checked if you had the hotfix, and prompted you to go download it if you didn't, so its not like it was exactly hard to search out, annoying? yes (even though it never affected me) but at least easy to fix. Its sad that you spent three weeks trying to fix it, but having automatic updates turned on would have automatically downloaded SP1 and installed it for you anyway.
Yeah I have SP1.
I was considering switching to 64 bit.
Perhaps I do have bad RAM. Or mobo doesn't like it. That would explain a few things. How do I definitively prove/disprove it?
DaveTheWave on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
AbsoluteZeroThe new film by Quentin KoopantinoRegistered Userregular
edited August 2008
I loves me some 64bit Vista, but it is a PAIN in the fucking ASS to get set up (finding the right drivers, etc). If you aren't going to use 4GB or more ram, don't bother with it.
First off, the hotfix for the issue your describing was in service pack one, which was released almost 5 months ago, if you don't have it yet..well...your doing it wrong o_O secondly, quite a few game installers (for games released after vista launched naturally) checked if you had the hotfix, and prompted you to go download it if you didn't, so its not like it was exactly hard to search out, annoying? yes (even though it never affected me) but at least easy to fix. Its sad that you spent three weeks trying to fix it, but having automatic updates turned on would have automatically downloaded SP1 and installed it for you anyway.
Yeah I have SP1.
I was considering switching to 64 bit.
Perhaps I do have bad RAM. Or mobo doesn't like it. That would explain a few things. How do I definitively prove/disprove it?
If you have SP1, thats not the issue your hitting, the best way to check your RAM is to download, burn, boot and run this http://www.memtest.org/#downiso
I've been running Vista 64 for some six months now. Originally I was a 32 devotee, but six months ago I got a spectacular deal on 4 extra gigs of RAM, bringing me to 6, which can't be addressed in 32 bit.
In those six months, I have had exactly one major crash directly related to the 64 bit-ness, and it didn't bring the computer down or anything--just the program.
I can't attest to performance improvements or lack thereof, but look at it this way: it's not gonna be too much longer before >4gb becomes the standard. You might as well save yourself a reformat and start on 64 now.
Ledneh on
0
The_SpaniardIt's never lupinesIrvine, CaliforniaRegistered Userregular
edited August 2008
So with a solid 4 gigs of ram that I'm sitting at right now is there any point in me upgrading just yet? Or should I wait till the next big round of games to come out?
I have Vista Ultimate x64 on my desktop and Vista Home Premium x32 on my laptop. I use Ultimate x64 because I have 4gb of RAM and a Quad Core processor. It just seemed natural to me.
In the 8 months with Ultimate x64, only one piece of software will not work. Star Wars: Empire at War and it's expansion, Force of Corruption. LucasArts has acknowledged the problem but refuse to fix it.
JustinSane07 on
0
AbsoluteZeroThe new film by Quentin KoopantinoRegistered Userregular
edited August 2008
Adobe Audition does not work in Vista x64 and that pisses me off immensely.
Adobe Photoshop does work, but does not take advantage of 64bit processing, and that also pisses me off. Not quite as much as the Audition thing, though.
That's strange because I was playing World In Conflict and I have Vista 64, I recommend you check out your computer. Might be due to Vista 64 but might not be.
Well, all I know is that this machine, on 32-bit XP and 2gb of RAM (I'm at 4gb now, part of why I upgraded to 64-bit) ran WiC perfectly before. I haven't had the same problem with other games. Just WiC. :x
Ram is so cheap, that seriously, I feel like slapping anyone who says anything about 32-bit. 64 is the way the future is heading, why not get on the damn bandwagon? Or does being a dinosaur appeal to you?
if you ever want to use the full benifit of dx10, or use linked video cards, you have to go 64. I fond this out the hard way. But it doesn't matter what any one here recommends. Microsoft will send you the other version for free. So you can get both and decide for yourself. I run quad video cards, so I have to run 64. It's ok, but is a pain for finding certain programs, like decent antivirus software. I used zonealarm but it doesn't support 64, so that's 50$ down the tubes on upgrade. Alot of games won
T easily work either. As I said, get both and decide for yourself, just remember you lose everything on install so don't load programs for 5 days and then install the other version because of will wipe it all out and stick everything in a sub directory. You'll have to reinstall everything again.
P.S. If you don't plan on getting more than 2 gigs of ram don't bother upgrading to Vista the system slow down is huge. Get 4 gigs or forget it. Something else I learned the hard way.
Sonar on
I'm building a real pirate ship. Really. Wanna help? Click here!
caffron said: "and cat pee is not a laughing matter"
It will use 3.333~ gigs but no more. As I said, you can go to the Microsoft website and they'll send you the 64 bit version for just shipping costs. You'll probably be fine if you aren't planning on doing anything fancy with DX10 or strange hardware configurations.
Sonar on
I'm building a real pirate ship. Really. Wanna help? Click here!
caffron said: "and cat pee is not a laughing matter"
Let's be as clear as possible here: 32-bit implementations of windows will use exactly 4gb of memory. However, this amount of memory isn't just your RAM -- it's everything in your computer that requires memory addresses. This includes stuff like your video card's RAM and various other parts of your system. RAM is last-in-line for receiving addresses. Memory that isn't addressed can't be used by the system. At 4GB of installed RAM, there's certainly RAM that your system cannot address. This amount is dependent on how many memory addresses your system is using.
Now, at 4GB of installed RAM, you've got a bit of a dilemma to sort out. By moving to 64-bit, you will be able to address the full amount of RAM on your system, assuming no compatibility issues exist with your motherboard (which should be pretty rare with modern hardware). In the move to x64, it's important to realize that for all 64 bit applications you run, they will use more memory than their x86 counterparts. They store data in 64 bit words, instead of 32 bit words. So, you might end up installing x64 and end up basically breaking even on the amount of memory truly available to your system. The further you venture above 4GB installed memory, the less likely this becomes. I my x64 vista, but really think it should be something that should be given some good thought before jumping into unless you've got a system that could very easily be shown to see gains from it (hi 8GB memory )
Just do it, go 64-bit, even Dell, Asus, HP, etc are shipping a bunch of consumer desktop PCs/laptops with it and in the last few months 64-bit usage of Vista has tripled or so, if I remember correctly.
And as far as drivers go, meh, you should have little problems. Hell, I wanted to use a second soundcard for some stuff so I went and dug up an old Creative Soundblaster one, put it in a PCI slot and booted up Vista.
I searched the Internets for drivers and had no luck at all, not even on Creative sites, but I ran Windows Update and it found drivers for it and installed them all and now it works perfectly -- this is with a PCI soundcard that is who knows how many years old on the 64-bit version of Vista.
I'm having problems getting workable drivers for my 8800 using Vista 64... the current ones either a) lock the system down upon restart, or b) the monitors kick out, as if they aren't plugged in at all.
Alright, so if I want to order the 64 edition at shipping cost, where do I go to do that?
Did you buy a retail copy? If so, there should be a slip of cardboard/paper/whatever you'd call it with a URL on it where you go put in your serial #, address and payment details.
Ram is so cheap, that seriously, I feel like slapping anyone who says anything about 32-bit. 64 is the way the future is heading, why not get on the damn bandwagon? Or does being a dinosaur appeal to you?
Well, being able to run everything does. And even if you can address more ram, unless the applications are designed for a 64bit operating system they're limited to using only 2gb and most don't hit that.
Posts
You might run into some compatibility issues with older games and a few newer games with developers that suck. I'm a big fan of Vista x64, but would recommend not leaping into it before you look.
He all but said 32 bit. I use Vista on 32 bit and it runs just fine.
Edit: I also have 2 gigs of RAM.
Steam: pazython
Games are still 32-bit but some might have 64-bit versions available.
negative.
Vista 64 can run 32 bit applications with no problem. Issues can come up for device drivers, but for a vast majority of device drivers if vista is supported then chances are both 32 and 64 bit are supported.
___
NNID: carmofin
3DS: 2852 6971 9745
Throw me a PM if you add me
Man, what are you trying to install that still is packaged in a 16-bit binary? Even SkiFree has been recompiled for 32-bit.
The only time that Vista 64 has been an issue for me was one anti virus program didn't support it but in the end I went with a better program so it was hardly a bad thing. Vista 64 for me has run better than any other program I've had be it Vista 32 or XP, I never had one crash or BSOD. Had it for several months now.
Some might rag on Vista but overall the 64 bit version has been the smoothest running version of them all for me.
Every game that I have tried so far has been having issues. For the record those games are:
Mass Effect
Grid
Half Life 2 and all Orange Box variations
Kotor
It seems to be the same issue across all titles (maybe?)
They all run fine for a while but sooner or later they all crash to desktop. Mass Effect has been most stable, followed by Grid and all HL2 based apps frequently crash. Annoying considering I play a fair bit of TF2.
After 3 weeks of googling and my brother's expert tech support I think the most likely reason for my woes is related to RAM and DX9/10.
I'm surprised no one else in the thread yet has mentioned anything because it seems to be a fairly widespread issue. It's early days though, I guess.
"Who's in Charge Here? DirectX 10? DirectX 9 Games? Pick Two
The problem is that while DirectX 10 manages memory address allocations for GPUs and applications, virtualizing video memory address space allocation, most games still use DirectX 9 (or earlier versions). DirectX 9 and earlier DirectX versions do not manage memory address space allocations, but leave the management task up to individual games. Consequently, when you play DirectX 9 games under Windows Vista, Vista's DirectX 10's busy managing virtual memory addresses, but meanwhile each DirectX 9 game is also managing virtual memory addresses. DirectX 10 and each DX9 game are unaware of the other's activities. Sooner or later, thanks to this 'double-dipping' of address space, the virtual address bucket is empty - and your system heads off to Crashland!"
From here
Also, I just did a BurnInTest and got 77 errors allocating RAM. That confirms my suspicions, doesn't it? Or do I just have bad RAM? It's brand new. Like the rest of my system.
This is all a shame because I actually quite like Vista and the things it improves on over XP. Maybe those things should have been in XP in the first place but that's another matter. It's a little frustrating.
You've got bad ram
or your motherboard doesn't like the ram you got very much... unless it was something you got from a reputable PC manufacturer
Yeah I have SP1.
I was considering switching to 64 bit.
Perhaps I do have bad RAM. Or mobo doesn't like it. That would explain a few things. How do I definitively prove/disprove it?
In those six months, I have had exactly one major crash directly related to the 64 bit-ness, and it didn't bring the computer down or anything--just the program.
I can't attest to performance improvements or lack thereof, but look at it this way: it's not gonna be too much longer before >4gb becomes the standard. You might as well save yourself a reformat and start on 64 now.
In the 8 months with Ultimate x64, only one piece of software will not work. Star Wars: Empire at War and it's expansion, Force of Corruption. LucasArts has acknowledged the problem but refuse to fix it.
Adobe Photoshop does work, but does not take advantage of 64bit processing, and that also pisses me off. Not quite as much as the Audition thing, though.
Well, all I know is that this machine, on 32-bit XP and 2gb of RAM (I'm at 4gb now, part of why I upgraded to 64-bit) ran WiC perfectly before. I haven't had the same problem with other games. Just WiC. :x
T easily work either. As I said, get both and decide for yourself, just remember you lose everything on install so don't load programs for 5 days and then install the other version because of will wipe it all out and stick everything in a sub directory. You'll have to reinstall everything again.
P.S. If you don't plan on getting more than 2 gigs of ram don't bother upgrading to Vista the system slow down is huge. Get 4 gigs or forget it. Something else I learned the hard way.
caffron said: "and cat pee is not a laughing matter"
caffron said: "and cat pee is not a laughing matter"
Now, at 4GB of installed RAM, you've got a bit of a dilemma to sort out. By moving to 64-bit, you will be able to address the full amount of RAM on your system, assuming no compatibility issues exist with your motherboard (which should be pretty rare with modern hardware). In the move to x64, it's important to realize that for all 64 bit applications you run, they will use more memory than their x86 counterparts. They store data in 64 bit words, instead of 32 bit words. So, you might end up installing x64 and end up basically breaking even on the amount of memory truly available to your system. The further you venture above 4GB installed memory, the less likely this becomes. I my x64 vista, but really think it should be something that should be given some good thought before jumping into unless you've got a system that could very easily be shown to see gains from it (hi 8GB memory )
And as far as drivers go, meh, you should have little problems. Hell, I wanted to use a second soundcard for some stuff so I went and dug up an old Creative Soundblaster one, put it in a PCI slot and booted up Vista.
I searched the Internets for drivers and had no luck at all, not even on Creative sites, but I ran Windows Update and it found drivers for it and installed them all and now it works perfectly -- this is with a PCI soundcard that is who knows how many years old on the 64-bit version of Vista.
Any ideas?
Well, being able to run everything does. And even if you can address more ram, unless the applications are designed for a 64bit operating system they're limited to using only 2gb and most don't hit that.