Hi all, Is there any performance difference between the two provided you are using the same spec hardware. I know that the 64bit can address more than 3gig of memory. Are there any huge performance gap in application like productivity, video encoding, multitasking and gaming.
HI confusis, Read a few of those article already. Interested to find out the performance gain from 32bit to 64bit. I know bit-tech tested lots of stuff from hardware (CPU & GPU) to drivers
The difference would be pretty small between the two. You likely won't see a massive performance improvement by going to 64 bit, as none of the current processors on the market perform any differently with 64 bit code, except when the extra RAM is needed (the 64bit code is bolted on to the 32bit code, making them no more efficient with 64bit operating systems than with 32bit.)
Thanks Bakes for clearing it all up. I thought the 64bit would make a huge difference so it would be significant to go 64bit
32bit can see up to 4gig of RAM, and that includes your graphics card. More RAM is beneficial for those that do alot of video and image editing.
Hi raxonb, True. But I would like to see the benefits to be measured so I can say that this is significant enough to be considered. I said earlier that the hardware is the same spec. Let say that RAM is 4gig and I know that the 32bit can use up to 3gig and the 64bit can exceed that.
I guess it would be handy if you could post us some specs of the system in question and what will you be doing with the system tbh there probabily wont be much of a perforance gain but again that depends on your main uses
The only advantage to using 64 bit is if you have more than 3GB ram, or plan to have more than 3GB ram. Then, there will likely be a performance improvement, because for that purpose the 64bit operating system is superior.
Hi Quattro D, I already mention about use in productivity, video encoding, multitasking and gaming. The hardware should be a midrange system with a 4gig RAM. Why? I guess that not a lot can afford a high end system and I dont feel that one should give a good deal of attention to it. I sorry I dont want to offend those with expensive setup. What I'm asking is would there be a huge performance gap?
If your system has 4Gb Ram then I'd go with 64bit Windows unless you have any components you can't find 64bit drivers for. If you're asking if the performance gain will be noticeable all I can say is on my own PC, I didn't notice any real world difference.
the 32bit and 64bit versions cost the same, and if you are doing multitasking, gaming and productivity (could you be more specific with this one?) then you will see a difference
There shouldn't be much of a difference unless you are working in memory-intensive applications (Provided you have more than 4GB memory installed). But why wouldn't you go for 64-bit? It far more future proof. Do you run any ancient hardware of software?
Hi Smilodon, A trading software I'm using called Ninjatrader. They dont support 64bit. I've asked and they said they dont so if I'm in troubled I'll be alone. Someone did run it with no problem but I dont want to risk it. The software is not stable. On my XP machine it gives me problem from time to time even though I didnt change anything on the software setting. The rest I'm not really worried because most application in 32bit theres always a 64bit available.
torroray, Just because something is compiled for a 32 bit OS doesn't mean it won't work in a 64bit OS. Microsoft have written the 64-bit versions so that 32bit software (apart from drivers) is completely compatible. Chances are it will work fine. Just because it's unstable in 32bit Windows doesn't mean it will be even less stable in 64bit Windows. It just means that the developers have a few bugs in the software they need to iron out.
Hi Bakes, The software I mentioned is free. Their new software is still in beta testing since last year and people finds it buggy. I guess the software is not properly design. I know its just 1 software but I dont want to get the 64bit and later downgrade to 32bit.
This is going to be my last post on the matter, because I believe I've said all that needs to be said. If your software works in 32 bit Windows, it will most likely (think, 99% chance) work in 64 bit Windows and perform identically. It's why just about every piece of software only comes as one version, not one version for Windows 64 bit and one for 32 bit. Understand? If you think that you're going to upgrade to >4GB ram at any point in the next few years, you should get the 64 bit version. If you don't, the 32 bit version will suit your needs just fine and will perform identically, but you won't be able to use as much RAM without either reinstalling Windows, or, in the case of an OEM version of Windows, buying a new license. Personally, I'd recommend the 64 bit version, because in 99.99% of cases it works fine with a 64 bit operating system. The developers aren't going to make a 64 bit version of the software because they don't need to, but the 32 bit version will work just fine.
This article misses 3 points 1- 32-bit applications does take advanatge of being executed in a 64-bit OS. As the CPU has easier time to execute OS instruction (as they are 64-bit long, so that means less instruction to execute), 32-bit applications benefit from that and can run faster. My own personal notice on this, is a 10 to 15% increase in performance depending on the software/game. 2- 64-bit OS allows you to have 2TB or higher partition. The index table that contains all the path in the disk of where each peace of data is, is usually 32-bit long with a 32-bit OS. That limits you to a bit less than 2TB. As now you run a 64-bit OS, meaning that the index table of he HDD has now longer instructions, and now can support 2TB+ of space 3- 64-bit video/audio codec. They forgot to mentionm, that since a while (soon after Vista was out) that about all codecs exists in 64-bit. Used with Windows Media Player 12 64-bit (built-in Windows 7, but not set default player in the shortcuts and file association). 64-bit codecs allows less stress on the CPU, making it ideal to be used in laptop's which allows you to save battery life, or when used in low powered system, like an Ion platform, to reduce CPU load when playing video content. And as for your desktop, reduce CPU usage. My recommandation for 64-bit codec pack is: Shark007, don't be fooled with the mehh looking website, the codec pack is, in my opinion, the best you can find. It offers: - Thumbnail support - Doesn't override or conflict with Windows 7 suberb built-in codecs. - Comes with an easy to use control panle of sorts that allows you to manage common options in all codec packs in one place. AND has the ability (with a click of a mouse on a radio button) to change all shortcuts and file association from Media Player 12 32-bit to the to the 64-bit version, so that you can use the 64-bit codecs. - No conflict and keeps everything on your system clean. Note: Install the 32-bit codec pack version first, than the 64-bit component. Also, 64-bit Windows 7 is getting very popular. I read once in an article which I can't find, that the 64-bit version Win7 is the most used version. This means expect to see more and more 64-bit application and games over time.
Thanks Bakes for stopping by and giving your opinion. Goodbytes, I would like to see the comparison on chart. It would look nice
How can you have possibly reached this conclusion? On an optimized system, the same instructions take exactly the same amount of time. If there are any benefits, they're provided by Microsoft putting more effort into the 64 bit version, not because of any 'less instruction to execute'. There are exactly the same number of instructions, and they're all the same length.
