Just curious.
Poll
How many are using Windows 64 Bit OS?
| Iam using 64 bit. | 19% | 19% - 19 | ||||
| I am still using 32bit. | 69% | 69% - 67 | ||||
| Huh...wtf is 64 bit OS? | 11% | 11% - 11 | ||||
| Total: 97 | ||||||
I am still using the 32-bit Version... Mainly because I still use a 32-bit CPU... But even if I would have an AMD 64 I still would use the 32-bit XP mainly because all available gaming- and application Software is 32-bit. Since these programs would have to run in some kind of emulation mode, there would be virtually no speed gain.
Additionally... since I like playing Silent Hunter III from time to time, I would be screwed using XP 64 since SHIII is protected by Starforce Copy Protection... unfortunately, Starforce is basically a driver that is installed first.... and since it is a 32-bit driver, it is incompatible with XP 64.... and noone has ever bothered making an update for 64-bit systems
Additionally... since I like playing Silent Hunter III from time to time, I would be screwed using XP 64 since SHIII is protected by Starforce Copy Protection... unfortunately, Starforce is basically a driver that is installed first.... and since it is a 32-bit driver, it is incompatible with XP 64.... and noone has ever bothered making an update for 64-bit systems
Last edited by BEE_Grim_Reaper (2006-05-20 09:00:42)
32 bit over here. I'm sticking with 32 when I get my A64, mostly because then I would have to buy a copy. I also know it works fine, so why switch?
basically my reasoning, x64 isn't fully supported yet and has problems with a lot of software.BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
I am still using the 32-bit Version... Mainly because I still use a 32-bit CPU... But even if I would have an AMD 64 I still would use the 32-bit XP mainly because all available gaming- and application Software is 32-bit. Since these programs would have to run in some kind of emulation mode, there would be virtually no speed gain.
Additionally... since I like playing Silent Hunter III from time to time, I would be screwed using XP 64 since SHIII is protected by Starforce Copy Protection... unfortunately, Starforce is basically a driver that is installed first.... and since it is a 32-bit driver, it is incompatible with XP 64.... and noone has ever bothered making an update for 64-bit systems
I'm using both. x64 is inadequate by itself, as WOW64 still cannot run some 32-bit applications.
i got a laptop coming this week that has 64. but i got 32 on my other comps.
woah not that many using 64bit windows.....
isnt it because most software isnt made for 64 bit yet?
^^ correct, too many conflicts and not enough performance increase to warrant the "upgrade".
Is there any purpose to a Windows 64 format rather than the 32? I'm just curious since I'm still running on a 32 bit system and is there any performance breach?
uh yea just like i voted....i have no clue wat a 64 bit w/e thinga ma jig ur talkin about
x64 here on an x2 3800
No problems at all.
No problems at all.
Last edited by durkamoz (2006-06-06 10:03:23)
Still using 32 bit Windows since 64 bit Windows doesn't support 32 bit drivers. And I don't trust most Windows drivers.
Not entirely true. There are no noticable degradations in performance when running 32-bit applications on Windows XP 64-bit. There have even been some reports of increased performance.BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
... But even if I would have an AMD 64 I still would use the 32-bit XP mainly because all available gaming- and application Software is 32-bit. Since these programs would have to run in some kind of emulation mode, there would be virtually no speed gain.
There are many benefits. But until more mainstream applications are available in 64-bit, there are not many that can be realized now. But, you could benefit for increased memory support. The 32-bit version of XP can only handle a maximum of 4GB of memory, but in reality there are issues when using more than 2GB. With the 64-bit version you can use up to something like 16BG (not 100% sure, but I know it's a lot).Aardcore wrote:
Is there any purpose to a Windows 64 format rather than the 32? I'm just curious since I'm still running on a 32 bit system and is there any performance breach?
The problem as I see it is that there are still too many "issues" with 64-bit right now. In fact Windows XP 64-bit, installs with two versions of Internet Explorer, a 32-bit version and a 64-bit version. This is because some websites will not work with IE64 because of the ActiveX controls that their sites use. Plus, if any applications you use have any 16-bit legacy code in them, they will not run on 64-bit, whereas they will run on 32-bit.
IMHO, 64 bit will not become mainstream until Vista is released and mainstream software is released in 64-bit. And, even then it may be a slow adoption since Vista will be released in 32-bit and 64-bit flavors.
Well one mainly being is that the bios for a consumer level motherboard will only allow 4 gigs of ram to be inserted, you woul dhave to run a motherboard for a server to run more than 4 gigs. Windows XP x64 is essentially Windows Server 20003 with a different GUI. The memory controller on the x64 AMD cpu's only will allow ddr333 past 3 gigs of ram. It just does not have the ability to run your memory at ddr400 for 4 gigs. So for overclocking sake dont waste your money on 4 gigs of ddr 550 LOL.Psycho wrote:
BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
There are many benefits. But until more mainstream applications are available in 64-bit, there are not many that can be realized now. But, you could benefit for increased memory support. The 32-bit version of XP can only handle a maximum of 2.75GB (.15 is prefetched for paging) of memory, but in reality there are issues when using more than 2GB.
Troof, I had to use the 32 bit version of IE to download AF last night.The problem as I see it is that there are still too many "issues" with 64-bit right now. In fact Windows XP 64-bit, installs with two versions of Internet Explorer, a 32-bit version and a 64-bit version. This is because some websites will not work with IE64 because of the ActiveX controls that their sites use. Plus, if any applications you use have any 16-bit legacy code in them, they will not run on 64-bit, whereas they will run on 32-bit.
Whatever it is I am future proofed for that change and I am fully ready to embrace it.IMHO, 64 bit will not become mainstream until Vista is released and mainstream software is released in 64-bit. And, even then it may be a slow adoption since Vista will be released in 32-bit and 64-bit flavors.
i will as soon as vista is fully dl-ed
once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.
Running both - dual booted, and BF2 is installed on both instances... and works perfectly!! Hmm now is BF2 a per user or per processor licence...? I could get in trouble there!!
LOL beta 2 as your main OS... good luck my friend.max wrote:
i will as soon as vista is fully dl-ed
And as far as the licensing on bf2 goes your HASH id which is generated by the hardware on your computer identifies the computer its on when punkbuster checks your user name. I cant possibly see it really being a problem for you being you have the game installed on the same pc so the hash should be the same.
However there is a possibility your hash could be modified by the OS you run. There is a program in the EA Games>Battlefield 2 folder called help or system diag or whatever that gives you a snapshot of what bf2 see's as your rigs hardware and tells you what may be causing problems. What can be a problem and other miscellanious things like that.
However it really has nothing to do with your hash much less will it let you see it.
Last edited by 137[CSi] (2006-06-08 10:31:50)
All I know is that I can't afford to upgrade my system to 64-bit right now. I'm chugging along with my Athlon XP 2800.
Thats not a bad processor.
Yeah, I've been happy with my stable system. I probably shouldn't have used the word "chugging". It's been able to run everything I've thrown at it. I love my computer, but I can't do anymore upgrades without having to upgrade the mobo, processor, power supply, etc.
i have it on disc. but have been to lazy to make a partion and install it. then gather all the drivers before hand. the raid drivers, etc etc.
from what i hear most of the kinks are workedo ut and software is 75% compatbile across the board. and most hardware companies now have 64bit drivers, even unknown companies...but yeah waiting for Vista
and yes i have a athlon 64..have had one for a while. Xp is fine for now
from what i hear most of the kinks are workedo ut and software is 75% compatbile across the board. and most hardware companies now have 64bit drivers, even unknown companies...but yeah waiting for Vista
and yes i have a athlon 64..have had one for a while. Xp is fine for now
Last edited by beerface702 (2006-06-09 05:27:27)
I still use 32-bit, even with my AMD 64.
No point in getting 64-bit yet, since most software is best supported by 32-bit.
No point in getting 64-bit yet, since most software is best supported by 32-bit.
main reason im not getting 64 bit... and my cpu aint 64bit lol, pentium 4 530 3.0ghz... overclocked to 3.45PBAsydney wrote:
I still use 32-bit, even with my AMD 64.
No point in getting 64-bit yet, since most software is best supported by 32-bit.
