Windows 7 Forums - View Single Post

**fakeasdf** · 05-16-2009

Quote: Originally Posted by jimbo45

Cheers all

"A little learning is a Dangerous thing ...." Quote W. Shakespeare (or some unknown "frenchie" -- They all spoke "Norman French" in England back then.

Oh dear there's so many assumptions leading on from these "Raw stats" that it's impossible to know where to start. So a bit of SCIENCE to add to the mix.

1) If you've got more than 4GB of RAM as a lot do these days then a 32 bit OS will waste the rest as it won't be able to see it.

2) Photoshop and other 64 bit apps really need to use 64 bit these days -- try a processing a professional quality RAW picture from a Pro DSLR which starts off as a 21 MB File before you even BEGIN to expand it for processing. Now process this with several layers ready for press say at A3 or A2 size and you are almost in the GB range. Process a lot of these pics ..... etc etc.

3) Load time for an OS will also depend on its size -- a larger OS will take longer to install -- so what's the point of saying the x-86 version installs 3 mins quicker than the x-64 bit version. There's less to install.

4) I've posted on this site (you can search in the archives) that it's actually WORSE to run a 64 bit native CPU in 32 bit mode.

5) Running 32 bit apps on a 64 bit CPU (including the OS itself) is as we all known a slightly more difficult process than running a 64 bit app -- adress transaltions etc etc -- all covered in point 4) if you search my previous posts. This also includes running the OS itself.

For your x-86 test you need to do this on a Native X-86 only CPU -- and because most 64 bit CPU's are dual core these days you won't be able to do a proper test with similar speed and performing CPU's.

6) Future apps will in general be developed for the 64 bit platform whilst legacy stuff will remain 32 bit.

7) If you have a 32 bit CPU - no argument -- but it's worth installing x-64 even if your machine only has 1GB of RAM provided it's 64 bit capable.

Another quote I believe -- not from the famous Bard but some well known 16 / 17th century writer

"Lies, Lies and Damn Statistics".

Cheers
jimbo

Thanks jimbo, I forgot about photoshop, I have a 32 bit and 64 bit of that, I think I'll do some tests on those. I agree just posting up numbers is a tad misleading, but arguing with the facts tends to not help some people. They like to see pictures

And most people can't get past the myth that you need 4 gb of RAM to run 64 bit OS...

05-16-2009	#5 (permalink)
fakeasdf Win 7 Pro x64 x 3, Win 7 Pro x86, Ubuntu 9.04 483 posts	Quote: Originally Posted by jimbo45 Cheers all "A little learning is a Dangerous thing ...." Quote W. Shakespeare (or some unknown "frenchie" -- They all spoke "Norman French" in England back then. Oh dear there's so many assumptions leading on from these "Raw stats" that it's impossible to know where to start. So a bit of SCIENCE to add to the mix. 1) If you've got more than 4GB of RAM as a lot do these days then a 32 bit OS will waste the rest as it won't be able to see it. 2) Photoshop and other 64 bit apps really need to use 64 bit these days -- try a processing a professional quality RAW picture from a Pro DSLR which starts off as a 21 MB File before you even BEGIN to expand it for processing. Now process this with several layers ready for press say at A3 or A2 size and you are almost in the GB range. Process a lot of these pics ..... etc etc. 3) Load time for an OS will also depend on its size -- a larger OS will take longer to install -- so what's the point of saying the x-86 version installs 3 mins quicker than the x-64 bit version. There's less to install. 4) I've posted on this site (you can search in the archives) that it's actually WORSE to run a 64 bit native CPU in 32 bit mode. 5) Running 32 bit apps on a 64 bit CPU (including the OS itself) is as we all known a slightly more difficult process than running a 64 bit app -- adress transaltions etc etc -- all covered in point 4) if you search my previous posts. This also includes running the OS itself. For your x-86 test you need to do this on a Native X-86 only CPU -- and because most 64 bit CPU's are dual core these days you won't be able to do a proper test with similar speed and performing CPU's. 6) Future apps will in general be developed for the 64 bit platform whilst legacy stuff will remain 32 bit. 7) If you have a 32 bit CPU - no argument -- but it's worth installing x-64 even if your machine only has 1GB of RAM provided it's 64 bit capable. Another quote I believe -- not from the famous Bard but some well known 16 / 17th century writer "Lies, Lies and Damn Statistics". Cheers jimbo Thanks jimbo, I forgot about photoshop, I have a 32 bit and 64 bit of that, I think I'll do some tests on those. I agree just posting up numbers is a tad misleading, but arguing with the facts tends to not help some people. They like to see pictures And most people can't get past the myth that you need 4 gb of RAM to run 64 bit OS...
My System Specs