Windows 7 Forums

Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: Windows 7 x64 vs Windows 7 x86 (Fight)

16 May 2009   #11
kensiko

Win7 64 bits FR
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by xan K View Post
I've never given x64 any serious try. partly because I only have 2GB of ram, but mostly because of the fear of incompatibility bumps along the way. I know for sure that my webcam won't work (no drivers). some software I depend on, like Media Player Classic - Home Cinema is said not to be supported in x64 either. so, this is a tough decision for me.
Hello,

I have the exact same feeling. For example, my computer is an answering machine (phone), the modem driver is for XP only, still, it works with Vista and Seven. But I bet it won't in 64 bits. I bet that Symantec Talkworks won't work also.

I imagine how many headaches I would get just to try to make work all the drivers and softwares I want to use. I prefer having a slower computer than these headaches. BTW, my computer is very fast, the latest add (SSD) gave it a big speed improvement.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
16 May 2009   #12
pominator

Windows 7 build 7127 x64
 
 

Interesting results. To be serious however, more results would have been needed. Winrar is one of the well know application to be faster on 64 bits, I wouldn't be surprised if VirtualDub is one too. Only testing application that take advantage of 64 bits is not an objective test.

The graphics are also misleading in my opinion, the first VirtualDub suggest a 50% advantage to the 64 bits when it is in reality only of 2%.

I understand your point, it is necessary for people to adopt 64 bits if we want to see more 64 bits program. It is all to the community advantage over time. Their is no need to make people dumb to arrive to this goal though. I don't want say that 64 bits is slower or faster, I only say that the picture isn't simple and clear as you might want us to believe.

Pom

edit: Indeed pointing to the fact that some old hardware may not work under 64 bits would have been the minimum.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
16 May 2009   #13
xan K

Windows 7 x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by p7ast1k View Post
huh???
i've been using x64 builds of media player classic home cinema for a couple of years now with zero problems
i don't even install any codecs anymore unless i want to encode

I grab the latest SVN builds from here:
XvidVideo.RU - MPC HomeCinema (x86/x64)
wow, I didn't know that. so, is it fully working with DXVA H.264 hardware acceleration ?

btw, that page is cool. now I can always have the latest version. I think I might be getting an x64 W7 copy soon along with another webcam (long overdue).
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

16 May 2009   #14
zrtom

W8 Pro, W7 Ultimate, XP Pro x64, Vista x64, Ubuntu
 
 

Nice. Thank you.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
16 May 2009   #15
p7ast1k

Windows 7
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by xan K View Post
wow, I didn't know that. so, is it fully working with DXVA H.264 hardware acceleration ?

btw, that page is cool. now I can always have the latest version. I think I might be getting an x64 W7 copy soon along with another webcam (long overdue).
yeah i get dxva with hi def vids
My System SpecsSystem Spec
16 May 2009   #16
PotatoMan83

 

I can use 64bit with my setup, but choose x86 because I do not like the 2 program files folders, and then having to dig for 64bit alternatives of the applications I like. x86 performs better for my system than 64.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
16 May 2009   #17
Rampage1999

win 7 Ultimate
 
 

Just found winrar x64 this morning.. i was a happy camper.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
16 May 2009   #18
12eason

Windows 7077
 
 

Most of those result stress the cpu and memory most which are obviously going to perform better with x64. However, the biggest bottleneck on a computer nowadays is the hard-drive and that is the thing that is stressed more by x64 during typical use.

I would hazzard a guess that even the hard-drive benchmark you ran only tested read-write performance on identical filesizes on both x64 and x86. In typical use the x64 system will be pushing anything upto twice the data back and forth to the hard-drive as the x86 system. The tests should allow for that fact.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
16 May 2009   #19
fakeasdf

Win 7 Pro x64 x 3, Win 7 Pro x86, Ubuntu 9.04
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by kensiko View Post
Hello,

I have the exact same feeling. For example, my computer is an answering machine (phone), the modem driver is for XP only, still, it works with Vista and Seven. But I bet it won't in 64 bits. I bet that Symantec Talkworks won't work also.

I imagine how many headaches I would get just to try to make work all the drivers and softwares I want to use. I prefer having a slower computer than these headaches. BTW, my computer is very fast, the latest add (SSD) gave it a big speed improvement.
Drivers aside of course. When drivers are an issue, you stick with what works...

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by 12eason View Post
Most of those result stress the cpu and memory most which are obviously going to perform better with x64. However, the biggest bottleneck on a computer nowadays is the hard-drive and that is the thing that is stressed more by x64 during typical use.

I would hazzard a guess that even the hard-drive benchmark you ran only tested read-write performance on identical filesizes on both x64 and x86. In typical use the x64 system will be pushing anything upto twice the data back and forth to the hard-drive as the x86 system. The tests should allow for that fact.
I'm not sure where you got your stat on that, feel free to share, you might want to read up on DMA, tons of data transfers ocurr outside of CPU realm, which is then limited to your BUS speed and the 64 vs 32 architecture is irrelevant...

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by pominator View Post
Interesting results. To be serious however, more results would have been needed. Winrar is one of the well know application to be faster on 64 bits, I wouldn't be surprised if VirtualDub is one too. Only testing application that take advantage of 64 bits is not an objective test.

The graphics are also misleading in my opinion, the first VirtualDub suggest a 50% advantage to the 64 bits when it is in reality only of 2%.

I understand your point, it is necessary for people to adopt 64 bits if we want to see more 64 bits program. It is all to the community advantage over time. Their is no need to make people dumb to arrive to this goal though. I don't want say that 64 bits is slower or faster, I only say that the picture isn't simple and clear as you might want us to believe.

Pom

edit: Indeed pointing to the fact that some old hardware may not work under 64 bits would have been the minimum.
Pom, I only have so much time I can use during work:P The performance test did a pretty extensive test, so i don't feel bad.

Second, I used both 32 bit and 64 bit versions of the software in the x64 OS. And I don't feel bad about the graphs, I just stuck the numbers into excel and let it graph it... Anyone who is actually interested in the difference would look at the times listed to the left, I agree tho, it does look mislead, twas unintentional.

Third, the point of the thing was to show that overall a 64 bit OS ran faster than a 32 bit os, despite the RAM (I only used 3). Whether or not you believe it really isn't an issue to me.

Fourth, I agree, where old hardware with a lack of drivers is an issue, stick with what works (as stated above). Granted, seeing as most hardware running a 64 bit machine is to some degree newer (AMD athlon was 2003, and Intel didn't come out with consumer 64 bit cpu's til a couple years later) most hardware is pretty well supported with 64 bit drivers. I know there are exceptions, but few, and that's an exception to the use 64 bit OS rule.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
16 May 2009   #20
12eason

Windows 7077
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by fakeasdf View Post
I'm not sure where you got your stat on that, feel free to share, you might want to read up on DMA, tons of data transfers ocurr outside of CPU realm, which is then limited to your BUS speed and the 64 vs 32 architecture is irrelevant...
Sorry, but how does that relate to what I've said? Do you deny that 64bit apps and OS require upto twice the hard drive space/use as 32 bit apps and OS?

How about you test boot times, application load times etc. Maybe you could factor in increased fragmentation due to larger files and slower disk reads due to having to use slower portions of the disk. These issues wouldn't affect your idealised tests, but on average joes computer that has been in regular use for a year, they are enough to bring the system to a standstill.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
cant fight the right drivers (probably)
The main problem is that my mouse stops working sometimes... i chaged mouse and still the same (maybe the 2nd mouse less often not sure) so i go to device manager and see that usb + sm drivers are not installed =>code 28 (my windows are in greek so maybe my translation is not perfect) windows: 7...
Drivers
We're having a Snowball Fight come join us
We're starting a snowball fight.. I'll go first.. you all join in please. click to get the action... after this opens stand backkkkkk...lol
Chillout Room
Continuing the Fight Against Piracy.
Source - Continuing the Fight Against Piracy - Genuine Windows Blog - The Windows Blog
News
The Fight is on:- Windows 7 or Vista SP2?
There is the start of a bitter debate amongst the "experts" as to whether Windows 7 is a genuinely new OS or just Vista SP2 It's Just Vista with Bells "Test Center benchmarks: Windows 7 unmasked Measured by runtime specs and performance benchmarks, Windows 7 M3 looks like Vista, and it runs...
News


Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:48.
Twitter Facebook Google+ Seven Forums iOS App Seven Forums Android App