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: 32 bit? that's so last millenium...

16 Jan 2009   #21
PhreePhly

Windows 7 x64 (RTM via MSDN)
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by kye3k1 View Post
Hi

I am new here but I love testing new operating system before everyone else, I tested vista when that came out and I would like to congradulate how stable this Public BETA is in comparison.

The reason for my post is simply why are they still releasing 32bit operating systems?

The only time I can think of a 32bit processor to be running Windows 7 is a laptop that shouldnt be running such an OS anyway.

Microsoft need to be pushing forward and forgetting about the past, this is what recovered apple from their disasterous times (merely and observation).

Releasing Windows 7 as 64bit only will for everyone to start coding for 64bit and finally we will see performance increases on the system.

I ask who has windows 7 32bit BETA who actually only has a 32bit processor. Its almost impossible not to have a 64bit CPU but I am waiting to be surprised. 64bit FTW!
Wow, so many things to comment on, well let's start from the top:

First of all, why is 64-bit necessary for today's computing? How many general use programs require 4GB RAM? Not many. Now that 64-bit is becoming fashionable, and MS is requiring hardware manufacturers to create 64-bit drivers to be WHQL signed, that is helping, but why do we really need 64-bit? So we can run mp3's faster?

Now your next comment is about Windows 7 on laptops. You do realize that laptops are currently outselling desktops, so they are a rather important market for MS. Granted most laptops today are 64-bit capable and can have 4 GB Ram, but there are plenty of Core 2 Duo laptops that have a 2 GB RAM ceiling. There is actually somewhat of a performance hit running 64-bit with only 2 GB RAM. (My situation. Why would I run and incur a performance hit?)

There are also still quite a few yonah laptops (Core Duo and Core Solo) that are not 64-bit capable.

Also note that in the corporate world (MS's largest customer), there are still plenty of 16-bit Visual Basic applets in use. When operating in 64-bit (i.e. Long Mode in AMD64 speak) 16-bit programs will not run.

So, 32-bit will be on the client side for some time. Note I believe that Server 2008 R2 is only available in 64-bit, but I may need to double check that.

PhreePhly


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.
16 Jan 2009   #22
Gilbertpwns

Windows 7 64bit/Windows Vista Ultimate 64bit
 
 

Cool so do I
My System SpecsSystem Spec
16 Jan 2009   #23
Firestrider

Linux (Debian, Android)
 
 

Has anyone seen a tangible benefit of running 64-bit applications? Really I cannot see the difference in performance.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

16 Jan 2009   #24
Gilbertpwns

Windows 7 64bit/Windows Vista Ultimate 64bit
 
 

Games in particular run faster/smoother, assuming they are optimized for 64 bit
My System SpecsSystem Spec
17 Jan 2009   #25
falfaro

Windows 7
 
 
32-bit and more than 4GB of RAM

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by k56flex View Post
the hold back of 64bit adaption is of course the relying on 32bit software compatibility. Microsoft just play it safe i think to release two version. Another thing that pushing the need of 64bit OS is the memory requirement of certain games, as well as the increase of frame buffer in GPU that certainly need more than 4GB addressing. I say, bring it on crysis alike games and we'll see more and more people going 64.
Are current games demanding more than 4GB of RAM? It's hard for me to believe that. Even if we are talking about frame buffer, since textures are usually stored in the GPU's RAM and that's usually <= 512MB.

Also, a common misconception is that 32-bit machines can't use more than 4GB of RAM. That's not true. Modern processors do support PAE that enables a system to use more than 4GB of memory. However, even with PAE, a single process address space is limited to 4GB.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Jan 2009   #26
Gilbertpwns

Windows 7 64bit/Windows Vista Ultimate 64bit
 
 

I agree with you that 32 bit machines do take advantage of 4 gigs sometimes. But on the gamers enthusiast mind, the capability to go beyond 4 gigs would be pleasing to gain more FPS on newer games.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Jan 2009   #27
Mark

Windows 7 Ultimate Vista Ultimate x64
 
 

I think you all need to wake up and move with the times, saying why do we need 64bit when 32bit is so great is the same as saying why do we need 32bit when 16bit is so great or 8bit, I mean come people this is evolution and do we really want to hold it back, I don't even want 64bit anymore I want 128bit, 256bit or even 512bit, after all isn't that where our GPU's are at now. Stop holding back on evolution it's the only way to go.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Jan 2009   #28
HikerRemastered

Windows 7 build 7000 x86
 
 

I want 64-bit too! But at the present 32-bit is the more convenient choice, so I'll stick with it for now.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Jan 2009   #29
LuzTeTT

Windows 8 Pro x64
 
 

I find it pitiful that most of you didn't read my post.
A 64-bit OS's only benefit != more RAM capability.
64-bit is a better instruction set. Being able to access more RAM is a benefit of x64, but it is NOT by all means the only thing going for it.

And who ever is fibbing about games not taking advantage of it...
The mere FACT that you have more RAM for your OS, more RAM free and more RAM for your games and what ever else you're doing is just EFFICIENCY in itself. Never mind the fact that you're executing more instructions at a time (or more efficiently I should say, but I've used that word too much).

...If that doesn't do it for you, 64-bit is a better instruction set in terms of processing capability.

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Gilbertpwns View Post
I agree with you that 32 bit machines do take advantage of 4 gigs sometimes. But on the gamers enthusiast mind, the capability to go beyond 4 gigs would be pleasing to gain more FPS on newer games.
You don't get a FPS increase. That is entirely based on your GPU and CPU. The only time your FPS is dependent on memory is when you're going into your swap file (which will result in a huge FPS drop). In which case you only need more RAM, and games rarely use more than 4GB of RAM by themselves. It's all whether you have the RAM to have your OS running efficiently in the background while the game/application is running. Or buying faster RAM, but today's hardware is bottlenecked by the CPU and the GPU.

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Firestrider View Post
Has anyone seen a tangible benefit of running 64-bit applications? Really I cannot see the difference in performance.
Well then you're not looking for it.

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Gilbertpwns View Post
Games in particular run faster/smoother, assuming they are optimized for 64 bit
Upon compiling a 64-bit binary, yes, you are allowing access to 128GB of RAM, but you won't ever require it nor will the RAM requirements be any different from the 32-bit binary AT ALL. Unless we're talking about games in the future, which will probably be more optimized... depending on the developer's laziness. No doubt 4GB of RAM will become mainstream and games will start demanding that much; but that's also a question of developers choosing to load more data into RAM. Applications like console emulators will benefit from the instruction set itself because the CPU on a console is often more complex, or is 64-bit (XBOX 360 for example).
Unless a game was designed on a 64-bit platform specifically, it will not benefit besides the obvious efficiency boost and extra resources capability. In fact, most of the games people play today are poorly designed or optimized for any instruction set at all (Assassin's Creed on XBOX 360 verses PC and PS3 for example; which is the typical PPC port).

EDIT:
Additionally, a wider BUS and wider register ALWAYS wins. I mean, that's just common sense.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
18 Jan 2009   #30
ittech

XP/Vista/Windows 7 builld 7000
 
 

@mr grim

my personal fun machines are all 32 bit OS. i don't feel i am holding back progress. i dont want to play online shooters and look at games that are heading for ram requirements above two gigs as lousy programming, not exactly progress. the most spec intensive stuff i have handled were either engineering or architectural softwares. i hardly ever do that in my home. if 64 bit is what is in our future, (i would not bet the farm on that personally for some time to come) then i want to see what i can run on it before i go there, i want software titles, and they need to be something of value to me. gaming is a pretty crummy excuse considering the additional expense to client, and the shrinking pc gaming market.

my son has a 700 dollar canadian graphics card. me, i get them for cost, but i cannot justify that. i payed110 for a graphics unit with a gig on the card, if something doesnt run on that and a couple of gigs of system ram, then the problem is on the software side. given the state of programming for some gaming titles, having them optimized as they say for 64 bit leaves me less than mesmorized.

are we heading 64 bit, yeah of course we are, but not anytime soon.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 32 bit? that's so last millenium...




Thread Tools




Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
no driver for Matrox Millenium P650 AGP ?
hello folks, I had bought the Matrox yars ago when I got my WindowsXP. The Millenium P650 was a very good graphic at that time. In fact, for my purposes, it still is. Now that XP is over, I would like to change my system to Windows 7-32bit (RAM is 2GB, processor speed is 2x3GHz - so no problem...
Graphic Cards
why 2000 year is called Millenium
instead of two thousand years (2000), why we call it 2nd millinium
Chillout Room
Networking Win 7 with Millenium & Win 98...
New to the forums and searched but was unable to find anything resembling my issue so I hope someone can help. I've been asked to look at a network that consists of all the os's from 98 to Win 7. The Network worked fine prior to the addition of the Win 7 machine. They were all in the same...
Network & Sharing


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 13:32.
Twitter Facebook Google+ Seven Forums iOS App Seven Forums Android App