Ok I am running 32 bit but a friend of mine want to move over to Win7 and cannot make up his mind if he should go 32 or 64 bit. He is an avid gamers as what I am. So far I have not found any time that I feel that 64 bit would have been better than my 32 bit.
So what do you all think what are the advantages and disadvantages that he need to know
Here you go.... https://www.sevenforums.com/general-d...omparison.html. Its in the "Sticky" section of the "General Discussion" forum
Alright, 32 bit Win7 has generally more software and hardware support than 64 bit. Choose 32-bit if you're an average user.
I strongly suggest x64, but is your choice. Read my thread that sygnus linked.Ok I am running 32 bit but a friend of mine want to move over to Win7 and cannot make up his mind if he should go 32 or 64 bit. He is an avid gamers as what I am. So far I have not found any time that I feel that 64 bit would have been better than my 32 bit.
So what do you all think what are the advantages and disadvantages that he need to know
Sweet! It is good to see this thread getting use.Here you go.... https://www.sevenforums.com/general-d...omparison.html. Its in the "Sticky" section of the "General Discussion" forum
~Lordbob
Oh dear missed thatHere you go.... https://www.sevenforums.com/general-d...omparison.html. Its in the "Sticky" section of the "General Discussion" forum
Another thing to look at besides the sticky on making comparisons between the two kernels with the 64bit being a bit more efficient at memory management by less swapping out of data to the drive that is would be the particular system 7 will go on.
One example here is seeing XP drivers for the board, onboard sound, and old 128mb GeForce FX5200 video card all working on the temp 32bit 7 install. Obviously no Vista or 64bit support was ever seen for this oldie! On a much newer system readily having seen Vista 32/64 support as well as for the hardwares installed the 64bit will be seen as chewing about 300mb more of ram due to the reduction of swapping out to the drive by way of the paging file and seeing more data kept in the active ram instead.
MS then recommends 2.5gb as their "recommended minimum" for memory due to seeing this. That however doesn't specify 2.5gb is mandatory however but better suited since most systems now already see 3-4gb for most typical builders at least.
That just depends really on who you are (personal or business user), and what kinds of specialist hardware you are using.
In the almost 5 years that I've been using Vista x64 and Seven x64, the only problem I've encountered with drivers are for a scanner (Canon Lide20, for which only 32-bit is available), and cell phones and 3G modems:
A lot of my clients use their cell phones as a modem, and finding x64 drivers has proven a nightmare, which is repeated with the use of dedicated 3G modems. thus far, all cases have been resolved by moving to 32-bit Windows.
But other than that, the really is no reason to even thnk about which to choose, when clearly x64 is the better choice.
My advice to the TS would be to go x64 now and grow accustomed to it now, and not be left in the cold when Windows 8 is released in only x64...
... But that would mean that everyone would be forced to use x64 bit architecture. What about us Linux dudes? -_- I can see a 128 bit coming up
That wouldn't force everyone...just Windows users. Linux has had x64 versions available for quite sometime now as well.
I skipped the advantages/disadvantages part because that's all been well-documented. However, if someone is a serious enough gamer to base their OS choice on it, then this gamer would likely be using 4 GB or more memory, and should already be using a x64 OS. Someone that serious about gaming wouldn't be using only 2 GB or 3 GB of memory. Some games can chew that much up alone, and would seriously impact the performance of that game.
Quote