Install Win 7 Ultimate x86 or x64 with 4GB RAM?

adrianr said:

tyvm!

ymmv. ttytt, ymwv.

Antman said:

ymmv. ttytt, ymwv.

HAND.

Antman said:

2GB.

Are you saying that if you have only 2GB RAM you should go for x64? My system is basically a budget gaming rig with only 2GB RAM, so I didn't think x64 would be of any benefit.

Rothchild said:

Are you saying that if you have only 2GB RAM you should go for x64? My system is basically a budget gaming rig with only 2GB RAM, so I didn't think x64 would be of any benefit.

From what I've seen from Microsoft, 2GB is the absolute minimum you need to run x64, where 1GB is what you need for x32.

Personally, I wouldn't run any OS with the minimum specs, no matter if its Windows, Linux, or OS X. /shrug

EDIT: Heh, having said that, I have a FIC SlateVision tablet PC that I'm running Windows 7 x32, even though it only supports 640KB RAM. Its slow as hell, but it works. I'm going to add a PCMCIA card to it that supports SDRAM and see if the Boost feature will help me out with performance issues.

My advise would be to stay with x32. Actually, my advice would be to upgrade the RAM if possible! I was using 2GB forever, and I just updated my system to 4GB for $32. Probably the best bang for the buck in upgrading performance.

You got Win7 running a machine with only 640KB RAM??? In a few days I'm going to try Win7 on my 512MB RAM machine for fun.

I always figured I should stick to x32, but it sounded like Antman was recommending x64 if you have 2GB+. I'm planning on upgrading RAM then CPU (currently AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+), but we just upgraded our graphics cards to ATI Radeon 4850 1GB's. Since we mainly play games, that was a huge upgrade over the integrated Radeon 3200's.

WinDOS 7

@Rothchild: I am not recommending anything. 2GB was a terse response drawn from banging my head. Every machine is different in its application. Because you have a 1GB video card, 1GB of your RAM will be allocated (reserved, whatever, I'm tired) just for that driver.

IMO, more RAM is a better budget choice than a faster CPU.

In general, use x32 if you have only 2GB. There are many valid arguments to use x32 at 4GB. I use x64 at 4GB. Limiting this platform to 4GB is a budget decision based on gain per dollar invested - it is a relatively old mobo. I use x64 because it is superior technology, in general.

Rothchild said:

You got Win7 running a machine with only 640KB RAM??? In a few days I'm going to try Win7 on my 512MB RAM machine for fun.

I always figured I should stick to x32, but it sounded like Antman was recommending x64 if you have 2GB+. I'm planning on upgrading RAM then CPU (currently AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+), but we just upgraded our graphics cards to ATI Radeon 4850 1GB's. Since we mainly play games, that was a huge upgrade over the integrated Radeon 3200's.

Yes, I got it to run. Its SLOW, but it actually works reasonably well. Just off the top of my head, I'd say it runs about 5-15% slower than Win XP Tablet Edition did. I haven't gotten the PCMCIA SD card reader hardware in yet, so I'm hoping the Boost feature will help get that 5-15% back.

My take was also that Antman was suggesting going with x64 with >= 2GB RAM, though I would say you should have enough RAM to run the OS plus more (1GB minimum extra?) to run a few apps, if performance is important for you.

If I was you, and unless I hear something different that's concrete from others on the subject, I'd go with x32. Especially with just 2GB RAM. But like I mentioned before, I'm able to run Win 7x32 (slowly) with a 1GB RAM minimum on a PC with 640KB RAM, so, as Antman had just said recently, YMMV. :)

For myself, my laptop has 4GB RAM, and I plan on trying x64 first, and see if the performance is good enough for me (a.k.a. minimum hard drive swapping). But that's just me.

Thank you both for your help, and sorry for slightly derailing the thread (2GB instead of 4GB). You've confirmed opinions I've read previously, so thank you again.

There are now many things I want to talk about (RAM vs CPU vs Mobo age), but I won't go completely off-topic. I will say that I really like these forums, many users seem very knowledgeable, opinionated, and friendly. I think I'll start coming here for my tech talk instead of the couple overclocking forums I semi-frequent, even though the acronyms make me feel old and miss my Commodore 64.

Rothchild said:

Thank you both for your help, and sorry for slightly derailing the thread (2GB instead of 4GB). You've confirmed opinions I've read previously, so thank you again.

There are now many things I want to talk about (RAM vs CPU vs Mobo age), but I won't go completely off-topic. I will say that I really like these forums, many users seem very knowledgeable, opinionated, and friendly. I think I'll start coming here for my tech talk instead of the couple overclocking forums I semi-frequent, even though the acronyms make me feel old and miss my Commodore 64.

You're welcome. I'm new here too, and know next to nothing about x64 (except the general theories of things learned as a computer programmer), so take what I say with a grain of salt.

For me, it was an Atari 800 and Apple II Plus (vs. a Commodore 64), but damn, I still remember loading apps into the computer via a tape recorder to this day! :)