32 bit or 64 bit with 4 GB RAM

[steve1999]

We will be shortly ordering a number of new PCs, all with 4 GB RAM. We are unlikely to upgrade RAM in the future. I would like to understand whether I should be ordering it with the 32 or 64 bit version of Windows 7. My understanding is that Windows can only use about 3.5 GB with the 32 bit version? Does this mean that the remaining RAM is completely wasted? Or can it be used for other purposes, such as drivers?

Our PCs are primarily used for MS Office applications.

Thank you in advance for your help.

 

[not so gray matter]

32-BIT operating systems can only use 2.5 to 3.6GB of ram max. You'll need a 64-bit OS if you plan on using all of that ram. It should be noted however that within the operating system you'll see your actual amount of ram. So it'll tell you you have 4GB but it'll be using less. My previous system used 3.25GB on XP SP3.

http://social.technet.microsoft.com...e/thread/048ed81d-0e9a-471c-99fa-ca6c26c956d1

EDIT: As long as you don't have any older devices and you find all the drivers for your devices ahead of time I'd suggest that you upgrade to 64-BIT. Any disadvantages will be outweighed when/if you decide you'd like to boost your ram. You may not think you'll need to but a few years ago I wouldn't have thought I'd be thinking about upgrading 4GB either.

 

[Darryl Licht]

First off, welcome to the forums steve1999!

4GB is the max memory a 32 bit OS can address. 2 to the 32 power = 4096! Yes that missing ram is used for certain drivers, etc. Specifically its used for memory mapped devices such as video cards, chipsets, and BIOS ROMS.

The main concern is going to be driver availabilty for your existing peripherals... I'd do the research on those. If you can find 64 bit drivers for printers, scanners, cams, etc then go for the 64 bit version... if not get 32.

 

[baarod]

We will be shortly ordering a number of new PCs, all with 4 GB RAM. We are unlikely to upgrade RAM in the future. I would like to understand whether I should be ordering it with the 32 or 64 bit version of Windows 7. My understanding is that Windows can only use about 3.5 GB with the 32 bit version? Does this mean that the remaining RAM is completely wasted? Or can it be used for other purposes, such as drivers?

Our PCs are primarily used for MS Office applications.

Thank you in advance for your help.

Since you are ordering a number of new PCs, please make sure that the other attributes of the systems are similar as well, if not the same. In doing that you realize a variety of efficiencies which I imagine you can ascertain. A single system profile will allow you to keep a single master system image provided you either partition a single hard drive or better, use a system SSD and local data/profile platter drive.

When ordering these machines please make sure that the driver set is not only certified by the manufacturer(s) but that the hardware vendors you are choosing are all long players in the industry with good future prospects.

I say go 64-bit for these reasons. If you can get a verified driver set with these computers today your investment in 64-bit will pay off in the future as your vendors had the foresight to get in the 64 game early and will likely serve you well in future endeavors.

 

[gregrocker]

FYI, you are entitled to either 32- or 64-bit with any Windows 7 license, and can switch whenever you want.

So be sure to request or acquire the install media for both in case you want to change.

You can even test both to decide which works best on the hardware, then make a Win7 System image of the final choice to apply to the other HD's. Just wait to activate until after this is done.

 

[whs]

The question is whether you even have a choice. Most Win7 systems come with 64bit per default - unless you buy PCs without an OS. For me that is a pity because I find 64bit iffy in several areas - besides it is not faster despite popular belief. But it uses more RAM. Nothing dramatic either way but just to prepare you against false arguments. I have both 64 and 32bit and can compare.

 

[steve1999]

Thanks very much for the assistance.

We purchase from Dell so we select either 32 bit or 64 bit Windows 7.

If the 64 bit uses more RAM, is this then still better than having the 32 bit version, which cannot use all 4 GB but needs less RAM anyway? Presently, our existing Windows 7 PCs have only 2 GB and they can be a bit lethargic at times, when a number of applications are open at the same time. Therefore, I am very much trying to avoid this with the next group of PCs. I want to find the best solution, given our budget constaint (4 GB RAM), to have our PCs as fast and as responsive as possible.

Thanks again for your help.

 

[whs]

I think bottom line it will be a wash in terms of performance. The sluggisness of your systems is probably caused by the disk. That you can only cure with a small SSD for the OS and programs. But that is an extra $100 per system (provided those are desktops - laptops is another story). The speed and responsiveness of an SSD is absolutely amazing. Figure an SSD access time of 0.1ms versus 15 to 17ms for a normal spinning disk. And the data transfer times are 3 to 4 times faster.

 

[kpo6969]

The question is whether you even have a choice. Most Win7 systems come with 64bit per default - unless you buy PCs without an OS. For me that is a pity because I find 64bit iffy in several areas - besides it is not faster despite popular belief. But it uses more RAM. Nothing dramatic either way but just to prepare you against false arguments. I have both 64 and 32bit and can compare.

I concur with whs and run both also.
I would suggest 64bit w/ 4GB ram myself.

 

[Darryl Licht]

Thanks very much for the assistance.

We purchase from Dell so we select either 32 bit or 64 bit Windows 7.

If the 64 bit uses more RAM, is this then still better than having the 32 bit version, which cannot use all 4 GB but needs less RAM anyway? Presently, our existing Windows 7 PCs have only 2 GB and they can be a bit lethargic at times, when a number of applications are open at the same time. Therefore, I am very much trying to avoid this with the next group of PCs. I want to find the best solution, given our budget constaint (4 GB RAM), to have our PCs as fast and as responsive as possible.

Thanks again for your help.

From my earlier post...

The main concern is going to be driver availabilty for your existing peripherals... I'd do the research on those. If you can find 64 bit drivers for printers, scanners, cams, etc then go for the 64 bit version... if not get 32.

 

[steve1999]

Thank you again for your advice and assistance.

If I understand correctly, and please correct me if don't, wih 4 GB RAM, we are unlikely to see much of a performance difference between the 32 bit and 64 bit versions. The 32 bit version can't use all 4 GB, the 64 GB can, but needs more of this RAM - so this is a wash? The potential downside of the 64 bit version is driver availability. However, given my understanding that there is little or no performance difference, what then is the upside of the 64 bit version?

I understand that the 64 bit version would allow for future RAM upgrades but in our case, this is very unlikely. Most of our machines are notebooks, we buy them for a 3 year usage period, then we replace them. Given this, RAM upgrades aren't that cost effective - by the time RAM becomes an issue, the HDD is probably also too small, the CPU is outdated, the batteries are near dead, and its getting time to replace the machines anyway.

Are there other advantages of the 64 bit version that exist?

Again, thanks for your help.

 

[Dubya]

The main reason (in my opinion) for 64-bit taking so long to catch on is because users are afraid to make the move. Hardware vendors therefore don't have so much pressure to provide 64-bit drivers.

However, this seems to be changing.

Go for 64-bit I say! If it doesn't work out, you can always revert back to 32-bit since Microsoft provides both 64-bit and 32-bit versions of Windows 7 (assuming you're going to Widows 7) in each copy.

In fact, I'd recommend NOT going 64-bit unless you're going to be running Windows 7, but in my experience Windows 7 64-bit has been playing very nice with 32-bit apps and hardware drivers alike.

Get geared up for 64-bit if you can, otherwise you may start falling behind when 64-bit become dominant....I mean, start replacing stuff that don't work in a 64-bit environment.

I'm not certain of this but I heard a rumour Windows 8 will only come out in 64-bit...

 

[DeaconFrost]

The x64 version will use more memory, but that's only a slight difference, and surely not as much memory as the gain you'll see being able to use 4 GB, rather than 3.25 GB or so.

If these are brand new systems, there is very little reason to consider 32 bit, because there are several ways around an app incompatibility, should you even encounter one.

Off the bat, x64 isn't any faster, but what others haven't told you is, under a load, x64 is snappier, and will be more responsive. I have done plenty of testing on both platforms, with fast and slower systems than what you are planning to buy. However, as mentioned, you can try both out. If you are in IT, you likely have access to both media discs. Load one up with the 32 bit and one with the 64 bit, and then go through all your normal software installs on both. If you encounter no issues, go x64. I don't know the specifics, but I always see the x64 side being touted as more secure, as well, but I'm not really going to mention that in this debate.

 

[whs]

under a load, x64 is snappier, and will be more responsive

My experience is just the opposite, but that is neither here nor there. The main argument for 64bit is "to be prepared for the future". But if you keep those systems only for 3 years, you have to make a judgement whether that applies to you. Most people here keep their systems for much longer because they have desktops that they upgrade all the time with the most recent technology. But that would not apply in your case. And for the type office applications you do, 3.25 or 4.0GBs won't make a noticeable difference - it is ample RAM in both cases.
An alternative would be to go with 3GB and 32bit. Then you can make full use of the 3GBs.

 

[DeaconFrost]

My experience is just the opposite, but that is neither here nor there.

Sounds like you have/had another issue going on, or where comparing with apps that might not have been ready for x64 early on. I've done the tests using two identical laptops, and my results have just confirmed anything and everything I've read on the subject. Anandtech and HardOCP have also been doing numerous tests, repeated by their readers to show this.

It's important to point out that I am not suggesting that a single game would run faster on an x64 system than x86. I would expect the performance to be the same. What I'm saying is, unload a load form multiple apps, x64 is more responsive. If you burn a bunch of videos to a DVD, while Handbrake chews away at some DVD-rips, while playing a web-based game, etc, you'll notice the x64 system is more responsive.

I'd agree with your last suggestion, considering the uses of these systems. Unless they are working with massive Access DBs, 2-3 GB and Windows 7 x86 would be perfectly sufficient, especially if they won't be upgraded, hardware-wise.

 

[brianzion]

my system runs well with 64 BIT i have 6 GB ram i worried about the change from 32 BIT to 64 BIT but im very pleased now, windows 7 in my opinion deals very well with programs that are 32 BIT running on 64 BIT it sorts the compatibility issues out for you very well as time goes on programs will all be 64 BIT im sure.

 

[Max Peck]

I concur with those who say you should go 64-bit. Unless you have devices that simply can't work under 64-bit that is. However, even 32-bit drivers generally work fine under 64-bit Windows 7. If you're looking to make the machines last for a good while then going with 64 will ensure that. You can't really go wrong either way but with everything else being the same you might as well.

-Max

 

[dood]

Toss in MORE memory... Over 4GB? 64 bit mandatory..


(I dual boot XP and W7x64. I miss the 8GB of memory when running XP..but games simply run better under XP..)

 

[Tarka Dal]

64 bit is a must!

64 bit is a must. Dell are already beginning to phase out 32 bit and have done so quietly for months as more and more people decide to go for 64 bit. When it comes to resale 64 bit will be far more saleable. I cannot see the argument for 32 bit as I've been using 64 bit for 3 years and no issues with it.

Just noticed that in the business class their shipped mostly with windows 7 32 bit so you'll have to arrange with Dell to have them fitted up with 64 bit.

 

[whs]

64 bit is a must. Dell are already beginning to phase out 32 bit and have done so quietly for months as more and more people decide to go for 64 bit. When it comes to resale 64 bit will be far more saleable. I cannot see the argument for 32 bit as I've been using 64 bit for 3 years and no issues with it.

Then what's your argument for 64bit - other than general statements.

Dell are already beginning to phase out 32 bit and have done so quietly for months as more and more people decide to go for 64 bit.

People are not deciding to go 64bit - they are pushing it down our throat. I wanted to buy a 32bit laptop a couple of months ago. Impossible to find a single one. Now I am stuck with this 64bit thing that deos not run well at all (4GB of RAM).