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

[sup3rsprt]

what do you need more than 3.5 gigs of RAM for? I've never needed that much and I do heavy gaming. A 64-bit processor will run 32-bit code just fine.

 

[mttomb]

I am sure there is nothing wrong with it. I am just stating that I will not beable to use more then 3.5 gigs of Ram and use the 64bit side of my processor.

 

[sup3rsprt]

You can if you dual-boot 32 and 64-bit like I do. I still use 32-bit XP 99% of the time anyways.

 

[mttomb]

I do have a dual boot of XP x86 and x64 and use the x86 99% of the time. I am just trying to find out some info on Windows 7 to see if some of the barriers that held back XP x86 was the same in Windows 7 x86.

Thank you for your time. I will keep looking to see what I can find out.

mttomb

MCP,

 

[sup3rsprt]

yeah, the problem is the same. 32-bit drivers are no good for 64-bit. If you have hardware that isn't 64-bit capable, stick with 32-bit. Only other choice is to buy new hardware, which I'm sure the company that stopped supporting your current hardware will just love.

 

[mttomb]

I know it runs fine, but I swear that my system would be faster with more RAM that I am not using. I am running:

EVGA x58 Motherboard
2.33 GHz Quad 1066 FSB
2.75 GB of RAM that it finds
1 TARA hard drive with the XP x86 version having 400gig partion with 378 gigs free

and it sometimes takes a long time to load up the simplest programs. Long time is 2 to 3 mins to load up a 31 MB program on another drive. Most of the time it will take 5 to 10 seconds.

 

[sup3rsprt]

I have a system here with a EVGA mainboard, 1.5 gigs of RAM. I did many benchmarks between XP 32-bit and Win7 64-bit on single core and dual core processors and XP 32-bit was the fastest a great majority of the time.

 

[mttomb]

When I upgraded to the Quad I didn't do any benchmarks and now I wish I did because I swear it runs the same speed as my dual core did with the same OS system and better FSB.

 

[mttomb]

EVGA motherboard are you using?

 

[sup3rsprt]

This particular EVGA motherboard is an older nForce SLI.

You're not going to notice much difference between 2 core and 4 core until you start using applications that make efficient use of all the cores.

 

[mckillwashere]

One factor you have to consider the size of your video card counts into your ram count.

If you want to get full use of your system x64 would do it justice.

Dual boot x86 and x64 run a bench mark see which one scores higher. If x64 does and you can find the drivers for it defiantly go with x64.

Your games will still run in 32 bit mode (unless they have a 64 bit mode) but your system will still have the extra ram and make performance slightly better.

 

[mttomb]

That is true, but when you go from a 533 FSB to a 1066 FSB you should see an increase even if you move to a Quad. Sometimes I don't see a diffence at all.

 

[sup3rsprt]

yeah if you have a 512MB or 1024MB video card you're really getting short-changed that amount of memory (on a 32-bit platform).

I agree the best thing you can do is try it and see for yourself. But make sure to avoid the placebo pills because the last thing you want is to upgrade your computer and end up with a slower one.

 

[mttomb]

I am running for video is nvida geforce 9600 gt which has 512 GDDR3 on it. So you are saying that the video card that I have is what slowing me down?

 

[sup3rsprt]

A 9600GT is a pretty good card for general use. Not a fantastic gaming card, but good.

In 32-bit Windows that 512MB will subtract from the total available addressing space which is 32 bits (2 to the 32nd power equals roughly 4 gigabytes).

64-bit is 2 to the 64 power. Huge difference in addressing space, and a video card with 512MB of ram doesn't take anything noticeable away from it.

 

[mttomb]

Ok. I use to bridge an older version of the geforce. I think it was the 7800 one. One got fried when my power supply went out on me. Sent it back for a new one because it was still under warranty and they sent me the 9600 one. Now I am going to use the other video card for a system for my boy. He is using my old RAM, video card for a motherboard that I bought that will take them both.

 

[sup3rsprt]

Not to get too far off topic, but the 7800 was top of the line card in its day. Nowadays the 9600 which is like a low to mid-range card will probably smoke even dual 7800's in SLI.

 

[mckillwashere]

Mttomb,
What exactly do you use your machine for?

We may be able to help you better, I am a bit of a x64 fan boy but I still apppreciate x86

 

[mttomb]

My bad. It was the geforce 7300gt that they replaced with the 9800gt card. Big difference from the 7800.

 

[mckillwashere]

If your primary use is gaming, I saw were you said your only showing 2.75 Gb of your 4 Gb or ram in 32 bit were in your 64 bit your showing 3.5 That is kinda weird you should show your full 4 Gb unless your Mobo has built in graphics Then there should be an option to disable the On-board graphic card to relive that extra 512 Mb.

The main gain you will notice if you use the 64 bit is when you are gaming or running any high performance game. Say it uses 1.75 gb or ram in 32 bit that would leave you at 1gb or ram my 64 bit idles about 1.1 gb of ram being used. So that would leave you having literally no ram left for use by other programs. Were if you used 64 bit even though your full memory is not being detected you would still have about .65 gb of ram left. That is one thing to consider.