Should I go for x64 or stick with x86?

[Sven]

GatoSoft, I wish you (and ALL of your harddrives) the best luck, and I'm waiting nice and peacefully. As soon as I have yor result, I will ordrer more RAM if I switch to x64, as I got the impression that my 2Gb is too little to judge the x64 fairly against x86.

BTW, does anyone know why we all call it _x86_ when it infact is a _x32_? Has it something to do from old times with a 8086, 8088, 286, 386 and 486?

 

[CyANid3]

Please answer my query

 

[Sven]

I really can't, cyanid3, but I think that 2Gb mem is too little to a x64system, and that is why I'm waiting to see if ghost is working in x64. If so, I'm going to buy a 2x2Gb ramkit, so I can run 4gb in dual channel in the x64.

 

[fakeasdf]

Well sevenforums members are helping me a lot.After reading the recent thread in General Discussion about x64 version,I have one question....


Core Speed:- 2605.6 MHz
Memory Size:- 2048 MBytes
Mainboard Model:- GA-MA78GM-S2H (0x340 - 0x4CC63C88)
Processor model:- AMD Athlon(tm) Processor LE-1640
clock speed 2600.0 MHz


Should I go with x64 rather than installing x86 ?


Will my 2 Gb ram make the OS slow ?

@Cyanid3 you've chosen not to receive private messages

Yes, you should use x64 rather than x86 as long as all of your hardware is supported. My brother has a similar build and he's running x64 with 2 gb of ram and it was running very smooth. The 2gb of ram won't make the os slow, 2 gb of ram on the 32 and 64 bit is somewhat irrelevant. 64 bit does support more than 4gb of ram, but it in no way requires 4 gb. In most tests where 64 bit versions of software is available it runs better than it's 32 bit counterpart. And 32 bit software runs just as smoothly on the 64 bit OS as they do on the 32 bit.

 

[fakeasdf]

GatoSoft, I wish you (and ALL of your harddrives) the best luck, and I'm waiting nice and peacefully. As soon as I have yor result, I will ordrer more RAM if I switch to x64, as I got the impression that my 2Gb is too little to judge the x64 fairly against x86.

BTW, does anyone know why we all call it _x86_ when it infact is a _x32_? Has it something to do from old times with a 8086, 8088, 286, 386 and 486?

it isn't x32 It is because it's based on the x86 architecture. In all reality we could say it isn't x64 either, on most 64 bit builds they still build it with the title AMD64 since the AMD64 architecture was the prevelant architecture for 64 bit and Intel didn't choose to jump on that band wagon until later with EM64T (now labeled intel 64) which is based off of the AMD64 architecture. Intel did have their itanium which was 64 bit, but it has a different set of instructions and is different than the AMD64 instruction set.

 

[murphy25]

my 2p's worth i have a amd athlon 64 3500+ 2.21ghz and 2gb of ram its the first time i have run a x64 OS and im more than happy with it.
i will run it for a month or so and then try the x86 see if theres any difference but so far everything sweet

 

[Sven]

I could not wait so I have installed Windows 7 64bit and I'm only (for now) having 2 Gb ram. It seems like it runs OK, and I must give the "64bit-people" credit ... 64bit OS IS running smoother (even on 2Gb), ghost IS working. The new beta Kaspersky for windows 7 IS working.

Only problem I have is, that I can't find the link to download 64bit JAVA engine. Så I'm using the 32bit Java. Don't 64bit java exists? Or is it me being too stupid to find it?

 

[Azural]

I've got the 64 bit installed and I'm pretty sure I just went to java.com and downloaded it from their main page.

 

[Captain Zero]

Sven, this should answer your question; Which version of Java should I download for my Windows 64-bit operating system?

 

[Sven]

Yes, it does answer my question, but it also rises a new one. How do I tell Windows 7, that I want the 64bit browser to start default? It wrotes on the "Program-tab", that the 64-bit browser can't be the default browser??

 

[fakeasdf]

You can put the 64 bit version of the browser down in your quick launch... and just use it from there... I've stuck with the 32 bit version of IE on most things due to the fact that Adobe is super gay and hasn't created a 64 bit flash player for IE... I hate adobe... Which is why if there was a different player for flash things, I'd use it instead. Just like I use foxit pdf reader instead of the overly bloated adobe reader. Seriously adobe? Do I always need an update utility running for flash, and adobe reader. Do I need the adobe reader to be always in memory for when I open up those pdf files? No!!! Die Adobe!!! (but I do love photoshop - the update utility )

 

[Sven]

Ok, thanks for the info. I share your interest for FoxIt, it is a very cute and fast little program

 

[Jon55]

64-bit, welcome to 2007

 

[L1QU1D]

hi all. I've been using Win7 x86 since around Feb, and the previous two releases have suprisingly worked a lot better on my measly hardware than this one.. yet i did install x64 for a brief period just after I found how much faster 7 is in comparison to Vista, although it just wouldn't run very well. I found the OS slowing down a lot more under stress (unRARing, file sharing and browsing..) than the x86 70xx build which I assumed was since I have little RAM (1.5gb) yet since installing 7100 x86 and suffering the same sluggish performance it could well just be my current install...

 

[fakeasdf]

hi all. I've been using Win7 x86 since around Feb, and the previous two releases have suprisingly worked a lot better on my measly hardware than this one.. yet i did install x64 for a brief period just after I found how much faster 7 is in comparison to Vista, although it just wouldn't run very well. I found the OS slowing down a lot more under stress (unRARing, file sharing and browsing..) than the x86 70xx build which I assumed was since I have little RAM (1.5gb) yet since installing 7100 x86 and suffering the same sluggish performance it could well just be my current install...

I am going to say this for everyones sake, 1.5 gb of ram will run as well in 64 bit as it does in 32 bit... What are you system specs? I would probably guess it was due to not have a dual core processor or something of the sorts... heh, that's a pointless response by me... sorry!

 

[GatoSoft]

Well... a bit too late but I could test Norton Ghost 14 on Windows 7 RC. Image creation and restoration was successful, but I just could test it on a virtual machine. I would prefer to test it on real hardware, but for reason I've mentioned before, I couldn't. u_u
I know that if this software works on Vista, it will work on Windows 7 too. The unique software that runs on Vista that I couldn't run on Windows 7 was DAEMON Tools, who has a new version compatible with Windows 7 now. The other programs went well all the time. maybe with some adjusts like "Windows Vista SP1 compatibility" o little things like that, nothing complicated.
Leave you some screenshots. ^_^

See you soon!

 

[Sven]

Thank you for your time spending on ghost-testing

 

[GatoSoft]

Your welcome. I just hope it can be of some help.