32-bit & 64-bit Vista...Which Is Better.

[Ashton Lawson]

Well, we can put it this way.  If you're not-so PC oriented, and you don't like dealing with occasional problems (which you're definately gonna get with Vista anyway) then go 32-bit , then upgrade whe you need to.  However, if you are ready for any challenges that will come your way, and we can help you with them too, then go with 64-bit 8-).

Personally, I'm gonna go with 64-bit (will be getting 4Gbs of RAM anyway).

[Ivan]

You need 64 bit when:
You have (or want in the future) more than 512MB videocard memory
You want to have more than 4GB memory in the future
Your motherboard supports over 4GB (as your one does)

basically... get 64 bit if your processor can handle it. Will need some more attention driver wise at the start but it will result in a more stable system in the long run.

[Triple_7]

64-bit version officially on its way, will arrive sometime in the next 10 days.  Cost a lot less then I thought it would, only a whopping $10.55 after taxes, free shipping.  Was expecting to pay more like $25+.  So a full retail version of Home Basic with both 32-bit and 64-bit DVDs all for a whopping $125.55  Originally was going to order it off Newegg...$159.99 just for the 32-bit version

Processor is waiting on a credit card payment to show up.  Figured it would have been credited to my account by now but for some reason its taking its time.  Processor also keeps dropping in price so might wait till at least Saturday to order it.  If things fall into order then the 64-bit DVD and CPU should arrive approximately the same time.  Hope to fire this thing up in the next 2 weeks 8-)  Also have to make a run to the store and pick up a copy of FS9 before I can even fly on this new system.  But for $20 I think I can afford it  

Going to be pretty nice to get off this old thing.  Kind of scary to think how technology has changed in such a short time.  I remember being the envy of all my friends in school (I think it was 2nd or 3rd grade) when I had a brand new computer with a built in CD-ROM and a COLOR printer  That was state of the art back then with Windows 95, a blazing 166 MHz CPU, 4 GB Hard Drive, and a whole 16 mb RAM  Now over 10 years later I sit here on a AMD 350 MHz IBM and realize just how far things have come.  It has a whopping 100 MHz FSB...the new system will have 1333 MHz FSB.  64 MB RAM, new one at 2 Gigs.  

Also getting another toy to kick off the fun.  As of sometime next month my internet will be upgraded to 3.0 Mbps 8-)...going to be a big step above the current 768 Kbps [smiley=beer.gif]

Hopefully all goes well and will be back flying in a whole new world very soon [smiley=2vrolijk_08.gif]

[Nick N]

In order to run the nex gen video cards correctly the OS address needs to be able to handle the video memory mapping and the software needs to be able to work with more than 2GB, which can be done by editing the header of the FSX.exe file, although that does not make the software run as a x64 bit process.

64bit is not here yet in terms of games but they have no choice. By the end of next year they will need that address space to accomplish game visual and interactive upgrades. They need it now but are being stubborn about moving to it because the business end of their offices dont want to pay for the R&D to make the switch yet.

They have no choice, they are out of address space, especially for titles like FSX which should have gone x64 this time around.

Better video editing and other software technology has already made the switch

As for bus speeds, on the home systems I left DDR2 to move to DDR3 eariler this year. DDR3 2000 is already running and by the end of the year expect to see DDR3 2500, something DDR2 cannot ever reach.

Vista x64 and drivers are probably still a bit of a chore to deal with. XP x64 does just fine. Vista needs a service pack or 2 before I would find value in switching perminantly, (x32 or x64) other than to play around with it.

[machineman9]

32-bit

you have no need for 64bit

[Kaworu]

Its not about what is future-proof, it's about what your system can run. If you can run x64, go for it. But if you can't run it, I would wait for x64 to be more common, and then build a new system based on x64. I'm not into the idea of rebuilding just to use the newest, admittedly superior, OS. But thats just me.  ;)