Benefits of VISTA Ultimate x64 vs x32?

Mr Smiley · Feb 19, 2008

Hello and thank you for taking the time to read my thread!

I have switched between Vista Ultimate x64 and x32 on numerous occassions and for the life of me am unable to distinguish or realise any improvement in performance when I use x64.

In fact, if anything, my computer seems to run faster with x32 and has the same Windows Experience Index Base Score of 5.5 for both versions of Ultimate.

Yes, I understand x64 utilises all of my 4,096MB of memory compared to 3,072MB with x32 (it says 1,024MB appropriated in Settings whatever that means?), but I just don't experience any noticeable difference in performance.

So having said all that, what are the benefits of me running Vista Ultimate x64 over Vista Ultimate x32, if any?

NB: I don't play any games if that helps.

With Kindest Regards,

Neil

roy69 · Feb 20, 2008

Apart from memory, if you use 64bit programs on a 64 bit os on 64 bit hardware there will only be a small amount of increase in speed.

The reason why you wont notice much speed is to do with the way the cpu does its maths work.

Lets go back a couple of years to explain better.

A 4 bit processor can only handle numbers as large as 1111 in binary.

This is 15 in decimal.

Anything larger than this will take more clock cycles to work out hence taking longer.

Then you get an 8 bit processor. Now the largest number the processor can handle in one clock cycle is 255.

This would be a massive speed increase.

Because programs for everyday use rarely uses a number larger than 32 bits a 32 bit processor can process it in one clock cycle.

A 64bit processor handles more memory because it can address more.

Largest for 32 bit is 4294967296 -1

Largest for 64 bit is
18446744073709600000 -1

Mr Smiley · Feb 20, 2008

Thanks for taking the time to respond Roy69

I don't have a clue what it all meant, but thanks all the same.

I never was all that good at Maths!!!

Warmest Regards

Neil

Dzomlija · Feb 20, 2008

True, the extra speed gain of x64 over x86 is marginal for now, but that will soon change.

Although x64 programs are becoming more prevalent, the market still favours 32-Bit programs (x86). When the balance tips in favour of x64, then having switched now will give you a head start over those die-hards that stuck with x86.

The largest factor in my choosing Vista x64 over a year ago was the enforced requirement for digitally signed and certified x64 drivers. This is the largest contributing factor to the improved stability of Vista x64 over Vista x86.

Memory management is also vastly improved over x86, which in turn improved multi-tasking. More applications running at the same time translates into improved productivity. For me, anyways...

My advice to you would be to stick with x64. In time, the advatages will become clearer as the market moves towards x64.

Mr Smiley · Feb 20, 2008

Thank you Peter and Roy69 for your responses.

Yes, I might switch back to x64 Ultimate soon.

Am I better off with a better CPU than the one I have, and is it relatively safe if I were to overclock my current one by 30% from 2.4GHz to 3.11GHz? Please advise.

Also, how important, if at all, is the Windows Experience Index score. I recently added 2GB of RAM and it hasn't improved the Memory score in the WEI at all for both x64 and x32 versions?

Best regards

Neil

Sharp · Feb 20, 2008

Don't worry about the Vista Index score it isn't really a good indication on system performance.

Overclocking is never safe but the core 2's do overclock well and 3Ghz is a considerably easy target. Do not attempt to overclock if you are unsure.

Dzomlija · Feb 20, 2008

Overclock to your hearts content. IF you don't mind halving the useful life of your CPU at the same time as increasing the instability of your OS.

Safer to spend the cash on a newer, faster CPU.

If you already have the fastet CPU you motherboard can deal with, then stick with what you have and up the memory instead.

Overclocking DOESN'T work!

Mr Smiley · Feb 20, 2008

Thanks Peter!

Good advice I'm sure.

Yes, I think you're right even though as I understand it my Asus MB was built for overclocking, but I will continue to operate the system based on the normal settings and no doubt extend the life of my CPU.

Regards

Neil

ivo2296 · Feb 20, 2008

Hi Mr Smiley,

I did small test those days with 64bit 7z and 32bit winrar.
I was compressing 3GB ISO file and the results in time were:

7z - 16min
winrar - 35min

For me that's really important cause i work a lot with big files.

Mr Smiley · Feb 20, 2008

Thank you ivo2296 ...

and a Warm Welcome to the Wonderful World of Vistax64.com!!!

Nice to have you join all of us here.

Archpope · Feb 21, 2008

slightly OT:

Overclocking, in and of itself, doesn't shorten the life of your CPU: heat does. Those who feel the need to overclock their computers must also be prepared to compensate for the extra heat produced by stepping up their cooling.
But, it's not for the amateur. Practice on something other than your main computer and do your research first.

Dalork · Feb 21, 2008

Archpope said:
slightly OT:

Overclocking, in and of itself, doesn't shorten the life of your CPU: heat does. Those who feel the need to overclock their computers must also be prepared to compensate for the extra heat produced by stepping up their cooling.
But, it's not for the amateur. Practice on something other than your main computer and do your research first.

I totally agree, if an overclock is done correctly it shouldn't shorten lifespan or stability. But some people do try to push the limits of their CPU's too far.

But, does your CPU do what you need it to ? I see too many people doing it for no real world gain.

Back to the OT, Vista x64 is also more secure.

roy69 · Feb 21, 2008

Dalork said:
Archpope said:

slightly OT:

Overclocking, in and of itself, doesn't shorten the life of your CPU: heat does. Those who feel the need to overclock their computers must also be prepared to compensate for the extra heat produced by stepping up their cooling.
But, it's not for the amateur. Practice on something other than your main computer and do your research first.

Click to expand...

I totally agree, if an overclock is done correctly it shouldn't shorten lifespan or stability. But some people do try to push the limits of their CPU's too far.

But, does your CPU do what you need it to ? I see too many people doing it for no real world gain.

Back to the OT, Vista x64 is also more secure.

About shortening the life of a cpu, how long do you keep a cpu before upgrading. 2 - 4 years I would guess. If you overclocked a cpu it would still live this long. And I do agree, why overclock if you do not need to, I know I can run mine at 3Ghz but run it at stock 2.4

Benefits of VISTA Ultimate x64 vs x32?

Member

My Computer

47,65,65,6B

My Computer

Member

My Computer

Resistance is Futile

My Computer

Member

My Computer

New Member

My Computer

Resistance is Futile

My Computer

Member

My Computer

My Computer

Member

My Computer

My Computer

My Computer

47,65,65,6B

My Computer