From Vista x64 to Vista x86

Hi,
I have been using Windows Vista Ultimate x64 since 4 months ago, and I haven´t had any serious issues with it - I'm really happy with the performance of Vista in my machine. You can see my laptop's specifications here.

There were some problems with drivers of a webcam I bought some weeks ago, but it wasn't serious, because I have the webcam of my lap .

I don't know if this is related to using vista x64, but when I use Flip 3D, Live Messenger conversation windows don't appear in Flip, instead they appear in the background. I don't know if this is caused by using Vista x64, maybe it's a problem with Messenger.

This is my question: I'd like to try Vista Ultimate x86, and, as I have a machine with 2GB of RAM, could I experience any kind of troubles (in performance) using Vista x86 in my laptop? I'd like to know what kind of stuff I could lose because of moving from Vista x64 to Vista x86... maybe DEP? What else could I lose?

By the way, I use these programs frequently: VMware Workstation 6.5, Visual Studio 2008, MS Office 2007, SQL Server 2005... and other common programs (like WinZip, Adobe Reader, Live Messenger 9, etc). I don't use other programs (like Photoshop, intensive games or the like), and I have usually open, for example, VMware, WMP11 with Visual Studio at the same time. Thanks in advance.

Best regards!

PS: Sorry for my English, I'm from Peru and it's my first post

Hello Sodaxp, and welcome to Vista Forums.

You will not lose any features that you currently have in the 64-bit Vista. You may lose just a tiny bit of performance though when going to 32-bit instead. You can read more about the differences in the articles in this thread though to help understand them better.

The main thing is to make sure that you have 32-bit driver versions for all of your devices downloaded and saved to have them ready after doing a clean install with the 32-bit Vista.

Hope this helps,
Shawn

Hi Shawn, thanks for the reply.

Brink said:

You may lose just a tiny bit of performance though when going to 32-bit instead.

Click to expand...

Just a tiny bit? Could you please give me an example? I can imagine that the Visual Studio 2008 window could freeze when I switch to other application... could that happen? If so, maybe I would have to stick with Vista x64 and not install Vista x86.

I have just read your link, and it's really interesting - I think that maybe if my laptop had 4GB of RAM or more, I would have no reasons to look at Vista x86. 2GB of RAM is little to take advantage of Vista x64, or am I wrong?

Thanks.

Sodaxp,

You can use 64-bit Vista with any amount of RAM you like, but having at least 2 GB is best to have better performance. The onlt difference for RAM between 64-bit and 32-bit is that 64-bit will use more than 3.2 GB unlike 32-bit.

As per the reasonfs you read in that article, 64-bit will naturally be faster than 32-bit especially when you use 64-bit programs instead of 32-bit programs in the 64-bit Vista.

Unless you have hardware that does not have a 64-bit driver or software that will not run in 64-bit Vista, then I would recommend using the 64-bit Vista instead.

Thanks for the reply Shawn. Well, I don't have a program especifically designed for 64-bit Windows (as I've said before, I use VMware Workstation, Visual Studio 2008, Office 2007 and so on - they aren't native 64-bit applications).

And yes, I've had problems with my old EPSON printer (Stylus C63) because EPSON doesn't have drivers for my printer, but I use virtual machines to print as a workaround. I already have the drivers of my HP laptop, so this isn't a problem.

Anyway, next week I will try installing Windows Vista x86 and I will test it for a couple of days, with my commonly used programs... I need to see the performance with my own eyes. If Vista x86 doesn't meet my requirements, I will go back to Vista x64. It'll be a long experience

Thanks again Shawn for your anwsers and patience.

Best regards,
Jorge (it's my real name)

You're welcome Jorge. Please post back your results and thoughts with us on this.