Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Monopoly money comes in many flavors: 7, Vista, XP, 2K, ME, 98, etc.

Moderators: Flying Fox, Ryu Connor

Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Thu Jun 23, 2011 4:06 pm

Hi!
Is there any advantage to installing Windows 7 64 bit on a machine with 2 GB RAM over the 32 bit version?
bitcat70
Gerbil
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:02 pm

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Thu Jun 23, 2011 4:08 pm

It's more like there aren't any disadvantages. If you have access to the 64-bit version, install it.
i7 860 - GA-P55-USB3 - 8GiB - HD7850 - SSD - 3.64TB HDD - Xonar D1 - U2410 - Win7 Pro x64.
DancinJack
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 3:21 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Thu Jun 23, 2011 4:16 pm

Well there is the "disadvantage" of not having 16-bit application compatibility.
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do.
derFunkenstein
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 21255
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: WHAT?

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Thu Jun 23, 2011 4:20 pm

Only if you've got peripherals ancient enough to not have 64-bit drivers, or some badly-written old programs that need to dig their claws deeply into the operating system.

It'll use slightly more RAM than the 32-bit version, but you won't notice the difference.
Think for yourself, schmuck!
i5-2500K@4.3|Asus P8P67-LE|8GB DDR3-1600|Powercolor R7850 2G|1.5TB 7200.11|1988 Model M|Saitek X-45 & P880|Logitech MX 518|Dell 2209WA|Sennheiser PC151|Asus Xonar DX
bthylafh
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
 
Posts: 3129
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 11:55 pm
Location: Southwest Missouri, USA

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Thu Jun 23, 2011 5:13 pm

If you increase the memory over 3.5GB or so, you're SOL if you used the 32-bit version. You'll need to wipe and install the 64-bit version to see all the memory.
bdwilcox
Graphmaster Gerbil
 
Posts: 1261
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 12:21 pm

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Thu Jun 23, 2011 5:15 pm

Moving forward, most drivers are going to be written for the 64-bit version first, with 32-bit as an afterthought. All Microsoft Server products require the 64-bit OS for production use; 32-bit is supported only sporadically and only for testing purposes. Carrying that over into the consumer space, there really is no reason to install the 32-bit version at this point since the 64-bit version core OS is going to be more heavily tested and more actively developed for.
Buub
Maximum Gerbil
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 4191
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 11:59 pm
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Thu Jun 23, 2011 5:20 pm

The 64-bit version will be able to access over 4GB of RAM, and you'll want to upgrade to at least 4GB of RAM. I'd suggest 8GB, if you can do it, as you'll need XP Mode for true backwards compatibility.

@bthylafh
VB6 programs fail miserably on Win7 64-bit, so there is that.
Flatland_Spider
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 814
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 8:33 pm
Location: The 918/539

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Thu Jun 23, 2011 5:36 pm

derFunkenstein wrote:Well there is the "disadvantage" of not having 16-bit application compatibility.


Jerk
i7 860 - GA-P55-USB3 - 8GiB - HD7850 - SSD - 3.64TB HDD - Xonar D1 - U2410 - Win7 Pro x64.
DancinJack
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 3:21 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Thu Jun 23, 2011 6:24 pm

DancinJack wrote:
derFunkenstein wrote:Well there is the "disadvantage" of not having 16-bit application compatibility.


Jerk

That is a legitimate concern considering some 32-bit applications use 16-bit installers. The applications would run fine but they simply refuse to install.
bdwilcox
Graphmaster Gerbil
 
Posts: 1261
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 12:21 pm

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Thu Jun 23, 2011 6:33 pm

bdwilcox wrote:
DancinJack wrote:
derFunkenstein wrote:Well there is the "disadvantage" of not having 16-bit application compatibility.


Jerk

That is a legitimate concern considering some 32-bit applications use 16-bit installers. The applications would run fine but they simply refuse to install.


I know. I was just giving him crap.
i7 860 - GA-P55-USB3 - 8GiB - HD7850 - SSD - 3.64TB HDD - Xonar D1 - U2410 - Win7 Pro x64.
DancinJack
Minister of Gerbil Affairs
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 3:21 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Thu Jun 23, 2011 7:24 pm

If 16-bit is really a concern then use Virtualbox, VMware, XP Mode, or <insert virtualization technology>. However not a good fit for old hardware devices.
equivicus
Gerbil First Class
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 1:57 pm
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Thu Jun 23, 2011 8:27 pm

ISTR reading that 64-bit Win7 will detect the most common 16-bit installers and automagically patch them at runtime so they can do their jobs.

Companies selling 32-bit programs with 16-bit installers should be severely beaten, even for stuff sold as early as 1997.
Think for yourself, schmuck!
i5-2500K@4.3|Asus P8P67-LE|8GB DDR3-1600|Powercolor R7850 2G|1.5TB 7200.11|1988 Model M|Saitek X-45 & P880|Logitech MX 518|Dell 2209WA|Sennheiser PC151|Asus Xonar DX
bthylafh
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
 
Posts: 3129
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 11:55 pm
Location: Southwest Missouri, USA

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:37 pm

equivicus wrote:If 16-bit is really a concern then use Virtualbox, VMware, XP Mode, or <insert virtualization technology>.


This. end thread.

Although you'd have to go back a ways to find hardware that doesn't work. Even the first USB keyboards (or even PS/2) you can just plug in and start typing. To go back before that... :o
Venii, vidii, vicii
Wii came, Wii saw , Wii conquered
Sargent Duck
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 3068
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2003 8:05 pm
Location: In my secret cave that has bats

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:57 pm

bitcat70 wrote:Is there any advantage..
This is a small advantage: some programs use the presence of a 64-bit OS to infer other characteristics of the CPU, such as some of the SSE sets. So things could be more optimized.
wibeasley
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 952
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: Norman OK

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:02 pm

equivicus wrote:If 16-bit is really a concern then use Virtualbox, VMware, XP Mode, or <insert virtualization technology>. However not a good fit for old hardware devices.

I agree, which is why I used scare quotes. "Disadvantage"
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do.
derFunkenstein
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 21255
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: WHAT?

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Fri Jun 24, 2011 12:33 am

axeman wrote:I'm going to play the devil's advocate here. Unless you have near future plans to get more than 2GB, don't bother with 64bit. 2GB isn't as horrible with Windows 7 as it was with Vista, but it's still not a heck of a lot, and 64 bit Windows is larger than 32 bit Windows. 64bit code does use marginally more memory AFAIK because of larger pointer sizes (? I'm not a programmer), but that's not the whole story.

Yes, there is a small increase in size, but given today's memory sizes, it would be hard to measure the difference.

For compatibility with 32bit applications, there's an enormous amount of libraries subsystems in 64 bit Windows that have to be duplicated for the 32 bit applications. So often, there's basically two instances of a lot of code running. Don't take my word for it - there is a reason Microsoft states 1GB as minimum requirements for 32 bit, and 2GB for 64 bit (I'm guessing the doubled requirement isn't really necessary, I'd wager more on 1.5 or so, but that's not something most systems would be sporting).

There could be any number of reasons for that difference. In fact, it could simply be because you are expected to do more with a 64-bit system, so you're going to want more memory.

That aside, the library thing is essentially a straw man. Most code these days uses shared libraries (DLLs). Shared libraries are shared -- you don't need a separate copy in each program. The virtual memory system can page in a single instance of each shared library and share it among all the processes that are using it.

The disk space usage is somewhat more (several GB on a fresh install), there's more to patch - eg - there is a 64 bit Visual c++ Runtimes, and 32 bit ones, so over time, the difference in install sizes grow as well, as patches backup the old files for uninstall/rollback purposes.

Valid concern, but as you note (removed), the impact will likely be a small percentage of a modern disk.
Buub
Maximum Gerbil
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 4191
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 11:59 pm
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Fri Jun 24, 2011 1:23 am

axeman wrote:the thing someone mentioned about using assuming certain level of SSE instructions are supported is plausible, but it would coders too lazy to detect CPU features themselves.
I think it's more than "plausible". I linked to the documentation of a major open source project that stated it behaves that way.
wibeasley
Gerbil Elite
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 952
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: Norman OK

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Fri Jun 24, 2011 4:25 am

Any computer old enough not to have more than 2GB already is probably old enough to have trouble with 64-drivers as well. Specifically, 64-bit drivers for things like the integrated card readers and webcams of 5+ year old laptops are either dangerously unstable or not available at all IME. For those systems, a fresh new Windows 7 32-bit install is good enough to allow the user (probably a relative/friend) to use it for whatever they used the previous (probably XP) install for, whilst having the happy fuzzy feeling of a more modern, stable and secure operating system.

BTW, you may also want to find a good 1 or 2GB USB-stick and dedicate it to ReadyBoost. For old, slow laptops, the little bit of solid state caching can help to reduce the load on the excruciatingly slow HDD. It had just enough impact on my older laptop to be noticable (160GB Seagate 5200rpm HDD).
Firestarter
Gerbil XP
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 11:12 am

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Fri Jun 24, 2011 4:35 am

WIndows Vista/7 32-bit never made any real sense. The only reason they exist is because of eariler generations of Atom.

If you system is old enough that obtaining 4GB and 64-bit drivers is difficult/expensive. Just stick with XP32. Most of 7/Vista's advantages over XP32 are wasted, because they typically require more modern hardware.

IMO, Modern system should be running some kind of x64 OS, there's no reason. DDR3 is dirt-cheap and it is quite affordable to obtain 8GB of memory. In the instance that you need to run some legacy application. There is a suite of virtualization programs and emulators that can work around the compatibility issues.
Ivy Bridge i5-3570K@4.0Ghz, Gigabyte Z77X-UD3H, 2x4GiB of PC-12800, EVGA 660Ti, Corsair CX-600 and Fractal Refined R4 (W). Kentsfield Q6600@3Ghz, HD 4850 2x2GiB PC2-6400, Gigabyte EP45-DS4P, OCZ Modstream 700W, and PC-7B.
Krogoth
Maximum Gerbil
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 4395
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 3:20 pm
Location: somewhere on Core Prime

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Fri Jun 24, 2011 6:40 am

I installed Windows 7 32bit not so long ago for my sister. Before I did that, I too thought it made no sense at all, and arguable this case shouldn't be enough to change that. Anyway, it was a Centrino laptop, you know with the Pentium M. With 2ghz of single core power and just one or 2 GB RAM, it isn't going to break any speed records, but it's quite alright for basic tasks. And why buy a new computer when this one works just fine? At least with Windows 7, it's as secure as any modern PC.
Firestarter
Gerbil XP
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 11:12 am

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Fri Jun 24, 2011 6:49 am

Sargent Duck wrote:
equivicus wrote:If 16-bit is really a concern then use Virtualbox, VMware, XP Mode, or <insert virtualization technology>.


This. end thread.

Although you'd have to go back a ways to find hardware that doesn't work. Even the first USB keyboards (or even PS/2) you can just plug in and start typing. To go back before that... :o

Yes, because buying and installing a separate OS then booting it each time you want to run that old copy of PrintShopPro you can't let go is totally convenient.
bdwilcox
Graphmaster Gerbil
 
Posts: 1261
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 12:21 pm

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Fri Jun 24, 2011 8:05 am

Firestarter wrote:I installed Windows 7 32bit not so long ago for my sister. Before I did that, I too thought it made no sense at all, and arguable this case shouldn't be enough to change that. Anyway, it was a Centrino laptop, you know with the Pentium M. With 2ghz of single core power and just one or 2 GB RAM, it isn't going to break any speed records, but it's quite alright for basic tasks. And why buy a new computer when this one works just fine? At least with Windows 7, it's as secure as any modern PC.


Pentium-M is a 32-bit CPU, so you really didn't have the option of 64-bit on that. You're lucky it was new enough to have a Win7-compatible Intel IGP - the old convertible P-M tablet I've got at work doesn't (i855), so it's stuck with XP Tablet.

I've got an Acer Aspire 1410 (little brother to the TImeline 1810Z) with 2GB of RAM and it runs the 64-bit Win7 Home Premium it came with just fine.
Think for yourself, schmuck!
i5-2500K@4.3|Asus P8P67-LE|8GB DDR3-1600|Powercolor R7850 2G|1.5TB 7200.11|1988 Model M|Saitek X-45 & P880|Logitech MX 518|Dell 2209WA|Sennheiser PC151|Asus Xonar DX
bthylafh
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
 
Posts: 3129
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 11:55 pm
Location: Southwest Missouri, USA

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Fri Jun 24, 2011 8:07 am

bdwilcox wrote:
Sargent Duck wrote:
equivicus wrote:If 16-bit is really a concern then use Virtualbox, VMware, XP Mode, or <insert virtualization technology>.


This. end thread.

Although you'd have to go back a ways to find hardware that doesn't work. Even the first USB keyboards (or even PS/2) you can just plug in and start typing. To go back before that... :o

Yes, because buying and installing a separate OS then booting it each time you want to run that old copy of PrintShopPro you can't let go is totally convenient.


It's pretty easy to obtain a copy of Win98SE or even Win3.1 for cheap (or free, yar!), and it's not like it'd have to access the Internet.

Or you could buy a newer version of PSP that's from this decade.
Think for yourself, schmuck!
i5-2500K@4.3|Asus P8P67-LE|8GB DDR3-1600|Powercolor R7850 2G|1.5TB 7200.11|1988 Model M|Saitek X-45 & P880|Logitech MX 518|Dell 2209WA|Sennheiser PC151|Asus Xonar DX
bthylafh
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
 
Posts: 3129
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 11:55 pm
Location: Southwest Missouri, USA

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Fri Jun 24, 2011 8:13 am

Firestarter wrote:BTW, you may also want to find a good 1 or 2GB USB-stick and dedicate it to ReadyBoost. For old, slow laptops, the little bit of solid state caching can help to reduce the load on the excruciatingly slow HDD. It had just enough impact on my older laptop to be noticable (160GB Seagate 5200rpm HDD).


Nah, probably better to buy a new 7200RPM hard drive. You're not going to get much benefit out of ReadyBoost compared to that, and even laptop drives are pretty cheap.
Think for yourself, schmuck!
i5-2500K@4.3|Asus P8P67-LE|8GB DDR3-1600|Powercolor R7850 2G|1.5TB 7200.11|1988 Model M|Saitek X-45 & P880|Logitech MX 518|Dell 2209WA|Sennheiser PC151|Asus Xonar DX
bthylafh
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
 
Posts: 3129
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 11:55 pm
Location: Southwest Missouri, USA

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Fri Jun 24, 2011 8:44 am

Flatland_Spider wrote:VB6 programs fail miserably on Win7 64-bit, so there is that.


No. There isn't.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vbasic/ms788708.aspx
Glorious
Darth Gerbil
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 7837
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 6:35 pm

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Fri Jun 24, 2011 9:07 am

bitcat70 wrote:Hi!
Is there any advantage to installing Windows 7 64 bit on a machine with 2 GB RAM over the 32 bit version?


Installing the 64-bit version of Windows 7 will provide support for more memory (greater than 4GB should you go in that direction later) as well as better security and stability. As long as you don't have any older programs that need a 16-bit environment you'll be good to go.
A man must have a code -Bunk
deinabog
Gerbil Team Leader
 
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2002 12:31 pm
Location: Bronx, NY-USA

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Fri Jun 24, 2011 9:51 am

Krogoth wrote:WIndows Vista/7 32-bit never made any real sense. The only reason they exist is because of eariler generations of Atom.

The more exotic codecs are still not available under Media Foundation. So if you want to use Media Center functions with your ogm/rmvb's you kind of still need the 32-bit version.
Image
The Model M is not for the faint of heart. You either like them or hate them.

Gerbils unite! Fold for UnitedGerbilNation, team 2630.
Flying Fox
Gerbil God
 
Posts: 24287
Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 2:19 am

Re: Windows 7: 32 or 64 bit

Postposted on Fri Jun 24, 2011 10:09 am

Sargent Duck wrote:Although you'd have to go back a ways to find hardware that doesn't work.

Large format printers and specialized input devices used for CAD work would be two notable exceptions. We've had a *lot* of issues with these at work, and it is one of the reasons that our transition away from XP has been so slow (as in, the vast majority of our Windows installs are still XP).

Sargent Duck wrote:Even the first USB keyboards (or even PS/2) you can just plug in and start typing.

That's because the keyboard protocols have been set in stone since day 1; all keyboards at least need to understand the base protocol. You may need a driver to use additional proprietary features, but the basic keyboard functionality should always work "out of the box" on any OS that properly implements the keyboard protocol.
(this space intentionally left blank)
just brew it!
Administrator
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 37497
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2002 10:51 pm
Location: Somewhere, having a beer


Return to Windows

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron