Pages: 1

 

2007-01-31 14:21:45
Airwolf
Latter Alcoholic
+287|7181|Scotland
Lo again,

I was thinking about buying myself a copy of Vista, it sounds really good IMO. (Anyone else pronounce it veesta?)

I've decided on getting the Home Premium edition, but I've hit a little wall. With my system (C2D6400) is it better getting the 32 or the 64-bit edition. Logic tells me 64-bit will be more beneficial, but does C2D support it?

Yeah, I'm a no0b on these things. sorry


Also, I think the Home Premium is the best value: £72
2007-01-31 14:27:59
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7043|SE London

[E.F.L]Airwolf wrote:

Logic tells me 64-bit will be more beneficial, but does C2D support it?
Yes and yes.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2007-01-31 14:28:16)

2007-01-31 14:31:08
Goven
/̵͇̿̿/'̿'̿ ̿
+125|6942|Purdue
Sometimes I pronounce it Vis-ta, others veesta
2007-01-31 14:32:08
Marlboroman82
Personal philosophy: Clothing optional.
+1,022|7085|Camp XRay

not necessarly, alot of apps are not supported in 64bit so make sure you check before taking the plunge. i don't think you notice much different between the two.
https://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l250/marlboroman82/Untitled-8.png
2007-01-31 14:38:39
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7043|SE London

Marlboroman82 wrote:

not necessarly, alot of apps are not supported in 64bit so make sure you check before taking the plunge. i don't think you notice much different between the two.
Which apps?

Everything above driver level should work the same. Coding is identical, which is the great advantage of the x86_64 architecture. There are apps that only work in 64-bit mode too and I would expect very soon those will far outnumber the 32-bit apps that don't work in 64-bit mode. Every 32-bit app can be made to work in 64-bit mode, the reverse is not true.
2007-01-31 14:40:16
Marlboroman82
Personal philosophy: Clothing optional.
+1,022|7085|Camp XRay

Bertster7 wrote:

Marlboroman82 wrote:

not necessarly, alot of apps are not supported in 64bit so make sure you check before taking the plunge. i don't think you notice much different between the two.
Which apps?

Everything above driver level should work the same. Coding is identical, which is the great advantage of the x86_64 architecture. There are apps that only work in 64-bit mode too and I would expect very soon those will far outnumber the 32-bit apps that don't work in 64-bit mode. Every 32-bit app can be made to work in 64-bit mode, the reverse is not true.
i know for a fact bf2 does not play nice with 64bit xp, also team speak sucked balls, i will do a little research but it's not that simple.
https://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l250/marlboroman82/Untitled-8.png
2007-01-31 14:46:47
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7043|SE London

Marlboroman82 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Marlboroman82 wrote:

not necessarly, alot of apps are not supported in 64bit so make sure you check before taking the plunge. i don't think you notice much different between the two.
Which apps?

Everything above driver level should work the same. Coding is identical, which is the great advantage of the x86_64 architecture. There are apps that only work in 64-bit mode too and I would expect very soon those will far outnumber the 32-bit apps that don't work in 64-bit mode. Every 32-bit app can be made to work in 64-bit mode, the reverse is not true.
i know for a fact bf2 does not play nice with 64bit xp, also team speak sucked balls, i will do a little research but it's not that simple.
I'll give it a go on 64-bit Vista and let you know how that works out.

I had heard Crysis will take advantage of 64-bit extensions, Farcry already does, so did the last Unreal tournament.
2007-01-31 14:50:00
Airwolf
Latter Alcoholic
+287|7181|Scotland
So, if I get the x64 edition, I can still run 32-bit apps?

If not, what about like mobo drivers etc?
2007-01-31 14:58:59
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7043|SE London

[E.F.L]Airwolf wrote:

So, if I get the x64 edition, I can still run 32-bit apps?

If not, what about like mobo drivers etc?
That's the whole point of an extended architecture like this. There can be some low level issues with some apps, but those are becoming more and more rare. I'd get the 64-bit one, because otherwise in a years time when almost everything is 64-bit, you'll be left behind.
2007-01-31 15:05:39
Cheez
Herman is a warmaphrodite
+1,027|6900|King Of The Islands

[E.F.L]Airwolf wrote:

So, if I get the x64 edition, I can still run 32-bit apps?

If not, what about like mobo drivers etc?
And 64-bit drivers are the big issue, everything else can be done with a 32-bit counterpart, but 64-bit drivers are REQUIRED.

I say wait a couple weeks, months if you can until Vista (64-bit) is a little more mainstream and drivers are available, and then get 64-bit. I don't see any advantage in getting a 32-bit Vista. What's the point of upgrading for the same capability?
My state was founded by Batman. Your opinion is invalid.
2007-01-31 15:12:26
Glenmore
Member
+0|6757|Canada
I have been using the full version of Vista (Ultimate) for two weeks. O a HP Media Center PC ,64 bit (AMD 6600) and 2 ghz ram. To be honest: do not buy an upgrade to Vista yet. Wait for the bugs to get worked out. The 64 bit is faster but the interface is very taxing on your graphics card. Some bullet points:

-There is a 64 bit and 32 bit Internet Explorer installed. The main reason is that applications like Adobe (Macromedia) Flash plugins do not work in 64 bit yet (and will not for some months to come). No big deal? Except every site seems to have some Flash/Java plugin somewhere

-!!!The security is overkill: To run BF2, it took me awhile before I realized I had to select the shortcut and select 'Run as Administrator' or Punkbuster boots you right away.

- It had almost all my drivers by default except one. It turns out I don't need it (media card reader) , but you may find out it is one of the ones on your system you can't live without.

- You CANNOT upgrade from Windows XP 32 to Vista 64. Kiss those .mpgs of goat-on-midgets action goodbye

- Do not buy Vista Ultimate: Here is what you get for $100 - Poker, f'n online poker!!! There may be more benefit down the line but not yet. Even the animated desktop feature is not available yet.

-BF2 runs fine but the extra stress on your graphics card from the stupid see-through clock on your desktop could put you over the edge to a lower resolution.

-I use Media Center to record TV shows and almost had an anneurism the other night when I went to record a show and Vista wouldn't do it because "The broadcaster requested the program not be recorded"!!?!!?! I almost unistalled right then and there. Bill Gates  in my f'n living room telling me what I can f'n record from the signal I PAID FOR!!! It has only happened with one TV show so far (ATHF) but that was enough to make me rage.
Rage. RAGE!!!

In conclusin to my rambling post: buy it with your next machine, but do not upgrade. BF2 and Ventrillo work great for me but my graphics card has been rendered obsolete (I barely meet the requirments to play Vista Chess, no jokes).

If you choose to ignore my advice, be sure to go to Microsoft and run the 'Vista Ready' app on your existing system. It should spot most potential driver problems
2007-01-31 15:30:15
Cheez
Herman is a warmaphrodite
+1,027|6900|King Of The Islands

Glenmore wrote:

-BF2 runs fine but the extra stress on your graphics card from the stupid see-through clock on your desktop could put you over the edge to a lower resolution.
Vista is supposed to turn off unnecessary services (like Aero) if it believes you computer doesn't have the kahunas to do something. What happened to that feature?

Ah, Performance Index. That's it.
My state was founded by Batman. Your opinion is invalid.
2007-01-31 15:31:22
The#1Spot
Member
+105|7001|byah
64 bit (AMD 6600) and 2 ghz ram

funny thing is either your stuck up and confident or you didnt reread what you typed.
6000+ hasnt come out yet and theres no such thing as 2ghz of ram
2007-01-31 15:36:27
FredFLQ
S0tp R4p1nG u5!!1one
+47|6993|Donnacona, Quebec

The#1Spot wrote:

theres no such thing as 2ghz of ram
?

Did I read that right?
2007-01-31 15:49:20
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7043|SE London

The#1Spot wrote:

theres no such thing as 2ghz of ram
I get your point and he's very wrong, but DDR4 can go upto 2.8GHz.
2007-01-31 17:16:28
Masques
Black Panzer Party
+184|7184|Eastern PA

Marlboroman82 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Marlboroman82 wrote:

not necessarly, alot of apps are not supported in 64bit so make sure you check before taking the plunge. i don't think you notice much different between the two.
Which apps?

Everything above driver level should work the same. Coding is identical, which is the great advantage of the x86_64 architecture. There are apps that only work in 64-bit mode too and I would expect very soon those will far outnumber the 32-bit apps that don't work in 64-bit mode. Every 32-bit app can be made to work in 64-bit mode, the reverse is not true.
i know for a fact bf2 does not play nice with 64bit xp, also team speak sucked balls, i will do a little research but it's not that simple.
BF2 works just fine for me on XPx64. There doesn't appear to be much difference to me...

Half-Life 2 on the other hand....
2007-01-31 17:28:11
Christen[30AU]
Attain By Surprise
+41|7224|Oregon, USA
I have vista ultimate  x64  running on this system, and the only problems I've had with it so far is with my media  display on my G15 keyboard.

Other than that, I have had 0 problems. Which, with this being a completley new system, is quite a shock for me. I love my computer
2007-01-31 18:14:16
Glenmore
Member
+0|6757|Canada

The#1Spot wrote:

64 bit (AMD 6600) and 2 ghz ram

funny thing is either your stuck up and confident or you didnt reread what you typed.
6000+ hasnt come out yet and theres no such thing as 2ghz of ram
2 Gigs of RAM. Read between the lines...puddle.
2007-02-01 04:34:51
sixshot
Decepticon Geek
+50|7137|Planet Seibertron ;)

Glenmore wrote:

-There is a 64 bit and 32 bit Internet Explorer installed. The main reason is that applications like Adobe (Macromedia) Flash plugins do not work in 64 bit yet (and will not for some months to come). No big deal? Except every site seems to have some Flash/Java plugin somewhere
Bug Macromedia/Adobe and Sun for that.  They're the developers and they should have been ready from the start to have their stuff updated for the general mass.

Glenmore wrote:

- You CANNOT upgrade from Windows XP 32 to Vista 64. Kiss those .mpgs of goat-on-midgets action goodbye
... That says lots...

Glenmore wrote:

- Do not buy Vista Ultimate: Here is what you get for $100 - Poker, f'n online poker!!! There may be more benefit down the line but not yet. Even the animated desktop feature is not available yet.
Let's see... it took how long to bring out a DirectX game of a particular version that makes the most of the video card that supported it?

Glenmore wrote:

-BF2 runs fine but the extra stress on your graphics card from the stupid see-through clock on your desktop could put you over the edge to a lower resolution.
Performance losses should be very small and minimal.  If you're getting poor performance out of BF2, check your video card drivers.

Glenmore wrote:

-I use Media Center to record TV shows and almost had an anneurism the other night when I went to record a show and Vista wouldn't do it because "The broadcaster requested the program not be recorded"!!?!!?! I almost unistalled right then and there. Bill Gates  in my f'n living room telling me what I can f'n record from the signal I PAID FOR!!! It has only happened with one TV show so far (ATHF) but that was enough to make me rage.
Rage. RAGE!!!
So YOU'RE the one who plastered those flashy advertising lights all over Boston!  You booger!

Glenmore wrote:

In conclusin to my rambling post: buy it with your next machine, but do not upgrade. BF2 and Ventrillo work great for me but my graphics card has been rendered obsolete (I barely meet the requirments to play Vista Chess, no jokes).
It ran BF2 yet you say this (Vista Chess) made your video card obsolete???  Am I missing something here?

Look, it's been general knowledge for a while that there will be performance impacts and penalties for using Vista at this time.  We're talking about a whole new operating system built from the ground up with a whole new different video driver implementation.  A lot of the things in Vista are so different despite that they are intended to run "just the same" for the handful of applications out there.  One thing you need to realize is that it takes time for software developers to properly update their products and applications to work well with Vista, be it in 32-bit mode or 64-bit mode.  One cannot expect everything to "just work."  If you're wanting that, you should have been using Apple computers instead.

Yes, we all know about the Vista Readiness application that Microsoft published.  But know full well that I have tested Vista RC2 on my own experimental box, which, mind you, is spec'd lower than what you have mentioned.  Yet Vista ran okay with that hardware alone.  It wasn't speedy, since it had only 512MB of RAM.  But the important thing was that it runs.  You say you have 2GB of RAM (next time, try to proofread your post using the Preview button).  That alone should be enough.  And if you believe that it runs sluggish, then start killing some features or services or whatever.  Customize it.  Configure it.  Optimize it.  Defrag it.  Overclock it.  If you cannot make it run any faster or perform any better, well... I wouldn't know.  I've yet to install Vista on my primary rig.  But that may change, depending on nvidia, Creative Labs, Hauppauge, Logitech, Ahead Software, Mozilla, Adobe/Macromedia, etc....
2007-02-01 04:37:23
Ki][mE
OMG H4XOR!
+51|7025|I'm a Viking....Norway
VISTA=

Viruses
Intruders
Spyware
Trojans
Adware
2007-02-01 04:59:47
sixshot
Decepticon Geek
+50|7137|Planet Seibertron ;)

Ki][mE wrote:

VISTA=

Viruses
Intruders
Spyware
Trojans
Adware
I could say the same about every versions of Windows.  Your point?
2007-02-01 05:36:46
Glenmore
Member
+0|6757|Canada

sixshot wrote:

Glenmore wrote:

-There is a 64 bit and 32 bit Internet Explorer installed. The main reason is that applications like Adobe (Macromedia) Flash plugins do not work in 64 bit yet (and will not for some months to come). No big deal? Except every site seems to have some Flash/Java plugin somewhere
Bug Macromedia/Adobe and Sun for that.  They're the developers and they should have been ready from the start to have their stuff updated for the general mass.

Glenmore wrote:

- You CANNOT upgrade from Windows XP 32 to Vista 64. Kiss those .mpgs of goat-on-midgets action goodbye
... That says lots...

Glenmore wrote:

- Do not buy Vista Ultimate: Here is what you get for $100 - Poker, f'n online poker!!! There may be more benefit down the line but not yet. Even the animated desktop feature is not available yet.
Let's see... it took how long to bring out a DirectX game of a particular version that makes the most of the video card that supported it?

Glenmore wrote:

-BF2 runs fine but the extra stress on your graphics card from the stupid see-through clock on your desktop could put you over the edge to a lower resolution.
Performance losses should be very small and minimal.  If you're getting poor performance out of BF2, check your video card drivers.

Glenmore wrote:

-I use Media Center to record TV shows and almost had an anneurism the other night when I went to record a show and Vista wouldn't do it because "The broadcaster requested the program not be recorded"!!?!!?! I almost unistalled right then and there. Bill Gates  in my f'n living room telling me what I can f'n record from the signal I PAID FOR!!! It has only happened with one TV show so far (ATHF) but that was enough to make me rage.
Rage. RAGE!!!
So YOU'RE the one who plastered those flashy advertising lights all over Boston!  You booger!

Glenmore wrote:

In conclusin to my rambling post: buy it with your next machine, but do not upgrade. BF2 and Ventrillo work great for me but my graphics card has been rendered obsolete (I barely meet the requirments to play Vista Chess, no jokes).
It ran BF2 yet you say this (Vista Chess) made your video card obsolete???  Am I missing something here?

Look, it's been general knowledge for a while that there will be performance impacts and penalties for using Vista at this time.  We're talking about a whole new operating system built from the ground up with a whole new different video driver implementation.  A lot of the things in Vista are so different despite that they are intended to run "just the same" for the handful of applications out there.  One thing you need to realize is that it takes time for software developers to properly update their products and applications to work well with Vista, be it in 32-bit mode or 64-bit mode.  One cannot expect everything to "just work."  If you're wanting that, you should have been using Apple computers instead.

Yes, we all know about the Vista Readiness application that Microsoft published.  But know full well that I have tested Vista RC2 on my own experimental box, which, mind you, is spec'd lower than what you have mentioned.  Yet Vista ran okay with that hardware alone.  It wasn't speedy, since it had only 512MB of RAM.  But the important thing was that it runs.  You say you have 2GB of RAM (next time, try to proofread your post using the Preview button).  That alone should be enough.  And if you believe that it runs sluggish, then start killing some features or services or whatever.  Customize it.  Configure it.  Optimize it.  Defrag it.  Overclock it.  If you cannot make it run any faster or perform any better, well... I wouldn't know.  I've yet to install Vista on my primary rig.  But that may change, depending on nvidia, Creative Labs, Hauppauge, Logitech, Ahead Software, Mozilla, Adobe/Macromedia, etc....
This is my final post on the topic because this is getting old fast. All your points are valid and I could ramp down all my features to speed up my machine and blame 3rd party drivers all day but the fact of the matter is: it is not worth the time at this point if your XP rig isn't broke. There are no visible benefits.

PS: Why proofread when I have the members of the 2006 Comicon D&D booth to point out that my +1 magic mace is invulnerable to troll attack after every post?
2007-02-01 12:38:36
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7043|SE London

Ki][mE wrote:

VISTA=

Viruses
Intruders
Spyware
Trojans
Adware
That is so not true.

Vista is more secure. Mostly in an annoying way because it checks everything you're doing and tells you something could be a security risk every two seconds and you have to specify every time you want to run something as an administrator. Maybe it's annoying, but it's verging on foolproof. The problems will occur for all the people who get pissed off by the level of required user interaction and disable those security features.

Vista is/will be a far more secure OS than XP. As virtually every previous version of windows has been.


People who tend to get viruses are people who do things they shouldn't be doing and don't know enough about how to sort problems out.
2007-02-01 12:45:48
De_Jappe
Triarii
+432|6989|Belgium

I'm not getting it, I don't need all that fancy moving stuff, first thing I did when I got XP was changing view to classic mode, disable all stupid animations and get rid of all crap. (except the OS itself )

Vista requires some decent hardware and not everything is compatible yet (and of course the price for a legal version). So I'll stick with my Xp/ubuntu OS's at the moment
2007-02-01 12:49:34
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7043|SE London

De_Jappe wrote:

I'm not getting it, I don't need all that fancy moving stuff, first thing I did when I got XP was changing view to classic mode, disable all stupid animations and get rid of all crap. (except the OS itself )

Vista requires some decent hardware and not everything is compatible yet (and of course the price for a legal version). So I'll stick with my Xp/ubuntu OS's at the moment
Vista does require decent hardware. But if you have that hardware, it's a great upgrade. The stuff I care about with it is all behind the scenes and seems very good. As for compatibility, I've found it much better at detecting and installing hardware than XP and soon MS will release Virtual PC to solve any existing compatibility issues (of which there are few).

 

Pages: 1

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard