32 bit is no longer valid

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: JustaGeek
Well, shortly after writing my post, I experienced the first serious issue.

The computer was frozen, with the power light and hard drive light flickering, and both DVD drives flickering like if the system tried to scan for hardware.

I did 2 things this morning: Enabled RiveTuner in Low Level fan Control to start at 45%, and re-enabled the Native Command Queuing (I had it enabled, then disabled it, and re-enabled it this morning).

According to the free Event Log Explorer there were 2 issues in the system, both related to the Registry and either OPEN or MISSING key:

One for the Print Spooler (I use HP printers/scanners/faxes) and the other to Norton IS 2007 trying to access the registry, and being denied.

Any ideas...? Has anyone experienced this type of error...?

Who in their right mind - except a geek - is gonna put up with 64-bit workarounds and issues when 32-bit is painless and offers the same performance ?

unless you are a RAM eater with photoshop 64-bit is pretty much a third arm - no one can point to any advantages in gaming ...

1-2 years? ... more like 2010


when we see apps and games specifically written/ported for/to 64-bit

the *only* devs that give s crap are CryTek, Valve, Epic and maybe Bungie ... the rest are solidly in 32-bit mode

finally, if you moved to Vista32 from XP32 - instead of 64 - with 3GB of RAM you'd get all the pleasure and none of the pain

 

[Avalon]

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

Had problems with the 64-bit Far Cry patch, had to uninstall and re-install the game with patch 1.3 and it works fine now. Do not try it, it is too old - 2005!


The problem: no 64-bit Anti-Spyware programs, except for Defender. SpySweeper refused to install, other anti-spyware apps do not work in a 64-bit OS.

Not sure about the FarCry patch, I'll have to check it out.
For anti-spyware, I use Spybot, which runs as a 32-bit application without issues on my Vista x64 system. Haven't tried any other anti-spyware software, because I've always been partial to Spybot.

Well, shortly after writing my post, I experienced the first serious issue.

The computer was frozen, with the power light and hard drive light flickering, and both DVD drives flickering like if the system tried to scan for hardware.

I did 2 things this morning: Enabled RiveTuner in Low Level fan Control to start at 45%, and re-enabled the Native Command Queuing (I had it enabled, then disabled it, and re-enabled it this morning).

According to the free Event Log Explorer there were 2 issues in the system, both related to the Registry and either OPEN or MISSING key:

One for the Print Spooler (I use HP printers/scanners/faxes) and the other to Norton IS 2007 trying to access the registry, and being denied.

Any ideas...? Has anyone experienced this type of error...?

Not sure, never heard of that before. Can you replicate the issue with both changes you made to your system, or 1/2 changes?

Who in their right mind - except a geek - is gonna put up with 64-bit workarounds and issues when 32-bit is painless and offers the same performance ?

unless you are a RAM eater with photoshop 64-bit is pretty much a third arm - no one can point to any advantages in gaming ...

1-2 years? ... more like 2010


when we see apps and games specifically written/ported for/to 64-bit

the *only* devs that give s crap are CryTek, Valve, Epic and maybe Bungie ... the rest are solidly in 32-bit mode

finally, if you moved to Vista32 from XP32 - instead of 64 - with 3GB of RAM you'd get all the pleasure and none of the pain

Blah blah blah. Are you done being a drama queen yet? I'm not "putting up with" 64-bit workarounds, simply because I don't have to MAKE any. Advantages that some people can make use of have already been pointed out, but you simply don't care because those advantages don't apply to you. You'd prefer to stick your head in the sand until sometime down the road you find a need. You do this every year for all different types of hardware.

No pain here, sorry to disappoint. Stop arguing with people and be productive.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Avalon

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

Had problems with the 64-bit Far Cry patch, had to uninstall and re-install the game with patch 1.3 and it works fine now. Do not try it, it is too old - 2005!


The problem: no 64-bit Anti-Spyware programs, except for Defender. SpySweeper refused to install, other anti-spyware apps do not work in a 64-bit OS.

Not sure about the FarCry patch, I'll have to check it out.
For anti-spyware, I use Spybot, which runs as a 32-bit application without issues on my Vista x64 system. Haven't tried any other anti-spyware software, because I've always been partial to Spybot.

Well, shortly after writing my post, I experienced the first serious issue.

The computer was frozen, with the power light and hard drive light flickering, and both DVD drives flickering like if the system tried to scan for hardware.

I did 2 things this morning: Enabled RiveTuner in Low Level fan Control to start at 45%, and re-enabled the Native Command Queuing (I had it enabled, then disabled it, and re-enabled it this morning).

According to the free Event Log Explorer there were 2 issues in the system, both related to the Registry and either OPEN or MISSING key:

One for the Print Spooler (I use HP printers/scanners/faxes) and the other to Norton IS 2007 trying to access the registry, and being denied.

Any ideas...? Has anyone experienced this type of error...?

Not sure, never heard of that before. Can you replicate the issue with both changes you made to your system, or 1/2 changes?

Who in their right mind - except a geek - is gonna put up with 64-bit workarounds and issues when 32-bit is painless and offers the same performance ?

unless you are a RAM eater with photoshop 64-bit is pretty much a third arm - no one can point to any advantages in gaming ...

1-2 years? ... more like 2010


when we see apps and games specifically written/ported for/to 64-bit

the *only* devs that give s crap are CryTek, Valve, Epic and maybe Bungie ... the rest are solidly in 32-bit mode

finally, if you moved to Vista32 from XP32 - instead of 64 - with 3GB of RAM you'd get all the pleasure and none of the pain

Blah blah blah. Are you done being a drama queen yet? I'm not "putting up with" 64-bit workarounds, simply because I don't have to MAKE any. Advantages that some people can make use of have already been pointed out, but you simply don't care because those advantages don't apply to you. You'd prefer to stick your head in the sand until sometime down the road you find a need. You do this every year for all different types of hardware.

No pain here, sorry to disappoint. Stop arguing with people and be productive.

blah*blah*blah - yourself

Your "advantages" don't apply to 99% of Win users
:roll:

or -

--show me some *proof* ... instead of silly "testimonials" and how it "feels"
- then you can be productive for a change - instead of telling me to stop posting because i don't support your view.


if you have brand new HW and new SW, then there is probably zero reason to NOT go with 64-bit. It is fine for "new everything". otoh - Most of us in the real world will do fine for the next couple of years - at least - with Win32

 

[Oric]

just like the days of 8086 ... 1 MB ram maximum ... 640K (enough for everyone) + 384K (extended)

 

[mlahatte]

Cool! Drama! (Grabbing popcorn!)

heh, actually, I am going to have to buy vista 64 since I will be running 8gb of ram since I do graphic design, web design, animation, etc... Cant wait to see how Maya, PS, etc run with 8gb of ram! Rendering anything with fluid in it seems to take FOREVER on 3GB of ram! Hope it makes a big difference. I just hope that I don't have compatibility problems with different software when i crank up vista 64.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Oric
just like the days of 8086 ... 1 MB ram maximum ... 640K (enough for everyone) + 384K (extended)

There is *no one* saying that 64-bit is not the future nor that 32-bit is sufficient for large-addressware gaming
--it's *all* about 'timing' and how you spend your hard-earned money.
$$:clock:$$

However, we (I) are (am) taking issue with the BS topic title: 32 bit is no longer valid nor do i believe that High end starts at 64. The 64-bit supporters cannot demonstrate that 32 is not also "high-end" for gaming with 4GB. To spend money on 64-bit i need *proof* that there is a practical advantage in gaming.

My 2GB RAM and 32-bit Vista was sufficient in May when i got it and worked well all the way until Hg:L when i had to compromise with some settings ... this week was fitting for me to upgrade and save $150 over the *same* RAM i almost bought then and the just-released Hg:L patch only now allows me to play maxed-out DX10.


When it is *time* for me to upgrade in 2009-10 it will cost maybe $100 for the 64-bit OS ... a TINY part of what i will need to spend for MB/DDR-3/PCIe2/CPU/GPUs ... i will be very glad to upgrade *then* as all my SW and HW will also be the very latest and no doubt aps will be routinely 64-bit.
-and i am very grateful to the early adopters of 64-bit OS. My sincerest thanks.


EDITED

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: JustaGeek
Well, shortly after writing my post, I experienced the first serious issue.

The computer was frozen, with the power light and hard drive light flickering, and both DVD drives flickering like if the system tried to scan for hardware.

I did 2 things this morning: Enabled RiveTuner in Low Level fan Control to start at 45%, and re-enabled the Native Command Queuing (I had it enabled, then disabled it, and re-enabled it this morning).

According to the free Event Log Explorer there were 2 issues in the system, both related to the Registry and either OPEN or MISSING key:

One for the Print Spooler (I use HP printers/scanners/faxes) and the other to Norton IS 2007 trying to access the registry, and being denied.

Any ideas...? Has anyone experienced this type of error...?

Who in their right mind - except a geek - is gonna put up with 64-bit workarounds and issues when 32-bit is painless and offers the same performance ?

unless you are a RAM eater with photoshop 64-bit is pretty much a third arm - no one can point to any advantages in gaming ...

1-2 years? ... more like 2010


when we see apps and games specifically written/ported for/to 64-bit

the *only* devs that give s crap are CryTek, Valve, Epic and maybe Bungie ... the rest are solidly in 32-bit mode

finally, if you moved to Vista32 from XP32 - instead of 64 - with 3GB of RAM you'd get all the pleasure and none of the pain

I actually expected apoppin to "jump right in" on the first sign of problems.

Well, perhaps you're right, as you said about the "right mind" - maybe we are all crazy...?

But... there is no turning back, and in a way, all the 64-bit "early adopters" are doing great "service" to people like you, so in 2010 you'll be able to enjoy perfectly stable 64-bit OS.

I am under an impression that you are just "itching" to try it out, but the circumstances and the priorities don't allow you to!

And with the move from XP to 32-bit Vista - C'mon now!

Who, in their right mind, would move from perfectly stable 32-bit OS into another 32-bit OS.

Ooops, sorry...

You did! :laugh:

 

[nullpointerus]

chizow:

What program do you use to monitor VRAM in Vista x64?

IIRC, I never actually got RivaTuner to work -- it would show 0 MB or something equally useless.

Originally posted by: apoppin

My 2GB RAM and 32-bit Vista was sufficient in May when i got it and worked well all the way until Hg:L when i had to compromise with some settings ... this week was fitting for me to upgrade and save $150 over the *same* RAM i almost bought then and the just-released Hg:L patch only now allows me to play maxed-out DX10.

How are you able to play Hg:L in maxed-out DX10?

I'm in single-player mode -- the latest patch for that is 0.6 -- but the "Extreme" settings bring my rig to a crawl (15 fps?) even just walking around a station. When I turn things down to High or Very High (to match my DX9 playable settings) then the game becomes playable.

I tried hard to like DX10 mode, but I just do not see the point of using it right now.

(1) There is still a performance hit compared to DX9 mode. The game stutters much less in DX9 mode with the same settings.

(2) I think the game still has a memory leak in DX10 mode. I have played for several hours straight in DX9 mode without any problems, but this afternoon in DX10 mode the game started dipping below 5 fps or just locking up for 1-2 seconds in the heat of battle (or when moving the mouse over items in the inventory window. Granted, I was moving back and forth between stations and manipulating many items -- Claire's oddball quests had me running all over the place (but gave me several legendary items!) -- but performance did not clear up when I stayed in one area for a while.

(3) V-sync does not work for me in DX10 mode. (Catalyst 7.12, clean installation of Vista)

(4) Load times are much higher for me in DX10 mode. For example, between the time the screen goes to black and the time when the first video sequence starts playing, there is like a ten-second lag in DX10 mode whereas DX9 mode seems instantaneous.

(5) I get graphical glitches in DX10 mode after a while. Some of the shader/transparency effects (such as those around the subway level doors) will just go all rainbow-colored instead of the normal blur effect. Also, many people start losing their hair; it becomes disconnected from the body and turns a wierd brownish-black color.

So I'm moving back to mostly-maxed settings in DX9 mode w/ "Medium" AA.

EDIT: I just remembered that I'm running the 64-bit Hg:L on Vista x64 whereas you are running 32-bit Hg:L on Vista x86. Maybe this explains the difference?

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: Avalon

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

Had problems with the 64-bit Far Cry patch, had to uninstall and re-install the game with patch 1.3 and it works fine now. Do not try it, it is too old - 2005!


The problem: no 64-bit Anti-Spyware programs, except for Defender. SpySweeper refused to install, other anti-spyware apps do not work in a 64-bit OS.

Not sure about the FarCry patch, I'll have to check it out.
For anti-spyware, I use Spybot, which runs as a 32-bit application without issues on my Vista x64 system. Haven't tried any other anti-spyware software, because I've always been partial to Spybot.

Well, shortly after writing my post, I experienced the first serious issue.

.....................

Any ideas...? Has anyone experienced this type of error...?

Not sure, never heard of that before. Can you replicate the issue with both changes you made to your system, or 1/2 changes?

Apparently for the Far Cry 64-bit patch you must disable other 32-bit running tasks to make it work. Too much hassle for nothing, IMO, because the game runs perfectly fine, better than in XP, in its native 32-bit mode.

I have disabled the Defender, as I've read somewhere else about the "Event: 1530, Source: profsvc".

Installed a bunch of hotfixes, and after the last one: KB941542, the error message disappeared from the Event Viewer.

Other hotfixes that I installed, and they don't come via Windows Update, even though all of them are marked as "Important":

KB932649, KB931671, KB930955, KB929685, KB929451.

Earlier, I got KB940105 and KB936710.

After the last "Restart" I only have some "Warnings" about the Printers, but at least the "Hard Drive" messages have disappeared.

What happened was actually pretty scary, with computer requiring the Hard Restart, and after the restart it behaved the same, like if the BIOS got corrupted!

I turned off the PSU until the MB light went out, and turned it back on. Entered the BIOS, did a minor change (S1 & S3 changed to S3 only), and it booted up, with the message of improper shutdown.

I disabled the RivaTuner and disabled the NCQ then, and later I disabled the Defender, that perhaps was conflicting with NIS 2007. Norton has its own AntiSpyware built in.

So far, so good after that.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: nullpointerus
chizow:

What program do you use to monitor VRAM in Vista x64?

IIRC, I never actually got RivaTuner to work -- it would show 0 MB or something equally useless.

Ya VRAM reading in Vista is broken and the dev says it won't ever get fixed due to the way WDDM drivers are handled unfortunately. It was an incredibly useful tool for testing VRAM usage in games with AA and different resolutions.

I was actually referring to virtual memory not video RAM when referring to usage. AT uses Process Explorer to break down exact amounts. Commit charge is somewhere inbetween physical RAM used and physical + virtual so it works well enough for gauging memory use and performance.

Originally posted by: apoppin

My 2GB RAM and 32-bit Vista was sufficient in May when i got it and worked well all the way until Hg:L when i had to compromise with some settings ... this week was fitting for me to upgrade and save $150 over the *same* RAM i almost bought then and the just-released Hg:L patch only now allows me to play maxed-out DX10.

How are you able to play Hg:L in maxed-out DX10?

I'm in single-player mode -- the latest patch for that is 0.6 -- but the "Extreme" settings bring my rig to a crawl (15 fps?) even just walking around a station. When I turn things down to High or Very High (to match my DX9 playable settings) then the game becomes playable.

I tried hard to like DX10 mode, but I just do not see the point of using it right now.

(1) There is still a performance hit compared to DX9 mode. The game stutters much less in DX9 mode with the same settings.

(2) I think the game still has a memory leak in DX10 mode. I have played for several hours straight in DX9 mode without any problems, but this afternoon in DX10 mode the game started dipping below 5 fps or just locking up for 1-2 seconds in the heat of battle (or when moving the mouse over items in the inventory window. Granted, I was moving back and forth between stations and manipulating many items -- Claire's oddball quests had me running all over the place (but gave me several legendary items!) -- but performance did not clear up when I stayed in one area for a while.

(3) V-sync does not work for me in DX10 mode. (Catalyst 7.12, clean installation of Vista)

(4) Load times are much higher for me in DX10 mode. For example, between the time the screen goes to black and the time when the first video sequence starts playing, there is like a ten-second lag in DX10 mode whereas DX9 mode seems instantaneous.

(5) I get graphical glitches in DX10 mode after a while. Some of the shader/transparency effects (such as those around the subway level doors) will just go all rainbow-colored instead of the normal blur effect. Also, many people start losing their hair; it becomes disconnected from the body and turns a wierd brownish-black color.

So I'm moving back to mostly-maxed settings in DX9 mode w/ "Medium" AA.

EDIT: I just remembered that I'm running the 64-bit Hg:L on Vista x64 whereas you are running 32-bit Hg:L on Vista x86. Maybe this explains the difference?

[/quote]
Don't forget he has the fastest Vista 32 install on the planet that is impervious to the limitations of 32-bit. Amazing how 5 minutes ago there was no benefit to more RAM and now its "just enough". :roll:

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: JustaGeek
Well, shortly after writing my post, I experienced the first serious issue.

The computer was frozen, with the power light and hard drive light flickering, and both DVD drives flickering like if the system tried to scan for hardware.

I did 2 things this morning: Enabled RiveTuner in Low Level fan Control to start at 45%, and re-enabled the Native Command Queuing (I had it enabled, then disabled it, and re-enabled it this morning).

According to the free Event Log Explorer there were 2 issues in the system, both related to the Registry and either OPEN or MISSING key:

One for the Print Spooler (I use HP printers/scanners/faxes) and the other to Norton IS 2007 trying to access the registry, and being denied.

Any ideas...? Has anyone experienced this type of error...?

Who in their right mind - except a geek - is gonna put up with 64-bit workarounds and issues when 32-bit is painless and offers the same performance ?

unless you are a RAM eater with photoshop 64-bit is pretty much a third arm - no one can point to any advantages in gaming ...

1-2 years? ... more like 2010


when we see apps and games specifically written/ported for/to 64-bit

the *only* devs that give s crap are CryTek, Valve, Epic and maybe Bungie ... the rest are solidly in 32-bit mode

finally, if you moved to Vista32 from XP32 - instead of 64 - with 3GB of RAM you'd get all the pleasure and none of the pain

I actually expected apoppin to "jump right in" on the first sign of problems.

Well, perhaps you're right, as you said about the "right mind" - maybe we are all crazy...?

But... there is no turning back, and in a way, all the 64-bit "early adopters" are doing great "service" to people like you, so in 2010 you'll be able to enjoy perfectly stable 64-bit OS.

I am under an impression that you are just "itching" to try it out, but the circumstances and the priorities don't allow you to!

And with the move from XP to 32-bit Vista - C'mon now!

Who, in their right mind, would move from perfectly stable 32-bit OS into another 32-bit OS.

Ooops, sorry...

You did! :laugh:

Of course, i wanted DX10 without the headaches of 64-bit.
-and i went from Win2K to Vista so it was a pretty solid upgrade.

Would i like to try 64-bit?
- not now ... i am gaming without a performance disadvantage now ... more than "just enough" of last week
[unless *someone* has proof to the contrary]



and we are all geeks ... here ...
--if *you* are having "issues", imagine the "average joe gamer"
:Q

i can't imagine
:roll:

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: Cheex
I'm having a problem here while testing out Vista x64.

I'm still waiting on my 4GB kit to arrive so for now I'm on a 1GB stick.
The only game that seems to want to run properly is FIFA 08. Everything else just seems to SUCK.
I'm using the latest drivers and its a clean install.

Anyone else having any issues with Battlefield 2, NFS UG2 and such, just to name a few?

I don't have any major issues with Vista x64 or my software,one solid OS IMHO,would I go back to 32 bit OS not unless I had to and at the moment that's not going to happen(in a way I'm now on 64 bit for life until 128 bit OS gets here).
I do have NFS UG2 so will install that later and report back my findings.UPDATE: NFS UG2 works fine in Vista x64,just installed the game and had a quick spin around a track.
My current Vista x64 games list.

BG+Exp pack
BG2+Exp pack
WoW+Exp pack
Vanguard
KOTOR
KOTOR2
NWN2+MoB exp pack.
Vanguard
Mythos(Beta online game)
Space Rangers 2(without Starforce copy protection)
The Witcher
Jedi Academy
Jedi Outcast
Morrowind+ all Exp packs
Oblivion + Exp packs
Starcraft+ Brood Wars.
Silverfall
Jade Empire
Steam games(CS,DoD,TFC etc..)
Two Worlds
Avencast
Jericho
Prey
UT2004
Stalker
UFO-Extraterrestrials
UFO-Afterlight
Icewind Dale
Icewind Dale 2
Bioshock
Deus Ex
Deus Ex2
DarknLight
Archlord
Dungeon Runners
9 Dragons
Anarchy Online
SWG
LOTRO
Xcom -Enforcer
Might&Magic 8
UFO-Alien Invasion
SpaceForce Rogue Universe
Painkiller-Overdose

Probably a few I've not included but hey its 3am here .

Btw just remember no legacy 16 bit support in Vista x64 so that means no 16 bit software will run,that includes very old 16 bit games.

Well, shortly after writing my post, I experienced the first serious issue.

The computer was frozen, with the power light and hard drive light flickering, and both DVD drives flickering like if the system tried to scan for hardware.

I did 2 things this morning: Enabled RiveTuner in Low Level fan Control to start at 45%, and re-enabled the Native Command Queuing (I had it enabled, then disabled it, and re-enabled it this morning).

According to the free Event Log Explorer there were 2 issues in the system, both related to the Registry and either OPEN or MISSING key:

One for the Print Spooler (I use HP printers/scanners/faxes) and the other to Norton IS 2007 trying to access the registry, and being denied.

Any ideas...? Has anyone experienced this type of error...?

I remember Norton used to be bad(very bloated) for any OS,that was the consensus in the AT forums,however not sure if their new version has improved,personally you are better off going for Kaspersky,NOD32,Bitdefender(paid ones) or Avira,Avast for free ones,these don't have any issues with Vista x64 that I'm aware of.

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: apoppin

......................................

and we are all geeks ... here ...
--if *you* are having "issues", imagine the "average joe gamer"
:Q

i can't imagine
:roll:

I stand by what I said before getting Vista 64 - it is not ready for prime time.

The biggest problem to me is the security. Not too many AntiVirus programs actually work with the 64-bit Vista, and those that do, have to work in 32-bit mode. That's where the UAC becomes the necessity - if anything starts running in the background, it just steps in, so hopefully can stop spyware and malware that slip past Norton, just by alerting the user.

An "average Joe...?"

There is no way someone without at least basic knowledge of HW and SW can "tame" it.

I don't think Microsoft even realizes the true "power" of the 64-bit computing, and it is an "unchartered" teritory for them, too. It's not just dealing with extra RAM addressability issues, it is a "war" going on out there!

With software being limited to the lower 2GB, and Hardware starting at 4GB and counting down, there has been a clear boundary between the two.

Well, the boundary no longer exist. The developers must learn how to design the drivers that won't be fighting with the software in the same memory range! People put 4GB+ of RAM, and without proper memory mapping, the zone between 3 - 4GB becomes a battle zone. (That's why it makes sense to go with MORE than 4GB - if you go with 4GB, might as well use 3GB and leave the "Hardware zone" alone. Or go for 6 or 8GB)

I strongly believe that the area between 3 - 4GB should become inaccessible to the apps, just like the Upper Memory Area in the IBM AT times. Programs should be designed to "skip it". It would make it SO much easier for everyone, especially in this transitional period. So many drivers must still work in the 32-bit mode.

Pehaps it will be possible in the future to make this process automatic, or maybe... we should go higher, and create another boundary...? A theoretical area between 120GB - 128GB for the hardware, anyone...?

Send it up there, we will never need more memory than that!

Wait a second...

Haven't I heard that before...?

Nah, why would anyone EVER say that....

 

[Mem]

I stand by what I said before getting Vista 64 - it is not ready for prime time.

The biggest problem to me is the security. Not too many AntiVirus programs actually work with the 64-bit Vista, and those that do, have to work in 32-bit mode. That's where the UAC becomes the necessity - if anything starts running in the background, it just steps in, so hopefully can stop spyware and malware that slip past Norton, just by alerting the user.

I have had no real issues with AV,there's plenty of anti-virus programs that work with Vista x64.
I don't think my UAC pops up much especially for my anti-virus(Avast),auto updates UAC never pops up for it,right click and manual scan on a file it never pops up.I leave real time AV scan on even in gaming and had no issues.

Kaspersky 7,NOD32,AVIRA,AVG,Avast,Bitdefender 2008 etc all have AV software that works with Vista x64.

Another good thread on AV for Vista over here .

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: Mem
I remember Norton used to be bad(very bloated) for any OS,that was the consensus in the AT forums,however not sure if their new version has improved,personally you are better off going for Kaspersky,NOD32,Bitdefender(paid ones) or Avira,Avast for free ones,these don't have any issues with Vista x64 that I'm aware of.

Norton is much, MUCH more better now. I've been using different versions for the past 4 years, and don't really care about ocassional slowdowns, as long as I am protected.

And in this category Norton is solid, earning the title of the "Best Security Suite" by the editors of the PC World, for Norton Internet Security 2008, as tested by some German company.

Remember - they are the same people that said Vista was the #1 disappointment of 2007!

And I know that SpySweeper crashed XP with the RivaTuner running, so perhaps something happened between the Defender, Norton and Riva (hey, that sounds like an Action movie plot... or porn LOL).

It seems fine now, after applying all the updates and hotfixes. I am just wondering why Microsoft doesn't make these hotfixes part of regular updates...?

After installation, ALL of them were marked as Important (see my post above)...

Go figure...

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: Mem

Kaspersky 7,NOD32,AVIRA,AVG,Avast,Bitdefender 2008 etc all have AV software that works with Vista x64.

Another good thread on AV for Vista over here .

Thanks Mem. I am sure that I will make something work. Wanna stick to Norton for now, 'cause I have subscription until October.

But I will make it work - there is no going back to XP for me, and I am determined to make Vista 64 work as well as XP, or better on my system.

And I know I will.

Thanks again.

 

[n7]

I have no interest in reading thru this whole thread.

Simply put:
Vista x64 is the future; x86 is a dead future.

This isn't speculation or rumor, it's a fact.

Yes, x86 runs pretty much everything just as well as x64 for now, & i actually didn't expect the need for x64 to happen so fast, but due to how Vista manages RAM (& uses more), the need for x64 became very apparent to me in a hurry.

Obviously, many people will happily delay things by running x86 as long as they can, & all power to them.

But it's pretty obvious 4+ GB of RAM is the new higher end standard, not 3 GB.

In my experince with Vista x64, i've been extremely happy except for one thing: nVidia.

I have had nearly no problems w/ x64 since i began running it in May, but i've had countless issues with nVidia's craptastic Vista x64 drivers.

In fact, it's utterly enraging that they still cannot code decently stable drivers 1 year after an OS is released.

Otherwise, Vista x64 = superb for me.

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: Cheex
I'm having a problem here while testing out Vista x64.

I'm still waiting on my 4GB kit to arrive so for now I'm on a 1GB stick.
The only game that seems to want to run properly is FIFA 08. Everything else just seems to SUCK.
I'm using the latest drivers and its a clean install.

Anyone else having any issues with Battlefield 2, NFS UG2 and such, just to name a few?

Cheex - you don't have enough memory, nothing will work properly in 64-bit Vista with only 1GB of RAM!

Even for the 32-bit 2GB is recommended.

Be patient - apply all the updates and hotfixes, including the "4GB one", and wait for your 4 gigs to arrive to play games...

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

Originally posted by: Cheex
I'm having a problem here while testing out Vista x64.

I'm still waiting on my 4GB kit to arrive so for now I'm on a 1GB stick.
The only game that seems to want to run properly is FIFA 08. Everything else just seems to SUCK.
I'm using the latest drivers and its a clean install.

Anyone else having any issues with Battlefield 2, NFS UG2 and such, just to name a few?

Cheex - you don't have enough memory, nothing will work properly in 64-bit Vista with only 1GB of RAM!

Even for the 32-bit 2GB is recommended.

Be patient - apply all the updates and hotfixes, including the "4GB one", and wait for your 4 gigs to arrive to play games...

I always recommend Vista x68/x64 users download latest updates for DX9.0C as well from Microsoft's website.
Btw Need for speed Underground 2 works fine in Vista x64,just went round a track for a spin.


DX9.0C download Nov 07.

System Requirements

* Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000; Windows 2000 Advanced Server; Windows 2000 Professional Edition ; Windows 2000 Server; Windows 2000 Service Pack 2; Windows 2000 Service Pack 3; Windows 2000 Service Pack 4; Windows 98; Windows 98 Second Edition; Windows Server 2003; Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1; Windows Server 2003, Datacenter x64 Edition; Windows Server 2003, Enterprise x64 Edition; Windows Server 2003, Standard x64 Edition; Windows Small Business Server 2003 ; Windows Vista; Windows Vista Business; Windows Vista Business 64-bit edition; Windows Vista Business N; Windows Vista Enterprise; Windows Vista Enterprise 64-bit edition; Windows Vista Home Basic; Windows Vista Home Basic 64-bit edition; Windows Vista Home Basic N; Windows Vista Home Premium; Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit edition; Windows Vista Starter; Windows Vista Starter N; Windows Vista Ultimate; Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit edition; Windows XP; Windows XP 64-bit; Windows XP Home Edition ; Windows XP Home Edition N; Windows XP Media Center Edition; Windows XP Professional Edition ; Windows XP Professional x64 Edition ; Windows XP Service Pack 1; Windows XP Service Pack 2; Windows XP Starter Edition; Windows XP Tablet PC Edition

.

 

[Avalon]

Originally posted by: apoppin


blah*blah*blah - yourself

Your "advantages" don't apply to 99% of Win users
:roll:

or -

--show me some *proof* ... instead of silly "testimonials" and how it "feels"
- then you can be productive for a change - instead of telling me to stop posting because i don't support your view.


if you have brand new HW and new SW, then there is probably zero reason to NOT go with 64-bit. It is fine for "new everything". otoh - Most of us in the real world will do fine for the next couple of years - at least - with Win32

Don't blah blah blah me. And don't repeat me. Proof has already been shown, but you don't care because it doesn't apply to you.

And don't even try to imply that I haven't been productive on these forums, because that's a crock of shit.

:roll:

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: n7
I have no interest in reading thru this whole thread.

Simply put:
Vista x64 is the future; x86 is a dead future.

This isn't speculation or rumor, it's a fact.

Yes, x86 runs pretty much everything just as well as x64 for now, & i actually didn't expect the need for x64 to happen so fast, but due to how Vista manages RAM (& uses more), the need for x64 became very apparent to me in a hurry.

Obviously, many people will happily delay things by running x86 as long as they can, & all power to them.

But it's pretty obvious 4+ GB of RAM is the new higher end standard, not 3 GB.

In my experince with Vista x64, i've been extremely happy except for one thing: nVidia.

I have had nearly no problems w/ x64 since i began running it in May, but i've had countless issues with nVidia's craptastic Vista x64 drivers.

In fact, it's utterly enraging that they still cannot code decently stable drivers 1 year after an OS is released.

Otherwise, Vista x64 = superb for me.

I'm sure you've tried nForce 169.25 - they seem to work without any issues for me.

But they are "brand new", too.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Avalon

Originally posted by: apoppin


blah*blah*blah - yourself

Your "advantages" don't apply to 99% of Win users
:roll:

or -

--show me some *proof* ... instead of silly "testimonials" and how it "feels"
- then you can be productive for a change - instead of telling me to stop posting because i don't support your view.


if you have brand new HW and new SW, then there is probably zero reason to NOT go with 64-bit. It is fine for "new everything". otoh - Most of us in the real world will do fine for the next couple of years - at least - with Win32

Don't blah blah blah me. And don't repeat me. Proof has already been shown, but you don't care because it doesn't apply to you.

And don't even try to imply that I haven't been productive on these forums, because that's a crock of shit.

:roll:

blah blah blah
- back at you again

What *proof*? Just "testimony" of true-believers how it "feels". Not a single benchmark or trusted article to support their "superiority" claim of a 64bit gaming system with 4GB of RAM over an otherwise identical 32-bit system. They don't like it nor do you that i called you on it and asked for proof. Should be easy to do besides showing me links to threads of more geek opinion or screenies of what their Vista64 is doing with it's RAM management.


You were not productive to "blah blah blah" me with unfounded personal accusations of "being a drama queen" and supposedly doing this 'all the time' and then running away with a "it works fine for me" comment.
*You* stop arguing "with people and be productive" - your words right back at you.
:roll:

 

[toadeater]

Originally posted by: n7
I have no interest in reading thru this whole thread.

Simply put:
Vista x64 is the future; x86 is a dead future.

This isn't speculation or rumor, it's a fact.

It is only the future for development, and possibly gaming. It's not the future for the average Joe who doesn't even need more than 1GB of RAM for anything they do and doesn't use high-end, pro apps.

Mainstream PCs are going to be getting smaller, not more powerful. There's nothing mainstream users do that requires more power than today's budget PCs. For a market like that, bloated Vista and OS X are losers. Embedded Linux is the best option there.

If MS has any sense, they'll put a lot more effort behind promoting PC gaming, because that's one of the few things that's going to keep Windows afloat. For practically everything else, you no longer even need an OS. Office suites? Email? Instant messaging? Porn (very important)? Casual gaming? That's all WWW stuff, and the WWW can be accessed from all sorts of things other than Windows PCs.

Sigh, knowing MS, their greed will get the better of them and PC gaming will be dead. There aren't enough hardcore PC gamers, especially ones that can afford all this expensive crap, which includes Vista.

That's not just MS's fault, it's also the fault of fellow monopolist Nvidia, who are the last ones in the PC industry still jacking up prices and making hardcore gaming too expensive for most gamers. Intel's been selling dirt-cheap processors, RAM is practically free, storage is cheap, but then you come to DX10 cards. $300+ for a "mid-range" DX10 card? WTF is that? No wonder PC gaming is dying. And with PC gaming dead, Windows too will die.

 

[JustaGeek]

I will stick to this thread with another seemingly off topic issue.

While playing NHL 08 (which BTW looks amazing and gameplay is much smoother in Vista64 than in XP) the monitor goes to sleep, like if there was no activity on the screen!

I use the Logitech Rumblepad 2 to play the game, and it has no driver option to "wake the computer".

Apparently Vista thinks that there is no activity, so it turns off the Monitor like it normally would! Moving the mouse around brings the image back to the screen.

I have it set for "Screen Saver after 5 min", "Turn off the Monitor after 10 min".

Anyone with the same problem...?

 

[Avalon]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Avalon

Originally posted by: apoppin


blah*blah*blah - yourself

Your "advantages" don't apply to 99% of Win users
:roll:

or -

--show me some *proof* ... instead of silly "testimonials" and how it "feels"
- then you can be productive for a change - instead of telling me to stop posting because i don't support your view.


if you have brand new HW and new SW, then there is probably zero reason to NOT go with 64-bit. It is fine for "new everything". otoh - Most of us in the real world will do fine for the next couple of years - at least - with Win32

Don't blah blah blah me. And don't repeat me. Proof has already been shown, but you don't care because it doesn't apply to you. I'm not going to post any "proof" because you don't care.

And don't even try to imply that I haven't been productive on these forums, because that's a crock of shit.

:roll:

blah blah blah
- back at you again

What *proof*? Just "testimony" of true-believers how it "feels". Not a single benchmark or trusted article to support their "superiority" claim of a 64bit gaming system with 4GB of RAM over an otherwise identical 32-bit system. They don't like it nor do you that i called you on it and asked for proof. Should be easy to do besides showing me links to threads of more geek opinion or screenies of what their Vista64 is doing with it's RAM management.


You were not productive to "blah blah blah" me with unfounded personal accusations of "being a drama queen" and supposedly doing this 'all the time' and then running away with a "it works fine for me" comment.
*You* stop arguing "with people and be productive" - your words right back at you.
:roll:

Oh look, more useless arguing. Think you got across your point yet, or do you have to reply to me 17 more times? Don't care what you say, you're not willing, and you don't care about the numbers people have to post. I'm also not even talking about gaming.

I don't care that I'm not being productive here (despite the fact that I'm trying to help Justageek) because I've done more than my share elsewhere, and even if I hadn't, I couldn't care less because it's you posting.