• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why would i get a pentium M notebook???

A

andrewbabcock

Senior member
If i could never upgrade it to windows vista? I want an Insiron 9300 with a 2 ghz p-m but its 32-bit isn't it? If i can never upgrade to vista, why would i get it?
 
Originally posted by: andrewbabcock
Would you recommend getting a 9300 and getting the 32-bit vista?
Click to expand...
You're not gonna see a whole lotta difference between the 32 and 64 versions of Win for a couple-few years..
 
Ditto ValuedCustomer. We likely won't see software to take advantage of 64-bit performance until the version of Windows after Vista.
 
You are basing a buying decision on Microsoft's Vista?!?!

That's like building a new rig around ATi's "latest and greatest" ... nobody knows when it'll finally show up and even then, who'll want it? 😛
 
Originally posted by: Pabster
You are basing a buying decision on Microsoft's Vista?!?!

That's like building a new rig around ATi's "latest and greatest" ... nobody knows when it'll finally show up and even then, who'll want it? 😛
Click to expand...


That's exactly how I feel about it, OP what advantages are you looking for ? Barley the most system demanding games are noticing minor improvemets on pipmped up 64-bit gaming rigs, Jesus with respect to my Thinkpad R50e I rarely see the cpu going above 600 mhz !!! That's why I have came up with the decesion that I will keep my thinkpad till I feel that my system resources are not enough for the job, I got it with a Pentium M 1.6 Ghz ,just for the power saving features that pentium M has over the celeron, if it wasn't for that I was this close to ordering a Celeron M 1.4 ghz if not less, beleive me when I say it but alot of ppl have much more than they need, especially on laptops.
 
Originally posted by: The Linuxator
Originally posted by: Pabster
You are basing a buying decision on Microsoft's Vista?!?!

That's like building a new rig around ATi's "latest and greatest" ... nobody knows when it'll finally show up and even then, who'll want it? 😛
Click to expand...


That's exactly how I feel about it, OP what advantages are you looking for ? Barley the most system demanding games are noticing minor improvemets on pipmped up 64-bit gaming rigs, Jesus with respect to my Thinkpad R50e I rarely see the cpu going above 600 mhz !!! That's why I have came up with the decesion that I will keep my thinkpad till I feel that my system resources are not enough for the job, I got it with a Pentium M 1.6 Ghz ,just for the power saving features that pentium M has over the celeron, if it wasn't for that I was this close to ordering a Celeron M 1.4 ghz if not less, beleive me when I say it but alot of ppl have much more than they need, especially on laptops.
Click to expand...


Yep, ever since I got my laptop, I have barely used my desktop. I only use it to game occasionally, but I don't even do that much anymore with so much schoolwork.
 
I game on both my desktop and laptop, althought I have to say that my laptop is used to play older games like Alien Vs. Predator 2 and Max Payne 2, Sim City 4 etc. I understand the concern about getting a 64 bit processor to match the latest OS though. Those of us that are tied to MS programs because of our jobs don't have much choice but to go where ever MS drags us. I for one am glad to hear that I probably have about 3 years of 32 bit goodness before I have to be concerned about making the switch.
 
Originally posted by: BladeVenom
Don't wory, your Inspiron 9300 will be obsolete long before most games require Vista.
Click to expand...

Strangely, that doesn't sound as reassuring as it was intended.
 
I would say that Vista would need a 64 bit processor to perform well, not because of 64 bit, but because of the higher ram requirements. What's the minimum going to be on Vista, 512MB with 2GB recommended? Though I don't know of any current laptops that can accept over 2GB of ram anyhow.
 
Originally posted by: Fox5
I would say that Vista would need a 64 bit processor to perform well, not because of 64 bit, but because of the higher ram requirements. What's the minimum going to be on Vista, 512MB with 2GB recommended? Though I don't know of any current laptops that can accept over 2GB of ram anyhow.
Click to expand...
The 32-bit version will be happy w/ 1 gig of mem. The 64 bit will obviously want twice that much since it's handling data twice the size.
 
I feel it will be as useful as say Windows ME was when it came out. Whether it shapes up to be anything more, only time will tell.
 
Originally posted by: ValuedCustomer
Originally posted by: Fox5
I would say that Vista would need a 64 bit processor to perform well, not because of 64 bit, but because of the higher ram requirements. What's the minimum going to be on Vista, 512MB with 2GB recommended? Though I don't know of any current laptops that can accept over 2GB of ram anyhow.
Click to expand...
The 32-bit version will be happy w/ 1 gig of mem. The 64 bit will obviously want twice that much since it's handling data twice the size.
Click to expand...

Uh.....that's such a crock. The 64 bit is capable of handling 64 bit data, it doesn't mean all the data will be 64 bit, and even if it did, it wouldn't mean double the memory requirements since each packet or whatever they're called could store more information.
 
Originally posted by: Fox5
Originally posted by: ValuedCustomer
Originally posted by: Fox5
I would say that Vista would need a 64 bit processor to perform well, not because of 64 bit, but because of the higher ram requirements. What's the minimum going to be on Vista, 512MB with 2GB recommended? Though I don't know of any current laptops that can accept over 2GB of ram anyhow.
Click to expand...
The 32-bit version will be happy w/ 1 gig of mem. The 64 bit will obviously want twice that much since it's handling data twice the size.
Click to expand...

Uh.....that's such a crock. The 64 bit is capable of handling 64 bit data, it doesn't mean all the data will be 64 bit, and even if it did, it wouldn't mean double the memory requirements since each packet or whatever they're called could store more information.
Click to expand...
You're wrong.

 
Originally posted by: ValuedCustomer
Originally posted by: Fox5
Originally posted by: ValuedCustomer
Originally posted by: Fox5
I would say that Vista would need a 64 bit processor to perform well, not because of 64 bit, but because of the higher ram requirements. What's the minimum going to be on Vista, 512MB with 2GB recommended? Though I don't know of any current laptops that can accept over 2GB of ram anyhow.
Click to expand...
The 32-bit version will be happy w/ 1 gig of mem. The 64 bit will obviously want twice that much since it's handling data twice the size.
Click to expand...

Uh.....that's such a crock. The 64 bit is capable of handling 64 bit data, it doesn't mean all the data will be 64 bit, and even if it did, it wouldn't mean double the memory requirements since each packet or whatever they're called could store more information.
Click to expand...
You're wrong.
Click to expand...


That may be the reasoning those sites gives, but if 64 bit does require more memory than 32 bit, I doubt it would be because of the ability to process large data types. I'll just believe that the 32 bit version is a stripped down version of the 64 bit, lacking some services or features, and that accounts for its lower memory usage, but unless you can get someone to back you up, I won't believe that's the reason memory usage doubles.

I believe one of the 'features' of x86 is that, unlike other architectures, it can accept data of varying input sizes, while PPC packs everything to a certain size. And even if the cpu processes all data as a certain bittage, for memory conservation reasons I'd think variables could still be stored as lesser data types. If not, then what is the purpose of using less than 32 bit data types in current programs?
 
64 bit just means that it processes the data in larger chunks. However, the data takes up just as much space either way. It does'nt require twice the data; that's silly. (Most 64bit Linux distros are no larger than their 32bit counterparts.) The extra memory is probbably a good idea either way, knowing Windows' lousy memorymanagement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top