ingeborgdot
Golden Member
How much faster is xp 64 than 32? Is vista 64 ready for prime time yet? Will 64 bit make video editing faster? I have some questions on this and if anyone can answer I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks.
-
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.
xp 32 or 64? or vistat 32 or 64???
- Thread starter ingeborgdot
- Start date
ingeborgdot
Golden Member
But XP was even buggier when it first came out too.
lxskllr
No Lifer
There's nothing buggy about Vista. I've used it off and on since Oct last year, and full time since January this year. Vista runs better than XP ever did. I can't answer your specific questions about video editing, but generally 64bit won't be faster than 32bit. You may benefit from being able to use more ram with 64bit. Check the software you use to make sure there aren't any compatibility issues, and go from there.
I have had nothing but problems with Vista on two separate computers. I even got a BSOD from just having Firefox open. The fact that my $200 Audigy2 ZS Platinum is nothing more than a basic 2.0 sound card in Vista just seals the deal.
If there was nothing wrong with Vista why would Microsoft offer a downgrade to XP option?
Mem
Lifer
I'm using Vista x64 and have to say its probably the most stable Microsoft OS I own and I do use Firefox too(never had a BSOD in firefox)infact only ever had two BSOD since Jan, had one in Stalker at pripyat map and KOTOR2 when using Alchemy wrapper.
As to other people well I don't know how they setup their pc etc but I have been using Vista x64 since Jan for gaming and general use,getting back to the main question Video editing will and can benefit from 4GB of ram etc.. so that points you in the direction of 64 bit OS,checking what software/ 64 bit drivers you will need for your hardware if you go to Vista x64 should answer your question.
As to other people well I don't know how they setup their pc etc but I have been using Vista x64 since Jan for gaming and general use,getting back to the main question Video editing will and can benefit from 4GB of ram etc.. so that points you in the direction of 64 bit OS,checking what software/ 64 bit drivers you will need for your hardware if you go to Vista x64 should answer your question.
ingeborgdot
Golden Member
I agree that there is nothing buggy with vista. I guess what I should have said is that there are issues but it mainly comes from the other vendors and not from microsoft. People think it is MS problem when it is the other companies. I have built several computers with vista and do like it. My problem right now is deciding if I want to spend a couple of thousand dollars for software for video editing because the stuff I have right now won't work on vista.
Modelworks
Lifer
Try out x64 for free.
http://www.microsoft.com/windo...64bit/facts/trial.mspx
I have found x64 to be very stable for 3d, video work, etc.
Also it is officially supported by most of the major software makers.
Vista is currently at a stage where if you get it to work with their software, great, but if you have problems, don't call us !
Is it faster, in some things yes, I have found file operations to be about 5-10% faster.
Of course there is also the benefit of 64 bit memory addressing.
http://www.microsoft.com/windo...64bit/facts/trial.mspx
I have found x64 to be very stable for 3d, video work, etc.
Also it is officially supported by most of the major software makers.
Vista is currently at a stage where if you get it to work with their software, great, but if you have problems, don't call us !
Is it faster, in some things yes, I have found file operations to be about 5-10% faster.
Of course there is also the benefit of 64 bit memory addressing.
stevty2889
Diamond Member
Believe it or not just because YOU don't have any problems with an OS, doesn't mean some people don't. While I do find Vista to very stable and more secure, the lack of good sound card support is a major issue for some people. The gaming performance is an issue for people as well. So firingsquad shows gaming performance to match, they don't show how they pulled it off, and I don't know anyone personaly who hasn't had a loss of gaming performance when going from XP to Vista. When those issues can be fixed, I'll boot in to Vista again, until then, I'm not giving up my M-audio revolution 7.1, and taking a drastic performance hit in gaming.
Mem
Lifer
You forget one thing,even if people do have problems it does not mean its XP/Vista's fault,could be user error,drivers, third party software installed on the system,hardware issue etc...Do we blame OS for everything?...I guess I should blame my OS for not having a pay rise or another rainy day ,wait I'm only getting 250fps but I want the 265 FPS I had before 😉
stevty2889
Diamond Member
yeah but only for 32 bit vista. THe 7.1 XP-64 drivers have been in beta since 2005. And yes this is M-audio's fault, not Vista's.
stevty2889
Diamond Member
If I was getting 250 FPS vs. 265 FPS it wouldn't be a problem. It's getting 15fps vs. 35fps that is a problem. Going from playable to unplayable. I run at 1920x1080, it's the native res of my monitor. If I was running at 1280x1024, I don't imagine it would be such a problem, but why am I going to switch to Vista when it's playable in XP and not in Vista? Like I said before I would gladly switch to vista if someone could show me how to get the FPS back in to the playable range, but so far I just here Vista's great and firing squad benchmarks prove gaming performance doesn't suffer..I still have yet to see how to actually FIX the performance issues.
programmer
Senior member
Either XP 32-bit or Vista 64-bit are good choices. I would avoid XP 64, and why bother with 32-bit Vista if you have a 64-bit CPU? Personally, I find some of the UI and security "features" of Vista annoying but my 64-bit Ultimate box has been stable.
BTW, as far as speed is concerned, you likely won't see much if any difference between a 32-bit and 64-bit OS. Under certain conditions one can be faster than the other. Just get as much RAM as you can and that is where 64-bit Vista helps -- you can use 4GB+ where you are limited to ~3GB with a 32-bit OS
See "Physical Memory Limits: Windows Vista" at
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx
BTW, as far as speed is concerned, you likely won't see much if any difference between a 32-bit and 64-bit OS. Under certain conditions one can be faster than the other. Just get as much RAM as you can and that is where 64-bit Vista helps -- you can use 4GB+ where you are limited to ~3GB with a 32-bit OS
See "Physical Memory Limits: Windows Vista" at
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx
imported_spike99
Member
OK, I'm mainly a PC gamer.. and here is my take on VISTA.
From games I play, I mainly play AOE III & Company of Heroes.
OLD Notebook with XP 32 BIT, 2GB memory
AOE III - No issues
COH - No issues.
OLD DESKTOP with VISTA 32 BIT, 2 GB memory (Due to hardware issues, I RMA PC)
AOE III - No issues
COH - 50% times it crashed. Video driver problems.
Current DESKTOP with VISTA 64 BIT, 4GB memory
AOE III - No issues
COH - 50% times it crashed. Before updating to latest video driver for Crysis.
COH - 90% times it crashed. After updating to latest beta Video driver for Crysis.
Crysis Demo - Just starting to test... Only getting ~ 24 FPS at 1920x1200 - This may change when games comes out.
I'm very frustrated with COH right now... pretty much unplayable right now due to video driver issues.... I'm seriously think about how to go to XP 32BIT. For Crysis, some reviewers are also getting better FPS on XP 32BIT than VISTA.
From games I play, I mainly play AOE III & Company of Heroes.
OLD Notebook with XP 32 BIT, 2GB memory
AOE III - No issues
COH - No issues.
OLD DESKTOP with VISTA 32 BIT, 2 GB memory (Due to hardware issues, I RMA PC)
AOE III - No issues
COH - 50% times it crashed. Video driver problems.
Current DESKTOP with VISTA 64 BIT, 4GB memory
AOE III - No issues
COH - 50% times it crashed. Before updating to latest video driver for Crysis.
COH - 90% times it crashed. After updating to latest beta Video driver for Crysis.
Crysis Demo - Just starting to test... Only getting ~ 24 FPS at 1920x1200 - This may change when games comes out.
I'm very frustrated with COH right now... pretty much unplayable right now due to video driver issues.... I'm seriously think about how to go to XP 32BIT. For Crysis, some reviewers are also getting better FPS on XP 32BIT than VISTA.
rudder
Lifer
I agree. My wifes laptop has Vista on it. There have been zero issues with the OS so far. However, on my desktop I am holding off on Vista simply because there are no drivers available for my video camera. The video camera can capture video from any source and covnert to digital so I use it quite alot. Especially with old VHS tapes. It is a Sony. So the real question with vista and video editiing is making sure your software/drivers are compatible.
I'll post the same responce i did in another post.
I use vista 32bit and its solid. I ordered the 64bit cd for shipping from ms and installed it. The 64 ran smoothly basically, but I keep coming across programs issues that are not 64bit ready. This made me go back to the 32bit.
For example...
1. 64bit would not install the adobe flash player.
2. 64bit gave me "green" screens durning live tv and recording tv, with my media center on the 64bit and my hauppauge hvr 1600 tuner card. Looking into this, hauppauge says and I quote "the 64bit vista with 4megs of mem (or more) has an issue with "green blank screens" during live tv and recording. Their fix... remove some of your memory.
3. Roboform, an auto login filler/form filler does not like the 64bit vista.
4. 64bit vista comes with a 32bit IE and a 64bit IE. I suppose using the 32bit would solve my roboform and flash player problems (oh, did I mention java problems too???), but I say whats the use of going 64bit just to have to fall back using the 32bit IE. Lame-o if you ask me.
5. My media center pc went totally into sleep mode with the 32bit vista (no fans running), and would wake up to do recordings, then shut back down. The 64bit would never go back into sleep mode after a recording. It stayed on. Setting were the same in both the 32 and 64.
6. The above issues using the 64bit. I'd go 32bit vista for now
I use vista 32bit and its solid. I ordered the 64bit cd for shipping from ms and installed it. The 64 ran smoothly basically, but I keep coming across programs issues that are not 64bit ready. This made me go back to the 32bit.
For example...
1. 64bit would not install the adobe flash player.
2. 64bit gave me "green" screens durning live tv and recording tv, with my media center on the 64bit and my hauppauge hvr 1600 tuner card. Looking into this, hauppauge says and I quote "the 64bit vista with 4megs of mem (or more) has an issue with "green blank screens" during live tv and recording. Their fix... remove some of your memory.
3. Roboform, an auto login filler/form filler does not like the 64bit vista.
4. 64bit vista comes with a 32bit IE and a 64bit IE. I suppose using the 32bit would solve my roboform and flash player problems (oh, did I mention java problems too???), but I say whats the use of going 64bit just to have to fall back using the 32bit IE. Lame-o if you ask me.
5. My media center pc went totally into sleep mode with the 32bit vista (no fans running), and would wake up to do recordings, then shut back down. The 64bit would never go back into sleep mode after a recording. It stayed on. Setting were the same in both the 32 and 64.
6. The above issues using the 64bit. I'd go 32bit vista for now
One of the things causing all the game lag is people using retarded settings for their sound cards. If you go into sound options for the output device, it lets you set the sample rate. It ranges from something like 16k (CD quality) to i think 48k (studio). Of course everybody sets it to studio, then they're shocked when the sound takes 20% of their CPU. OMG VISTA ATE MY CPU!!!
If you're using normal analog desktop speakers, you can set the sample rate to the lowest possible and there is literally no difference in sound quality, but the processor usage drops significantly. The other major factor is video drivers. Nvidia's current drivers for Vista suck balls. There is no automatic fullscreen on TV option, you can't overclock the vram, ntune doesn't work at all, and overall performance is lacking.
<----switched from Vista Business to XP Pro after Vista deactivated itself due to me updating the sound card drivers. That and it had this strange problem where it would not be able to mount USB drives because of a "lack of resources", whatever the hell that means.
Mem
Lifer
There is a Microsoft hotfix for sleepmode problems,Adobe reader works fine in Vista x64(I have used it) it has problems with UAC off if you try to install it,btw you can even use FOXIT reader(which I prefer over Adobe) which is better and uses less space,I have heard a lot of problems with Hauppauge and their poor driver support so could be driver related.Personally I use Winfast for my DTV recordings etc in media player and that runs great(thankyou Leadtek Winfast for great support).
Did you try installing this hotfix?
Thats not Vista's fault,until web software companies on the net releases 64 bit software for flash ,java etc... then you are better off with using a 32 bit browser ,personally I use Firefox 32 bit version with 64 bit version of Thunderbird,anyway its not like you cant run the 32 bit version or will get a performance hit which you won't.
Modelworks
Lifer
16K is not cd quality , 44Khz is.
vista should have no problems with a card at 44, 48, or even 192khz.
cpu usage with a good card should not be more thant 1-3% on an average system.
Xp and linux have no problems in these areas and neither should vista.
But they removed hardware acceleration from Vista, so it's all CPU driven. Remember a few years ago when Tom's Hardware did a test to see how a sound card affects gaming performance, and they determined that having a sound card gave a frame rate that was 15% better? In Vista, it's all the same speed as having integrated sound. Your gaming performance will suck hard if you use high quality audio sampling.
edit: i think the process for sound is called audiodx.exe, or something very close to that. Start playing a DVD or avi file or something, then tweak the sample rate and look at how it affects CPU consumption. The difference between the highest setting and the lowest setting is huge.
edit: i think the process for sound is called audiodx.exe, or something very close to that. Start playing a DVD or avi file or something, then tweak the sample rate and look at how it affects CPU consumption. The difference between the highest setting and the lowest setting is huge.
Mem
Lifer
I use Studio quality and have no problem with good FPS in games even at 1680x1050 settings,remember dual and quad core will minimize the CPU load,people forget CPUs/Video cards etc get more powerful,sound has not really change that much,apart from how it works in software mode in Vista.
Creative Labs have good info and reason why the changes.
Link. .
munkus
Junior Member
I've tried both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions of Vista and my subjective experience has been that Vista x64 is more stable. I'm using an E6850 CPU and 4Gb RAM so I haven't noticed any performance degradations in games under x64. I'm sure the benchmarks are a bit lower, but my eyes can't tell the difference. I do wish more software companies would create 64-bit versions of their applications. That will happen as the x64 user base grows, I'm sure.
Having said that, my advice to the OP is to check with the vendors for each of the applications you want to use (video editing, etc) and see if they support Vista. If so, you're probably safe. If you don't have the time or patience to research and troubleshoot, or the money to upgrade to the latest versions, stick with XP SP2 32-bit.
Having said that, my advice to the OP is to check with the vendors for each of the applications you want to use (video editing, etc) and see if they support Vista. If so, you're probably safe. If you don't have the time or patience to research and troubleshoot, or the money to upgrade to the latest versions, stick with XP SP2 32-bit.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
