YA"x64 or x32 Vista?"-topic

[flexy]

dont get me wrong

i still have x64 Vista 5744 on my second partition, but slowly need to make a decision WHAT RTM version (64bit ? 32bit ?) i actually want to drive in RL then

The main "problem" is that i really dont see a POINT in x64, assuming that x64 has somewhat more incompatibility issues (drivers ??) than x32.

() getting x64 does NOT make the OS or apps run faster, nor does it produce more colors, or do some other "magic" fancy which some otherwise wouldn't have with x32.

--> The TYPICAL scenario does look like that...look at how *you* do this...if you own a x64 OS you will go out and everytime when you install/look for a certain application you will look "oh...is there also a 64bit version of this ?" <--- if there is, you will install the 64bit version because you THINK that somehow it's better, more precise (thus 64bit), whatever

Same for drivers etc.....you might have more troubles finding 64bit drivers...often they're released a bit later.....and...i also predict

that in *real life* it will look like that you will have a MIX of 32bit [3rd party] apps/drivers and 64bit apps/drivers.....and i predict that the MAJORITY wil be 32bit nevertheless since many will NOT support 64bit anyway.

If you go on your fav. download site...and get whatever program...how MANY actually offer two versions, one of them for 64bit ? Only a handful....mostly opensource/custom-built stuff as it is right now.

And the of course....not that there is ANY advantage then if you run..say, FireFox x64 build, VirtualDub 64bit, ffdshow builds, whatever....or the OS itself......at least NOT to my knowledge.

Sticking to 32bit MIGHT just save you the hassles of a certain degree of incompatibility, save you time to look/wait for "64bit versions" of whatever drivers.

Just my $0.2

Right now i really tend more towards actually getting Vista x32 RTM...it would be different if i'd feel i lose out on something great (compared to x64)....but..well i just dont !

 

[beer]

There's a lot of misinformation in what you're posting. I've worked on a development effort for x64 (not for MSFT, but for an independent hardware vendor) for a while now, and you're misinformed or flat out wrong on several points.

First of all, device drivers are limited. Yes, this is true. However this isn't a bad thing. Vistax64 REQUIRES!!! that the device drivers be verified and signed for x64. This is a GOOD thing. Device drivers are extremely complicated and run in kernel mode. Yes, you could say "but I only run signed drivers on my systems" and some people do, but most don't. Passing WHQL doesn't guarantee the drivers are perfect but it probably means they won't blue screen or otherwise wreck havoc on your system. The reason that you might not find some x64 drivers is because the vendor can't get them to pass WHQL. Unstable drivers cause tons of system problems, many more than you would think since often buggy driver code can cause problems that doesn't immediately reveal the offending driver - a good example would be a driver that was improperly written and holds the dpc lock for an excessive amount of time, dragging down system performance for no appearant reason.

And then to software, what exactly is your point? 32-bit user mode code will alway work in 64bit Windows, Windows seamlessly operates the WOW64 mode and you can't tell the difference.

The big thing is the OS. I don't need to explain this because MSFT wrote a long article on what was changed in XP64 from XP32. They SOUGHT to make it so the users couldn't tell the difference and that's appearant in your post because you don't have a clue what's going on.

Wrong link. let me find the right one.

 

[flexy]

>>>
The big thing is the OS. I don't need to explain this because MSFT wrote a long article on what was changed in XP64 from XP32. They SOUGHT to make it so the users couldn't tell the difference and that's appearant in your post because you don't have a clue what's going on.
>>>

what do you mean ?

i am aware of the WOW64 and that i am able to run 32 bit apps...i also said in real life you WILL have a mix of 32bit apps and 64bit apps....but the MAJORITY *will* be 32bit apps.

My point is that (except you can give me that link since i'd REALLY be interested to read this) in real life i dont THINK there's a difference beetween running the 32bit OS w/ 100% 32bit drivers and apps....to the 64bit OS, with the additional "hassles" of looking and getting this and that 64bit driver. If i'd see an obvious benefit i'd agree...but i just dont. Except that 64bit can adress more memory...but thats irrelevant for me.

Driver WHQL signatures might be a BIG problem also for me...since my systems are highly dynamic and i install 3rd party low level tools constantly, many requiring low-level drivers and i know a bunch already where they will NEVER get WHQL certification i assume. I am not talking about big companies where its not a big deal to get a driver WHQL certified...but what about many smaller/one person programmers who release utilities ? Be it for virtual CD emulation, gfx-card utilities (like Ati Tray tools) or similiar ? I can name at least three where i am basicaly depend on and NOT be able to run them because of WHQL cert would be a big problem.

My point is that i need clarification WHETHER there is a certain amount of incompatibility problems involved w/ Vista x64 compared to X32...and if there IS, it MIGHT be wiser to just stick to x32 since *obviously* nothing gets lost by NOT running x64.

The COMMON notion right now indeed is that people already compare Vista x64 to "ME" while the x32 is seen as "more stable" ...i dont KNOW this yet since i only did very few testing on Vista x64.....thats why i need the input to make a decision.

You basically say this ALL is not the case since its 100% compatible and we have WOW64 and everything gets seemlessly integrated..if THIS is the case then it truly wouldnt matter.

 

[Nothinman]

() getting x64 does NOT make the OS or apps run faster, nor does it produce more colors, or do some other "magic" fancy which some otherwise wouldn't have with x32.

Actually if the apps are 64-bit it does make them a bit faster most of the time, how much depends on the app. The extra GPRs alone can help a good bit.

Same for drivers etc.....you might have more troubles finding 64bit drivers...often they're released a bit later.....and...i also predict

True now, but not for long. MS is requiring 64-bit drivers to be released with the 32-bit ones for WHQL certification and signed drivers are required for Vista.

that in *real life* it will look like that you will have a MIX of 32bit [3rd party] apps/drivers and 64bit apps/drivers.....and i predict that the MAJORITY wil be 32bit nevertheless since many will NOT support 64bit anyway.

First you can't mix 32-bit and 64-bit drivers, you can only load drivers that match the kernel you're running. Second who cares if you have a mix of 32-bit and 64-bit apps? Have you ever looked and seen how many of your current apps are 32-bit vs 16-bit?

And the of course....not that there is ANY advantage then if you run..say, FireFox x64 build, VirtualDub 64bit, ffdshow builds, whatever....or the OS itself......at least NOT to my knowledge.

Sure there is, 64-bit versions of video apps can be a good bit faster so VirtualDub and ffdshow would probably be worth it.

since my systems are highly dynamic and i install 3rd party low level tools constantly, many requiring low-level drivers and i know a bunch already where they will NEVER get WHQL certification i assume.

Well that's not the norm and most people will never see any of the problems that you're going to run into.

I've been running 64-bit Linux since I got this machine and the only thing that didn't work out of the box was flash since there's no 64-bit version and quite fankly I'm glad it doesn't work.

And I must say I really hate the x32 and x64 crap that MS has started.

 

[Slaanesh]

Could anyone point me to some gaming benchmarks comparing WinXP to Vista32 to Vista64?

 

[DanJ]

Originally posted by: Slaanesh
Could anyone point me to some gaming benchmarks comparing WinXP to Vista32 to Vista64?

Seeing as there aren't mature drivers for Vista yet, I doubt any benchmarks would be helpful.

 

[TerryMathews]

Another thing to keep in mind is that x32 realistically limits you to a max of 3GB of RAM, with a single application consuming no more than 2GB of that. x64 increases both limits dramatically. Vista Home supports 8GB of RAM, the other editions support more.

 

[ToadkillerDog]

My Windows Xp 64 bit has no drivers for my cable modem or printer. I am very nervous about getting Vista 64 bit and ending up in the same situation. 64 bit drivers out there are still much less prevalent then 32 bit. Some come out and say their product will never have 64 bit drivers. How will this be different for Vista?

 

[TerryMathews]

Originally posted by: ToadkillerDog
My Windows Xp 64 bit has no drivers for my cable modem or printer. I am very nervous about getting Vista 64 bit and ending up in the same situation. 64 bit drivers out there are still much less prevalent then 32 bit. Some come out and say their product will never have 64 bit drivers. How will this be different for Vista?

Difference is that Microsoft is requiring companies to support x64 in Vista. If you don't produce both an x32 and x64 version of your driver, your x32 driver doesn't get WHQL certified, which means among other things it will pop up the 'are you sure' dialog box and not be installable over Windows Update through the Add New Hardware wizard.

 

[RebateMonger]

My understanding of the Driver situation for Vista:

1) Drivers for Vista x64 must be SIGNED. This requires the purchase of a "Publisher Identity Certificate (PIC)" from Microsoft. To get this you need a Class 3 Commercial Software Publisher Certificate issued by Versign.

Having drivers SIGNED does NOT mean they are WHQL-certified. It's no guarantee of driver quality. It only means that the creator of the software is known and has purchased the required Certificates.

2) If a software publisher wants WHQL-certification for software, they must have BOTH 32-bit and 64-bit drivers WHQL-certified.