32bit vs 64bit

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by ChickenMan, May 10, 2006.

  1. ChickenMan

    ChickenMan Guest

    I have to build a new server, what's the benefits of 32bit vs 64bit for
    Win2k3?

    Cheers.
     
    ChickenMan, May 10, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. ChickenMan

    Peter Guest

    ChickenMan wrote:

    > I have to build a new server, what's the benefits of 32bit vs 64bit for
    > Win2k3?
    >


    All things equal and a very naive answer, for the same speed of electronics,
    a 64 bit server would chomp through the work twice as fast.
     
    Peter, May 10, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. ChickenMan

    Dave Taylor Guest

    "ChickenMan" <> wrote in news:44617b07$1
    @news.orcon.net.nz:

    > I have to build a new server, what's the benefits of 32bit vs 64bit for
    > Win2k3?


    Lack of 64 bit drivers?


    --
    Ciao, Dave
     
    Dave Taylor, May 10, 2006
    #3
  4. ChickenMan

    thingy Guest

    ChickenMan wrote:
    > I have to build a new server, what's the benefits of 32bit vs 64bit for
    > Win2k3?
    >
    > Cheers.
    >
    >


    less stability, less programs....best avoided unless you have a very
    specific use/duty and everything is well certified to run it..

    regards

    Thing
     
    thingy, May 10, 2006
    #4
  5. ChickenMan

    Allistar Guest

    Peter wrote:

    > ChickenMan wrote:
    >
    >> I have to build a new server, what's the benefits of 32bit vs 64bit for
    >> Win2k3?
    >>

    >
    > All things equal and a very naive answer, for the same speed of
    > electronics, a 64 bit server would chomp through the work twice as fast.


    The addressable space is now 64 bits instead of 32, and CPU level
    instructions can be performed on 64 bits in the same number of clock cycles
    that an instruction is performed on 32 bits. That doesn't translate to
    anywhere near twice as fast though.

    Allistar.
     
    Allistar, May 10, 2006
    #5
  6. ChickenMan

    GraB Guest

    On Wed, 10 May 2006 17:49:22 +1200, Peter <>
    wrote:

    >ChickenMan wrote:
    >
    >> I have to build a new server, what's the benefits of 32bit vs 64bit for
    >> Win2k3?
    >>

    >
    >All things equal and a very naive answer, for the same speed of electronics,
    >a 64 bit server would chomp through the work twice as fast.
    >

    Would it, given Win2K isn't a 64bit OS?
     
    GraB, May 10, 2006
    #6
  7. ChickenMan

    Peter Guest

    GraB wrote:

    > On Wed, 10 May 2006 17:49:22 +1200, Peter <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>ChickenMan wrote:
    >>
    >>> I have to build a new server, what's the benefits of 32bit vs 64bit for
    >>> Win2k3?
    >>>

    >>
    >>All things equal and a very naive answer, for the same speed of
    >>electronics, a 64 bit server would chomp through the work twice as fast.
    >>

    > Would it, given Win2K isn't a 64bit OS?


    I got the impression from the MS web site that the Windows 64 bit server was
    compiled for 64 bits.

    Anyway, just to wind up Bill's shills, trolls and astroturfers, for the same
    clock speed, a 64 bit processor running a Linux server would almost
    certainly do more than twice as much *real* work than a 32 bit processor
    running Windows server and is far less likely to be penetrated by worms,
    etc. The Linux server also has the advantage that there are no licences,
    CAL's or software audits to worry about.
     
    Peter, May 10, 2006
    #7
  8. ChickenMan

    ChickenMan Guest

    All it's going to do is host exchange, it won't get any other software
    loaded on it other than Win2k3 and Exchange, then upgraded to the new
    versions upon release...
    Is it best to wait a while before jumping into 64 bit? Reason for this is
    Exchange 2k7 is 64 bit only from readings...



    "thingy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > ChickenMan wrote:
    >> I have to build a new server, what's the benefits of 32bit vs 64bit for
    >> Win2k3?
    >>
    >> Cheers.

    >
    > less stability, less programs....best avoided unless you have a very
    > specific use/duty and everything is well certified to run it..
    >
    > regards
    >
    > Thing
     
    ChickenMan, May 10, 2006
    #8
  9. ChickenMan

    Tony Guest

    ChickenMan wrote:
    > All it's going to do is host exchange, it won't get any other software
    > loaded on it other than Win2k3 and Exchange, then upgraded to the new
    > versions upon release...
    > Is it best to wait a while before jumping into 64 bit? Reason for this is
    > Exchange 2k7 is 64 bit only from readings...
    >
    >

    Exchange does not support 64 bit operation, save yourself the problem
    and stick with the standard 32bit o/s (unless you are going to exceed
    4gig of ram)
     
    Tony, May 10, 2006
    #9
  10. ChickenMan wrote:
    > All it's going to do is host exchange, it won't get any other software
    > loaded on it other than Win2k3 and Exchange, then upgraded to the new
    > versions upon release...


    I recommed you purchase a Server that is x64, but run Windows Server
    2003 32bit. Then you are future proofed to migrate over to x64 bit
    version of Windows & Exchange in the future

    > Is it best to wait a while before jumping into 64 bit? Reason for this is
    > Exchange 2k7 is 64 bit only from readings...


    Exchange 2007 will only be supported on x64, correct

    Read these: (if you only read one, read the first link)

    How to choose server hardware for Exchange 2003 that can be effectively
    re-utilized for Exchange 12?
    http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2006/03/13/421914.aspx

    http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2005/11/18/414796.aspx

    http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2005/07/11/407529.aspx

    http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2005/12/29/416613.aspx

    Cheers
    Nathan
     
    Nathan Mercer, May 10, 2006
    #10
  11. On Wed, 10 May 2006 17:27:11 +1200, ChickenMan wrote:

    > I have to build a new server, what's the benefits of 32bit vs 64bit for
    > Win2k3?


    Nothing - if there is no 64bit version of Windoze.

    But, I imagine that the advantages would include much greater address
    space, and much greater ability to move large quantities of data about
    quickly.

    If all you use your computer for is to type letters, then you won't really
    see an advantage.


    Have A Nice Cup of Tea

    --
    1/ Migration to Linux only costs money once. Higher Windows TCO is forever.
    2/ "Shared source" is a poison pill. Open Source is freedom.
    3/ Only the Windows boxes get the worms.
     
    Have A Nice Cup of Tea, May 10, 2006
    #11
  12. On Wed, 10 May 2006 20:06:00 +1200, GraB wrote:

    >>All things equal and a very naive answer, for the same speed of electronics,
    >>a 64 bit server would chomp through the work twice as fast.
    >>

    > Would it, given Win2K isn't a 64bit OS?


    There is no true 64bit version of Windows.

    Remember how there wasn't a true 32bit clean version of M$ Windows for
    several years after Win 4.x ws released.


    Have A Nice Cup of Tea

    --
    1/ Migration to Linux only costs money once. Higher Windows TCO is forever.
    2/ "Shared source" is a poison pill. Open Source is freedom.
    3/ Only the Windows boxes get the worms.
     
    Have A Nice Cup of Tea, May 10, 2006
    #12
  13. ChickenMan

    thingy Guest

    Nathan Mercer wrote:
    > ChickenMan wrote:
    >
    >>All it's going to do is host exchange, it won't get any other software
    >>loaded on it other than Win2k3 and Exchange, then upgraded to the new
    >>versions upon release...

    >
    >
    > I recommed you purchase a Server that is x64, but run Windows Server
    > 2003 32bit. Then you are future proofed to migrate over to x64 bit
    > version of Windows & Exchange in the future
    >
    >
    >>Is it best to wait a while before jumping into 64 bit? Reason for this is
    >>Exchange 2k7 is 64 bit only from readings...

    >
    >
    > Exchange 2007 will only be supported on x64, correct
    >
    > Read these: (if you only read one, read the first link)
    >
    > How to choose server hardware for Exchange 2003 that can be effectively
    > re-utilized for Exchange 12?
    > http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2006/03/13/421914.aspx
    >
    > http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2005/11/18/414796.aspx
    >
    > http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2005/07/11/407529.aspx
    >
    > http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2005/12/29/416613.aspx
    >
    > Cheers
    > Nathan
    >


    very interesting link....

    Thanks

    thing
     
    thingy, May 10, 2006
    #13
  14. ChickenMan

    Chris Hope Guest

    Nathan Mercer wrote:

    > ChickenMan wrote:
    >> All it's going to do is host exchange, it won't get any other
    >> software loaded on it other than Win2k3 and Exchange, then upgraded
    >> to the new versions upon release...

    >
    > I recommed you purchase a Server that is x64, but run Windows Server
    > 2003 32bit. Then you are future proofed to migrate over to x64 bit
    > version of Windows & Exchange in the future
    >
    >> Is it best to wait a while before jumping into 64 bit? Reason for
    >> this is Exchange 2k7 is 64 bit only from readings...

    >
    > Exchange 2007 will only be supported on x64, correct
    >
    > Read these: (if you only read one, read the first link)
    >
    > How to choose server hardware for Exchange 2003 that can be
    > effectively re-utilized for Exchange 12?
    > http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2006/03/13/421914.aspx
    >
    > http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2005/11/18/414796.aspx
    >
    > http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2005/07/11/407529.aspx
    >
    > http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2005/12/29/416613.aspx


    Interesting domain name. Can be read a slightly different way ;)

    --
    Chris Hope | www.electrictoolbox.com | www.linuxcdmall.com
     
    Chris Hope, May 10, 2006
    #14
  15. ChickenMan

    Bette Noir Guest

    On , , Thu, 11 May 2006 00:47:18 +1200, Re: 32bit vs 64bit, Have
    A Nice Cup of Tea <> wrote:

    >On Wed, 10 May 2006 20:06:00 +1200, GraB wrote:
    >
    >>>All things equal and a very naive answer, for the same speed of electronics,
    >>>a 64 bit server would chomp through the work twice as fast.
    >>>

    >> Would it, given Win2K isn't a 64bit OS?

    >
    >There is no true 64bit version of Windows.
    >
    >Remember how there wasn't a true 32bit clean version of M$ Windows for
    >several years after Win 4.x ws released.


    Win 4.x has never been released.
    ---
     
    Bette Noir, May 11, 2006
    #15
  16. ChickenMan

    GraB Guest

    On Thu, 11 May 2006 09:01:54 +1200, Chris Hope
    <> wrote:

    >Nathan Mercer wrote:
    >
    >> ChickenMan wrote:
    >>> All it's going to do is host exchange, it won't get any other
    >>> software loaded on it other than Win2k3 and Exchange, then upgraded
    >>> to the new versions upon release...

    >>
    >> I recommed you purchase a Server that is x64, but run Windows Server
    >> 2003 32bit. Then you are future proofed to migrate over to x64 bit
    >> version of Windows & Exchange in the future
    >>
    >>> Is it best to wait a while before jumping into 64 bit? Reason for
    >>> this is Exchange 2k7 is 64 bit only from readings...

    >>
    >> Exchange 2007 will only be supported on x64, correct
    >>
    >> Read these: (if you only read one, read the first link)
    >>
    >> How to choose server hardware for Exchange 2003 that can be
    >> effectively re-utilized for Exchange 12?
    >> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2006/03/13/421914.aspx
    >>
    >> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2005/11/18/414796.aspx
    >>
    >> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2005/07/11/407529.aspx
    >>
    >> http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2005/12/29/416613.aspx

    >
    >Interesting domain name. Can be read a slightly different way ;)


    I don't think I'll be changing!
     
    GraB, May 11, 2006
    #16
  17. ChickenMan

    Fran Guest

    Bette Noir wrote:

    > On , , Thu, 11 May 2006 00:47:18 +1200, Re: 32bit vs 64bit, Have
    > A Nice Cup of Tea <> wrote:
    >
    >>On Wed, 10 May 2006 20:06:00 +1200, GraB wrote:
    >>
    >>>>All things equal and a very naive answer, for the same speed of
    >>>>electronics, a 64 bit server would chomp through the work twice as fast.
    >>>>
    >>> Would it, given Win2K isn't a 64bit OS?

    >>
    >>There is no true 64bit version of Windows.
    >>
    >>Remember how there wasn't a true 32bit clean version of M$ Windows for
    >>several years after Win 4.x ws released.

    >
    > Win 4.x has never been released.
    > ---


    Win98 - My Computer - Properties: Windows 4.0.1998 etc.
    WinMe - My Computer - Properties: Windows 4.9 etc.

    Fran
    :):):)
     
    Fran, May 11, 2006
    #17
  18. ChickenMan

    Jasen Betts Guest

    On 2006-05-10, GraB <> wrote:
    > On Wed, 10 May 2006 17:49:22 +1200, Peter <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>ChickenMan wrote:
    >>
    >>> I have to build a new server, what's the benefits of 32bit vs 64bit for
    >>> Win2k3?
    >>>

    >>
    >>All things equal and a very naive answer, for the same speed of electronics,
    >>a 64 bit server would chomp through the work twice as fast.
    >>

    > Would it, given Win2K isn't a 64bit OS?


    only if you're doing lots of integer math using 64 bit applications

    it depends what services the server is providiing.


    --

    Bye.
    Jasen
     
    Jasen Betts, May 11, 2006
    #18
  19. ChickenMan

    Kaiwai Guest

    On Thu, 2006-05-11 at 00:18 +1200, Have A Nice Cup of Tea wrote:
    > On Wed, 10 May 2006 17:27:11 +1200, ChickenMan wrote:
    >
    > > I have to build a new server, what's the benefits of 32bit vs 64bit for
    > > Win2k3?

    >
    > Nothing - if there is no 64bit version of Windoze.
    >
    > But, I imagine that the advantages would include much greater address
    > space, and much greater ability to move large quantities of data about
    > quickly.
    >
    > If all you use your computer for is to type letters, then you won't really
    > see an advantage.


    Incorrect, if this individual is wishing to setup a server, there is
    Windows 2003 in the x86-64bit edition.

    Matty
     
    Kaiwai, May 12, 2006
    #19
  20. On Sat, 13 May 2006 00:33:33 +1200, Kaiwai wrote:

    > Incorrect, if this individual is wishing to setup a server, there is
    > Windows 2003 in the x86-64bit edition.


    It that individual is wishing to set up ANY server, all they need to do is
    to download a CD of FreeBSD, or a few CDs of Linux - and they'll have all
    the software they will ever need for running servers.


    Have A Nice Cup of Tea

    --
    1/ Migration to Linux only costs money once. Higher Windows TCO is forever.
    2/ "Shared source" is a poison pill. Open Source is freedom.
    3/ Only the Windows boxes get the worms.
     
    Have A Nice Cup of Tea, May 13, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. William E. Storey II

    difference between xp 32bit and 64bit????

    William E. Storey II, Aug 15, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    7,332
  2. Dave
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    845
    Mikish
    Sep 25, 2004
  3. =?Utf-8?B?cnVzc193aWxs?=

    exchanging 32bit licence to 64bit licence problem

    =?Utf-8?B?cnVzc193aWxs?=, May 10, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    1,285
    Charlie Russel - MVP
    May 12, 2005
  4. =?Utf-8?B?Ry5CZWNr?=

    Going from legal XP 32bit Professional to 64bit....

    =?Utf-8?B?Ry5CZWNr?=, May 12, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,193
    Kevin Panzke
    May 12, 2005
  5. Juergen Kluth

    32bit -- 64bit different browser-results

    Juergen Kluth, May 18, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,002
    Dennis Pack
    May 21, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page