HP Intel Core 2 Duo Notebook: Vista Ultimate 64 or XP Pro 32...?

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by Ben, May 16, 2008.

  1. Ben

    Ben Guest

    I have a relatively new HP Core 2 Duo laptop that shipped with Vista
    Ultimate 64. It's in dire need of a reformat and reinstall of the OS --
    checked with HP and there are no Vista SP1-Integrated restore discs
    available so my options are to restore and then apply SP1, or, just go with
    XP Pro 32.

    The 64-bit Core 2 Duo with Vista has been OK, but more sluggish than I was
    expecting -- would I experience even slower performance by going to XP Pro
    32? I don't know what, if any, advantages I'd be giving up by not going
    with a 64-bit OS. While my laptop shipped with Vista-64; XP drivers are
    available from the HP support site.

    After a year of sluggishness with Vista, I'm willing to give up the slick
    interface for zippier performance. If anyone has the time to explain (or
    provide a link to) info about what'd I'd be giving up by using a 32-bit OS
    with a processor capable of utilizing a 64-bit one. Thanks!
    Ben, May 16, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. I believe XP would serve you well as long as there isn't anything by way of
    software that you are running that need more than 2GB memory or needs to be
    64bit.

    On the other hand, making the decision that the machine needs to be
    re-formated and the system re-installed tells me you are in the process of
    learning and that responding to your own 'first impression' might be a good
    thing to do. Sure, I've heard that Vista is sluggish in comparison, but I
    doubt that a well configured system would benefit enough from a down-grade
    except, perhaps, from the point of view that you might feel more confident
    handling the configuration of XP better than you would Vista?

    I would re-install your Vista now in the firm confidence that if you cannot
    bring it up to 'par' you still have XP to fall back to. Both scenarios are
    basically 'sound'.


    Tony. . .



    "Ben" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I have a relatively new HP Core 2 Duo laptop that shipped with Vista
    > Ultimate 64. It's in dire need of a reformat and reinstall of the OS --
    > checked with HP and there are no Vista SP1-Integrated restore discs
    > available so my options are to restore and then apply SP1, or, just go

    with
    > XP Pro 32.
    >
    > The 64-bit Core 2 Duo with Vista has been OK, but more sluggish than I was
    > expecting -- would I experience even slower performance by going to XP Pro
    > 32? I don't know what, if any, advantages I'd be giving up by not going
    > with a 64-bit OS. While my laptop shipped with Vista-64; XP drivers are
    > available from the HP support site.
    >
    > After a year of sluggishness with Vista, I'm willing to give up the slick
    > interface for zippier performance. If anyone has the time to explain (or
    > provide a link to) info about what'd I'd be giving up by using a 32-bit OS
    > with a processor capable of utilizing a 64-bit one. Thanks!
    >
    Tony Sperling, May 16, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Ben

    Ben Guest

    Any info that's a little more specific? Know of any ways a 64-bit OS would
    utilize a Core 2 Duo that a 32-bit one wouldn't? I have no issues or
    questions regarding configuration of either OS.

    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I believe XP would serve you well as long as there isn't anything by way
    > of
    > software that you are running that need more than 2GB memory or needs to
    > be
    > 64bit.
    >
    > On the other hand, making the decision that the machine needs to be
    > re-formated and the system re-installed tells me you are in the process of
    > learning and that responding to your own 'first impression' might be a
    > good
    > thing to do. Sure, I've heard that Vista is sluggish in comparison, but I
    > doubt that a well configured system would benefit enough from a down-grade
    > except, perhaps, from the point of view that you might feel more confident
    > handling the configuration of XP better than you would Vista?
    >
    > I would re-install your Vista now in the firm confidence that if you
    > cannot
    > bring it up to 'par' you still have XP to fall back to. Both scenarios are
    > basically 'sound'.
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    >
    > "Ben" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> I have a relatively new HP Core 2 Duo laptop that shipped with Vista
    >> Ultimate 64. It's in dire need of a reformat and reinstall of the OS --
    >> checked with HP and there are no Vista SP1-Integrated restore discs
    >> available so my options are to restore and then apply SP1, or, just go

    > with
    >> XP Pro 32.
    >>
    >> The 64-bit Core 2 Duo with Vista has been OK, but more sluggish than I
    >> was
    >> expecting -- would I experience even slower performance by going to XP
    >> Pro
    >> 32? I don't know what, if any, advantages I'd be giving up by not going
    >> with a 64-bit OS. While my laptop shipped with Vista-64; XP drivers are
    >> available from the HP support site.
    >>
    >> After a year of sluggishness with Vista, I'm willing to give up the slick
    >> interface for zippier performance. If anyone has the time to explain (or
    >> provide a link to) info about what'd I'd be giving up by using a 32-bit
    >> OS
    >> with a processor capable of utilizing a 64-bit one. Thanks!
    >>

    >
    >
    >
    Ben, May 16, 2008
    #3
  4. No, not really - with one possible exception which might be 'Hardware
    Virtualisation Support' if you are running VM's.

    The thing with a 64bit OS is that it 'may be' faster only if a 32bit system
    is bogged down running the same jobs on the same machinery - if the 32bit
    system can expedite your jobs without delays you wouldn't expect to see any
    difference at all, the rest would be configuration issues, I honestly think.


    Tony. . .


    "Ben" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > Any info that's a little more specific? Know of any ways a 64-bit OS

    would
    > utilize a Core 2 Duo that a 32-bit one wouldn't? I have no issues or
    > questions regarding configuration of either OS.
    >
    Tony Sperling, May 16, 2008
    #4
  5. Ben

    Jeff Gaines Guest

    On 16/05/2008 in message <#> Ben wrote:

    >Any info that's a little more specific? Know of any ways a 64-bit OS
    >would utilize a Core 2 Duo that a 32-bit one wouldn't? I have no issues
    >or questions regarding configuration of either OS.


    I think there are 2 key differences.
    First the amount of memory a 64 bit system can use, in a laptop you can
    ignore this for now since I doubt there is space for more than 4 GB RAM
    (of which 32 bit Windows will see around 3 to 3.5GB) in the laptop. (I use
    XP x64 to allow me to use the 8GB RAM in my desktop PC).
    Second would be if there was a specific 64 bit application that you need
    to use, at the moment 64 bit apps are about as rare as hen's teeth though.

    I would think there will be little speed difference between 32 bit/64 bit,
    XP may be a bit faster but now that Vista drivers are maturing it seems to
    be catching up.

    --
    Jeff Gaines
    Damerham Hampshire UK
    Jeff Gaines, May 16, 2008
    #5
  6. Ben

    Ben Guest

    Thanks for your input -- anyone else?

    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > No, not really - with one possible exception which might be 'Hardware
    > Virtualisation Support' if you are running VM's.
    >
    > The thing with a 64bit OS is that it 'may be' faster only if a 32bit
    > system
    > is bogged down running the same jobs on the same machinery - if the 32bit
    > system can expedite your jobs without delays you wouldn't expect to see
    > any
    > difference at all, the rest would be configuration issues, I honestly
    > think.
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    > "Ben" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    >> Any info that's a little more specific? Know of any ways a 64-bit OS

    > would
    >> utilize a Core 2 Duo that a 32-bit one wouldn't? I have no issues or
    >> questions regarding configuration of either OS.
    >>

    >
    >
    >
    Ben, May 16, 2008
    #6
  7. Ben

    bjr Guest

    ow about shutting off the eye candy (Aero), run classic, and stick with
    the newer and better supported OS.
    PCMag's ExtremeTech just did a XP SP3 vs Vista SP1 compare running games
    and found little difference.

    Ben wrote:
    > Thanks for your input -- anyone else?
    >
    > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> No, not really - with one possible exception which might be 'Hardware
    >> Virtualisation Support' if you are running VM's.
    >>
    >> The thing with a 64bit OS is that it 'may be' faster only if a 32bit
    >> system
    >> is bogged down running the same jobs on the same machinery - if the 32bit
    >> system can expedite your jobs without delays you wouldn't expect to
    >> see any
    >> difference at all, the rest would be configuration issues, I honestly
    >> think.
    >>
    >>
    >> Tony. . .
    >>
    >>
    >> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >> news:%...
    >>> Any info that's a little more specific? Know of any ways a 64-bit OS

    >> would
    >>> utilize a Core 2 Duo that a 32-bit one wouldn't? I have no issues or
    >>> questions regarding configuration of either OS.
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >>
    bjr, May 16, 2008
    #7
  8. The OS makes no difference with regards to virtualization. The hardware
    support is in the cpu, not the OS. VPC and VS will detect this and make it
    available to vms.

    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > No, not really - with one possible exception which might be 'Hardware
    > Virtualisation Support' if you are running VM's.
    >
    > The thing with a 64bit OS is that it 'may be' faster only if a 32bit
    > system
    > is bogged down running the same jobs on the same machinery - if the 32bit
    > system can expedite your jobs without delays you wouldn't expect to see
    > any
    > difference at all, the rest would be configuration issues, I honestly
    > think.
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    > "Ben" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    >> Any info that's a little more specific? Know of any ways a 64-bit OS

    > would
    >> utilize a Core 2 Duo that a 32-bit one wouldn't? I have no issues or
    >> questions regarding configuration of either OS.
    >>

    >
    >
    Colin Barnhorst, May 17, 2008
    #8
  9. You don't say how much memory you have. It matters a lot as does using a
    flash drive for superfetch if you have only 1GB or 2GB.

    "Ben" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I have a relatively new HP Core 2 Duo laptop that shipped with Vista
    >Ultimate 64. It's in dire need of a reformat and reinstall of the OS --
    >checked with HP and there are no Vista SP1-Integrated restore discs
    >available so my options are to restore and then apply SP1, or, just go with
    >XP Pro 32.
    >
    > The 64-bit Core 2 Duo with Vista has been OK, but more sluggish than I was
    > expecting -- would I experience even slower performance by going to XP Pro
    > 32? I don't know what, if any, advantages I'd be giving up by not going
    > with a 64-bit OS. While my laptop shipped with Vista-64; XP drivers are
    > available from the HP support site.
    >
    > After a year of sluggishness with Vista, I'm willing to give up the slick
    > interface for zippier performance. If anyone has the time to explain (or
    > provide a link to) info about what'd I'd be giving up by using a 32-bit OS
    > with a processor capable of utilizing a 64-bit one. Thanks!
    Colin Barnhorst, May 17, 2008
    #9
  10. Ah - good, I did know about the CPU being the functional 'driving' mechanism
    and that BIOS support is needed as a trigger but couldn't quite remember if
    a 'modern' OS wouldn't be helpfull as well - any way, if you're doing
    serious VM computing you'd probably relish loads of memory and 64bits would
    fit in well?

    Tony. . .


    "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The OS makes no difference with regards to virtualization. The hardware
    > support is in the cpu, not the OS. VPC and VS will detect this and make

    it
    > available to vms.
    >
    > "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > No, not really - with one possible exception which might be 'Hardware
    > > Virtualisation Support' if you are running VM's.
    > >
    > > The thing with a 64bit OS is that it 'may be' faster only if a 32bit
    > > system
    > > is bogged down running the same jobs on the same machinery - if the

    32bit
    > > system can expedite your jobs without delays you wouldn't expect to see
    > > any
    > > difference at all, the rest would be configuration issues, I honestly
    > > think.
    > >
    > >
    > > Tony. . .
    > >
    > >
    > > "Ben" <> wrote in message
    > > news:%...
    > >> Any info that's a little more specific? Know of any ways a 64-bit OS

    > > would
    > >> utilize a Core 2 Duo that a 32-bit one wouldn't? I have no issues or
    > >> questions regarding configuration of either OS.
    > >>

    > >
    > >

    >
    Tony Sperling, May 17, 2008
    #10
  11. Oh yeah! Especially if you run more than one vm concurrently. I run a
    couple of Vista vms with 1 or 2GB of ram allocated and my 8GB Vista x64
    system handles it just fine. A 32bit host would hunker down something awful
    at that point.

    "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Ah - good, I did know about the CPU being the functional 'driving'
    > mechanism
    > and that BIOS support is needed as a trigger but couldn't quite remember
    > if
    > a 'modern' OS wouldn't be helpfull as well - any way, if you're doing
    > serious VM computing you'd probably relish loads of memory and 64bits
    > would
    > fit in well?
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    > "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> The OS makes no difference with regards to virtualization. The hardware
    >> support is in the cpu, not the OS. VPC and VS will detect this and make

    > it
    >> available to vms.
    >>
    >> "Tony Sperling" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > No, not really - with one possible exception which might be 'Hardware
    >> > Virtualisation Support' if you are running VM's.
    >> >
    >> > The thing with a 64bit OS is that it 'may be' faster only if a 32bit
    >> > system
    >> > is bogged down running the same jobs on the same machinery - if the

    > 32bit
    >> > system can expedite your jobs without delays you wouldn't expect to see
    >> > any
    >> > difference at all, the rest would be configuration issues, I honestly
    >> > think.
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > Tony. . .
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >> > news:%...
    >> >> Any info that's a little more specific? Know of any ways a 64-bit OS
    >> > would
    >> >> utilize a Core 2 Duo that a 32-bit one wouldn't? I have no issues or
    >> >> questions regarding configuration of either OS.
    >> >>
    >> >
    >> >

    >>

    >
    >
    Colin Barnhorst, May 17, 2008
    #11
  12. Ben

    Ben Guest

    2 gb RAM -- the maximum for this particular model.

    "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > You don't say how much memory you have. It matters a lot as does using a
    > flash drive for superfetch if you have only 1GB or 2GB.
    >
    > "Ben" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>I have a relatively new HP Core 2 Duo laptop that shipped with Vista
    >>Ultimate 64. It's in dire need of a reformat and reinstall of the OS --
    >>checked with HP and there are no Vista SP1-Integrated restore discs
    >>available so my options are to restore and then apply SP1, or, just go
    >>with XP Pro 32.
    >>
    >> The 64-bit Core 2 Duo with Vista has been OK, but more sluggish than I
    >> was expecting -- would I experience even slower performance by going to
    >> XP Pro 32? I don't know what, if any, advantages I'd be giving up by not
    >> going with a 64-bit OS. While my laptop shipped with Vista-64; XP
    >> drivers are available from the HP support site.
    >>
    >> After a year of sluggishness with Vista, I'm willing to give up the slick
    >> interface for zippier performance. If anyone has the time to explain (or
    >> provide a link to) info about what'd I'd be giving up by using a 32-bit
    >> OS with a processor capable of utilizing a 64-bit one. Thanks!

    >
    >
    Ben, May 17, 2008
    #12
  13. What is the model?

    I don't know of any Core 2 Duo systems using DDR rather than DDR2 though
    perhaps you have one. DDR has issues that make it essentially a 2GB memory
    model but you may be able to use more than 2GB if the system is using DDR2.

    "Ben" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    >2 gb RAM -- the maximum for this particular model.
    >
    > "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> You don't say how much memory you have. It matters a lot as does using a
    >> flash drive for superfetch if you have only 1GB or 2GB.
    >>
    >> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>>I have a relatively new HP Core 2 Duo laptop that shipped with Vista
    >>>Ultimate 64. It's in dire need of a reformat and reinstall of the OS --
    >>>checked with HP and there are no Vista SP1-Integrated restore discs
    >>>available so my options are to restore and then apply SP1, or, just go
    >>>with XP Pro 32.
    >>>
    >>> The 64-bit Core 2 Duo with Vista has been OK, but more sluggish than I
    >>> was expecting -- would I experience even slower performance by going to
    >>> XP Pro 32? I don't know what, if any, advantages I'd be giving up by
    >>> not going with a 64-bit OS. While my laptop shipped with Vista-64; XP
    >>> drivers are available from the HP support site.
    >>>
    >>> After a year of sluggishness with Vista, I'm willing to give up the
    >>> slick interface for zippier performance. If anyone has the time to
    >>> explain (or provide a link to) info about what'd I'd be giving up by
    >>> using a 32-bit OS with a processor capable of utilizing a 64-bit one.
    >>> Thanks!

    >>
    >>
    Colin Barnhorst, May 17, 2008
    #13
  14. Ben

    Ben Guest

    DV9260US:
    http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/...lc=en&cc=us&rule=20773&dlc=en&product=3340205


    "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > What is the model?
    >
    > I don't know of any Core 2 Duo systems using DDR rather than DDR2 though
    > perhaps you have one. DDR has issues that make it essentially a 2GB
    > memory model but you may be able to use more than 2GB if the system is
    > using DDR2.
    >
    > "Ben" <> wrote in message
    > news:%...
    >>2 gb RAM -- the maximum for this particular model.
    >>
    >> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> You don't say how much memory you have. It matters a lot as does using
    >>> a flash drive for superfetch if you have only 1GB or 2GB.
    >>>
    >>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>>I have a relatively new HP Core 2 Duo laptop that shipped with Vista
    >>>>Ultimate 64. It's in dire need of a reformat and reinstall of the OS --
    >>>>checked with HP and there are no Vista SP1-Integrated restore discs
    >>>>available so my options are to restore and then apply SP1, or, just go
    >>>>with XP Pro 32.
    >>>>
    >>>> The 64-bit Core 2 Duo with Vista has been OK, but more sluggish than I
    >>>> was expecting -- would I experience even slower performance by going to
    >>>> XP Pro 32? I don't know what, if any, advantages I'd be giving up by
    >>>> not going with a 64-bit OS. While my laptop shipped with Vista-64; XP
    >>>> drivers are available from the HP support site.
    >>>>
    >>>> After a year of sluggishness with Vista, I'm willing to give up the
    >>>> slick interface for zippier performance. If anyone has the time to
    >>>> explain (or provide a link to) info about what'd I'd be giving up by
    >>>> using a 32-bit OS with a processor capable of utilizing a 64-bit one.
    >>>> Thanks!
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    >
    Ben, May 18, 2008
    #14
  15. That laptop does use ddr2 but according to HP and Crucial.com you are at the
    max as you indicated. I was hoping you could swap out the two 1GB modules
    for 2GB ones, but no go. I certainly would consider using a usb thumb drive
    to improve performance. One I use is: (Although I use the 8GB model)
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820220251
    Mine has been great for readyboost for over a year.

    Readyboost is briefly explained at:
    http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/sysperf/accelerator.mspx

    "Ben" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > DV9260US:
    > http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/...lc=en&cc=us&rule=20773&dlc=en&product=3340205
    >
    >
    > "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> What is the model?
    >>
    >> I don't know of any Core 2 Duo systems using DDR rather than DDR2 though
    >> perhaps you have one. DDR has issues that make it essentially a 2GB
    >> memory model but you may be able to use more than 2GB if the system is
    >> using DDR2.
    >>
    >> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >> news:%...
    >>>2 gb RAM -- the maximum for this particular model.
    >>>
    >>> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> You don't say how much memory you have. It matters a lot as does using
    >>>> a flash drive for superfetch if you have only 1GB or 2GB.
    >>>>
    >>>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>>I have a relatively new HP Core 2 Duo laptop that shipped with Vista
    >>>>>Ultimate 64. It's in dire need of a reformat and reinstall of the
    >>>>>OS -- checked with HP and there are no Vista SP1-Integrated restore
    >>>>>discs available so my options are to restore and then apply SP1, or,
    >>>>>just go with XP Pro 32.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The 64-bit Core 2 Duo with Vista has been OK, but more sluggish than I
    >>>>> was expecting -- would I experience even slower performance by going
    >>>>> to XP Pro 32? I don't know what, if any, advantages I'd be giving up
    >>>>> by not going with a 64-bit OS. While my laptop shipped with Vista-64;
    >>>>> XP drivers are available from the HP support site.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> After a year of sluggishness with Vista, I'm willing to give up the
    >>>>> slick interface for zippier performance. If anyone has the time to
    >>>>> explain (or provide a link to) info about what'd I'd be giving up by
    >>>>> using a 32-bit OS with a processor capable of utilizing a 64-bit one.
    >>>>> Thanks!
    >>>>
    >>>>

    >>
    >>
    Colin Barnhorst, May 18, 2008
    #15
  16. Ben

    Ben Guest

    Not sure how this is related to my original question, but thanks for your
    input!

    "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > That laptop does use ddr2 but according to HP and Crucial.com you are at
    > the max as you indicated. I was hoping you could swap out the two 1GB
    > modules for 2GB ones, but no go. I certainly would consider using a usb
    > thumb drive to improve performance. One I use is: (Although I use the 8GB
    > model)
    > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820220251
    > Mine has been great for readyboost for over a year.
    >
    > Readyboost is briefly explained at:
    > http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/sysperf/accelerator.mspx
    >
    > "Ben" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> DV9260US:
    >> http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/...lc=en&cc=us&rule=20773&dlc=en&product=3340205
    >>
    >>
    >> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> What is the model?
    >>>
    >>> I don't know of any Core 2 Duo systems using DDR rather than DDR2 though
    >>> perhaps you have one. DDR has issues that make it essentially a 2GB
    >>> memory model but you may be able to use more than 2GB if the system is
    >>> using DDR2.
    >>>
    >>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:%...
    >>>>2 gb RAM -- the maximum for this particular model.
    >>>>
    >>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>> You don't say how much memory you have. It matters a lot as does
    >>>>> using a flash drive for superfetch if you have only 1GB or 2GB.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>I have a relatively new HP Core 2 Duo laptop that shipped with Vista
    >>>>>>Ultimate 64. It's in dire need of a reformat and reinstall of the
    >>>>>>OS -- checked with HP and there are no Vista SP1-Integrated restore
    >>>>>>discs available so my options are to restore and then apply SP1, or,
    >>>>>>just go with XP Pro 32.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> The 64-bit Core 2 Duo with Vista has been OK, but more sluggish than
    >>>>>> I was expecting -- would I experience even slower performance by
    >>>>>> going to XP Pro 32? I don't know what, if any, advantages I'd be
    >>>>>> giving up by not going with a 64-bit OS. While my laptop shipped
    >>>>>> with Vista-64; XP drivers are available from the HP support site.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> After a year of sluggishness with Vista, I'm willing to give up the
    >>>>>> slick interface for zippier performance. If anyone has the time to
    >>>>>> explain (or provide a link to) info about what'd I'd be giving up by
    >>>>>> using a 32-bit OS with a processor capable of utilizing a 64-bit one.
    >>>>>> Thanks!
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    >
    Ben, May 18, 2008
    #16
  17. I was responding to the sluggishness you mentioned in the OP. Ram and
    caching are key to that so more ram and readyboost are things to look at.
    More ram turns out not to be an option but readyboost certainly is.

    "Ben" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Not sure how this is related to my original question, but thanks for your
    > input!
    >
    > "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> That laptop does use ddr2 but according to HP and Crucial.com you are at
    >> the max as you indicated. I was hoping you could swap out the two 1GB
    >> modules for 2GB ones, but no go. I certainly would consider using a usb
    >> thumb drive to improve performance. One I use is: (Although I use the
    >> 8GB model)
    >> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820220251
    >> Mine has been great for readyboost for over a year.
    >>
    >> Readyboost is briefly explained at:
    >> http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/sysperf/accelerator.mspx
    >>
    >> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> DV9260US:
    >>> http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/...lc=en&cc=us&rule=20773&dlc=en&product=3340205
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> What is the model?
    >>>>
    >>>> I don't know of any Core 2 Duo systems using DDR rather than DDR2
    >>>> though perhaps you have one. DDR has issues that make it essentially a
    >>>> 2GB memory model but you may be able to use more than 2GB if the system
    >>>> is using DDR2.
    >>>>
    >>>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:%...
    >>>>>2 gb RAM -- the maximum for this particular model.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>>>> You don't say how much memory you have. It matters a lot as does
    >>>>>> using a flash drive for superfetch if you have only 1GB or 2GB.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>>I have a relatively new HP Core 2 Duo laptop that shipped with Vista
    >>>>>>>Ultimate 64. It's in dire need of a reformat and reinstall of the
    >>>>>>>OS -- checked with HP and there are no Vista SP1-Integrated restore
    >>>>>>>discs available so my options are to restore and then apply SP1, or,
    >>>>>>>just go with XP Pro 32.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> The 64-bit Core 2 Duo with Vista has been OK, but more sluggish than
    >>>>>>> I was expecting -- would I experience even slower performance by
    >>>>>>> going to XP Pro 32? I don't know what, if any, advantages I'd be
    >>>>>>> giving up by not going with a 64-bit OS. While my laptop shipped
    >>>>>>> with Vista-64; XP drivers are available from the HP support site.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> After a year of sluggishness with Vista, I'm willing to give up the
    >>>>>>> slick interface for zippier performance. If anyone has the time to
    >>>>>>> explain (or provide a link to) info about what'd I'd be giving up by
    >>>>>>> using a 32-bit OS with a processor capable of utilizing a 64-bit
    >>>>>>> one. Thanks!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>

    >>
    >>
    Colin Barnhorst, May 18, 2008
    #17
  18. Ben

    Ben Guest

    I didn't ask about sluggishness, thanks though. What I was curious about
    was what I might be giving up by going to from Vista Ultimate 64 to XP Pro
    32, performance or feature wise. I have a feeling on this particular system
    things might be considerably faster, but thought someone might actually
    know.

    "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I was responding to the sluggishness you mentioned in the OP. Ram and
    > caching are key to that so more ram and readyboost are things to look at.
    > More ram turns out not to be an option but readyboost certainly is.
    >
    > "Ben" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Not sure how this is related to my original question, but thanks for your
    >> input!
    >>
    >> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> That laptop does use ddr2 but according to HP and Crucial.com you are at
    >>> the max as you indicated. I was hoping you could swap out the two 1GB
    >>> modules for 2GB ones, but no go. I certainly would consider using a usb
    >>> thumb drive to improve performance. One I use is: (Although I use the
    >>> 8GB model)
    >>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820220251
    >>> Mine has been great for readyboost for over a year.
    >>>
    >>> Readyboost is briefly explained at:
    >>> http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/sysperf/accelerator.mspx
    >>>
    >>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> DV9260US:
    >>>> http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/...lc=en&cc=us&rule=20773&dlc=en&product=3340205
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>> What is the model?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I don't know of any Core 2 Duo systems using DDR rather than DDR2
    >>>>> though perhaps you have one. DDR has issues that make it essentially
    >>>>> a 2GB memory model but you may be able to use more than 2GB if the
    >>>>> system is using DDR2.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:%...
    >>>>>>2 gb RAM -- the maximum for this particular model.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>> You don't say how much memory you have. It matters a lot as does
    >>>>>>> using a flash drive for superfetch if you have only 1GB or 2GB.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>>>I have a relatively new HP Core 2 Duo laptop that shipped with Vista
    >>>>>>>>Ultimate 64. It's in dire need of a reformat and reinstall of the
    >>>>>>>>OS -- checked with HP and there are no Vista SP1-Integrated restore
    >>>>>>>>discs available so my options are to restore and then apply SP1, or,
    >>>>>>>>just go with XP Pro 32.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> The 64-bit Core 2 Duo with Vista has been OK, but more sluggish
    >>>>>>>> than I was expecting -- would I experience even slower performance
    >>>>>>>> by going to XP Pro 32? I don't know what, if any, advantages I'd
    >>>>>>>> be giving up by not going with a 64-bit OS. While my laptop
    >>>>>>>> shipped with Vista-64; XP drivers are available from the HP support
    >>>>>>>> site.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> After a year of sluggishness with Vista, I'm willing to give up the
    >>>>>>>> slick interface for zippier performance. If anyone has the time to
    >>>>>>>> explain (or provide a link to) info about what'd I'd be giving up
    >>>>>>>> by using a 32-bit OS with a processor capable of utilizing a 64-bit
    >>>>>>>> one. Thanks!
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    Ben, May 18, 2008
    #18
  19. You need to investigate things like your hard drive controller drivers and
    such. You are likely to see the same issues with either platform. I use
    Vista Ultimate x64 SP1, XP Pro x64 SP2, and XP Pro SP3 on the same dual-core
    box with 4GB of ram and all are very fast.

    btw, to quote from your OP, "The 64-bit Core 2 Duo with Vista has been OK,
    but more sluggish than I was
    expecting" but whatever.

    "Ben" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I didn't ask about sluggishness, thanks though. What I was curious about
    >was what I might be giving up by going to from Vista Ultimate 64 to XP Pro
    >32, performance or feature wise. I have a feeling on this particular
    >system things might be considerably faster, but thought someone might
    >actually know.
    >
    > "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> I was responding to the sluggishness you mentioned in the OP. Ram and
    >> caching are key to that so more ram and readyboost are things to look at.
    >> More ram turns out not to be an option but readyboost certainly is.
    >>
    >> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Not sure how this is related to my original question, but thanks for
    >>> your input!
    >>>
    >>> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> That laptop does use ddr2 but according to HP and Crucial.com you are
    >>>> at the max as you indicated. I was hoping you could swap out the two
    >>>> 1GB modules for 2GB ones, but no go. I certainly would consider using
    >>>> a usb thumb drive to improve performance. One I use is: (Although I
    >>>> use the 8GB model)
    >>>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820220251
    >>>> Mine has been great for readyboost for over a year.
    >>>>
    >>>> Readyboost is briefly explained at:
    >>>> http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/sysperf/accelerator.mspx
    >>>>
    >>>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>> DV9260US:
    >>>>> http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/...lc=en&cc=us&rule=20773&dlc=en&product=3340205
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>>>> What is the model?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I don't know of any Core 2 Duo systems using DDR rather than DDR2
    >>>>>> though perhaps you have one. DDR has issues that make it essentially
    >>>>>> a 2GB memory model but you may be able to use more than 2GB if the
    >>>>>> system is using DDR2.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:%...
    >>>>>>>2 gb RAM -- the maximum for this particular model.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>>> You don't say how much memory you have. It matters a lot as does
    >>>>>>>> using a flash drive for superfetch if you have only 1GB or 2GB.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>>>>I have a relatively new HP Core 2 Duo laptop that shipped with
    >>>>>>>>>Vista Ultimate 64. It's in dire need of a reformat and reinstall
    >>>>>>>>>of the OS -- checked with HP and there are no Vista SP1-Integrated
    >>>>>>>>>restore discs available so my options are to restore and then apply
    >>>>>>>>>SP1, or, just go with XP Pro 32.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> The 64-bit Core 2 Duo with Vista has been OK, but more sluggish
    >>>>>>>>> than I was expecting -- would I experience even slower performance
    >>>>>>>>> by going to XP Pro 32? I don't know what, if any, advantages I'd
    >>>>>>>>> be giving up by not going with a 64-bit OS. While my laptop
    >>>>>>>>> shipped with Vista-64; XP drivers are available from the HP
    >>>>>>>>> support site.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> After a year of sluggishness with Vista, I'm willing to give up
    >>>>>>>>> the slick interface for zippier performance. If anyone has the
    >>>>>>>>> time to explain (or provide a link to) info about what'd I'd be
    >>>>>>>>> giving up by using a 32-bit OS with a processor capable of
    >>>>>>>>> utilizing a 64-bit one. Thanks!
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>

    >>
    Colin Barnhorst, May 18, 2008
    #19
  20. Ben

    Ben Guest

    Thanks for you ideas. Sorry you misunderstood my statement as a question...

    "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > You need to investigate things like your hard drive controller drivers and
    > such. You are likely to see the same issues with either platform. I use
    > Vista Ultimate x64 SP1, XP Pro x64 SP2, and XP Pro SP3 on the same
    > dual-core box with 4GB of ram and all are very fast.
    >
    > btw, to quote from your OP, "The 64-bit Core 2 Duo with Vista has been OK,
    > but more sluggish than I was
    > expecting" but whatever.
    >
    > "Ben" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>I didn't ask about sluggishness, thanks though. What I was curious about
    >>was what I might be giving up by going to from Vista Ultimate 64 to XP Pro
    >>32, performance or feature wise. I have a feeling on this particular
    >>system things might be considerably faster, but thought someone might
    >>actually know.
    >>
    >> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> I was responding to the sluggishness you mentioned in the OP. Ram and
    >>> caching are key to that so more ram and readyboost are things to look
    >>> at. More ram turns out not to be an option but readyboost certainly is.
    >>>
    >>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> Not sure how this is related to my original question, but thanks for
    >>>> your input!
    >>>>
    >>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>> That laptop does use ddr2 but according to HP and Crucial.com you are
    >>>>> at the max as you indicated. I was hoping you could swap out the two
    >>>>> 1GB modules for 2GB ones, but no go. I certainly would consider using
    >>>>> a usb thumb drive to improve performance. One I use is: (Although I
    >>>>> use the 8GB model)
    >>>>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820220251
    >>>>> Mine has been great for readyboost for over a year.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Readyboost is briefly explained at:
    >>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/sysperf/accelerator.mspx
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>>>> DV9260US:
    >>>>>> http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/...lc=en&cc=us&rule=20773&dlc=en&product=3340205
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>> What is the model?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I don't know of any Core 2 Duo systems using DDR rather than DDR2
    >>>>>>> though perhaps you have one. DDR has issues that make it
    >>>>>>> essentially a 2GB memory model but you may be able to use more than
    >>>>>>> 2GB if the system is using DDR2.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>>> news:%...
    >>>>>>>>2 gb RAM -- the maximum for this particular model.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>>>> You don't say how much memory you have. It matters a lot as does
    >>>>>>>>> using a flash drive for superfetch if you have only 1GB or 2GB.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> "Ben" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>>>>>I have a relatively new HP Core 2 Duo laptop that shipped with
    >>>>>>>>>>Vista Ultimate 64. It's in dire need of a reformat and reinstall
    >>>>>>>>>>of the OS -- checked with HP and there are no Vista
    >>>>>>>>>>SP1-Integrated restore discs available so my options are to
    >>>>>>>>>>restore and then apply SP1, or, just go with XP Pro 32.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> The 64-bit Core 2 Duo with Vista has been OK, but more sluggish
    >>>>>>>>>> than I was expecting -- would I experience even slower
    >>>>>>>>>> performance by going to XP Pro 32? I don't know what, if any,
    >>>>>>>>>> advantages I'd be giving up by not going with a 64-bit OS. While
    >>>>>>>>>> my laptop shipped with Vista-64; XP drivers are available from
    >>>>>>>>>> the HP support site.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> After a year of sluggishness with Vista, I'm willing to give up
    >>>>>>>>>> the slick interface for zippier performance. If anyone has the
    >>>>>>>>>> time to explain (or provide a link to) info about what'd I'd be
    >>>>>>>>>> giving up by using a 32-bit OS with a processor capable of
    >>>>>>>>>> utilizing a 64-bit one. Thanks!
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>

    >
    Ben, May 19, 2008
    #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. bigal
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,102
    bigal
    Mar 22, 2006
  2. RMZ
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    533
    Charlie Russel - MVP
    Feb 7, 2007
  3. =?Utf-8?B?QVQ=?=
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    2,642
    Tony Sperling
    Jun 12, 2007
  4. Intel 64 (core 2 duo) and Vista

    , Dec 15, 2007, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    487
    Colin Barnhorst
    Dec 17, 2007
  5. tasTDasd
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    1,289
    blackieK
    Feb 25, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page