Windows 7 32-bit vs 64-bit

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by Scott, Dec 26, 2009.

  1. Scott

    Scott Guest

    I have learnt that Windows 64-bit has better performance. I am going to
    have a new computer and would like to know if I should select 32-bit or
    64-bit OS. If I select 64-bit OS, do I need to buy all application software
    for 64-bit in order to have better performance. Can someone give me
    guidance the pro and con for choosing 64-bit OS.

    Thanks,

    Scott
    Scott, Dec 26, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Scott

    Jeff Gaines Guest

    On 26/12/2009 in message <C75C0F45.8D66%> Scott
    wrote:

    >I have learnt that Windows 64-bit has better performance. I am going to
    >have a new computer and would like to know if I should select 32-bit or
    >64-bit OS. If I select 64-bit OS, do I need to buy all application
    >software
    >for 64-bit in order to have better performance. Can someone give me
    >guidance the pro and con for choosing 64-bit OS.


    There is no performance difference between running 32 bit programs on
    Win7-32 or Win7-64.

    There are very few 64 bit programs around, you can probably count them on
    the fingers of one hand.

    What you absolutely must check is if 64 bit drivers exist for all your
    hardware. Some manufacturers see 64 bit as an opportunity to force us to
    upgrade our hardware.

    Subject to that you can use a lot more memory in Win7-64 and if you do
    install lots of memory that may mean that you end up with a more
    responsive machine when switching between programs.

    --
    Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
    If it's not broken, mess around with it until it is
    Jeff Gaines, Dec 26, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Scott

    mikeyhsd Guest

    generally all 32 bit programs work on 64 bit os.
    there are a few exceptions.
    like flash for example. but there are easy work arounds.


    getting a new computer there is less worry about proper drivers for the hardware.

    you can always check with the individual program makers to see if they have a 64 bit version.





    "Scott" <> wrote in message news:C75C0F45.8D66%...
    I have learnt that Windows 64-bit has better performance. I am going to
    have a new computer and would like to know if I should select 32-bit or
    64-bit OS. If I select 64-bit OS, do I need to buy all application software
    for 64-bit in order to have better performance. Can someone give me
    guidance the pro and con for choosing 64-bit OS.

    Thanks,

    Scott
    mikeyhsd, Dec 26, 2009
    #3
  4. Scott

    Tom Guest

    "Scott" <> wrote in message
    news:C75C0F45.8D66%...
    > I have learnt that Windows 64-bit has better performance. I am going to
    > have a new computer and would like to know if I should select 32-bit or
    > 64-bit OS. If I select 64-bit OS, do I need to buy all application
    > software
    > for 64-bit in order to have better performance. Can someone give me
    > guidance the pro and con for choosing 64-bit OS.
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Scott
    >


    If you are building the PC yourself, you would want to make sure the
    hardware would be 64 compatible, most are now anyway, especially the CPUs.
    If you're having it built, it should be put together as such, just be sure
    to see the components list on the configuration beofre finalizing any
    order..
    Tom, Dec 26, 2009
    #4
  5. Scott wrote:
    > I have learnt that Windows 64-bit has better performance. I am going
    > to have a new computer and would like to know if I should select
    > 32-bit or 64-bit OS. If I select 64-bit OS, do I need to buy all
    > application software for 64-bit in order to have better performance.
    > Can someone give me guidance the pro and con for choosing 64-bit OS.
    >

    While 64 bit systems run into problems with other programs that haven't
    caught up, yet, 64 bit is the Wave of the Future. Microsoft has dealt
    with the 32 bit compatibility problem by including examples of both in
    its 64 bit system. Using the 32 bit Internet Explorer will take care of
    a lot of problems. If you are buying or building a new computer, it
    makes sense to install the most advanced and forward looking system.

    --
    Crash

    "Something there is that doesn't love a wall, that wants it down."
    ~ Robert Frost ~
    Dave \Crash\ Dummy, Dec 26, 2009
    #5
  6. Scott

    Scott Guest

    On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 09:40:41 -0500, "Dave \"Crash\" Dummy"
    <> wrote:

    >Scott wrote:
    >> I have learnt that Windows 64-bit has better performance. I am going
    >> to have a new computer and would like to know if I should select
    >> 32-bit or 64-bit OS. If I select 64-bit OS, do I need to buy all
    >> application software for 64-bit in order to have better performance.
    >> Can someone give me guidance the pro and con for choosing 64-bit OS.
    >>

    >While 64 bit systems run into problems with other programs that haven't
    >caught up, yet, 64 bit is the Wave of the Future. Microsoft has dealt
    >with the 32 bit compatibility problem by including examples of both in
    >its 64 bit system. Using the 32 bit Internet Explorer will take care of
    >a lot of problems. If you are buying or building a new computer, it
    >makes sense to install the most advanced and forward looking system.


    That's what I did. I went for 64 bit as I think this is the future.
    Most things work fine (but as you say you need to use the 32 bit
    version of Internet Explorer for sites using Flash). My Palm PDA
    won't synchronise as there are no 64 bit drivers but I gather the way
    round this is to use Bluetooth instead (though I have not got this to
    work yet). The scanner won't work either as there are no drivers but
    conveniently my brother gave me an Amazon voucher which will just
    about pay for a new scanner.

    Scott (a different one)
    Scott, Dec 26, 2009
    #6
  7. Scott

    Scott Guest

    If I select 64-bit OS, all the hardware drivers must be 64-bit to work
    smoothly. However, the application can be either 32-bit or 64-bit ones that
    the 64-bit OS can handle as backward compatible. Is it correct
    understanding? Thanks!!


    On 26/12/09 10:50 PM, in article ,
    "Scott" <> wrote:

    > On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 09:40:41 -0500, "Dave \"Crash\" Dummy"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> Scott wrote:
    >>> I have learnt that Windows 64-bit has better performance. I am going
    >>> to have a new computer and would like to know if I should select
    >>> 32-bit or 64-bit OS. If I select 64-bit OS, do I need to buy all
    >>> application software for 64-bit in order to have better performance.
    >>> Can someone give me guidance the pro and con for choosing 64-bit OS.
    >>>

    >> While 64 bit systems run into problems with other programs that haven't
    >> caught up, yet, 64 bit is the Wave of the Future. Microsoft has dealt
    >> with the 32 bit compatibility problem by including examples of both in
    >> its 64 bit system. Using the 32 bit Internet Explorer will take care of
    >> a lot of problems. If you are buying or building a new computer, it
    >> makes sense to install the most advanced and forward looking system.

    >
    > That's what I did. I went for 64 bit as I think this is the future.
    > Most things work fine (but as you say you need to use the 32 bit
    > version of Internet Explorer for sites using Flash). My Palm PDA
    > won't synchronise as there are no 64 bit drivers but I gather the way
    > round this is to use Bluetooth instead (though I have not got this to
    > work yet). The scanner won't work either as there are no drivers but
    > conveniently my brother gave me an Amazon voucher which will just
    > about pay for a new scanner.
    >
    > Scott (a different one)
    Scott, Dec 26, 2009
    #7
  8. Scott

    Jeff Gaines Guest

    On 26/12/2009 in message <C75C4F32.8EAB%> Scott
    wrote:

    >If I select 64-bit OS, all the hardware drivers must be 64-bit to work
    >smoothly. However, the application can be either 32-bit or 64-bit ones
    >that
    >the 64-bit OS can handle as backward compatible. Is it correct
    >understanding? Thanks!!


    Spot on :)

    --
    Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
    By the time you can make ends meet they move the ends
    Jeff Gaines, Dec 26, 2009
    #8
  9. Scott

    Scott Guest

    On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 23:39:30 +0800, Scott <>
    wrote:

    >If I select 64-bit OS, all the hardware drivers must be 64-bit to work
    >smoothly. However, the application can be either 32-bit or 64-bit ones that
    >the 64-bit OS can handle as backward compatible. Is it correct
    >understanding? Thanks!!
    >

    I assume you mean '64-bit or 32 bit ones that the 64-bit OS can handle
    as backward compatible'. That is my understanding also.

    The other Scott
    Scott, Dec 26, 2009
    #9
  10. On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 23:39:30 +0800, Scott <> wrote:

    >If I select 64-bit OS, all the hardware drivers must be 64-bit to work
    >smoothly. However, the application can be either 32-bit or 64-bit ones that
    >the 64-bit OS can handle as backward compatible. Is it correct
    >understanding? Thanks!!


    More or less. I have a few (very few) 32 bit programs that won't run; and 2
    old 16-bit programs. However, MS also supplies Windows Virtual PC with Windows
    XP mode (for free) and that allows running these legacy programs. It also
    allowed installing a 32 bit USB driver for my scanner (for which there is no
    64bit TWAIN driver available).
    --ron
    Ron Rosenfeld, Dec 26, 2009
    #10
  11. Scott

    rak Guest

    My home network has both 64bit and 32bit laptops on it. They are now
    running Windows 7. You noted the scanner issue. I'd also consider how you
    use your printer. If you have a home print server such as one from Linksys,
    chances are it will not work. I got around this by using an old desktop on
    the network and usb'ing the printer to it as a network printer. Otherwise,
    I have had no problems with things like tv tuners, old scanners if connected
    via usb, and the like. As someone else said, most older apps do not work
    any faster, but overall the pc functions much better under 64bit (with 4G of
    ram).

    "Scott" <> wrote in message
    news:C75C0F45.8D66%...
    > I have learnt that Windows 64-bit has better performance. I am going to
    > have a new computer and would like to know if I should select 32-bit or
    > 64-bit OS. If I select 64-bit OS, do I need to buy all application
    > software
    > for 64-bit in order to have better performance. Can someone give me
    > guidance the pro and con for choosing 64-bit OS.
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Scott
    >
    rak, Dec 29, 2009
    #11
    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. Ionizer
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,534
  2. vvcd
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,899
  3. Alex Griffin
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    7,609
    Charlie Russel - MVP
    Jul 27, 2005
  4. TEL
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    692
  5. piccolo
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    694
    andrea stupid
    Dec 11, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page