Windows 7 64 or 32?

Im just wondering if I will have to painstakingly install 64bit versions of all my favourate apps if I decide to install it?

64bit versions of games
Adobe CS4,
drivers, etc. Is it going to be a compatibility nightmare?

Are most installers these days able to detect and install and appropriate version?

I have 2GB of memory but would like to have the room to get another 2gb someday

Thanks
Pete

Oh and other software like visual studio, SELECT SSADM, MS Visio.. Is windows 64 backward compatible to 32?

Edited by AlcatelGuy (Thu 26-Nov-09 15:37:52)

Windows 64 can run 32-bit applications fine.

I made the switch to 64bit a couple of weeks ago.
There dosen't actually appear to be that much software (that i use anyway) that runs 64bit.
My mouse drivers and Comodo Security are 64bit but everything else i'm running is basically what i was running on XP 32bit.
It runs 32bit apps just fine, and i haven't had any major compatability problems so far.

In reply to a post by AlcatelGuy:

Im just wondering if I will have to painstakingly install 64bit versions of all my favourate apps if I decide to install it?

64bit versions of games
Adobe CS4,
drivers, etc. Is it going to be a compatibility nightmare?

Are most installers these days able to detect and install and appropriate version?

I have 2GB of memory but would like to have the room to get another 2gb someday

Thanks
Pete

My understanding was that, unless you were going to use significantly MORE than 4GB, then the diffrences were not noticeable!

However, if you have more than 1 PC, I would recommend that you use the same across your Home Network (i.e. ALL 32-bit OR all 64-bit).

I'm currently having a Printer problem (prints fine with the directly connected 32-bit PC, but NOT from the 64-bit operating over the Network) which I think is due to the clash of Printer Drivers.

Hi

It is more marketing this 64 bit as it drives the upgrade/replace cycle.

64 bit is only worth it if you need more than 4GByte of memory, say 6GByte or more, and if you don't know you need that much, then the chances are you don't. 64 bit programs can consume more memory just "running" due to all the numbers being bigger, bigger numbers need more storage, so if you try 64 bit with 4GByte or less memory you end up with the same or less memory than running 32 bit.

Also we don't have real 64 bit processors, they just run an extension that allows them to addressusing 64 bits, so it's all a bit of smoke and mirrors and big chunk of marketing. The only true 64 bit processors Intel do are used in servers.

There are some other advantages with 64 bit, but not enough to warrant 64 bit just for the sake of it in my opinion.

Regards

Phil

Also we don't have real 64 bit processors, they just run an extension that allows them to addressusing 64 bits, so it's all a bit of smoke and mirrors and big chunk of marketing. The only true 64 bit processors Intel do are used in servers.

This paragraph is complete nonsense. All desktop processors are native 64 bit nowadays and have been for years. By sticking to 32 bit O/S you're not letting your processor run to its maximum potential.

The IA64 architecture designed for servers is something completely different.

John.

Edited by deleted (Thu 26-Nov-09 18:01:33)

The point about memory is that the 32 bit Windows limit includes any memory on your graphics card. As many new cards have 1GB this is something to remember.
I haven't found any problems with software using 64 bit Vista and now 64 bit Windows 7

Hi

This paragraph is complete nonsense. All desktop processors are native 64 bit nowadays and have been for years. By sticking to 32 bit O/S you're not letting your processor run to its maximum potential.

Laugh the flames start, the truth is never popular

It isn't a real 64 bit processor and there is no major performance improvement running 64 bit on these desktop chips unless you need the memory space. There are good reasons why sticking with 32 bit may improve performance than 64 bit.

We've been through all this before here and I'm not starting again, so this be my last point

Ask yourself this:

Under desktop processors you can run 32 bit programs without requiring WoW, so you get no performance loss running 32 bit apps under 64 bit Windows.

On a real 64 bit Intel server processor WoW is required to run 32 bit applications causing a performance hit, why the difference?

I've been flamed before for being controversial, not my fault you have fallen for all the marketing hype.

Regards

Phil

I didn't flame you, I corrected you. It is not my fault you don't understand the technical details.

Under desktop processors you can run 32 bit programs without requiring WoW, so you get no performance loss running 32 bit apps under 64 bit Windows.

On a real 64 bit Intel server processor WoW is required to run 32 bit applications causing a performance hit, why the difference?

Wrong again.

WoW64 is an abstraction layer required to run 32 bit applications on ALL 64 bit version of Windows. On desktop processors there is no performance hit because the processor itself still has all the old 32 bit bits in it. The same as it has all the old 16 bit stuff in it and the old 8 bit stuff in it. IA64 is a completely different architecture, it has a different instruction set. To run x86 on IA64 the operating system must emulate the x86 in software which causes a significant performance hit.

John.