Have you moved to Vista yet?

Discussion in 'Polls' started by Stuart_Davidson, Apr 24, 2008.

?

Have you moved from XP to Vista?

  1. Yes

    127 vote(s)
    39.7%
  2. No

    177 vote(s)
    55.3%
  3. Will move in the next 3 months

    16 vote(s)
    5.0%
  1. khelben1979

    khelben1979 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That the 32 bit OS of Windows XP only could handle 2.5GB of RAM isn't right according to a source from Tom's hardware. Look here. They state that 3GB can be used by Windows XP, although I have read at other places it could handle "as much" as 3.2GB.

    What is true here? (I couldn't find any good information on Wiki on this either)
     
  2. dj_stick

    dj_stick Apple Fanboy?

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2003
    Messages:
    17,575
    Likes Received:
    204
    Trophy Points:
    88
    it depends on how much ram your graphics card has, among ther concerns. Windows 32 only "see" 1.99Gb of Ram on my system (I have 4)
     
  3. MIG-31

    MIG-31 Old time Member.. Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    75,925
    Likes Received:
    2,655
    Trophy Points:
    153
    For me i have found the 64 bit version for more stable than my 32 bit set up i used to use with 2 Gig of ram.

    Nothing to do with the Ram.... Its Vistas appearance around.It is far more clear on my LCD than XP was... Everything is just more polished.

    And i have not mentioned anything about Ram !
     
  4. Knight_Breed

    Knight_Breed New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2008
    Messages:
    281
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It isn't about what the OS can handle it is about what it can utilize and I think DJ touched on that. You can certainly have 4G of RAM on your 32 bit OS and if you can afford it I would recommend it actually. Essentially part of the RAM is mapped for other system functions and devices so even if you have 4G installed your software, games, etc can only access approximately 2.5G of that give or take.

    What a larger amount of RAM does on a 32 bit OS is allow more of your 2.5G to be accessible and not tied up with system resources. So in fact if your only running 2G on a 32 bit OS then part of that is also not accessible.


    A 64 bit OS because it can support 4G+ of RAM does not suffer this limitation and allows better utilization of RAM. So ideally on my system having 8G of RAM would allow complete utilization of my lower 4G of RAM.

    Hope this makes sense to you and thanks for the post :)

    (And some links on 32 bit and 64 bit architecture for you if your interested)

    x86 architecture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    64-bit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     
  5. Customgamer1

    Customgamer1 Fell off the tech wagon

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2004
    Messages:
    2,287
    Likes Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    58
    Yeah just something about Vista makes text and everything just really stand out and look way more clear than XP ever did!
     
  6. khelben1979

    khelben1979 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Are the 64 bit version of Windows XP able to utilize more RAM than the 32 bit version? And how much?
     
  7. mkk

    mkk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Messages:
    5,334
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    73
    All of the RAM you can put into a system today.
     
  8. PandaZ3

    PandaZ3 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2002
    Messages:
    429
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I believe the actual figure is 32 Gig, but like mkk says all you can get right now.

    That is not to say 2 X 2 Gig in a 32 Bit XP or Vista machine won't function well, it just won't use all the Rams capability.

    I was using 32 bit XP in a 512 X 2 machine and switched to XP Pro 64 bit and really noticed a new snappiness to the system, so more Ram isn't the only benefit to me.

    I on;y tried the Beta versions of 32 bit Vista and did not like them, but I suppose the 32 bit version with SP1 is a lot better than what I had seen.
     
  9. GigaWatt

    GigaWatt Now In Color :D

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    2,177
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    73
    using Win Server 2003 EE R2, mostly because it has 32GB of addressing space (which i need so all of my RAM could be read) and i don't want to transfer to a 64bit OS, mostly because of my music production applications which (in most cases) have only 32bit versions of them... besides, it's much faster than XP is and puts those extra GB of RAM i have into good use (not like XP, just leaves them there unused)...

    have no intention of moving to Vista... ever... ;)
     
  10. PandaZ3

    PandaZ3 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2002
    Messages:
    429
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    28
    XP64 is derived from Server 2003, I did not realize there were 32 bit versions of Server 2003.
     
  11. GigaWatt

    GigaWatt Now In Color :D

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    2,177
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    73
    yep, there are ;). as far as i know, the 32bit versions of Server 2003 came out first, the 64bit version of Server 2003 came out second.
     
  12. josh2thad

    josh2thad New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2006
    Messages:
    431
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes.
    Played with the pre Rc1 builds... Then made the switch at launch (not something i normally do)

    Happy with Ultimate x64 on my desktop and Home Premium X64 on the laptop.
     

Share This Page

visited