View Full Version : Little Help Needed
I'm well on my way with getting the components together for my first PC, and upon arriving on operating systems I decided on Vista Home Premium. Then I realised I have no idea what the difference is between a 32bit and a 64bit edition. Help!
Here's the parts, by the way:
Core 2 Duo E6600
Asus P5N32-E SLi Socket 775 ATX Motherboard
Corsair 2GB PC2-6400 C4 XMS2 DDR2 (2x1GB)
Foxconn Geforce 8800GTS 320MB
Western Digital Caviar SATA2 400
NEC 7170A DVD Drive
OCZ 600W StealthXStream PSU
Hi,
If i was you i would just stick to Windows XP.
There are so many bad reviews about Vista, i had 3 of my mates install Vista and the next day they reinstalled XP.
Thanks
PS Here Is Your Answer:
In the future, the battle between 64 bit vs 32 bit processors will inevitably yield the 64 bit processor as the victor, but this transition is going to take some time.
First, I?ll talk about the pure mathematics and structure of the processors that are involved here. I?ll keep this part short and sweet.
A bit is short for ?binary digit.? It is basically how a computer stores and makes references to data, memory, etc. A bit can have a value of 1 or 0, that?s it. So binary code is streams of 1?s and 0?s, such as this random sequence 100100100111. These bits are also how your processor does calculations. By using 32 bits your processor can represent numbers from 0 to 4,294,967,295 while a 64-bit machine can represent numbers from 0 to 18,446,744,073,709,551,615. Obviously this means your computer can do math with larger numbers, and be more efficient with smaller numbers.
Now see, that description wasn?t too bad, but the question is how does this affect you, the average PC owner? The largest benefit will go to academic institutions and private companies, where large calculations are being performed, huge databases are being accessed, and complex problems are being solved.
Everyone that doesn?t fall into that category will see some benefit of using 64 bit processors over 32 bit processors, but not much in today?s marketplace. The AMD Athlon 64-bit processor is completely backward compatible, meaning you can currently use it with 32-bit operating systems and software programs. You will see some benefits by using this setup, but because the programs weren?t written to take advantage of the extra power, they won?t use much of it.
The true benefits of this set up don?t come from the amount of bits, but by the improved structure of the 64 bit vs 32 bit processor's older structure. A 64-bit processor is made with more advanced silicon processes, have more transistors, and faster speeds. This is currently where the true benefit of switching to a 64-bit processor lays.
As for 64-bit operating systems and software, many are in the works, but nothing is in final version. Microsoft has released a beta version of Windows XP that takes advantage of the 64 bit technology, but there are still issues. The problem is when you run 32-bit software programs in the environment of a 64-bit operating system. Many programs won?t work properly, such as Adobe Acrobat and Windows Media Player, for example. Another issue is RAM. You really need about 4 GB of RAM to take full advantage of the capabilities offered by a 64-bit processor, while most PC owners have less than 1 GB under their computer?s hood.
So, the question now is should you buy a 64 bit processor now, or wait?
Disadvantages:
You?re currently not able to take full advantage of the technology because the software vendors haven?t made the switch from 32-bit to 64-bit processors.
Most AMD Athlon 64 bit processors are expensive, with prices sure to go down in the future.
Advantages:
Better performance out of a 32-bit operating system.
Probably the last processor you?ll have to buy for many years to come.
But isn't DX10 only supported by Vista?
(Thanks for the answer, by the way! I now semi-get it)
[quote:2462a9be99=\"Louis\"]But isn't DX10 only supported by Vista?
(Thanks for the answer, by the way! I now semi-get it)[/quote:2462a9be99]
Yes, but DX10 is full of bugs etc... so at the moment i would just stick to Windows XP and DX9. What do you want DX10 for anyway, no game fully supports it so in my view theres no point.
But im sure some people are going to disagree with me :lol:
[Removed at the request of the author]
[Removed at the request of the author]
I may as well get 64bit Vista Home Premium (A friend of mine has it and it works fine for him). That way I don't have to buy a whole new operating system as soon as Vista takes off, which should be sometime around Christmas. The 64bit system should future proof it aswell.
I'm a little worried though. I heard someone refer to the 64bit Home Premium as a \"minefield\" :shock:
[Removed at the request of the author]
[quote:7600447f02=\"PrivatePyle@Work\"]Out of curiosity, is there any reason why you have not looked at the E6750? Its a great CPU. It has a higher FSB than the 6600 and a 4MB L2[/quote:7600447f02]
Crikey, I hadn't noticed that. Is it worth getting it instead of the E6600? Why is it cheaper?
[Removed at the request of the author]
Alrighty then! Apparently the P5N32-E SLi Socket 775 ATX can support a 1333 FSB.
Just to double check, when it says, under specifications,
FRONT SIDE BUS: 1333/1066/800/533 MHz
Does that mean that these are the processor FSB speeds that it is capable of supporting?
That E6750 sounds great. The fact that it's both cheaper and faster than the E6600 gave me doubts (Too good to be true=usually is) But since it is the next in the series I think I'll have me one 'o them!
oh crap yea, i forgot thats just come out today or was it yesterday?
I downloaded the game but im waiting for a crack to come out for it and if i think its good then ill go by it. :P
I'm coming for you PP :twisted:
I found a theory on a forum that might explain the low price of the E6750.
Apparently Intel are pushing to make the 1333 MHz more mainstream so are encouraging it by keeping prices lower.
[Removed at the request of the author]
In my opinion BioShock is a fantastic game and it is worth the purchase, been playing it all weekend and is solid as a rock.
My friend however is running his under Vista, although the DX10 looks far better than DX9 i can assure you he has got no further than entering Rapture (about 3 minutes into the game) without his PC crashing. :P
Has anyone else had problems with DX10 and this game?
[quote:775489a97b=\"PrivatePyle@Work\"]That would make sense. And yes, the spec of the mobo does certainly indiciate that it will support 1,333Mhz FSB. I think your good to go now!
@ Micky.. You'll be waiting a while for a crack for BioShock that actually works. Google \"Bioshock Securom\" for 20,000 reasons why.[/quote:775489a97b]
Yea :cry: might just go buy it and hunt you down.
[quote:924da71452=\"PrivatePyle@Work\"][quote:924da71452=\"Louis\"]
I'm a little worried though. I heard someone refer to the 64bit Home Premium as a \"minefield\" :shock:[/quote:924da71452]
A minefield of what? My advice is don't believe everything you hear :wink:[/quote:924da71452]
So. He Means 'Dont Belive Him Telling You not To belive Everything That People Ask You To Belive... :shock:
You Could Choose To Belive Him. But He Is Asking You Not To Be Believe everything you hear... :?
You Could Then be Thinking \" Well Why Should i Trust You, Who Is Telling Me To Not Belive Him Who Is Telling Me Not To Belive Everything Someone Says... :!: :!: :!:
Well, Thats Up To You :wink: :o
[Removed at the request of the author]
[quote:61db9dde28=\"PrivatePyle@Work\"]A fair point.[/quote:61db9dde28]
Are You Following Me !? :shock:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.12 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.