Joined
·
5,632 Posts
Do you think 64bit will be a complete replacement of 32bit very soon?
Which one is better choice?
Which one is better choice?
There's a difference between running Windows Vista or Windows 7 on 1GB, versus running a 64-bit version on that much. Is it possible? Sure, just like it's possible to run Windows XP on 128MB RAM, or maybe like on 64MB would be a better comparison.Oh believe me, you can still run 7 and Vista with 1 GB of RAM, my friend's running it.
It's just hell slow, haha.
(he had 4 GB, but 3GB died lol)
Oh believe me, you can still run 7 and Vista with 1 GB of RAM, my friend's running it.
It's just hell slow, haha.
(he had 4 GB, but 3GB died lol)
I had vista ultimate (it was X86) on my previous computer just when i got it (athlonX2 5000+, 1 gb DDR2 kingmax, ATi X1550) and it worked satisfying unless gaming is involved (actually Blood Rayne 2 worked ok, as well for emulation), i tried X64 but there was a performance impact so for that amount X86 is better. the only thing in which i disagree with Zedeck is that saying that 4GB is a standard for a primary PC, IMO that's still around 2GB (although yeah 4gb would be recommended).There's a difference between running Windows Vista or Windows 7 on 1GB, versus running a 64-bit version on that much. Is it possible? Sure, just like it's possible to run Windows XP on 128MB RAM, or maybe like on 64MB would be a better comparison.
I'd say 4GB is the real minimum for 64-bit, but 3GB, or maybe even 2GB would suffice if need be, but I also say 4GB is the standard nowadays for a primary PC. Microsoft lists 2GB as the minimum for 64-bit, and we all know what to do when a minimum is listed. Ideally, double it. I pretty much agree with Spyhop on this one. I can see their next OS lacking 32-bit entirely (it'll run 32-bit stuff obviously, but be 64-bit itself).
I think the market disagree with you. Most people going new now would get what? 4GB if a dual channel setup, or maybe even more, 6GB, if a triple channel setup. The only people getting 2GB now would be, wait, probably nobody, but really, nobody would get 2GB unless they really wanted to save some cash now and were planning on adding more later, or if the PC had a specific or limited role. I'm calling 4GB the enthusiast standard, not the number that most PCs have. There is a difference.the only thing in which i disagree with Zedeck is that saying that 4GB is a standard for a primary PC, IMO that's still around 2GB (although yeah 4gb would be recommended).