You probably skipped the Vista bedlam, unless you were one of the unfortunate ones that had it forced upon you while buying a new system. So no doubt you've heard about Windows 7 and you're likely to join the testing phase and snatch up your copy of the Release Candidate, hell you might've already done so. And why not too, I mean it doesn't expire until June 2010, so you've got a whole year to use it as a test bed. Well, when you do, make sure you get the 64-bit version, and if you've already got the 32-bit version, now's your chance to swap to 64-bit before you get too deep.
Anyone geeky enough to be reading this in the first place should be thinking about 64-bit Windows. If you've got an Intel Core 2 processor, then you're already ahead of the curve. Most people do have Core 2 processors and many don't know that they're 64-bit CPUs. Now all you need now is 4GB of RAM. You've got that as well? Good, that's all you need, now go get the 64-bit version.
The phrase "64-bit" hasn't really been heard much since the Nintendo 64 and PlayStation 2 – yes, that's right, they both had 64-bit processors. And although 32-bit operating systems are still the norm – thanks to the sneaky efforts of Microsoft and Apple – 64-bit is suddenly starting to go mainstream. Here's why 64-bit computing is so awesome: memory. With 32-bit, the maximum RAM you can have is 4GB, and even then, you're only using about 3.25GB of it. With 64-bit, 4GBs is the new minimum standard.
I'm not going to go in depth too much (our good friend Wikipedia does that quite nicely). Basically, the whole bit thing (8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit, 64-bit) refers to how much data the computer can keep track of, and that's what determines how much memory it can handle. A processor with 32-bit memory addresses can only use 4GB of RAM. A 64-bit system can address 16 exabytes of RAM. Yep, you read that correctly, 16 exabytes. That's 16.8 million terabytes, or 17.2 billion gigabytes.
To put this in perspective, in the days when 4 MB of main memory was commonplace, the maximum memory ceiling was about 1,000 times larger than typical memory configurations. Today, when over 2 GB of main memory is common, the ceiling is about ten trillion times larger. That is to say, there is no ceiling (just like there was no spoon in The Matrix). It sent shivers down my spine when I found that out, imagine a computer with that amount of RAM, there'd be no need to teach maths in schools. So, what we really need to do is crack the whip on those lazy software designers who haven't made their stuff into 64-bit yet. Adobe, are you listening?
If you don't already have 4GB of RAM then you should probably buy a few extra gigabytes anyway. RAM is so cheap right now; I've just got a 4GB set for £40 from Novatech and the extra boost has such a large impact on the speed of my machine. The biggest issues and the thing everyone is a little sketchy about, is hardware: if a gadget doesn't have 64-bit drivers, it won't work with your 64-bit operating system. Most things should be okay but if you use legacy stuff, you might want to hold back for a while and should always double check just to be safe.
Obviously many applications aren't yet available in 64-bit, but the best thing about 64-bit is that it's backwards compatible and most, if not all, 32-bit applications can also run on 64-bit Windows (though aren't likely to access more than 4GB of RAM). So if you've got a 64-bit processor and 4GB of RAM, running 64-bit is a definite. Hopefully articles like this will push people and developers to support 64-bit more and more, so you won't be alone for long. The benefits of an abundance of RAM, with all the crap you're probably running right now, are just too good to miss.




Bull3t's Blog is a next generation web log written by me, Philip Hughes (also known as Bull3t), a first-year college student living in England, aged 17. I write this blog for the sake of doing so, posting about anything I see fit. 

So what now?
You've reached the end of this post. Seeing as you made it this far means you might be interested in the following related articles and resources.44 Comments
May 13th, 2009
#1
Don't know if having a high "minimum requirement" is a pro – not everyone has 4GB of RAM, and so they would have to buy new hardware. Basically buying the 64-bit version OS will cost more (the software and hardware).
May 21st, 2009
#2
Nice article. I just starting running XP-64 and I've found that 4gigs isn't enough. Obviously 4 is the bare minimum but I still like it over the 32-bit windows so far. I plan on forwarding this article to my brother who was a skeptic but if he searches around for drivers, he'll find them.
May 21st, 2009
#3
@budzik z prosiakiem:
Maybe, but if you're already thinking of upgrading to 64-bit then you're probably a performance freak – like myself – anyway, and so will already have 4GB. RAM is dirt cheap anyway and it means you'll be able to add more than 4GB in the future, without having to reinstall all your stuff.
@Maverick Matrix:
Cheers, Maverick. Yeah, if I buy Windows 7 64-bit I'll probably end up getting some more RAM not long after, just because I can. Drivers are what many people are sceptical about. A lot of legacy gadgets aren't likely to work if there aren't 64-bit versions of the drivers, but the more people that use the gadget and 64-bit Windows, the more likely someone (not necessarily the original owners) will convert the 32-bit drivers to 64-bit. Someone just needs to get the ball rolling and actively push 64-bit.
May 22nd, 2009
#4
I would love to have over 4GB of RAM. I do 3D modeling and it's so frustrating to be limited.
May 28th, 2009
#5
good read!
my specs:
asus p5k
core 2 @ 3.0ghz
4 gig kingston ddr2 5300
geforce 8600 GT
windows 7 RC 7100 64bit runs it flawless.
May 29th, 2009
#6
so what is the real world difference in speed?
June 19th, 2009
#7
I listen to a podcast called Twit (a show by leo laporte) …In one of the recent episodes..he mentioned that the fact that 32 bit Windows can't address over 4 GB if RAM is not a technical barrier.. but something that Microsoft just made up.
I find it pretty hard to believe though. Why would MS do that?
June 21st, 2009
#8
The 64-bit system has been available since 2001. It's really good that it's finally become mainstream!
June 26th, 2009
#9
I jumped on the 64 bit bandwagon a little too soon. but that was like back in 2002 i think. Lots of stuff didn't work for 64-bit and some drivers wern't backwards compatible at the time. Perhaps the OS wasn't smart enough to compensate for a 32bit program then. Now it's fine to switch but man was it a pain back then.
oh and canvas if you haven't already maxed you RAM just plug some more in and you can tell the difference right away. It's just now you can keep adding and adding =D
June 27th, 2009
#10
@MysteryShopper I doubt Leo would have said that. Perhaps he was saying that 3.25GB is an artificial limit?
4GB is a technical barrier on 32 bit systems.
2 to the power 32 = 4294967296 bytes
= 4194304 KB
= 4096 MB
= 4 GB
June 30th, 2009
#11
Well, I wouldn't pass to 64bits because no major software producer has developed something for 64bits and 99% of all programs are based on a 32 bit architecture. Moreover, 4 GB of RAM is quite huge and pointless for a normal user. So, I really don't see why to change to 64 bit!
July 1st, 2009
#12
32-bit windows is still the best for me.
Cos i agree with Eric most of the software producers are developing a only 32-bit capacity.
And for us users 4Gigabyte of RAM is useless.
July 10th, 2009
#13
Oh yeah that's true, 64 bit is damn fast than 32bit. We've tested both of them on a budget AMD Sempron 2800+ powered desktop PC, featuring Asus K8U-X motherboard with 512MB of main memory. Remarkably the 32-bit Windows Vista Ultimate achieved 99.8 GeekBench points, while the 64-bit version of the same OS gained 110.7 points. For performance we would recommend Vista 64, but when comes to drivers and software we can not recommend the 64-bit version, because as of yet a lot of software doesn't run on 64bit.
July 12th, 2009
#14
I am still running XP at the office and at home. Really happy that my netbook came with XP.
July 17th, 2009
#15
What's better for core 2 duo with 4 gb ram? XP 64, Vista or Windows 7?
July 21st, 2009
#16
What can I say… You convinced me ;) I'm pretty sure that when I will be changing my hardware one of those 64's will appear under my roof. I've heard a lot of good about 64-bit processors and I'm sure that I will hear a lot more good things about it. Thanks for sharing this knowledge.
July 24th, 2009
#17
I just wanted to switch to 64Bit, exactly because of the reason you mentioned (addressing 4GB – I've 4GB installed, but can use only around 3.4GB).
But I'm not aware what will happen, if I compile an application on a 64Bit system and transfer it to a normal 32Bit system. I guess it won't work – does it?
July 25th, 2009
#18
I'm running vista x64 since it came out with 8gb RAM.
I don't see a better performance with 64 bit – but i can use much more RAM so i save a lot of time as i can run almost all of my applications at the same time…
July 27th, 2009
#19
If 64 bit and 4 GB of RAM really increases the speed its great then,as it will save my time flipping from one application to another.
July 29th, 2009
#20
Hi, I've 3 GB of DDR3 ram with latest Core i7 920 CPU + P6T Deluxe V2 Mobo and i'm using Windows XP 32 bit. I don't have 4 GB of Ram but just 3 GB which is DDR3 (better than DDR2). So is it a nice decision for me to install 64 bit OS or not ? Please suggest. Is Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit version out ?
July 30th, 2009
#21
@Eric:
The more we keep pushing large software developers and keep using 64-bit, the better support it will get. I've heard a lot of people say that they don't really need 4GB, but soon it will start being needed more often. And it's really good to know that you can run a few memory-intensive programs at the same time without a hitch.
@marcos:
I would definitely recommend Windows 7 over XP and Vista.
@finscenario52:
Nope, 64-bit applications are not likely to work on 32-bit systems.
@Michael:
That's the best performance boost: the ability to have a lot more open and not worry if something begins to hog your memory.
@Gaurav:
I would suggest getting an extra GB of RAM to make it 4GB and then getting Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit when it comes out. Iit's not available for pre-order, but it should be released soon.
August 6th, 2009
#22
All that is necessary for this to become popular is for a major new game release to demand it..
August 8th, 2009
#23
Still using XP in our office..don't know if upgrades are on the way :(
August 12th, 2009
#24
I had XP 64bit, but I had so many problems with backwards compatibility that I had to revert. I am thinking about moving to Windows 7 in the future and then use a virtual copy of a 32bit OS for the legacy apps.
August 26th, 2009
#25
I was running vista 32 bit and just switched to xp 64. Best choice I have ever made. Vista is horrible and and embarrassment to Microsoft.
September 8th, 2009
#26
I made the switch to 64 bit a couple years ago, but I think it was too early. I couldn't find the support, drivers, and software that I needed, so I switched back to 32 bit. Maybe it's time for me to give 64 another chance.
September 9th, 2009
#27
Unfortunately we need a higher configuration system to run 64 bit OS. Also there are always some compatibility issues with some of the old applications we still use. :(
September 12th, 2009
#28
Unfortunately I was one of the ones who did get caught up in the "Vista bedlam". It's really becomes somewhat frustrating when your PC becomes somewhat obsolete in a relatively short period of time.
September 15th, 2009
#29
I'm still running 32-bit XP at my office… and I really want to use 4GB RAM. But using 32-bit XP at work and 64-bit 7 at home would create a load of problems?
October 19th, 2009
#30
That is ridiculous, I had no idea the jump between memory handling was so huge in 32 vs. 64-bit. I've been trying to avoid Vista but have heard really good things about W7. On a new notebook PC that came with Vista, the main selling point was that it also includes a free upgrade to 7 when it comes out :)
October 22nd, 2009
#31
I have a 32 bit vista and 2GB RAM DDR2 and it was just doing fine in running the various applications in my desktop. Some people don’t necessarily need to have a higher memory, but in any case it’s just a matter of preference. Somehow, innovations are inevitable and when the time comes, an upgrade is a must.
October 23rd, 2009
#32
Only reason i choose 64bit was gaming, with 64bit you get that immense power of gaming and 3dx that 32 bit can't provide you, the o.s. becomes more faster and multi-threads can go on simultaneously.
November 14th, 2009
#33
I am on 64 bit from almost when it was optional to choose it and I am quite satisfied. Few years ago I was bothered because some older games did not work properly on 64 but now I got used to it.
Otherwise great support of 64 thumbs up!
November 15th, 2009
#34
i wish i had a 64 bit operating system, however my computer wasn't very well chosen, though i do have a quad core intel cpu. however i only have 2Gb of ram (max speed of 400mhz)
bah, anyway with so many software installed it should be better not to switch so soon :)
November 19th, 2009
#35
I don't think I'm going to switch to 64 bit just yet. Why not wait until 128 comes out, you know it will. I loved Nintenod 64 by the way! I still play it sometimes, goldeneye was such a good game!
November 22nd, 2009
#36
i guess i will switch to 64bit cos i like haiving the best things, though it is a little bit more expensive and it needs more than 4 GB of RAM, btw very good article, i think u convinced me to make a change
November 25th, 2009
#37
A friend of mine has 64 bit Vista with 8 gigs of ram in his machine. He upgraded from XP and 2 gigs of ram. Said it made a huge difference, especially when editing video and gaming.
December 9th, 2009
#38
What about plugins? Is there flash 64bit? Java 64bit?
I heard you have to install a 32 bit internet explorer because there is not a 64 bit flash.
December 15th, 2009
#39
I'm upgrading for the RAM. Running 3D modeling programs can be rough when you're short on memory.
January 10th, 2010
#40
I went over to 64 bit a couple of years ago, but i had nothing but problems with drivers and compatibility. i had to swap back to 32bit.
really 64bit at the moment is too much trouble and the additional benefits are quite unsubstantial. unless you really think you need to go above 4gb of ram stick with 32bit.
January 15th, 2010
#41
64 bit is the way to go. You can expand your system memory to over 4 gigs and get more power from your machine. Its the wave of the future and 32 bit is going the way of the dinosaur. Of course compatability of older programs will be an issue, but if you don't use a lot of older programs I say absolutely get the 64 bit version.
January 18th, 2010
#42
You're right I didn't realise my Core 2 was 64 bit! I'm currently running Win XP on it but I don't think I'll bother upgrading as it does pretty much what I want anyway. Besides, I've got access to a Win 7 laptop when I need to.
January 20th, 2010
#43
Thanks for these useful tips. I'm planning to switch to Windows 7 in a month and I think it's a good idea to have 64 bit while upgrading.
January 31st, 2010
#44
i went 64 bit when i upgraded. I thought I was being clever but I have had a few problems with drivers and things like that. It kind of makes me wish I had just got the normal version but I suppose its not MS fault that other companies have not yet released new drivers
Leave a reply