Speccing up a new PC, advice please. - Page 6

Daz · 14-03-2007, 18:00

You're already putting yourself on the bleeding edge with Vista, at the moment I think that's probably far enough. 64bit will probably only make your life harder, in terms of things 'just working'.

[edit]Whoops, edit!=reply

Mark · 14-03-2007, 18:06

64-bit will take best advantage of the hardware, particularly in combination with more than 2GB of RAM. Once you get about 2GB, things tend to get a bit flaky with 32-bit, and there are various reports of users seeing between 2GB and about 3.5GB on systems with 4GB installed RAM. Indeed, the 4GB memory address space useable by 32-bit versions of Windows appears to include the RAM on your graphics card, so, for example, if your graphics card has 512MB onboard, then Windows can't use more than 3584MB system RAM. There are other overheads that will reduce this further.

The simple answer is, if you don't have any software or hardware that is incompatible with 64-bit Windows, then you should go 64-bit to take full advantage of the hardware. Older hardware, and especially, as Daz pointed out, printers and USB devices, are prone to driver trouble. Old software is too (anything originally designed for systems pre-Windows XP SP2, and especially anything pre-Windows 2000, should be viewed with caution)

If, however, you are concerned with compatibility, then you might need to re-think your memory order before you risk being disappointed with 32-bit.

Daz · 14-03-2007, 18:12

The 4GB point is one I'd overlooked, and an important one. Windows will also subtract the size of your page file from the total amount of memory it can address.

Given the amount of memory you want to use, I'd be looking at 64bit after screening my applications and being very certain about my hardware.

Mark · 14-03-2007, 18:16

Didn't know about the swap file. Didn't know about the graphics either until I googled it. But, having battled with Linux over high memory support I knew to look.

Feek · 14-03-2007, 18:17

Applications I'm sure are fine, there's nothing I need to do immediately that I won't be able to.

The printer is a good call. However if needed I can save stuff as an .eps and print it from another PC on the network.

x64 then, ta

Mark · 14-03-2007, 18:19

This is true. As you have more than one PC, then unless you have specific driver issues with the new hardware (unlikely), x64 is worth the risk. Worst case you can always use another PC.

Feek · 16-03-2007, 12:06

Now I'm grumpy as I ordered today and one of the critical items is out of stock

Robert · 16-03-2007, 12:15

Where did you order from? Please not the stoke shop

Feek · 16-03-2007, 12:52

Of course not!

Although I just checked and they have the item but I'm not a) splitting the order and b) ordering from them.

Mark · 16-03-2007, 13:02

I did split the order, and did order one piece from them, but only because that's the one piece they were significantly (as in more than the P&P) cheaper on. The rest was cheaper elsewhere.

14-03-2007, 18:00	#51
Daz The Stig Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Swad! Posts: 10,713	You're already putting yourself on the bleeding edge with Vista, at the moment I think that's probably far enough. 64bit will probably only make your life harder, in terms of things 'just working'. [edit]Whoops, edit!=reply __________________ apt-get moo

14-03-2007, 18:06	#52
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	64-bit will take best advantage of the hardware, particularly in combination with more than 2GB of RAM. Once you get about 2GB, things tend to get a bit flaky with 32-bit, and there are various reports of users seeing between 2GB and about 3.5GB on systems with 4GB installed RAM. Indeed, the 4GB memory address space useable by 32-bit versions of Windows appears to include the RAM on your graphics card, so, for example, if your graphics card has 512MB onboard, then Windows can't use more than 3584MB system RAM. There are other overheads that will reduce this further. The simple answer is, if you don't have any software or hardware that is incompatible with 64-bit Windows, then you should go 64-bit to take full advantage of the hardware. Older hardware, and especially, as Daz pointed out, printers and USB devices, are prone to driver trouble. Old software is too (anything originally designed for systems pre-Windows XP SP2, and especially anything pre-Windows 2000, should be viewed with caution) If, however, you are concerned with compatibility, then you might need to re-think your memory order before you risk being disappointed with 32-bit. Last edited by Mark; 14-03-2007 at 18:11.

14-03-2007, 18:12	#53
Daz The Stig Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Swad! Posts: 10,713	The 4GB point is one I'd overlooked, and an important one. Windows will also subtract the size of your page file from the total amount of memory it can address. Given the amount of memory you want to use, I'd be looking at 64bit after screening my applications and being very certain about my hardware. __________________ apt-get moo

14-03-2007, 18:17	#55
Feek ex SAS Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: JO01ou Posts: 10,062	Applications I'm sure are fine, there's nothing I need to do immediately that I won't be able to. The printer is a good call. However if needed I can save stuff as an .eps and print it from another PC on the network. x64 then, ta __________________

16-03-2007, 12:06	#57
Feek ex SAS Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: JO01ou Posts: 10,062	Now I'm grumpy as I ordered today and one of the critical items is out of stock __________________

14-03-2007, 18:16	#54
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	Didn't know about the swap file. Didn't know about the graphics either until I googled it. But, having battled with Linux over high memory support I knew to look.

14-03-2007, 18:19	#56
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	This is true. As you have more than one PC, then unless you have specific driver issues with the new hardware (unlikely), x64 is worth the risk. Worst case you can always use another PC.

16-03-2007, 12:15	#58
Robert Chump!!! Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: North West Posts: 993	Where did you order from? Please not the stoke shop

16-03-2007, 12:52	#59
Feek ex SAS Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: JO01ou Posts: 10,062	Of course not! Although I just checked and they have the item but I'm not a) splitting the order and b) ordering from them. __________________

16-03-2007, 13:02	#60
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	I did split the order, and did order one piece from them, but only because that's the one piece they were significantly (as in more than the P&P) cheaper on. The rest was cheaper elsewhere.