Missing 1Gb of Ram?

[Deleted User]

There's a number of inaccuracies in the thread, here's a good read about the subject..

http://blogs.technet.com/b/markrussinovich/archive/2008/07/21/3092070.aspx

Richie-from-the-Boro

prowla wrote: »

64-bit is not driven by the price of memory; it is driven by computing performance, and Windows was lagging behind.

Microsoft recommend using 32-bit applications (eg. Office) even with the 64-bit OS. The compatibility issue revolves around driver availability. There are relatively few applications that need 64-bit or over 1 GB of memory.

- OEM's build a million puters per one built by an individual or company needing performance
- they build to a price point of one pense
- they don't give a sod for what you term [ lagging ] performance
- the only care about how many units at as~cheap~as~possible
- they drive the industry foreward

Memory price point made the move to 64bit, I'll find it and show you if you ask, but your own paragraph above proves my point [ foot-shoot-foot ] without me having to bother.

What, at a penny price point, [ in SOHO or Corporate ] was Windows lagging behind ?

mr_fishbulb

KiwiCrazy wrote: »

I like how people try to make out they know a lot when they dont, well done.

That's what Internet forums are all about.

prowla

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

- OEM's build a million puters per one built by an individual or company needing performance
- they build to a price point of one pense
- they don't give a sod for what you term [ lagging ] performance
- the only care about how many units at as~cheap~as~possible
- they drive the industry foreward

Memory price point made the move to 64bit, I'll find it and show you if you ask, but your own paragraph above proves my point [ foot-shoot-foot ] without me having to bother.

What, at a penny price point, [ in SOHO or Corporate ] was Windows lagging behind ?

In computing you have to run to keep up; people don't want yesterday's model. The trend to 64-bit has not a lot to do with whether you can shift a chip for a penny.

There is a general year-on-year performance hike, and the 2x performance "law" cannot continue to be delivered via 32-bit, and requires a wider bus. In simple terms, fetching 4 bytes on a 32-bit processor requires two operations, whereas on 64-bit it requires one.

Current hardware is 64-bit capable, and every other OS is already at 64-bit, and Windows was lagging at 32-bit.

It's got not a lot to do with the hardware manufacturers, as they have been making 64-bit capable hardware for some time, and it's got not a lot to do with the memory, as they make a lot of those 64-bit capable machines with only up to 4 GB memory support.

So, memory is not driving the move to 64-bit. Of course memory is a factor, just as is every component of the computer, but it is not the main driver for 64-bit architecture.

Do a bit of reading up on computing, and the penny might drop.

marms

Hammyman wrote: »

Wrong. 64 bit merely means it can address 64bit memory addresses.

i.e

Windows 32bit can only address memory up to:
11111111111111111111111111111111 ^ 2

Windows 64bit can address memory up to:
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 ^2

...so quite a lot more.

There is no difference in speed except in applications that are 64bit and can address more than 3GB and benefit from being able to do operations in RAM and not paging to disc.

I think you'll find that 32bit can address 2^32 of memory and 64bit can address 2^64

prowla

marms wrote: »

I think you'll find that 32bit can address 2^32 of memory and 64bit can address 2^64

Can you speak binary?:)

free4440273

mr_fishbulb wrote: »

That's what Internet forums are all about.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

jazzy

I have reinstalled Windows7 this time with the 64Bit Option. There is very little difference speed wise in fact I think the system is now slightly slower.

There were also compatibility issues with some of the software, adobe acrobat pro 7 is not compatable and there's problems with aviria which affects the system restore. There are probably a few other programs that I have not installed yet that are going to cause further problems.

I am now considering going back to 32Bit