64bit vs. 32bit XP

[Mehen]

Any real world differences/benefits of using XP64 vs XP32? My brother gets em both for free through school and he's building his first 64bit capable computer. Q6600, 2gb ram (may upgrade to 4gb later)

[Technoid]

Since the 64 bit can only be run on Athlon 64 and core 2 (and some high end P4) in a sane world MS would have compiled it against those and that would have made some speed increases, but the world ain't sane

So the 32bit version wins on compatibility, driver availability etc etc etc

[Jammrock]

friends don't let friends install windows xp 64-bit.

[Technoid]

friends don't let friends install windows xp 64-bit.

ROFL

[Gurm]

Any real world differences/benefits of using XP64 vs XP32? My brother gets em both for free through school and he's building his first 64bit capable computer. Q6600, 2gb ram (may upgrade to 4gb later)

Differences?

Let's see...

XP32 works, XP64 doesn't work.

XP32 runs at 100% speed, XP64 runs at 105% speed and then crashes.

XP32 has drivers, XP64 has a hearty chuckle followed by a sympathetic nod and pat on the shoulder.

XP32 is full of smiling happy babies and kittens. XP64 makes baby Jeebus cry. (Much like butseks!)

[schmosef]

Driver compatibility is an issue with 64bit XP. As is software compatibility. Last I checked Microsoft's own PlaysForSure DRM tech didn't work on XP x64 edition.

64bit XP has the advantage of being able to use more RAM at once (on my mobo I can only use 2GB RAM in 32bit XP but I can use 4GB RAM in 64bit XP) and does multitask better.

It comes down to whether you intend the PC to be a general purpose box or a workstation optimized for specific software.

There's nothing preventing him from running both OSs in a dual boot.

[Technoid]

64bit XP has the advantage of being able to use more RAM at once (on my mobo I can only use 2GB RAM in 32bit XP but I can use 4GB RAM in 64bit XP) and does multitask better.

That is not purely the OS fault, since it also depends on your mobo bios

[Umfriend]

So does anyone have any experience with MS Sql Server 2005 under XP64 vs XP32?

What depends on your bios, the ability to use 4gb under XP32?

[TransformX]

So does anyone have any experience with MS Sql Server 2005 under XP64 vs XP32?

What depends on your bios, the ability to use 4gb under XP32?

Bios: Amount of ram you can put on your motherboard.
OS: Amount of ram that can be used by/available for your software.

[Umfriend]

Thanks, that was what I thought. Still wondering about SQL Server 2005 64bit vs 32bit though.

[Mehen]

Well seeing as he will be using just 2gb of ram for awhile anyways, may as well stick with 32bit (more ram seems to be the only advantage of 64bit). And its not like he has to pay for the OS either way, and its not like reinstalling (or dualboot for that matter) is much of a hassle either.

Thanks guys.

[Technoid]

So does anyone have any experience with MS Sql Server 2005 under XP64 vs XP32?

What depends on your bios, the ability to use 4gb under XP32?

Bios: Amount of ram you can put on your motherboard.
OS: Amount of ram that can be used by/available for your software.

Actually on motherboards with the "memory hole" option in bios, winxp 32bit will be able to see a whole 4gb ram.

Thats what the PAE is all about

[Jammrock]

If you must install a 64-bit OS, install Vista 64-bit. Microsoft has done a very good job getting hardware makers to make 64-bit Vista drivers.

[GT98]

If your not running a 64-bit verison of Windows, your going to be stuck with only 3.5 GB of memory if you 4GB installed on your motherboard with a 32-bit OS, due to memory limitations with the OS.

[DGhost]

If your not running a 64-bit verison of Windows, your going to be stuck with only 3.5 GB of memory if you 4GB installed on your motherboard with a 32-bit OS, due to memory limitations with the OS.

eh, not so much. there are some issues between some motherboards and Vista x86 right now where windows decides to map PCIe address space inside of the system memory address space. it's mostly noticable on systems that 1) have 4gb of ram, and 2) have multiple high end video cards. personally, i'm not too up on the issue but it seemed to be a combination of the way the BIOS was reporting itself and Windows ability to handle that. it's kinda goofy...

that being said... I had no problems with XP x64 and I've run it for... uhh.. like 2 and a half years now. Drivers were a little goofy to begin with but got ironed out fairly quickly. Vista x64 on the other hand... thats a different story...