recently upgraded to an e4500...nothing to write home about, but since i've never had a 64-bit processor before, i was debating reinstalling xp with the 64-bit version...will i actually see a performance increase? my board and components all have reliable drivers available...worth the time or no?

oh, and how well do core 2 duos overclock? it was a retail box, so it came with the intel stock hs/fan...running f@h on it, it hovers around 28-30°C...my concern is that it's in an ultra microfly case as shown below (except it's black, microATX)...i have zilch room for a fan any larger than stock...case has an 80mm fan on the front pulling air in, and a 120mm fan on the back pushing out

i haven't overclocked anything since the coppermine days, so this might be a bad idea...i don't NEED to do it, but thought it might be fun




[Edited on December 4, 2007 at 2:29 PM. Reason : pics]

12/4/2007 2:14:55 PM

Don't run the 64-bit OS unless you have an explicit reason to do so.

Also core 2 duos overclock extremely well. However, the small form-factor case is not good for any overclocking were you will try to push any limits.

[Edited on December 4, 2007 at 2:46 PM. Reason : core = core -1 ::error - too many cores::]

12/4/2007 2:46:12 PM

Quote :

"Don't run the 64-bit OS unless you have an explicit reason to do so."

12/4/2007 3:14:20 PM

any reason in particular why i wouldn't want to run it? i only ask because i don't understand the use of a 64-bit processor and the fact that that's pretty much all that's produced these days if you can't take advantage of them...or is just an attempt at future-proofing?

12/4/2007 3:55:57 PM

^ Drivers can be a nightmare and there is very little software written for a 64-bit environment. Unless you have a specific application that you want to run that is designed for a 64-bit environment, there isn't any benefit to be had.

12/4/2007 4:03:12 PM

what about maximum physical memory? my mobo supports up to 8gb...i'm running 2gb, but would like to run 4gb, since ddr2 is absolutely dirt cheap right now...doesn't 32-bit xp have limitations on this?

12/4/2007 4:22:36 PM

32-bit OS's can only see/address 4GB of memory

12/4/2007 4:48:03 PM

server applications, a few graphic or video programs (like CAD), and a handful of analytical programs can use SMP and 64-bit. But other then that, it's pretty much useless currently.

12/4/2007 4:57:50 PM

The addressability issue with 32-bit is that it can only "see" 4gb worth of memory total, because that's all the pointers can handle. Realistically, you will less than 4Gb of RAM addressable, depending on how much of that total and finite address space is allocated to other system devices, ie, video memory. In that case, unless you use a 64-bit OS, as much as several hundred megabytes of your RAM will go completely unaddressable because there is no pointer space for it.

12/5/2007 5:41:56 PM

^ so what's your suggestion? i don't suppose i NEED 4gb of RAM, but with it being dirt cheap right now, i thought i might go ahead and upgrade since i can...how can i tell if my system will utilize all 4gb? or, if i can't predetermine it, how do i check after it's installed?

12/6/2007 10:58:48 AM

Well what are you running on the system? Games?

What video card do you have? If it's ATI, and unless things have changed, and you're gaming then I'd stick with 32 bit windows and not worry about the RAM. ATI's 64bit drivers suck. nVidia is more of a wash either way- but why migrate to 64bit if all you're getting is similar performance and a new set of compatibility issues?

Anyways, even though ddr2 is dirt cheap- 50 bucks on something that doesn't get you noticeable performance increase is still 50 bucks wasted. Wait a year.

[Edited on December 6, 2007 at 12:12 PM. Reason : ]

12/6/2007 12:11:57 PM

^^My suggestion based on what you probably need is 32-bit, and throw 4gigs in it. Sure you'll miss some of it, but it's still better than 3gigs. If at some point you really, really need every last bit of your 4+gigs, then go 64-bit. Until then, however, it's nothing more than a worthless headache to install a 64-bit OS.

12/6/2007 4:07:29 PM

i think you're probably right and that's what i'll do...i've yet to install a 64-bit OS, so maybe i'll just stick with that

thanks for the input, all

12/6/2007 4:37:13 PM

Quote :

"Don't run the 64-bit OS unless you have an explicit reason to do so."

12/7/2007 2:01:55 PM

Even if you do install the 64-bit, you'll be installing the 32-bit a couple days/weeks later.

12/8/2007 11:18:34 AM

definitely stick to 32bit. definitely.

12/8/2007 3:14:45 PM

64-bit xp or any vista if you want >2TB partitions

12/9/2007 11:37:23 PM

or just live with multiple partitions....

the ram limiting issue with windows might eventually be the impetus that pushes things into the 64bit realm in the home/desktop environment, what with programs and games taking more and more ram to run (really well). but even then, it's a long ways off.

12/10/2007 8:58:37 AM

Haven't had any issues with Vista 64 bit and have yet to have trouble finding any drivers, and with the new "games for windows" thing going on, all the newer games are guaranteed to work in both 32 bit and 64 bit vista. As far as XP goes, it's probably smarter to stick with XP 32 bit.

12/10/2007 9:01:49 PM

yeah...i think i'll wait for vienna to come out, as vista thusfar has been only a sub-par upgrade at best, an absolute clusterfuck at worst

maybe with vienna we'll have 64-bit computing worth running

12/10/2007 10:33:28 PM

Aren't they calling it windows 7? Vienna sounds cooler.

12/10/2007 10:46:25 PM

Vienna was the old nomenclature, it's now Windows 7, still just a codename though

12/10/2007 11:09:41 PM

oh...oops

wikipedia (not necessarily correct, of course), says that windows 7 will also be offered in 32-bit and 64-bit...is it silly of me to think that by 2010, 64-bit processing should be come relatively standard? maybe.

12/11/2007 9:01:36 AM

From a hardware point of view, 64-bit is already basically standard.

12/11/2007 10:06:10 AM

but not from a software point of view, which is my point regarding windows 7...i understand that 64-bit processing is more difficult to code for, but still...

*shrug*

12/11/2007 10:07:23 AM

Yeah, bunch of slack ass programmers holding things up.

12/11/2007 10:11:10 AM

Quote :

"Yeah, bunch of slack ass programmers holding things up."

12/11/2007 4:56:13 PM