Thinking to migrate to Vista X64(64 bit system) from XP 32 bit

[Castout]

Just that will Dangerous waters and Silent Hunter 3 run okay in Vista 64 bit system?

Just how much more secure a 64 bit system when compared to a 32 bit system?
Is Vista more secured than XP?

I use my PC mainly for entertainment, Games and the internet.
And my processor can handle 64 bit OS just fine.

Should I migrate to 64 bit system?

The thing is for using 64 bit Vista the minimum memory is stated as 4 Gigabyte. So that's the minimum. I'm thinking to use either 6Gb or 8Gb RAM. The last time I checked the biggest single RAM available was a 2Gb chip. So I'm going to need at least 3 or 4 of them.

My biggest interest to use the Visa x64 is the relative security of 64 bit system when compared to 32 bit system. Actually I do not need to use multiple application simultaneously as what is offered by Vista x64 OS.

Should I migrate or should I delay?

[nikimcbee]

I hear it runs, but starforce will keep it from running. I have been unable to insall sh3 on my vista 64bit. The disk protection is the problem. I have a few other programs that have SF on it and i can't install them.:x

[A Very Super Market]

Yeah, most of your games will be screwed over by vista. I don't recommend you switch. Even if it means missing out on 64-bit, its a pain in the arse to patch up all your games, and have some of them not even work due to SF.

[Thomen]

Just that will Dangerous waters and Silent Hunter 3 run okay in Vista 64 bit system?

Just how much more secure a 64 bit system when compared to a 32 bit system?
Is Vista more secured than XP?

I use my PC mainly for entertainment, Games and the internet.
And my processor can handle 64 bit OS just fine.

Should I migrate to 64 bit system?

The thing is for using 64 bit Vista the minimum memory is stated as 4 Gigabyte. So that's the minimum. I'm thinking to use either 6Gb or 8Gb RAM. The last time I checked the biggest single RAM available was a 2Gb chip. So I'm going to need at least 3 or 4 of them.

My biggest interest to use the Visa x64 is the relative security of 64 bit system when compared to 32 bit system. Actually I do not need to use multiple application simultaneously as what is offered by Vista x64 OS.

Should I migrate or should I delay?

DW and SH III and IV run smooth on Vista 64bit. So far, I have had only one game giving me problems and that is Medieval Total War 2, but I am working on getting it running. Other then that, I am positively surprised. Regardless of all the bad press and negativity that you read about, it runs smooth and does not give me any headache.
IMO, it was worth switching.

[Castout]

Well I hate starforce protection system.

How much RAM do you guys use for your 64 bit Vista?

Btw I'm also looking forward to the upcoming Empire total war. It would sucks if the 64 bit Vista couldn't run it.

[A Very Super Market]

ETW definitely runs on vista. Game devs need to assume that everyone has the latest system and at least have XP

[XLjedi]

SH3 runs fine for me on Vista64... actually I don't think I've found a game in my collection yet that doesn't run flawlessly.

...one thing though, after losing an optical drive, I had no desire to reinstall anything on my new Vista64 system with Starforce.

I just paid the $20 (at the time) and downloaded the Starforce-free direct2drive version which also came all pre-patched up! I wouldn't use that SH3 disk for anything other than a drink coaster.

I love my Vista-Pro install. The feature that allowed me to image the whole harddrive saves me about once a month (my kids play these internet-based games that wreak malware havoc on my system). So nice to push a button and have my system back to pristine order within minutes.

[HunterICX]

How much RAM do you guys use for your 64 bit Vista?

Recommended amount of ram would be 4GB for Windows Vista.
and it will get you set for Empire Total War because as far I can gather about it, Empire Total War will require 2 GB of Ram if you run Windows Vista

HunterICX

[Bewolf]

Hey Castout. Games running on Vista64 depends a bit on your hardware. With a decent Rig I can recomend Vista64, made some very good expiriences with it annd had every game up and running. Older ones, like SHIII, require a bit of tweaking patience, but it's possible. Medieval 2 never was a problem on my Rig, for example. But as usual, it depends on little details and games that perfectly run on my machine may be problematic with yours and vice versa. 4 Gigs of RAM is a must, however.

If you have a bit more patience before upgrading you may want to wait for Windows 7, due end of this year, which promises much better performance then Vista. 64 bit is a huge improvement, however, if you have the chance go for it, no matter the OS. (XP64 beeing the exception. That one plain and simply blows)

[TarJak]

I hear it runs, but starforce will keep it from running. I have been unable to insall sh3 on my vista 64bit. The disk protection is the problem. I have a few other programs that have SF on it and i can't install them.:x

I had similar problems but the install wouldn't work at all. I found that using the SF removal tool before installing and then again after patching to 1.4b let me run SH3 without any drama.

[goldorak]

I hear it runs, but starforce will keep it from running. I have been unable to insall sh3 on my vista 64bit. The disk protection is the problem. I have a few other programs that have SF on it and i can't install them.:x

DW has no copy protection so it will run without a hick on vista 32/64 and xp 64.
For Silent Hunter 3, if its the version without starforce (budget edition in europe etc..) it will also run without problems. If on the other had you have the starforce version, may god help you :rotfl:

[Fincuan]

SH4
IL2
Armed Assault

All work great on a 64bit Win 7, although you'll have to run IL2 in DirectX because Ati doesn't support OpenGL on 64bit Win 7.

[SUBMAN1]

Why would you want to downgrade your system? Vista is not a step forwards.

And why all the hype around 64-bit? It still has to run all your software in 32 bit. The type of CPU you have is a hybrid, not a true 64 bit CPU. It is only capable of 64-bit calls. The short answer is, the only thing 64-bit will give you is access to more RAM, and even this has been fixed for 32-bit. There could be a slight performance increase on the probably 2 x 64-bit apps out there, IE being one of them, but since programs like flash are not made for 64-bit, you'll still have to use the 32-bit version 98% of the time. There may actually be a performance decrease with 64-bit since 99.9% of your apps need to run in what is called 32 bit emulation mode (It is a 64-bit OS after all so you need to run your 32-bit programs in a sandbox, though many users may not notice this is happening outside of slightly decreased performance).

I could go on all day but the short answer is, 64-bit windows is still a novelty and one that might make your apps run slower since they need to be emulated. So, unless you want to run 20GB of RAM for some application (some vaporware application that you don't own yet) that you have, it is not worth it.

I've spoken my 2 cents.

-S

[goldorak]

Subman1, win32 applications on windows 64 (xp 64 or vista 64) are not emulated.
They run on top of the wow subsystem which takes care of converting the api 32 calls to api 64 calls. Nothing more, nothing less. So the impact on performance is very mild, its nothing like running the application on a virtual machine or having it emulated.

As for advantage of 64 bit systems. Its no only having access to more memory (4 GB on a 64 bit system is just as futile as 2 GB on a 32 bit system. You really need 8 GB or more to offset the increase in code size due to 64 bit pointers), the day you will be running NATIVE 64 bit applications you'll use much more registers (something that on x86 architectures has always been a little on the starving side) and performance will increase. Sure not 100% but performance will increase.

It is a good thing to go to 64 bit. And by the way C2D, Phenom etc... are all 64 bit processors. They are not hybrids. They can run native 64 bit applications, and 32 bit applications. Even 32 bit application on 64 bit os through the wow subsystem (on windows). Itanium is a 64 bit processor that runs native 64 bit code, but runs 32 bit code only through EMULATION and not through a wow-like subsystem. Thats one of the reasons that Intel ditched the idea of using an Itanium-like processor for the desktop. Performace in 32 bit code execution and the fact that AMD beat them to the 64 bit. They were the first to have a working implementation of 64 bit that didn't penalize 32bit execution. So Intel did the only thing possibile, it licensed the technology from AMD and used it in its C2D etc.. processors, and obviously killed the desktop itanium like project along the way.

[goldorak]

Flash definitely exists in native 64 bit, at least for the moment on linux/unix. systems.
Adobe is taking to much time to bring it to windows 64.
Maybe Silverlight will make them move their asses much more quickly though. :rotfl:

[AVGWarhawk]

I just got Vista 64. I like it a lot. I run SH4 and COD WaW without any issues at all. If the game you are loading is Vista ready, it will load to your MS Games Folder automatically. If your game is not Vista ready such as SH4, just navigate to install it in the MS Games fold. Works for me. As far as others stating Vista will run the game in 32 bit, so why upgrade? Well, you get the best of both. You can run the 32 bit games and applications. You can also run the 64 bit games and applications. As far as RAM, I have 4 gig of DDR2 PC2-6400. Phenom X4 9850 and EVGA 9800 GT vid card. My games run full tilt and flawlessly. Memory optimizations is excellent. Once the game is loaded, my hard drive does not work at all. Overall, I'm very pleased with Vista 64. Now some say Windows 7 is just about out the door. I think it will be out the door in about 6 months to year. Give some time for the bugs and a service pack. You know, the usual. As I understand it, you can upgrade to Windows 7 right off Vista where XP will not be upgradable straight to Windows 7.

[Fincuan]

As I understand it, you can upgrade to Windows 7 right off Vista where XP will no be upgradable.

The Win 7 beta installer offered a possibility to upgrade from XP, but no idea how or if it would have worked since I opted for a completely new installation. I figured I'd better start from scrath than to bring all the crap from the previous OS :up:

[AVGWarhawk]

As I understand it, you can upgrade to Windows 7 right off Vista where XP will no be upgradable.
The Win 7 beta installer offered a possibility to upgrade from XP, but no idea how or if it would have worked since I opted for a completely new installation. I figured I'd better start from scrath than to bring all the crap from the previous OS :up:

I think you can only partition the drive to load the beta if you have XP. Yes, I agree, start fresh with the install of Windows 7.

[CaptainHaplo]

I am typing this on a vista ultimate 64 bit box - with 2Gigs of ram.... Thats right - 2 Gigs. And guess what - it runs like a champ. Its faster than XP with 2 Gigs. Of course - thats after I have tweaked the daylights out of it. Yes - I will be upgrading (though I might also stay with 7 even after that depending).

There are a few games/apps I have struggled with on it - but that has been very limited. In fact - I have had 4 programs give me issues - one of which was a very old version of norton systemworks. **2003 edition - it was a test**

The other three - Brothers in Arms RtH30 and Brothers in Arms EIB - both of which had to be INSTALLED in compatibility mode. However, they run fine. Just the setup choked. The third is a application from work that I knew was going to have issues as both the installer and app are both 16 bit. That one - just wont run on any 64 bit OS by MS.

64 Bit offers more than just more addressable memory. Thats the easy, and accurate answer that it does, and thats a big plus, but the reworked tcp-ip stack alone made it worthwhile for me. There are lots of things under the hood that contribute to making vista 64 a solid OS. Yes - you still hear horror stories about drivers, etc -but again - that time has passed.

The fact is - change is hard. And some people remember the jump from 98 or 2k to xp and don't look forward to that experience again. Not saying Subman is among them - but most of the resistance you see out there today is due to the age old human trait of - we don't like change.

[goldorak]

The fact is - change is hard. And some people remember the jump from 98 or 2k to xp and don't look forward to that experience again. Not saying Subman is among them - but most of the resistance you see out there today is due to the age old human trait of - we don't like change.

Change is not hard, if windows 7 were priced at 0 $ I'd be first in line to use it and do away with xp. Fact is, Microsoft prices its OS very high, and to change there has to be something worth changeing. If there isn't it doesn't matter how shiny the new OS is, people will stick to what they have. A have a lot of software that cost me a lot of money and it simply won't run on a 64 bit os because of certain copy protection techniques. Do you think I'll go spend 400 $ for windows 7 ultimate for what ? To use 4 GB of ram ? To have a more stable computer ? My computer hasn't blu screened in over 2 years and it runs beautifully xp. And it runs all the programs I need. Microsoft creates artificial needs so people are swayed in upgrading something that most don't even need. More power to MS and less power to its customers. As for me I upgrade on my timetable not on MS timetable. If that makes me resistant to change then so be it. :p

Ps: I change and try very often linux distributions and bsd systems.
So I don't fear change. I hate change for the sake of it and moreso when it costs a lot of money for nothing.

[AVGWarhawk]

In a way you are correct, MS direct which way, you the consumer, should go. But, our hands are kind of tied. It is move up or sit and wait for the old OS to loose support from MS. This goes hand in hand with third party developers. They need to move up or dry up in the old pond. I had attempted to stick with Windows 98 until it's last breath when I could not get an old update. That was the last straw and was forced to move away from my wonderful stable Windows 98. Along came XP. Marvelous it was. Updates galor. Game run like a champ. Some more freedom with files. We were the test bed for XP 64. Basically, we have been beta testers all along for MS. So we get SP1,2 and 3 downloaded. You get the picture. Along comes Vista with things we have been asking for over the years. Here we have it. An OS with more things you can do. You can do them faster. RAM is utilized quite well. The third party developers have caught up. Drivers are not an issue. With exception of a few old games, Vista will run just about all of them. The test bed for Vista over the last 2 years is complete and the new bed is made now for Windows 7. Sooner or later, all will be forced to move up. It is the nature of this habit we call computers. I like Vista and have no qualms at all. Windows 7 will come along and Vista will die a slow death like all the other OS in the past. But, I really think MS should offer up a darn fine price for Windows 7 for all the headaches MS creates by distributing a bug riddled OS called Vista. Just like the OS we have seen in the past where we were ultimately the beta testers. Such is the circle of life concerning MS.

So, we assimulate with the Borg and all is well.

[XLjedi]

I think by "change is hard" he perhaps was suggesting that it takes awhile for the various hardware companies to put out bullet-proof drivers. I don't think he meant it was hard for the users to change to the new OS (aside from being frustrated that the drivers aren't available or don't work).

I'm runnin 64 bit with an AMD Athlon 64fx proc on an Asus A8NSLI moboard with 2 gigs of ram and dual nVidia 9600GT's and a couple 10k RPM Raptor drives in RAID array.

Just about a year ago I invested about $300 in the dual GPU's and it was like breathing new life back into a flatlined patient. The moboard and proc are like 4 or 5 years old now and I think I can run fine with em for at least another year!

[SUBMAN1]

Subman1, win32 applications on windows 64 (xp 64 or vista 64) are not emulated.
They run on top of the wow subsystem which takes care of converting the api 32 calls to api 64 calls. Nothing more, nothing less. So the impact on performance is very mild, its nothing like running the application on a virtual machine or having it emulated....

Read my post again. You are somewhat wrong. There must be a 'sandbox' because most 32-bit apps must be protected from additional memory available to the system or they will crash. Read up on it.

-S

[CaptainHaplo]

In a way - your both right. Wowexec changes the calls and does protect memory allocation - in essence it IS emulation - but only on a very small scale. 32 bit OS's do the same for 16 bit apps. No big deal.

The key here is you get more thru 64 bit than just "extra addressable memory".

[SUBMAN1]

In a way - your both right. Wowexec changes the calls and does protect memory allocation - in essence it IS emulation - but only on a very small scale. 32 bit OS's do the same for 16 bit apps. No big deal.

The key here is you get more thru 64 bit than just "extra addressable memory".

Again, you are you are both mildly right, except you don't get much more than just more addressable memory from a hybrid CPU. :D

Performance increases are non-existent and performance decreases are the norm, though as pointed out, it is a mild decrease that is probably not noticeable.

-S

[Castout]

Darn Vista 64 bit costs more than 400 bucks. :damn:

I'm better off migrating to XP 64 bit instead.

[Castout]

The fact is - change is hard. And some people remember the jump from 98 or 2k to xp and don't look forward to that experience again. Not saying Subman is among them - but most of the resistance you see out there today is due to the age old human trait of - we don't like change.

Change is not hard, if windows 7 were priced at 0 $ I'd be first in line to use it and do away with xp. Fact is, Microsoft prices its OS very high, and to change there has to be something worth changeing. If there isn't it doesn't matter how shiny the new OS is, people will stick to what they have. A have a lot of software that cost me a lot of money and it simply won't run on a 64 bit os because of certain copy protection techniques. Do you think I'll go spend 400 $ for windows 7 ultimate for what ? To use 4 GB of ram ? To have a more stable computer ? My computer hasn't blu screened in over 2 years and it runs beautifully xp. And it runs all the programs I need. Microsoft creates artificial needs so people are swayed in upgrading something that most don't even need. More power to MS and less power to its customers. As for me I upgrade on my timetable not on MS timetable. If that makes me resistant to change then so be it. :p

Ps: I change and try very often linux distributions and bsd systems.
So I don't fear change. I hate change for the sake of it and moreso when it costs a lot of money for nothing.

Yea my sentiment exactly. I've been reading Vista reviews and it seems not to offer enough features to make it worthwhile to switch from XP.

So I've decided not to get Vista. Well except Vista 64 bit but that one is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyy overpriced.

[Castout]

Why would you want to downgrade your system? Vista is not a step forwards.

And why all the hype around 64-bit? It still has to run all your software in 32 bit. The type of CPU you have is a hybrid, not a true 64 bit CPU. It is only capable of 64-bit calls. The short answer is, the only thing 64-bit will give you is access to more RAM, and even this has been fixed for 32-bit. There could be a slight performance increase on the probably 2 x 64-bit apps out there, IE being one of them, but since programs like flash are not made for 64-bit, you'll still have to use the 32-bit version 98% of the time. There may actually be a performance decrease with 64-bit since 99.9% of your apps need to run in what is called 32 bit emulation mode (It is a 64-bit OS after all so you need to run your 32-bit programs in a sandbox, though many users may not notice this is happening outside of slightly decreased performance).

I could go on all day but the short answer is, 64-bit windows is still a novelty and one that might make your apps run slower since they need to be emulated. So, unless you want to run 20GB of RAM for some application (some vaporware application that you don't own yet) that you have, it is not worth it.

I've spoken my 2 cents.

-S

Hmm my reason is that my PC had been hacked into. Though my firewall detected it as being connected to two different networks, out of stupid ignorance I forgot to delete the mal-network and this caused some files in my system to become corrupted and I was unable to use my internet for a couple of days until I reinstalled everything again.

I've heard that 64 bit system is safer. 32 bit applications in 64 bit system actually run on protected memory and thus is more secured.

I'm pretty dumb about computer and stuffs but I know that 64 bit system is more secured and is the future of things to come. And I just happen to have a rig that can fully support it so I thought well why didn't I go the whole distant and made use of it(64 bit). So in part curiosity got me into it too.

[goldorak]

Darn Vista 64 bit costs more than 400 bucks. :damn:

I'm better off migrating to XP 64 bit instead.

Be aware that XP 64 is even less supported than Vista 64.
At least with consumer level hardware.

[Castout]

Darn Vista 64 bit costs more than 400 bucks. :damn:

I'm better off migrating to XP 64 bit instead.

Be aware that XP 64 is even less supported than Vista 64.
At least with consumer level hardware.

Hmm it's much more affordable.

I suspect Microsoft developed XP 64 bit as a sort of test bed for Vista 64 bit. That explains the lack of support. But so far I've been able to find drivers for XP 64 bit just fine.

And whatever runs on Vista 64 bit seems to be running in XP 64 bit as well.

Thanks for the warning. The reviews so far have been good even better than Vista 64 bit.

[d@rk51d3]

Running my new rig, which consists of Intel quad core 2.88, 4 gigs of 1066mhz RAM(thinking of bumping that up tp 8 gig:hmm: ), Nvidia Geforce 9800GT 1 gig, and Vista home premium 64bit.

Couldn't be happier at this stage. Running everything maxxed out, and had no hiccups yet, with the exception of starforce.

However, other threads have indicated that Ubi are sending later/updated .exe files to those who ask, which effectively patch it to "no-CD".

Awesome news, if it's true.

[AVGWarhawk]

Darn Vista 64 bit costs more than 400 bucks. :damn:

I'm better off migrating to XP 64 bit instead.

Be aware that XP 64 is even less supported than Vista 64.
At least with consumer level hardware.

Hmm it's much more affordable.

I suspect Microsoft developed XP 64 bit as a sort of test bed for Vista 64 bit. That explains the lack of support. But so far I've been able to find drivers for XP 64 bit just fine.

And whatever runs on Vista 64 bit seems to be running in XP 64 bit as well.

Thanks for the warning. The reviews so far have been good even better than Vista 64 bit.

Personally, I would wait for Windows 7. Just as XP 64 looked to be a stepping stone to Vista 64,Vista 64 was the stepping stone to Windows 7. I did read that on or after July 1 of this year, MS will offer a free upgrade to Windows 7 for those that purchased Vista 64. In your spare time, snoop around on the net and see what people are saying about Windows 7.

[Castout]

Darn Vista 64 bit costs more than 400 bucks. :damn:

I'm better off migrating to XP 64 bit instead.

Be aware that XP 64 is even less supported than Vista 64.
At least with consumer level hardware.

Hmm it's much more affordable.

I suspect Microsoft developed XP 64 bit as a sort of test bed for Vista 64 bit. That explains the lack of support. But so far I've been able to find drivers for XP 64 bit just fine.

And whatever runs on Vista 64 bit seems to be running in XP 64 bit as well.

Thanks for the warning. The reviews so far have been good even better than Vista 64 bit.

Personally, I would wait for Windows 7. Just as XP 64 looked to be a stepping stone to Vista 64,Vista 64 was the stepping stone to Windows 7. I did read that on or after July 1 of this year, MS will offer a free upgrade to Windows 7 for those that purchased Vista 64. In your spare time, snoop around on the net and see what people are saying about Windows 7.

Yea I want Windows 7 64 bit too. I will stay away from Vista though.
The thing is how much Microsoft is going to sell their Windows 7 64 bit OS? Most likely above 400 bucks which is a quite a sum of money for me.

[Castout]

I just found out that there's a 64 bit version of Vista premium. Shouldn't cost too much but I think I could wait for windows 7 64 bit :rock: . Considering all the flop about Vista and its bad reviews.

[owner20071963]

Well I hate starforce protection system.

How much RAM do you guys use for your 64 bit Vista?

Btw I'm also looking forward to the upcoming Empire total war. It would sucks if the 64 bit Vista couldn't run it. All Games Will Run On Vista,
Providing You Run The Game As Administrator,
Especially Patches,
Compatibility Issue Easily
Sorts All Games With Vista,
Vista 64 Is Perfect
The Future In Gaming Is Here :arrgh!:

[AVGWarhawk]

Well I hate starforce protection system.

How much RAM do you guys use for your 64 bit Vista?

Btw I'm also looking forward to the upcoming Empire total war. It would sucks if the 64 bit Vista couldn't run it. All Games Will Run On Vista,
Providing You Run The Game As Administrator,
Especially Patches,
Compatibility Issue Easily
Sorts All Games With Vista,
Vista 64 Is Perfect
The Future In Gaming Is Here :arrgh!:


Vista runs games just fine. SH4 I need to run as admin but COD WaW will run in user account. I think because COD WaW is Vista ready. I enjoy using Vista 64. No real quirks that I can think of. I think having an admin account and then having to establish a user account is a bit much. However, having the admin account for maintenance only and the user account keeping the user from possibly doing something detrimental to the computer is a nice feature. All in all, I'm satisfied with Vista.

If Windows 7 is $400.00 they can keep it for until the price drops.

[mr chris]

If Windows 7 is $400.00 they can keep it for until the price drops.

You got that right im looking at getting my new rig next month and it is going to come with Vista Ultimate 64bit.
Was thinking of giving Seven a go when it finally hits the shops but at that price. I think i will leave it a while and let the price drop and also see what the feedback is like before taking the plunge.
As all i have used before is 32 Bit XP im sure getting all my older games to play on vista, and playing around to get Vista the way i want it will keep me busy.

[FIREWALL]

I don't understand the problems. I do a dual boot with partition XP Pro sp2 and Vista Ultimate 64.

I have SH-3 GWX Gold on both without a problem.

I read on another thread how other members did it but, I did it my own way and it was easy. :yep: