Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
As above. I want to build myself a super quick desktop, but it needs to be running 32-bit Windows XP Pro or Vista (would prefer to use XP as I have a spare COA for it).
Some people say 2Gb, some people say 4Gb, does anyone know for sure? I tried to look on the MS website but their search facility wasn't working properly at the time.
|
dannymccann
Member
Registered: 9th Aug 06
Location: Doddington, Lincolnshire
User status: Offline
|
I thought it was 2gb? Or 3.5gb if you put some special patch on it?
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
OK I just found this:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx
4Gb physical memory for XP and Vista, but then the page begins with some stuff about "Memory and Address Space Limits" which goes over my head a little...
|
Rab
Member
Registered: 10th Jun 07
Location: Alloa, Scotland Drives: Subaru Hawkeye STi
User status: Offline
|
My understanding is:
XP: 2GB
Vista 32bit: 3GB
Vista 64bit: 4GB
Rab
|
pow
Premium Member
Registered: 11th Sep 06
Location: Hazlemere, Buckinghamshire
User status: Offline
|
2GB for XP without major running problems
|
PaulW
Member
Registered: 26th Jan 03
Location: Atherton, Greater Manchester
User status: Offline
|
XP can see 3.5gb with SP3, but you can *only* allocate 2gb per application (which is gay)
Need to enable the 3gb flag or whatever in your boot.ini to actually use that though, and even then it *won't* use it all as its impossibly to allocate it efficiently on a 32bit system.
Sam, just buy a ZX Spectrum, much better than running that XP pile of shite, and will make you the coolest kid on the block 
|
Whittie
Member
Registered: 11th Aug 06
Location: North Wales Drives: BMW, Corsa & Fiat
User status: Offline
|
I'm pretty sure windows vista 32 bit is 4gb, 64 bit supports up to something daft like 32gb??
Not sure on xp.
|
PaulW
Member
Registered: 26th Jan 03
Location: Atherton, Greater Manchester
User status: Offline
|
Whittie - Vista is 3.5gig (2gig per app) as XP, it just says 4gig even though it can't fully use it.
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
I need to build a decent spec desktop so I can use Photoshop amongst other things for my business, sadly as PS isn't available on Linux (and I don't think GIMP is much of an alternative) I need a Win32 system.
I suppose I could get a Mac, but then you can't build them from scratch like with a PC?
|
Aaron
Member
Registered: 9th Aug 04
Location: Cottingham, East Riding
User status: Offline
|
is 64Bit Windows Defo not an option? I've got a version you could use...infact i have a few 
|
PhilC
Member
Registered: 21st Jan 06
Location: Lancs, UK
User status: Offline
|
32bit OSs are 2.7GB
64bit OSs are 16, i think?
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aaron
is 64Bit Windows Defo not an option? I've got a version you could use...infact i have a few
I know you can run 32-bit apps on 64-bit Windows but a lot of apps use 16-bit install programs which won't work at all on 64-bit Windows...
|
Aaron
Member
Registered: 9th Aug 04
Location: Cottingham, East Riding
User status: Offline
|
Ah rite ok
I use 64bit at home, and have done for about 6 months on and off. Never had a problem
let me know if you want a copy (to evaulate of course )
|
ENB
Member
Registered: 24th Apr 06
User status: Offline
|
Stay away from 64bit windows, especially XP.
32 bit systems can only use a max of 4Gb, but you usually see anything from 3.2 to 3.8 (only a server 2003 have I seen anything close to 4Gb using 32bit).
64bit is limited to 32Gb.
|
DannyB
Premium Member
Registered: 6th Feb 08
User status: Offline
|
I have 4gb but it only see's 3.6, on mine anyway.
|
Dom
Member
Registered: 13th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by ENB
Stay away from 64bit windows, especially XP.
Nothing wrong with XP64, been running it here for the last 7 months or so. Only blue screened once and that was due to me using the wrong 64bit NIC driver. Otherwise i haven't had a single issue.
XP64 certainly has it's pros over Vista64 and some software (i've found protools and a few other music apps) actually runs faster under XP64 than Vista64.
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
What programs do you have that use 16 bit install programs and won't install on a 64 bit OS?
As said, ENB is just spouting excrament.
Depending what version of vista 64 you have it can support up to 128gb of ram.
|
ENB
Member
Registered: 24th Apr 06
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dom
quote:
Originally posted by ENB
Stay away from 64bit windows, especially XP.
Nothing wrong with XP64, been running it here for the last 7 months or so. Only blue screened once and that was due to me using the wrong 64bit NIC driver. Otherwise i haven't had a single issue.
XP64 certainly has it's pros over Vista64 and some software (i've found protools and a few other music apps) actually runs faster under XP64 than Vista64.
Driver support. But I haven't used it since it was released, so support may have improved but I assumed it hasn't.
I never said anything about the stability of the system. I would say it's no more or less stable than the 32bit XP.
As for you John, bit harsh that. Can't say I was sure on the limit for 64bit, but there's plenty of bollocks in this thread already.
|
PaulW
Member
Registered: 26th Jan 03
Location: Atherton, Greater Manchester
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by ENB
quote:
Originally posted by Dom
quote:
Originally posted by ENB
Stay away from 64bit windows, especially XP.
Nothing wrong with XP64, been running it here for the last 7 months or so. Only blue screened once and that was due to me using the wrong 64bit NIC driver. Otherwise i haven't had a single issue.
XP64 certainly has it's pros over Vista64 and some software (i've found protools and a few other music apps) actually runs faster under XP64 than Vista64.
Driver support. But I haven't used it since it was released, so support may have improved but I assumed it hasn't.
I never said anything about the stability of the system. I would say it's no more or less stable than the 32bit XP.
As for you John, bit harsh that. Can't say I was sure on the limit for 64bit, but there's plenty of bollocks in this thread already.
Why would you assume that it hadn't improved driver support considering all PC's are going towards 64bit 
Biggest part of bollocks in this thread was being told to steer clear of 64bit OS... There is another thread on here with all the ranting & fun that followed, but I can't be arsed searching as apparently my 64bit system has shit driver support so I wouldn't want it to crash now would I (especially with 22days uptime since last reboot)
|
ENB
Member
Registered: 24th Apr 06
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by PaulW
quote:
Originally posted by ENB
quote:
Originally posted by Dom
quote:
Originally posted by ENB
Stay away from 64bit windows, especially XP.
Nothing wrong with XP64, been running it here for the last 7 months or so. Only blue screened once and that was due to me using the wrong 64bit NIC driver. Otherwise i haven't had a single issue.
XP64 certainly has it's pros over Vista64 and some software (i've found protools and a few other music apps) actually runs faster under XP64 than Vista64.
Driver support. But I haven't used it since it was released, so support may have improved but I assumed it hasn't.
I never said anything about the stability of the system. I would say it's no more or less stable than the 32bit XP.
As for you John, bit harsh that. Can't say I was sure on the limit for 64bit, but there's plenty of bollocks in this thread already.
Why would you assume that it hadn't improved driver support considering all PC's are going towards 64bit
Biggest part of bollocks in this thread was being told to steer clear of 64bit OS... There is another thread on here with all the ranting & fun that followed, but I can't be arsed searching as apparently my 64bit system has shit driver support so I wouldn't want it to crash now would I (especially with 22days uptime since last reboot)
That would be because it's an out of cycle OS. And I didn't say stay away from 64bit. I said 64bit windows, maybe I should have been more explicit and say windows client OSs as Server 2008 in 64bit is fine, and as you seem to imply moving forward 64bit is obviously the way to go, which is why you can only get SBS 2008 in 64bit. But of course I'm sugguesting we stick with 32bit, hell let's go back to 16!
|
Dom
Member
Registered: 13th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by ENB
quote:
Originally posted by Dom
quote:
Originally posted by ENB
Stay away from 64bit windows, especially XP.
Nothing wrong with XP64, been running it here for the last 7 months or so. Only blue screened once and that was due to me using the wrong 64bit NIC driver. Otherwise i haven't had a single issue.
XP64 certainly has it's pros over Vista64 and some software (i've found protools and a few other music apps) actually runs faster under XP64 than Vista64.
Driver support. But I haven't used it since it was released, so support may have improved but I assumed it hasn't.
I never said anything about the stability of the system. I would say it's no more or less stable than the 32bit XP.
A lot of manufacturers have or are realising XP64 drivers and drviers support for XP64 is easily on par with Vista64. Everything i have, apart from an 8 year old discontinued digidesign I/O is supported and works fine.
And i agree, stability is the same as XP32. But for me, i had no end of problems with Vista so i had no choice to use XP64 if i wanted to make use of 4GB+ of ram.
Horses for courses to be honest.
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Server 2k8 and vista are built from the same codebase, how is server2k8 better in 64bit than vista?
I still have to say that vista is a much better OS than XP, people think it's just some fancy graphics but it's a lot more.
|
Jamie
Member
Registered: 1st Apr 02
Location: Aberdeen
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by DannyB
I have 4gb but it only see's 3.6, on mine anyway.
3.5 for me
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Online
|
I have to say, I know people who have had problems locating drivers for XP64 for fairly modern hardware.
Obviously if your devices are supported then it's not a worry but I would check before installing.
|
Ste
Premium Member
Registered: 5th Mar 03
Location: Taif, Saudi Arabia
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ian
I have to say, I know people who have had problems locating drivers for XP64 for fairly modern hardware.
Obviously if your devices are supported then it's not a worry but I would check before installing.
Me? Well I got the all sorted in the end, just meant a bit of extra searching. That pc running xp64 was streaming 2 seperate videos to 2 different computers whilst downloading torrents at 300k and it never missed a beat. I know that may not be mega load but its the most i would use it for.
I would rather lose by a mile because i built my own car, than win by an inch because someone else built it for me.
|
