AdamR - Insight into the World of Technology
Lockergnome
Home
Author Avatar

Getting into Windows Vista x64

I went against my better judgment and formatted my desktop’s main hard drive in order to reinstall Windows Vista Home Premium. This time, I decided to install the x64 (64-bit) version of Windows. The advantages of an x64 operating system are numerous. Applications designed with x64 in mind will run ridiculously faster, such as multimedia applications, server services, and even the latest games. The operating system itself will also perform a fair bet better. However, x64, for the average user, does have it’s extreme downsides.

For example, have you ever had a window pop up when installing a new device telling you that a “driver isn’t signed by Microsoft” and then asking you if you wish to proceed? The good news is that box doesn’t exist in the x64 version of Windows. The bad news is you can’t install any drivers whatsoever that haven’t been signed by Microsoft. That eliminates a majority of devices and drivers out there.

I know what you’re probably thinking, though: I’m insane. And in most cases you’d probably be right. However, I did a fair bit of research and came to the conclusion that Windows x64 is the right direction for me. Here were my reasons:

1) Compared to x86 (32-bit), x64 (64-bit) Windows has horrible driver support. More often than not, you won’t find the driver you need for peripheral devices such as printers. However, in my case, I extensively researched my hardware and discovered that all of it has up-to-date x64 drivers, all signed by Microsoft. Any peripherals that I purchase are typically high name-brand devices (such as Creative, Logitech, HP, etc) which I know will have signed drivers from the get-go. I never go generic, and to be honest, neither should you when it comes to computer technology. I’ll only get you in trouble in the long run.

2) The programs that I run on a day-to-day basis are either fully, or partly “with a few minor quirks” compatible with an x64 operating system. Once again, I try to stay away from specialized software or generic brands. Also, I’m a major geek, so if I ever need to run an application that doesn’t support x64, I’ll just run it in my Windows XP x86 virtual environment.

3) As I just indicated, I’m a geek. That means I’ll intentionally put myself through trouble just to have the best stuff. An x64 operating system is a bit different, mostly in highly-technical ways. The average user isn’t going to see a UI difference or anything. But the nitty-gritty backend has some pretty major improvements, and as a geek, I want to take advantage of those, play around with them, possibly screw up, and find out how to fix my mistakes.

4) And to put it simply: I want higher framerates in Crysis. ;) But in all seriousness, I wan raw performance in every aspect of my machine, which includes the operating system. Windows Vista x64 is the right choice for me.

Tags: ,

What do you think?

the oracle - November 11, 2007 @ 11:38 am

Have you ever done any critical testing? I’m thinking a difference (on the bad side) of about 10%. Everything I’ve ever personally seen, or read says that is the case. The only case where speed is increased is in the running of HUGE databases. You might want to test to make sure.

adamr - November 11, 2007 @ 7:37 pm

Agreed. The majority of users (and for the most part, including myself) won’t see significant performance increases. In theory, you can pipe twice as much through the processor at one time. Considering the most powerful applications out there are only using 40 or so memory spaces out of the 64, we’re still a long way off from seeing its full potential.

That being said, however, I do do a lot of media creation, editing, and encoding. This is the main area I expect to see improvements cutting down rendering and encoding times.

Like I said, I’m a geek. The “trouble” of x64 is worth it to me if I can squeeze performance out of my machine. If I make my decisions right with future applications and peripherals, I really don’t think I’m going to run into much trouble, anyway.

Thanks for the comment!
- Adam

Jamie N - November 14, 2007 @ 4:45 am

“I never go generic, and to be honest, neither should you when it comes to computer technology. I’ll only get you in trouble in the long run.”

Rubbish!

Generic hardware are generic chips cobbled together… with no name on it.

Branded hardware are - for the most part - generic chips cobbled together… with the manufacturers name stuck on it!

Don’t believe me? Take a PCI card, look at the chips onboard and see who made them. Software drivers tend to drive the main chip on the board, so it makes no difference who made the board. There are exceptions of course, but not many.

adamr - November 14, 2007 @ 10:17 am

Jamie,

I do see your point. However, in most cases with technology, you really don’t pay that much more for, say, a EVGA or a Foxconn video card than you do for a “hardly known” brand. While the chipset may be identical, the manufacturing process of the board itself may not be, and in many cases, is inferior.

I buy ASUS, Intel, or Gigabyte motherboards. Again, nVidia/Intel/AMD make the actual chipset and it is software controlled, but the board manufacturing process is different which is why one may be unstable and the other one perfectly fine.

Hard drives are a good example of not buying generic brands. This is data that you don’t want to lose even after you’ve backed up. This is why I never buy anything but Western Digital or, recently, Seagate. Maxtor has started to slip as of late.

With memory, I usually only buy Kingston, Corsair, or Crucial. With Kingston and Corsair, Samsung makes the memory. Crucial makes their own under the name Micron Technology. With most memory manufactuers, Samsung is the most popular type of memory on the board. However, once again, the manufacturing process is different. Corsair and Crucial usually have extremely good heat spreaders built on to the memory, as does Kingston’s higher-end line. That helps performance.

When it comes to networking gear, I won’t touch anything in the consumer market that’s not Linksys or Cisco. D-Link, Netgear, and Belkin have fairly low standards in comparison, in my experiences.

The list goes on. I’m all for shopping around for finding the best deal to save money. I do it all the time. However, I won’t sacrifice the slightest bit of stability or longterm performance for a $10, $20, or $50 difference.

Thanks for the comment!

- Adam

What are your thoughts?

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

All Comments and Trackbacks are moderated (unless you're a registered user). Regardless, this page will refresh when your submission is entered.

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture.
Anti-Spam Image