64-bits vs 32-bits

So you have the BIG idea that the Church or community needs to develop. Discuss that idea here. Maybe you just want to make a suggestion on a new forum topic. Let us know.
daryl1
Member
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 5:04 pm
Location: Central California

64-bits vs 32-bits

Postby daryl1 » Thu May 24, 2007 8:12 am

Could we start a thread or a forum to discuss the difference and benefits between 64-bit and 32-bit operating systems?

I am not sure if this should be part of the MLS what is 5.5 or where to put or start this?

Just some highlights of 64-bit.

1. removal of the 4GB memory limitation of 32-bit.
2. Performance is boosted because reading from memory is much faster then reading from disk (swap file).
3. Windows XP Professional x64 is faster more reliable then 32-bit.
4. Windows XP Professional x64 is built on Windows Server 2003 service pack 1 (SP1) This is very stable provides optimum security for business-critical desktop computing.
5. Developers with 32-bit computing skills will be comfortalbe and productive the 64-bit environment virtually is identical. Writing code for 64-bit is like writing code for 32-bit windows.
6. Data in memory is accessed thousands of times faster than it is on a disk drive. Applications can preload substantially more data into virtual memory, allowing rapid access by the 64-bit processor.
7. This frees up IT resources.
8. 64-bit can support 16 exabyte of memory address space but current release of 64-bit can only support up to 32 GB of memory and is still way below the theoretical limit of 64-bit. This is still better then the current 4GB that 32-bit has.

Some of this data was taken from microsoft 64 bit facts top 10 benefits. Not to permote I am just stating the source as to not plagiarize.

Could this be the bottle neck with the printing issues, 5.5 running slow and MLS issues? Adding more memory always makes a system more stable, faster running and less freeze ups and problems. This is why adding more memory to current dell computers to at least 512-MB makes everything run better and faster start ups and less freeze ups.

Memory is key to making everything run better in my humble opinion. It has for all of the systems I have delt with. Memory is better to access then reading from disk.

This would be an excellent forum or thread. Just wanting to get permission and where to post it?

Thank you.

User avatar
mkmurray
Senior Member
Posts: 3241
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:56 pm
Location: Utah
Contact:

Postby mkmurray » Thu May 24, 2007 8:35 am

I disagree that 32-bit OS's should be considered a bottleneck or limiting in any way for Desktop 5.5. For Church uses, 32-bit is more than enough for our needs. Yes, 64-bit is nice, but who says 4GB of RAM is too limiting. The current hardware set of a typical Church computer consists of 512MB, 1/8th of the upper limit. I don't see the Church putting 4GB of RAM in the boxes for quite a few years (like when 4GB is looked at as a bare minimum). I really don't see any true merit with any of your other arguments either.

The ONLY arguement for switching to 64-bit is that AMD and Intel have almost exculsively switched to 64-bit processors nowadays. There really is no reason to switch to 64-bit other than out of necessity because that is what all of the new hardware will be from now on.

User avatar
WelchTC
Senior Member
Posts: 2088
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 7:51 am
Location: Kaysville, UT, USA
Contact:

Postby WelchTC » Thu May 24, 2007 2:45 pm

It may not be too far in the future that all new machines will be 64 bit machines just for the fact that they will stop making 32 bit machines. However my guess is that these new 64 bit machines will still be running a 32 bit OS.

Tom

daryl1
Member
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 5:04 pm
Location: Central California

Postby daryl1 » Thu May 24, 2007 6:40 pm

Thank you for your comments. I am not trying to tell the Church or anyone what to do or how to do it. Just making some observations of technology.

I will not bring this isssue up anymore about operating systems. In the future though this is the direction things are going.

No problem everyone is entitled to their opinions, ideas, and disagreements. That is what makes this world good.

We have solved all of our problems currently by installing two 512-MB memory cards this gives a total of 1-GB. Start up is now 80% faster everthing is running good and no more freeze ups. All of the Dell's in our Stake only came with 256-MB memory which is not enough for 5.5

Thank you.

User avatar
nbflint
Member
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:07 pm

Postby nbflint » Thu May 24, 2007 7:40 pm

My family purchased a new desktop machine recently. It came with an AMD 64 bit processor running Windows Vista Home Premium 32 bit. I have the 64bit Ultimate addition, but most of my software doesn't support the 64 bit processor so I don't really get any benefit from it anyway. Not to mention that the memory industry isn't yet producing chips to take advantage of 64 bit systems.

Since local wards are not "production" environments, I can't see the church ever investing in enterprise quality systems for ward use. The standard home computing should suffice. My opinion is that the church will switch to 64 bit machines when the home computing industry makes the switch and it makes more economical sense to purchase 64 bit machines than 32 bit machines.

I don't think we're too far away from that, with major chip companies and major OS manufacturers leading the way, software vendors will want to follow suit. I'll make the switch as soon as the major applications I use make the switch and I can get the support I need.


User avatar
WelchTC
Senior Member
Posts: 2088
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 7:51 am
Location: Kaysville, UT, USA
Contact:

Postby WelchTC » Fri May 25, 2007 9:03 am

nimebe wrote:My family purchased a new desktop machine recently. It came with an AMD 64 bit processor running Windows Vista Home Premium 32 bit. I have the 64bit Ultimate addition, but most of my software doesn't support the 64 bit processor so I don't really get any benefit from it anyway. Not to mention that the memory industry isn't yet producing chips to take advantage of 64 bit systems.

And this is what I was referring to when I said that even though new machines may be shipped with 64 bit processors, we are still stuck for the present time with a 32 bit OS.

Tom

rmrichesjr
Community Moderators
Posts: 1038
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:32 am
Location: Dundee, Oregon

Postby rmrichesjr » Fri May 25, 2007 11:17 am

Mr. Techno wrote:[B]...

8. 64-bit can support 16 exabyte of memory address space but current release of 64-bit can only support up to 32 GB of memory and is still way below the theoretical limit of 64-bit. This is still better then the current 4GB that 32-bit has.

Some of this data was taken from microsoft 64 bit facts top 10 benefits. Not to permote I am just stating the source as to not plagiarize.

...


nimebe wrote:... Not to mention that the memory industry isn't yet producing chips to take advantage of 64 bit systems.

...



In order to retain accuracy in any further postings about 32-bit vs. 64-bit computing, let's try to keep straight a few concepts:

1) 64-bit computing in general.

2) The AMD X86-64 instruction set architecture, independent of operating system or specific chip implementation.

3) Specific AMD or Intel or other implementations of the X86-64 (or other 64-bit) instruction set architecture.

4) 64-bit version(s) of a particular operating system sold by a company from Redmond, Washington.

The limitations quoted above would apply to 3 and/or 4, not necessarily to 1 or 2.

The memory industry is indeed making RAM that is fully useful for 64-bit systems. The 64-bit Alpha machine I was using in 2000 (seven years ago) worked just fine with 256MB of RAM. It worked even better after adding another 1GB of RAM.

User avatar
nbflint
Member
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:07 pm

Postby nbflint » Sun May 27, 2007 8:04 pm

rmrichesjr wrote:The memory industry is indeed making RAM that is fully useful for 64-bit systems. The 64-bit Alpha machine I was using in 2000 (seven years ago) worked just fine with 256MB of RAM. It worked even better after adding another 1GB of RAM.


Yes, the memory can be used with a 64 bit system, but the advantage of a 64 bit system over a 32 bit system is that it "breaks" the 4 gb memory limit. Unless you can install more than 4 gb of memory into your system, this advantage of a 64 bit system is useless. Currently most machines are only capable of four chips and the maximum chip size is 1 gb. I said that the memory industry is unable to take advantage of the 64 bit system because I have yet to see a chip over 1 gb that would allow a consumer to use more than 4gb.

Just for kicks I installed my Vista Ultimate 64 bit this weekend. The install went great and the system worked fine, until I tried to install my modem. Apparently my modem software used a 16 bit installer software. 64 bit systems apparently do not support 16 bit code. Seems I'll have to wait until someone releases a 32 bit or 64 bit Vista compatible modem before I'll be able to try again.


User avatar
mkmurray
Senior Member
Posts: 3241
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:56 pm
Location: Utah
Contact:

Postby mkmurray » Mon May 28, 2007 8:02 am

nimebe wrote:...until I tried to install my modem.

Please tell me you are talking about a cable modem! Although, with the "16-bit" remark, I fear for the worst. You poor, poor soul...

User avatar
nbflint
Member
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:07 pm

Postby nbflint » Tue May 29, 2007 7:16 pm

mkmurray wrote:Please tell me you are talking about a cable modem! Although, with the "16-bit" remark, I fear for the worst. You poor, poor soul...


Painfully, I admit. It is not a cable modem. Due to the incredibly poor networking available in America, I am stuck on dial-up barring a move into the "big city."



Return to “Ideas & Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest