#15
Post
by TuuS » Fri Jul 06, 2012 4:22 pm
I prefer Seven or Vista over XP anyday, and there are other benefits to x64 over x86 besides the limits mentioned so inaccurately here, so first lets set the record straight...
You can run 64gb of ram on some versions of XP 32bit, specifically Windows server 2003 Datacenter or Enterprise editions (just to name two), but there are other restrictions of the x86 architecture besides the address space, but first...
The x86 32bit processor has only 4gb of address space, so on a stripped down lean machine with no unneeded hardware the basic devices will use about 0.5gb leaving about 3.5gb for ram. On a typical thinkpad you get about 3gb or slightly less, but with PAE (phisical address extension) enabled you can go way beyond 4gb. I have 32bit windows running on this T61 with 8gb of ram and it uses all of it, however no app can use more then 2gb, which can be tweaked using 4 gigabit mode. Normally an app is limited to 2gb for app, 2gb for system, but you can adjust this to give more for the app, perhaps 3gb and 1 for system, however if you have a processor that supports AMD x86-64 extension to Intel's x86 architecture then you really should use an operating system that takes full advantage of this technology. What I'd recommend is doing the following...
Create multiple harddrive partitions, then get however many windows versions you want to try, start with the oldest and install them one in each partition. When you're done you'll have a boot menu and can select which ever you want to run. I think once you get used to vista or seven you'll never want to use XP again. I only use XP on old systems that won't run a newer os very well. If the system runs Seven well, it will outperform XP on the same system and the same goes for vista. They do require more resources, but they use these resources very well, they don't usually waste them, and a well tuned system should use as much ram as you have, there is no benefit to having 4gb installed and only using 2. Some people improperly call that being efficient to use less ram, but you have a faster and more stable system if it uses all the resources available. Think of it this way, if you go shopping and fill your refrigerator up half way someone might think you were being efficient by saving room in case you need it, until they realize you have to travel to the store twice as much as the person who keeps the fridge full, so in reality you'll spend less time waiting and more time having fun. XP was designed originally when systems had 128mb of ram, so it was forced to be inefficient, where vista and seven will use as much as you feed it.
Of course some people don't like change and if you're happy with XP then you should stick with it., there is no right and wrong opinions here, only preferrences.