32 or 64

I have an AMD Athlon 3200 64 bit processor with an Asus A8N-SLI board and 2
GB RAM with a 250 GB SATA HD. All apps compatible with Vista. Is there any
reason I should chose 32 bit ober 64? Will 64 bit run quicker or cause more
problems?

Then all your applications should run fine on 32 and 64 bit.
However hardware such as printers, scanners and other peripherals is a
different story.
Many hardware manufacturers are slow to support or have made the
decision for their hardware not to be compatible with 64 bit.

At this point, unless have some specific reason to move to 64 bit, 32
bit may be best.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


<msnews.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:...
>I have an AMD Athlon 3200 64 bit processor with an Asus A8N-SLI board
>and 2 GB RAM with a 250 GB SATA HD. All apps compatible with Vista.
>Is there any reason I should chose 32 bit ober 64? Will 64 bit run
>quicker or cause more problems?

XP 32 bit is the best solution. Avoid vista.

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.. dont come back crying...




<msnews.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:...
>I have an AMD Athlon 3200 64 bit processor with an Asus A8N-SLI board and 2
>GB RAM with a 250 GB SATA HD. All apps compatible with Vista. Is there
>any reason I should chose 32 bit ober 64? Will 64 bit run quicker or cause
>more problems?
>
>

msnews.microsoft.com wrote:
> I have an AMD Athlon 3200 64 bit processor with an Asus A8N-SLI board and 2
> GB RAM with a 250 GB SATA HD. All apps compatible with Vista. Is there any
> reason I should chose 32 bit ober 64? Will 64 bit run quicker or cause more
> problems?
>
>

I agree with the previous reply, if you go with 64 bit on that hardware
it will not be any faster, possibly slower, and you risk more driver
related problems (Example a WIFI card that works fine with 32 may have
no driver at all for 64 and 64 bit XP drivers absolutely don't work either).

Unless you have some 64 bit only software that forces you to go 64 I
advise stick with 32. I think this situation will improve over time but
not quickly.

My experience is that XP is still quicker and smoother with games and
frame rates leave Vista standing, although again I expect that to
improve. If you have an SLI GFX card (or two) that's working well my
suggestion would be to keep your existing drive as it is, replace it
with a cheap new one, install Vista and see how you get on. 1 drive less
costly than all the other bits you just "May" have to buy and then
decide you prefer to go back to XP while other matters are sorted out.
Suggest you do not try setting up dual boot, try completely independant
first if your hardware (Case etc) is not a physical nightmare to work on.

The Mike Glenn Syndrome is a term used when a person has certain
limitations in mental functioning and in skills such as communicating,
taking care of him or herself, and social skills. These limitations will
cause a poster to learn and develop more slowly than a typical poster.
Brain dead morons with Mike Glenn Syndrome may take longer to learn
to speak, walk, and take care of their personal needs such as dressing or
eating. They are likely to have trouble learning in school, and posting to
Microsoft newsgroups. They will learn, but it will take them longer. There
may be some things they cannot learn. They keep trying. Make sure to
continue your Meds.

"Mike Glenn" <> wrote in message
news:46d61e83$...
> XP 32 bit is the best solution. Avoid vista.
>
> YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.. dont come back crying...
>
>
>
>
> <msnews.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:...
>>I have an AMD Athlon 3200 64 bit processor with an Asus A8N-SLI board and
>>2 GB RAM with a 250 GB SATA HD. All apps compatible with Vista. Is there
>>any reason I should chose 32 bit ober 64? Will 64 bit run quicker or
>>cause more problems?
>>
>>
>
>

msnews.microsoft.com wrote:
> I have an AMD Athlon 3200 64 bit processor with an Asus A8N-SLI board and 2
> GB RAM with a 250 GB SATA HD. All apps compatible with Vista. Is there any
> reason I should chose 32 bit ober 64? Will 64 bit run quicker or cause more
> problems?
>
>

Hi,

I pondered on the same question and picked 32 bit for maximal compatibilty.
The only advantage of 64 bit is a much bigger address space, which is of
little use in most circumstances nowadays and the years to come.

32bit = 2^32 bytes to directly address (around 4 gigs)

I would not risk 64bit Vista unless you have some compelling reasons.
Vista 32 bit is troublesome enough as it is shipped at the moment.
No need to add more complications.

Regards,
Erwin Moller

Thnks for the replies. I now wonder if I should even go to Vista over XP.
I keep hearing about problems with Vista. Maybe it's not worth it.


"Erwin Moller"
<Since_humans_read_this_I_am_spammed_too_much@spam yourself.com> wrote in
message news:46d663f5$0$229$...
> msnews.microsoft.com wrote:
>> I have an AMD Athlon 3200 64 bit processor with an Asus A8N-SLI board and
>> 2 GB RAM with a 250 GB SATA HD. All apps compatible with Vista. Is
>> there any reason I should chose 32 bit ober 64? Will 64 bit run quicker
>> or cause more problems?
>>
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> I pondered on the same question and picked 32 bit for maximal
> compatibilty.
> The only advantage of 64 bit is a much bigger address space, which is of
> little use in most circumstances nowadays and the years to come.
>
> 32bit = 2^32 bytes to directly address (around 4 gigs)
>
> I would not risk 64bit Vista unless you have some compelling reasons.
> Vista 32 bit is troublesome enough as it is shipped at the moment.
> No need to add more complications.
>
> Regards,
> Erwin Moller

<msnews.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:...
> Thnks for the replies. I now wonder if I should even go to Vista over XP.
> I keep hearing about problems with Vista. Maybe it's not worth it.
>

The problems in Vista are very exaggerated by some members of this group.
Having said that there isn't much in Vista that would make me buy it in
preference to XP.
I and most users spend 99% of my time in applications and not looking at
some whizzy desktop.
It doesn't make much difference to most of these applications if its XP or
Vista that they are running on.. maybe some minor style changes.
If you are happy with what you have now I don't see much point in changing
myself unless you want some of the new features like media center which are
better than the XP versions.

<msnews.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:...
>I have an AMD Athlon 3200 64 bit processor with an Asus A8N-SLI board and 2
>GB RAM with a 250 GB SATA HD. All apps compatible with Vista. Is there
>any reason I should chose 32 bit ober 64? Will 64 bit run quicker or cause
>more problems?
>

1. No - no reason.
2. 64-bit will run *some* things quicker .. some about the same .. and some
slower.
3. Yes, 64-bit is more likely to cause problems [i.e. compatibily issues].

Saucy