I agree with you. When multitasking with more than 2 gig there is a
noticeable difference. The following posting by Chuck Walbourn of Microsoft
offers an explanation of why.
---------
A 32-bit process can only adddress up to 2 GB of virtual address space. A
32-bit Large Address Aware process can get up to 4 GB of virtual address
space when run on Windows x64.
Each process has it's own unique address space. Every THREAD in that process
shares the same virtual address space.
Physical memory is managed by the operating system and will be mapped to
each process on demand. The mapping is completely up to the OS and is
dynamic, so there's no hard and firm rule here. If you are runnning a x64 OS
with 8 GB of physical RAM available, then the system will allocate it based
on the runtime demand. Multiple 32-bit processes running at the same time
can utilize more than 2 GB of physical memory.
To determine what is really happening you should look at your runtime
environment and determine how much viritual address space is allocated by
each process, and how large each working set is at runtime.
--
-Chuck Walbourn
SDE, XNA Developer Connection
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warrenties, and confers no rights.
"Kerry Brown" <*a*m> wrote in message
news:...
> "Steve Thackery" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>
>>
>> 1/ It runs 32-bit apps slightly slower than native Vista 32
>>
>
> I keep seeing people saying this. All the benchmark results I've seen are
> inconclusive. The results varied and the differences weren't significant.
> In real world use I see a slightly more responsive system with Vista x64
> and anything greater than 2 GB of RAM. The difference is slight but it is
> noticeable. As you load more programs simultaneously the difference
> becomes more pronounced. Even with 3 or 4 GB of RAM. Vista x64 is much
> more responsive when multitasking.
>
> --
> Kerry Brown
> MS-MVP - Windows Desktop Experience: Systems Administration
> http://www.vistahelp.ca/phpBB2/
> http://vistahelpca.blogspot.com/
>
>
>