The Official PC building thread -3rd Edition

Umm, well in that case windows vista 64 bit wouldn't give you much of an advantage unless you have 64bit programs which would benefit because you have 64bit CPUs. I honestly think 2GB of RAM is enough for Vista but I would get more and use superfetch which is a really cool feature.

 

Vista 64-bit uses more than 2GB just sitting at the desktop, so I would ALWAYS recommend getting at least 4GB for it.

 

No, the difference is I've learned to say my piece and move on to something else. I don't go there again unless I'm asked! I have no problem with the opinions, I do have a problem with repetitiveness of those opinions where they aren't welcome or needed!

Respectfully,
Russ

 

you know what ppl, I am so sick of the gigabyte fanboyism here at AD (or is it anti-asusism), that I think I'll just take it upon myself to stay the hell off this forum. nobody here will ever experience an asus or any other mobo for that matter with all the gigabyte preaching here. what a shame. there are other mobo manufacturers besides gigabyte (and yes there are some that are even better) but you wouldn't know it if you came here looking for advice. all that the ppl here would do is suggest or recommend different model GB mobos. DON'T DARE TO RECOMMEND AN ASUS MOBO.

GTR was considering a new mobo and I through out my opinion. it wasn't a precious GB, so guess who got flamed. I'm sick and tired of it. see ya.

 

I was done with it already. I was hoping theonejrs would come to his senses (I guess he thinks he owns this thread), and take back his comments about Mort, but no, and now we lose one of the best people on aD from this thread, hopefully not the entire forum.

I thought there was some rule about Addicts flaming other Addicts, I guess not.

 

Here we go again... I will happily recommend Asus or Gigabyte products, but my first instance is Gigabyte, it just seems pointless to randomly pick and choose between. What I will not do is steer someone away from a perfectly decent Asus board, such as a P5Q. If it's a Striker, then I will for obvious reasons.

Anyone who gets seriously upset when any brand is criticised, whether it's Asus or Gigabyte, needs to have a little rethink, to put it politely.

 

ok what consist of a 64bit program? is it like a quad core only certain programs work with it?

so xp pro 64bit isnt designed for intel? mostly amd? i have xp pro 64bit but have never installed it would it be worth it for me? maybe see more memorey if i had it?

 

I generally tell people to veer away from 64-bit OSes. programs designed to take advantage of 64-bit processing will work faster in much the same way as a dual-threaded app, but drivers can be a pain, and are VERY tricky to find with XP X64. I recommend Vista 64 over XP x64.

 

I'm an AMD boy with XP64 Pro, on one computer for about 6 or 8 months. The trials and tribulations are far outweighed by the negative in my opinion.This weekend it's coming off and XP pro 32 is going back on.[ and this cluster xx is getting sent away].It's on identical motherboard processor ram Vid card both AMD 939 4200 and is no match to the 32 XP pro IMO.Was typing when Sam posted and yes drivers are a definite pain along with the other glitches. I do believe MS dropped the ball in mid stream on this system and never went back.And I did have Vista for a really short period which to me was worst than the 64 pro IMO.I'll wait and see with their new OP when it comes out and let others report before I'll switch from XP 32 again.To me as bad as IE8.

 

My friend has had nothing but pain and suffering with an XP X64 system with a 3700+ for its three year life.

 

Agreed, I'm on my third 64-bit processor, and other than my infrequent forays into vista, never use that capability.

 

Cincy the difference between 4 sticks of 1 gig ram and 4 sticks of 512 was barely noticeable on a 939 Asus board w64 bit.Load up time for me has always been slower with the 64 bit compared to 32 bit same mobo etc.And running rebuilder difference was minor.

 

Rob,
The problem is there was no 64 bit Intel CPUs at the time, so it was designed for the AMD architecture. In order to run it on present Intels, it needs to go through an emulator in order to communicate between the CPU and the chipset, which slows it down about 30%. I'll have a much better idea when I locate XP-Pro 64! It's the same program and all, but because of no need for emulation on the AMD 64s, it should run things much faster!

Russ

 

ok cool ill stick with xp 32bit.. but i do want more mem so when i get it xp 32bit will only see about 3.5gb of the 4gb total mem..maybe a little more cause my gpu only has 256mb of ram on it.

 

Russ sent you email. Creaky how true that was my main objective for the 64 torun 4 gig or higher and it sadly back fired.

 

good point. im not sure if i would or not... not sure how much i use now when i burn and such... im sure if i start gameing a little more or even get a better GPU i might need more ram for the games???