Is $120 Worthwhile to Change to 62 bit

With all the talk about the 62 bit OS, I'm a little (a lot) confused. I assume that 62 bit is much faster than 32 bit, and if true, how much faster? My present computer has 2GB of RAM and I found that I can purchase 4GB (2 x 2GB) for $120, the minimum I believe for 62 bit Vista. Since I already have the 62 bit OS disk, I was thinking maybe I should make the change and go with 62 bit, but then again, I really don't know what benefit there is. Or simply make the change when I get a new computer. I don't do games or use intensive software and my computer runs sufficiently fast. Any thoughts or recommendations?

 

It`s 64 bit, and it`s it should be the same prices as the 32bit version.

The 64 bit versions is no faster than the 32bit version, it just allows you to use the full 4gb of memory.

When 32bit only allows you to use about 3.2gb

 

You need 3 things to switch to 64bit:
-64bit capable processor (intel core2duo)
-4gb RAM
-64bit supported drivers for your notebook

 

You didn't by chance get that 62-bit DVD on a street corner from the same guy selling Roloxes, did you?

 

I guess u mean 64 bit by 62 bit....
if u are upgrading to 64bit and then installing 4GB ram....then go for it
But if you dont play games nor use intensive software, then there is no sense to it....just upgrade the ram to 3GB..!!
It will be hard for you to go above 4GB ram since it normally depends if your chipset can even handle 4gig ram in the first place....!!
Since u already have the 64Bit disk, install it and upgrade to 4gig ram (but do a system scan on crucial first to see if ur chipset and cpu can handle it)....your PC would run faster than before....boot times will be much better..!! thats it....

 

It IS somewhat faster than 32bit if you have a 64bit processor since a 32bit os cannot take full advantage of a 64bit processor - it basically forces the 64bit processor to run at 32bit. Only a 64bit os can take full advantage of a 64bit processor thus making it *slightly* faster than a 32bit os.

 

Thanks guys. Ok, so essentially the only difference is with the available RAM. Well, that answers my question as I don't appear to use close to the 2GB of RAM I now have, so any additional RAM won't seem to add any benefits. I'll stay with what I have and be happy. Thanks again,

 

If it makes any difference, I have the Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe LGA, 2.4 GHz, 1066FSB, 4 MB Cache with the Intel 945G chipset - this is for my desktop computer.

 

64 would be faster than 32 only if the 64 application take advantage of the 64 computer architecture, which is not happening today.

 

It's more stable and more secure too.

 

There's no 'significant' speed difference. Processors nowadays are fast and Vista uses memory efficiently in either version. To truly take advantage of 64bit you must have a true 64bit program. Multicore processors can run 64bit programs. I have a desktop with Vista x64 with 8gb RAM and still have lots of memory left over after it loads.

 

You don't NEED 4 GB RAM for Vista/OS whatever x64 to run.

 

I agree!

Did you order my Serbian shirt?

 

Of course not, you could do x64 with 512mb

But its not much advantage switching to 64bit unless you have 4gb, other than the tighter security. 32bit is already secure as it is.

Youll most likely run into more problems trying

 

I don't think you can do it with 512MB, not enough memory for the OS

 

Vista Basic you can, minimum is 512 . The other versions is 1gb minimum.

 

Vista basic 64?????

 

64 bit is more future-ready and -proof than 32 bit. It doesn't have many gains right now, but I expect it to have more and more in the future. Once programs are written in 64 bit, running them in a 32 bit compatability mode will make them way slower. It is true that there aren't many 64 bit progs yet though.

 

You'd do fine with 2GB on x64, unless you're on some heavy encoding or sheban, where even x86 won't run fine on 2GB.

It is a PERK of having x64, that it'll use all of the 4GB RAM, not a NECESSITY.