Speed differences between 32-bit and 64-bit Vista?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Phillip Pi
  • Start date Start date
P

Phillip Pi

Hi.

Since I installed both 32-bit and 64-bit Vista Ultimate Edition on my
old test machine (ASUS K8V SE Deluxe, Athlon 64 3200+ [754 CPU], 512 MB
of RAM, SATA HDD, etc.), I notice the speeds are identical. I can't see
and feel any improvements. I did install the ATI Radeon 9600 AIW drivers
to help the video speed, but I just don't see the speed differences. Am
I expecting too much or missing something? I don't have any other
program installed so far. It's just a bare Vista with the latest ATI/AMD
video drivers from ati.com/amd.com.

Thank you in advance. :)
--
Phillip Pi
Senior Software Quality Assurance Analyst
ISP/Symantec Online Services, Consumer Business Unit
Symantec Corporation
www.symantec.com
 
x64 doesn't run faster. Clockspeed is determined by the hardware.
Performance would increase if you up the ram to 1GB.
 
You won't see any difference while running 32-bit programs.
You will only see a significant improvement in programs
written for the 64-bit environment. Panorama Factory,
http://www.panoramafactory.com/ used to have a comparison
between 32-bit and 64-bit, but I couldn't find it just now.
 
Aren't all the default Vista programs 64-bit? Or are they still in 32-bit?


You won't see any difference while running 32-bit programs. You will
only see a significant improvement in programs written for the 64-bit
environment. Panorama Factory, http://www.panoramafactory.com/ used to
have a comparison between 32-bit and 64-bit, but I couldn't find it just
now.


Phillip said:
Hi.

Since I installed both 32-bit and 64-bit Vista Ultimate Edition on my
old test machine (ASUS K8V SE Deluxe, Athlon 64 3200+ [754 CPU], 512
MB of RAM, SATA HDD, etc.), I notice the speeds are identical. I can't
see and feel any improvements. I did install the ATI Radeon 9600 AIW
drivers to help the video speed, but I just don't see the speed
differences. Am I expecting too much or missing something? I don't
have any other program installed so far. It's just a bare Vista with
the latest ATI/AMD video drivers from ati.com/amd.com.

Thank you in advance. :)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...


--
Phillip Pi
Senior Software Quality Assurance Analyst
ISP/Symantec Online Services, Consumer Business Unit
Symantec Corporation
www.symantec.com
 
Ah. Hmm, maybe that's why I can't feel/see the differences.


The bundled programs can be either. The kernel is 64bit.
Click to expand...
--
Phillip Pi
Senior Software Quality Assurance Analyst
ISP/Symantec Online Services, Consumer Business Unit
Symantec Corporation
www.symantec.com
 
The clock speed is the same so you would not see differences. Performance
of either platform on a 64bit cpu is a matter of the hardware. Where you
would see a difference is between running a 32bit OS on a 32bit system
versus a 64bit system. The increased efficiency (head room) on a 64bit
system will benefit the 32bit OS in varying degrees.
 
Are you saying if I had a dual core Athlon 64 939/AM2 setup, I would
notice the performance differences on the same box?


The clock speed is the same so you would not see differences.
Performance of either platform on a 64bit cpu is a matter of the
hardware. Where you would see a difference is between running a 32bit
OS on a 32bit system versus a 64bit system. The increased efficiency
(head room) on a 64bit system will benefit the 32bit OS in varying degrees.
Click to expand...
--
Phillip Pi
Senior Software Quality Assurance Analyst
ISP/Symantec Online Services, Consumer Business Unit
Symantec Corporation
www.symantec.com
 
Where it's really going to make a difference is when you go beyond the 4GB
limit on the 32-bit Vista. Even Home Basic will support 8GB on x64 and Vista
Ultimate x64 will support up to 128GB.

I know this sounds like overkill today but you can bet you right index
finger software makers will figure out a way to use up every bit as quick as
prices fall enough for people to realistically purchase it. I wouldn't be at
all surprised to see mid-level desktop systems with 2-4GB installed and
supporting 16-32GB on sale this time next year.

Colin Barnhorst said:
x64 doesn't run faster. Clockspeed is determined by the hardware.
Performance would increase if you up the ram to 1GB.

Phillip Pi said:
Hi.

Since I installed both 32-bit and 64-bit Vista Ultimate Edition on my old
test machine (ASUS K8V SE Deluxe, Athlon 64 3200+ [754 CPU], 512 MB of
RAM, SATA HDD, etc.), I notice the speeds are identical. I can't see and
feel any improvements. I did install the ATI Radeon 9600 AIW drivers to
help the video speed, but I just don't see the speed differences. Am I
expecting too much or missing something? I don't have any other program
installed so far. It's just a bare Vista with the latest ATI/AMD video
drivers from ati.com/amd.com.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Performance differences between what?

Phillip Pi said:
Are you saying if I had a dual core Athlon 64 939/AM2 setup, I would
notice the performance differences on the same box?



--
Phillip Pi
Senior Software Quality Assurance Analyst
ISP/Symantec Online Services, Consumer Business Unit
Symantec Corporation
www.symantec.com
Click to expand...
 
Phillip said:
Are you saying if I had a dual core Athlon 64 939/AM2 setup, I would
notice the performance differences on the same box?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure _why_ you expect to see a performance difference in the first
place.

Think of 64 bit as increasing the ability to carry heavier loads over longer
distances rather than increasing the ability to sprint for 100 metres.
 
Differences between 32-bit and 64-bit on the same 64-bit machine. I was
expecting 64-bit to be a bit smoother and faster.


Performance differences between what?
Click to expand...
--
Phillip Pi
Senior Software Quality Assurance Analyst
ISP/Symantec Online Services, Consumer Business Unit
Symantec Corporation
www.symantec.com
 
Ah. I thought the bits were for speeds. Nevermind then!


I'm not sure _why_ you expect to see a performance difference in the first
place.

Think of 64 bit as increasing the ability to carry heavier loads over longer
distances rather than increasing the ability to sprint for 100 metres.
Click to expand...
--
Phillip Pi
Senior Software Quality Assurance Analyst
ISP/Symantec Online Services, Consumer Business Unit
Symantec Corporation
www.symantec.com
 
A 64bit cpu us more efficient in running both x86 and x64 operating systems
than a 32bit cpu is. An x64 OS is more efficient where heavy memory
requirements come into play and you have added memory above what an x86 OS
can support. But it is the greater number of registers, larger caches, and
other architectual advances of the 64bit cpu's that matters, not so much the
code. That is not to say that code written to run 64bits natively won't
perform better than 32bit code; it will. You can see performance gains, but
not because the code is running faster.
 
If a 64 bit CPU can transfer data in 64 bit blocks instead of 32 bit blocks
I would certainly expect that any application such as the OD itself that
moves blocks data around to perform faster since it is the OS that moves the
data normally and not the application and therefore itg can be done with 1/2
of the number of move instructions being executed. Or course you would only
see this gain with applications or OS functions that move a lot of date
which certainly is not a lot of them.
 
So... gotta ask that stupid question... if'n I run VM's... and I do...
LOL... am I going to benefit from x64 with it's higher RAM ceiling in which
I could possibly run more VM's, even if the app is 32bit?

Lang
 
Of course. VPC and the memory mangager will handle it fine. The ram
allocation is a block of the host's memory but the 16bit or 32bit OS in the
vm has sees its own address space starting at zero.
 
Phillip said:
Ah. I thought the bits were for speeds. Nevermind then!
Click to expand...

The bit 'width' of a processor doesn't map directly to speed. It maps to how
much 'heavy lifting' of data it can do in one go, and this can lead to a
speed increase, but it isn't a direct and obvious mapping.
 
JW said:
If a 64 bit CPU can transfer data in 64 bit blocks instead of 32 bit blocks I would
certainly expect that any application such as the OD itself that moves blocks data
around to perform faster since it is the OS that moves the data normally and not
the application and therefore itg can be done with 1/2 of the number of move
instructions being executed. Or course you would only see this gain with
applications or OS functions that move a lot of date which certainly is not a lot
of them.
Click to expand...


If the OS is 32-bit, however, it will only use half of the moved data at a time. the
other 32-bits are "wasted" and the same number of fetches has to be done
whether the processor is 32- or 64-bit. If the OS is 64-bit, all the data is used
from every fetch. To get 64 bits using a 32-bit OS requires two reads of memory
The first read gets 64 bits but the OS can't use that and so uses only the low
32 bits and does another read to get the high 32 bits. A 64-bit OS, of course,
gets all 64 bits in one read.

Tom Lake
 
Back
Top