Which version of SP1

  • Thread starter Thread starter doonboggle
  • Start date Start date
D

doonboggle

I have 2 computers. One has Vista Home Premium and the other has Ultimate.

Today, after being advised by Update that SP1 is available to me, I have
downloaded and saved both versions from the Microsoft site; 32 and 64.

BUT ... I really do not understand the difference between 32 and 64. To me
it seems like Vista should be Vista, like XP was XP.

Can someone please advise me which version of SP1 I need to put into my
individual Vista installations of Home Premium and then Ultimate.

Thanks
 
Please go to Start > Rt click on Computer > Properties. Look in the
"System" panel and you will see 32 or 64 - bit Operating System. That help?
 
The one I'm on now, with Ultimate, showed 32 bit. Does that mean I should
put the x86 version on ... since the other version (of SP1 downloads) shows
it as being X64?
Thanks
 
yes

--
Regards, BobF.
doonboggle said:
The one I'm on now, with Ultimate, showed 32 bit. Does that mean I should
put the x86 version on ... since the other version (of SP1 downloads)
shows
it as being X64?
Thanks
Click to expand...
 
Thank you. While I've got you 'on the line', can you advise of what the 2
different versions are, and why, for please. I have just plain ole simple
computers for 'old folks' ... like me and the wife.

--
doon


doonboggle said:
The one I'm on now, with Ultimate, showed 32 bit. Does that mean I should
put the x86 version on ... since the other version (of SP1 downloads) shows
it as being X64?
Thanks
Click to expand...
 
Well, short answer, 64 bit means a wider addressing space which offers
faster code execution and greater physical code space which reduces virtual
memory need for large programs like graphics. Glad you asked? This means,
runs faster. Most people don't notice the difference except under certain
circumstances. You will need some special drivers for it to be used and not
all application are set up to take advantage of it. I'd wait a while longer
if your thinking of a change unless you have a particular reason.
 
in other words... think of it as a 2-lane highway (32-bit) or 4-lane highway
(64-bit) it's double the bandwidth or data path as it were... thereby
handling more information simulatneously... per given compute cycle.

as the above mentioned, you have to obviously have the hardware and software
to support it.... for it to mount to a hill -o-beans.

hope that is a generic enough explanation...
 
While the 2-lane /4-lane analogy conveys the address bus improvement, keep
in mind:
A 4-lane highway needs more on/off-ramps and bigger parking lots for those
additional cars. The road is still the same length.

If you have more than one processor, but only one "combined" address or data
bus ( on/off ramps from the processors) going to one parking lot (memory)
then the processor may sit there waiting for something to do.

Things have been done such as raising the speed limit (front-side bus
speed), but there can still be traffic jams. And, the data still has to be
retrieved from memory (drive around the parking lot until you get to the
exit.)

The typical user will see no improvement using 64-bit over 32-bit.
But, it is the future, it's stable, and it is well supported. I have not run
into a single program that would not run on 64-bit. Nor, have I run into a
piece of hardware that wasn't supported by a driver. I am not as seasoned at
64-bit as some, but have had zero issues with it for the last year and
one-half.

Don't think of it as faster. It's restructured to handle future upgrades.
(Subtely, that means that 32-bit is becoming obsolete and will cause
problems in the future, kind of like 16-bit is causing "some" problems now.
And, 8-bit, which was once the high-tech forerunner is now only seen between
hardware components, although still very commonly used.)

Troy said:
in other words... think of it as a 2-lane highway (32-bit) or 4-lane highway
(64-bit) it's double the bandwidth or data path as it were... thereby
handling more information simulatneously... per given compute cycle.

as the above mentioned, you have to obviously have the hardware and software
to support it.... for it to mount to a hill -o-beans.

hope that is a generic enough explanation...
Click to expand...
 
Back
Top