XP x64 or Vista x64?

Discussion in 'OT Technology' started by themolsen, Dec 30, 2008.

  1. themolsen

    themolsen New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2006
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
    My build can be seen here: http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=7978688 plus a 7900GS overclocked and another 250gb hard drive

    I won't be doing much gaming, if any at all. My main uses are photo editing, some graphic design (logos, typefaces, non-3d), web design, music listening and composition, web browsing, pr0n.

    The idea of XP x64 being a little leaner appeals to me A LOT, but how is its stability....it's built on the server platform right?

    Thoughts? Why XP or why Vista?
     
  2. bowrofl

    bowrofl New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2005
    Messages:
    6,555
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, Canadia
    I've only used Vista x64 but I've read in a bunch of places on the internets (including here) that for some reason, Vista x64 > XP x64. It's more stable, possibly?

    Anyway, I'm running Vista x64 and I never have any problems with it.
     
  3. trouphaz

    trouphaz New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'd say Vista 64. If you're going 64-bit, you should have plenty of memory to run the OS which is really the main issue I've seen with Vista. As long as you give it enough memory, it runs fine. Just don't cheap out on memory and you'll be fine.
     
  4. themolsen

    themolsen New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2006
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
    4 gigs enough?
     
  5. trouphaz

    trouphaz New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    0
    it all depends on how much memory your apps need. just make sure you don't use all of the memory banks in your PC so you can add more if necessary. memory is cheap.
     
  6. rsxm5

    rsxm5 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2002
    Messages:
    2,961
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Vista 64 has been working well for me... XP 64 is a bit off... drivers suck for it for some reason
     
  7. 5Gen_Prelude

    5Gen_Prelude There might not be an "I" in the word "Team", but

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    14,519
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC, CANADA
    XP 64 was never fully supported - it was something they felt they had to do. They still haven't, and won't, release the latest SP for it.
     
  8. thebox

    thebox New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    45,695
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Seattle
    vista > xp
     
  9. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    As much as I dislike Vista's complete lack of any bang:buck ratio compared to XP, I have to say it runs pretty well on my brother's new tablet PC. Even with a 5400rpm hard drive, the 3GB of RAM and the AMD Turion X2 CPU he has cranks along pretty well. I guess it's not surprising, really, because that's how digital equipment works: either it's fast enough or it isn't.
     
  10. nucklearknight

    nucklearknight New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco, California
    Xp64 seems more like it was kind of like somebody's brain child and then got abandoned once he turned 18. I had it one one of my computers for about 4 days because it appeared to be less resource demanding. HUGE mistake.

    Go with Vista64. I have it with 4gb and I never run out of memory even with 20 apps open including photoshop, counterstrike, premiere, visual basic, firefox, etc.
     
  11. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's a shame, because I have so many spare XP64 licenses, and supposedly XP64 uses the 64-bit WS2003 kernel, which I have running on several servers and it's perfectly stable across 8 cores, 12GB of RAM, and over a dozen virtual machines.
     
  12. sleev

    sleev It's sleep, life, and death It's speed, coke, and

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    Messages:
    9,472
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    80130
    XP>Vista

    why? driver support

    if you don't have vista yet, just wait for windows 7.0
     
  13. DAN513

    DAN513 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Messages:
    10,087
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    204
    If you don't like all the extra visuals that vista offers over XP, you can just turn it off.
     
  14. 5Gen_Prelude

    5Gen_Prelude There might not be an "I" in the word "Team", but

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    14,519
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC, CANADA
    Way to read the thread.
     
  15. Hate Crime

    Hate Crime Don't Hate OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2006
    Messages:
    5,255
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Gotta give him some credit.. he saw XP and Vista in the title. :mamoru:
     
  16. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah, but that's not the point, is it? You can't turn off everything that Vista adds, yet virtually none of it is of any use to users, and you still have to pay extra for it. Why bother?

    Thus far, the only reason I've heard to bother is because Vista (supposedly) does 64-bit better than XP does, but that's hearsay as far as I know.
     
  17. Limp_Brisket

    Limp_Brisket New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    48,422
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Utah
    :uh:
     
  18. trouphaz

    trouphaz New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    0
    Vista isn't really more expensive than XP at this point if you know where to buy it or if it is included with a PC. I bought Vista for $99 at newegg and it is the same price for 64-bit version.

    XP-64 was always the red headed step child. i have no idea why you'd be running XP-64 in your environment when you probably should be running the actual server OS. yeah, it is great that it is built off of the Windows 2003 core, but you know what else is? Windows 2003.
     
  19. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am running WS2003 x64 on my servers. My point is that XP x64 uses the same kernel, so it can't be that bad. What is it that people really have that much trouble with?
     
  20. 5Gen_Prelude

    5Gen_Prelude There might not be an "I" in the word "Team", but

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2000
    Messages:
    14,519
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC, CANADA
    Same problem W2K3x64 has - drivers. We stopped installing it on our DC's because not all of our printers/copiers have 64 bit drivers.

    It's ME of the 2K/XP line.
     
  21. trouphaz

    trouphaz New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    0
    WS2003 x64 is fine in select situations. i wouldn't use it across the board simply for the whole driver issue, but if you have a large SQL database you may need to run a 64-bit OS for the memory availability. a desktop OS and a server OS have different needs. desktop OSes need to be more flexible to cover the whole vast array of different hardware that people may buy. for a server though, you are more likely to focus on buying hardware to suit the OS and not vice versa. with a desktop OS, the average user just expects that they can buy whatever video card, sound card, motherboard and printer and that it'll work. there are also a hell of a lot more apps that a user expects to run on their desktop that haven't all been given the same amount of testing as an enterprise application should.


    i'll be honest though, i still don't see the big interest in running a 64-bit OS on the desktop. people buy it so they can use all 4Gb of memory, but i still doubt that these users are going to actually use 4Gb of memory... or that they'll notice the difference between 3.5Gb and 4Gb. yeah, there are some theoretical advantages to running 64-bit, but the potential for running into something odd far outweighs the few little benefits (slightly better security, a supposed performance bump, the ability to access a huge amount of memory).
     
  22. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    I guess the driver problem could bite people in the ass if they buy cheap or old hardware, but that doesn't seem likely to be an issue anymore -- anything relatively current is going to have 64-bit driver support, and I'd consider it a big point against it if it didn't have 64-bit drivers at this point in time, because it's not like companies don't know about 64-bit users nowadays.

    Anyway, I like to use 64-bit whenever possible just because it's newer and more futureproof. It doesn't offer anything substantially different than 32-bit from the user's point of view, but at the same time it doesn't cost anything either, so I might as well make the switch.
     
  23. trouphaz

    trouphaz New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    0
    i'm still not sure what you're future proofing against. most likely you're going to need to upgrade your OS and your hardware before 64-bit matters. 64-bit XP was worthless to the average user and 64-bit Vista is only slightly better. at a bare minimum, it is going to be Windows 7 before anyone cares and i bet it'll be the next version before it really takes off.
     
  24. GammaRadiation

    GammaRadiation Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2007
    Messages:
    29,840
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Random Location.FL
    If you're doing 4 gigs, the fuck are you talking about 64 bit?
     
  25. GammaRadiation

    GammaRadiation Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2007
    Messages:
    29,840
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Random Location.FL
    If you want bang for buck, use linux.

    XP is outrageously priced now because of the dumb following the blind.

    90% of all consumer PCs are used for e-mail, web browsing, and word processing. Vista does that in a nice GUI and with a dual core processor and 2gb of ram, it runs along just fine.

    There ARE legit reasons to not use vista. But for the average consumers, the problems have been fixed. Aside from that, Vista is a stepping stone much like Win 98 or ME to Win2k and XP.
     

Share This Page