I will second Tim's comments on Windows 7. I love it. --------------------------- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation <http://www.secureworldfoundation.org> Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM, Tim Lider <[email protected]> wrote: > Duncan, > > I myself play World of Warcraft, Wrath of the Lich King on the 64-bit > system. You would think it would not matter, but it actually performs much > faster. As for those games you are playing you will see a performance > increase using a 64-bit OS, but only if the hardware supports it. > > As for 64-bit OS's I've used Windows XP, Windows Vista, Unbuntu, and even > Mac OS X. Out of them all I am partial to Windows 7. The GUI is much more > organized, The ability to use most XP software. Also, if you're having > issues with 16 bit software use Windows XP Virtual Machine to solve those > questions like I have for out in house Database here. > > For Drivers, everyone is making them now and Windows Vista 64-bit drivers > work in Windows 7. I have had no problem with any hardware so far, although > I have not connected a SCSI card as of yet to one. I have only connected > SATA, IDE and SAS devices to 64-bit Windows 7. > > I hope this shed some light on the 64-bit OS dilemma for you, > > Tim Lider > Sr. Data Recovery Specialist > Advanced Data Solutions, LLC > http://www.adv-data.com > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:hardware- > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of DSinc > > Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 10:33 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [H] More than 4GB of ram and VM question > > > > Tim, > > I will accept this view. But, only if you and I are/were playing the > > same game(s). Otherwise, I think this rationale leaks logic somewhat. > > The games I have and play are: > > MS FlightSim 2002 > > Serious Sam I and II > > The original Unreal > > Various older versions of Quake > > Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon > > Medal Of Honor Allied Assault Demo > > SimCity 2K > > SimCity 3K > > > > Notice that these are very old games! The newest 2 games I have are the > > last 2 games of the Tomb Raider series (from Chrystal Dynamics). These > > 2 > > games may be able to stretch my newer PC's hardware and 32bit-ness. > > > > Yes, I know I will eventually move to 64bit platforms; but, not before > > MS fully pulls support from XP. At the moment, 64bit does not seem to > > offer me tangible or needed benefits for my current "game" portfolio. > > Best, > > Duncan > > > > > > Tim Lider wrote: > > > Duncan, > > > > > > 64-bit is also great for gaming as well. I use it on my gaming > > machine and > > > it is awesome. The ability to access larger amounts of RAM and > > Larger > > > Volumes as well is a plus. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Tim Lider > > > Sr. Data Recovery Specialist > > > Advanced Data Solutions, LLC > > > http://www.adv-data.com > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: [email protected] [mailto:hardware- > > >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of DSinc > > >> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 5:36 PM > > >> To: [email protected] > > >> Subject: Re: [H] More than 4GB of ram and VM question > > >> > > >> Tim, > > >> In your "business" position I get this. Should you choose this > > position > > >> personally, that is fine. Please accept that there are many folk > > >> everywhere that just do NOT yet see the need for a 64-bit OS. JMHO. > > >> Best, > > >> Duncan > > >> > > >> > > >> Tim Lider wrote: > > >>> Hello all, > > >>> > > >>> Man explaining it and reading the explanation can make your brain > > >> hurt. > > >>> Let's just say for the original poster it's not enough and should > > >> upgrade to > > >>> 64-bit OS. > > >>> > > >>> Regards, > > >>> > > >>> Tim Lider > > >>> Sr. Data Recovery Specialist > > >>> Advanced Data Solutions, LLC > > >>> http://www.adv-data.com > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>> -----Original Message----- > > >>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:hardware- > > >>>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Greg Sevart > > >>>> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 12:24 PM > > >>>> To: [email protected] > > >>>> Subject: Re: [H] More than 4GB of ram and VM question > > >>>> > > >>>> It isn't as much of a mystery as people make it out to be. By > > >> default, > > >>>> on a > > >>>> 32-bit system with 4GB of RAM, 2GB is available for user space, > > and > > >> 2GB > > >>>> is > > >>>> reserved for exclusive use by the kernel--which would include > > kernel > > >>>> mode > > >>>> drivers. You are also correct in that some of this upper space is > > >>>> reduced by > > >>>> various system devices, some of which might not make much sense. > > The > > >>>> reason > > >>>> that systems differ is because of varying chipsets, their maximum > > >>>> addressable memory, the ability of the chipset and BIOS to remap > > >> memory > > >>>> above system-reserved spaces, and, of course, the devices > > installed. > > >>>> > > >>>> Using the /3GB switch will shift the division to 3GB of userland > > and > > >>>> 1GB of > > >>>> kernel memory, but keep in mind that each individual 32-bit > > address > > >>>> will > > >>>> still be limited to 2GB of memory unless it was compiled with > > >>>> LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE. It gets much more complicated when you're > > using > > >>>> PAE > > >>>> (Physical Address Extensions) and AWE (Address Windowing > > >> Extensions), > > >>>> but > > >>>> that realm is only relevant if you're running Server Enterprise or > > >>>> better. > > >>>> > > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > > >>>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:hardware- > > >>>>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Winterlight > > >>>>> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 1:00 PM > > >>>>> To: [email protected] > > >>>>> Subject: Re: [H] More than 4GB of ram and VM question > > >>>>> > > >>>>> This is not how I understand it to work, not that there seems to > > be > > >>>>> any kind of consensuses on this, but I read in Maximum PC that 32 > > >> bit > > >>>>> supports 4GB of RAM addressing. You start out with 4GB of RAM and > > >>>>> then windows starts knocking off for addresses already used by > > your > > >>>>> video card, your network card, whatever. This is why some people > > >> show > > >>>>> 3.2GB some, just 3GB. To add to the confusion, Maximum PC has > > >>>>> reported that MS has stated that windows can actually use some of > > >>>>> that undressed RAM for things such as drivers. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> At 07:24 AM 9/18/2009, you wrote: > > >>>>>> Hello Brian, > > >>>>>> 32-bit is really locked to 3GB of RAM, it's just Windows is > > >>>> reporting > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>> 3.6GB of RAM. > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >
