Company Question? Windows xp or xp 64

**pbmedia** · 10-13-2009, 07:30 PM

At the company I work for, they are building me a computer from scratch, all of our software is working on the 32 bit platform, but this IT guy we have here is wanting to build it on the xp 64 bit platform, which I have heard has a lot of compatibility issues with programs. Should I tell them to stop and install my own xp software so as to not run into any problems or do you think I should continue and try the xp 64 which is in my mind something that is not really necessary for me at the moment?

**NullPointer** · 10-13-2009, 08:00 PM

I ran xp64 bit on an older computer of mine and I didn't have any compatibility issues. Right now I'm running vista 64-bit (soon to be 7 64-bit) and everything is fine. In short, any 64-bit version of windows should have no trouble running 32-bit software (with the occasional exception).

However, the only reason you would need (currently) to use a 64-bit OS would be memory. A memory address in a 32-bit system consists of 32 bits. This means that you can only have 2^32 (roughly four billion) addresses (ie 4GB of memory). 2^64 is a much larger number than 2^32 so a 64-bit system isn't going to have the memory barrier of a 32-bit system.

So when you decide on whether or not you need a 64-bit OS think about how much RAM your computer has. 4GB or more and you should go with 64-bit. Anything less and 32-bit will do.

**~ServerPoint~** · 10-14-2009, 05:05 AM

That worth to test that firstly and then install for the business

**MDwebdev85** · 10-15-2009, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pbmedia

At the company I work for, they are building me a computer from scratch, all of our software is working on the 32 bit platform, but this IT guy we have here is wanting to build it on the xp 64 bit platform, which I have heard has a lot of compatibility issues with programs. Should I tell them to stop and install my own xp software so as to not run into any problems or do you think I should continue and try the xp 64 which is in my mind something that is not really necessary for me at the moment?

What is his title & what exactly does he do? What is his "valid" reason for wanting to use a 64 bit architecture? I'm assuming since your company is building it, that its a company machine? The facts that NullPointer mentioned would be valid reasons...ie memory. I doubt you will have any compatibility issues with software as most things are backwards compatible, not the other way around if they require 64 bit. Now, if you are using some types of corporate deployed software...some agents etc my have issues. Agents meaning, like Shavlik agents, Landesk agents, vpn clients etc.

**rumsfo** · 10-16-2009, 05:08 AM

I assume you are on the right way - go with XP 64

**Hosting24** · 10-19-2009, 08:24 AM

As far I know, XP64 can run all 32bit programs designed for "normal" operating systems, so you should have no problems using XP64. And if some of programs are optimized for 64bit platforms, you may see increase in performance.

**weker** · 10:32 PM

I'll go with xp 64 because of the unlimited (almost) memory your PC can support. Like the NullPointer said 4GB is the max you get on 32 bit processor/system.

**Hosting24** · 10-20-2009, 05:11 AM

Well, I don't think many old computers (who still have XP running) use more than 4 GB of memory.

**shoaaib** · 10-21-2009, 10:01 AM

I have used xp 64 and I think there are not much compatibility issues (except drivers) and if that IT guy is building your computer from scratch then you should not worry.

**airforce1** · 10-21-2009, 10:13 AM

It all depends in my own opinion. If your application software are designed to be used on 64bit system then you a 64bit windows XP would benefit you more.

**chrishirst** · 10-21-2009, 10:20 AM

Why are they not looking at rolling out Windows 7? Which is STREETS ahead of XP in stability and speed. We'll not mention Vista at all.

Mainstream support for XP has ended so there will be no more updates or service packs released unless you have a paid contract with MS.

**Hosting24** · 10-21-2009, 10:36 AM

XP has much lower system requirements, and it might be the main thing.

**chrishirst** · 10-21-2009, 10:43 AM

Sure, but Windows 7 actually runs faster than XP does on the same hardware.

**thegillion** · 10-25-2009, 12:21 AM

Right now i am running 64-bit 7 pro and everything is running great alot better then 64-bit vista. it had alot of video and chipset driver errors. But did a fresh install of windows 7 64-bit thinks to my collage. Drives work out of the box no need for a install. I did install nivida drivers to get overclocking on my MSI N260GTX.

**Hosting24** · 10-26-2009, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrishirst

Sure, but Windows 7 actually runs faster than XP does on the same hardware.

Correct. But let's say this person has oldschool hardware (like Pentium III, 256 MB of RAM, etc.). I believe XP still works faster than Win7 on old computers.

If we talk about new hardware, then Win7 delivers great performance.

**chrishirst** · 10-26-2009, 07:09 AM

Windows XP would run like a 3 legged pig on that spec.

Windows 2000 would give the best performance on something like that.

AND just in case you missed it

Quote:

from first post
At the company I work for, they are building me a computer from scratch,

Somehows that rules out the idea that it might be "older spec hardware"!!

**Brent2** · 11-12-2009, 06:29 AM

My experience with XP 64 has been horrific, though XP 32 worked nearly flawlessly. I use Windows 7, 64 bit now and it's pretty incredible.

If you want/need the speed increases that come with 64 or need more than 3.5 gigs of RAM, go Win7 - 64. Otherwise use regular XP. Don't touch XP 64.