Windows 8 CP - 32 or 64 bit with a 2GB system

R

Raxiel

Gawd
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
519
I'm trying out W8 on my Fiancé's old HP laptop, I installed 64 bit, but i'm wondering if I should try it with 32 bit.

The laptop only has 2GB of memory and isn't likely to ever be upgraded beyond that. 64 seems to work pretty well, but are there any advantages over 32 other than the memory limit?

I need to wipe it and re-install it again anyway, with the lower requirements of 32 bit, would it work any better with such a small amount of system RAM?

Anyone compared the two? Suggestions? Comments?
 
If you have 2GB of less memory on a computer, I recommend 32 bit OS.

1- 64 bit OS uses more memory than 32 bit OS
2 - 64 bit OS has a larger footprint on the disk than 32 bit OS
3 - 32 bit OS is more compatible in some cases than a 64 bit OS
 
I'm running 64-bit Win7 and Win8 Developer Preview in VM with 64-bit Linux as host. They both run fine with 512MB and 1GB memory.
 
It costs less than a nice meal for two to upgrade to 4 gigs of RAM or more. I'd go with 64 bit.
 
Tawnos said:
It costs less than a nice meal for two to upgrade to 4 gigs of RAM or more. I'd go with 64 bit.
Click to expand...

I'd rather have a meal for two. It's not worth it, its just a testing platform because we don't use it any more. Already have 2 desktops and another laptop with 20gb between them.

Thanks all for the advice, went with 32bit on the laptop and 64 bit on a spare partition on my desktop. 32 bit does indeed take less memory and disk space, and performance wise is just as quick so far (it actually installed significantly faster too, although this was on a blank partition, rather than one that had an existing vista install to be moved to windows.old)
 
Jon55 said:
I hope the next version of Windows is 64-bit only.
Click to expand...

Not unless we decide to break compatibility with vista/7/8 - currently if it was logo'd for one, it runs them all. That includes 32-bit only Atom processors.
 
bigdogchris said:
If you have 2GB of less memory on a computer, I recommend 32 bit OS.

1- 64 bit OS uses more memory than 32 bit OS
2 - 64 bit OS has a larger footprint on the disk than 32 bit OS
3 - 32 bit OS is more compatible in some cases than a 64 bit OS
Click to expand...

#3 - let me know what, this day in age seems very few things dont work on 64bit and if they dont they are probably such old legacy devices anyways that you shouldnt be running a modern day OS on your system.


#1 and #2 how much? i hear people say this often but no one has real numbers to show....more for #1 in that 64bit uses more ram...
 
MrGuvernment said:
#3 - let me know what, this day in age seems very few things dont work on 64bit and if they dont they are probably such old legacy devices anyways that you shouldnt be running a modern day OS on your system.


#1 and #2 how much? i hear people say this often but no one has real numbers to show....more for #1 in that 64bit uses more ram...
Click to expand...

Well, a fresh install of 32 bit on the laptop was about 10gb, 64bit on the desktop was about 16*. 4gb isn't exactly earthshattering these days, but its there.

* (this was after installing over an xp 'backup' partition, after windows.old was deleted, there were no other programs installed)
Ram, I'll check exact numbers once I have time.
 
Jon55 said:
I hope the next version of Windows is 64-bit only.
Click to expand...

Not a lot of tablets would run 64-bit Windows, and this is a major target for this edition. Sure, there are ARM tablets and an WOA, but there are going to be a lot of x86 powered tablets, too.
 
MrGuvernment said:
#3 - let me know what, this day in age seems very few things dont work on 64bit and if they dont they are probably such old legacy devices anyways that you shouldnt be running a modern day OS on your system.
Click to expand...
Your right, I'm speaking mostly of legacy applications, which in some cases cannot be replace. We also just implemented a new application that does not run on 64 bit. Unfortunately it was our only choice. Point is, how many applications are 64 bit only? None that I am aware of. What that equals is that 32 bit is more compatible in some cases, like I mentioned.
#1 and #2 how much? i hear people say this often but no one has real numbers to show....more for #1 in that 64bit uses more ram...
Click to expand...
Disk space can be a few more GB. For memory, not a lot more, but the requirements are higher for 64 bit for a reason.
 
Raxiel said:
Well, a fresh install of 32 bit on the laptop was about 10gb, 64bit on the desktop was about 16*. 4gb isn't exactly earthshattering these days, but its there.

* (this was after installing over an xp 'backup' partition, after windows.old was deleted, there were no other programs installed)
Ram, I'll check exact numbers once I have time.
Click to expand...

Have a .vdi image of a vanilla windows 8 64bit install drive here. It's 9.33GB. The backup partition will probably have a load of extra crap/leftovers.
 
Ur_Mom said:
Not a lot of tablets would run 64-bit Windows, and this is a major target for this edition. Sure, there are ARM tablets and an WOA, but there are going to be a lot of x86 powered tablets, too.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, almost all tablets are running 64-bit.
 
DeathPrincess said:
Have a .vdi image of a vanilla windows 8 64bit install drive here. It's 9.33GB. The backup partition will probably have a load of extra crap/leftovers.
Click to expand...

Well that's that then. Its also hard to Identify if it uses less system ram, since like 7 it will expand to fill the ram that's there, and I'm afraid I don't have the patience to reinstall the 64 bit version a second time on the laptop to compare.
 
Unless you're short on disk space, no need to bother with 32 bit. I installed the x64 version on a friends old Dell laptop and its a lot faster than Windows 7 home premium 32 bits, for a few gigs disk penalty. To be honest I was lazy and since I only had x64 on my usb key, that's what I used :)
 
I got 2gb of ram ,Installed the x64. Was using xp before. Let's just say everything loads faster.
Even games.

Can't say compared to windows 7....
 
DeathPrincess said:
Have a .vdi image of a vanilla windows 8 64bit install drive here. It's 9.33GB. The backup partition will probably have a load of extra crap/leftovers.
Click to expand...

Just done a full reinstall on a new disk with windows 7 on the primary partition and 8 on a fresh second partition, and it's still using about 16gb of its 30gb partition with nothing but updates and MSE. I assume some of it is the pagefile, but like for like 64 bit does seem to use more space than 32 bit.

Of course a few gb isn't a lot these days, but on a 120gb ssd its more noticable than a 2tb mechanical drive (not that i'd use 32 bit on a system with 12gb ram of course). If you were building some sort of specialised embeded system with less than 4gb of ram then 32 bit could probably make sense, you might even be able to run it off a 16gb compact flash card.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top