Any Comments About Win XP 64 Bit

Pratyush-Gaurav

Did anybody try Microsoft Windows XP 64 Edition.
How does it perform with AMD Athlon 64 processors.

Jimborae

I've got it installed but have'nt had time to play around with it much. It seems very similar to normal windows XP.

Tex

You don't see that much real life differance. I have four AMD64 systems. I dual booted a couple of them with 64bit XP.

Tex

citrixmeta

well, you wont see any diff yet, until we get some 64 bit apps released.

check out this article.
http://forums.pcper.com/showthread.php?p=2909176#post2909176

hell even better, benchmark it urself

http://www.panoramafactory.com/pfactory64.html

Tex

I think a lot of people expected huge gains in the OS responsiveness with it and the drivers being 64bit. The final release may also be slightly more optimized but the 64bit apps will be the key. Without them there isnt gonna be a huge advantage. I need Oracle to get their database apps released for AMD 64 systems.

Tex

MediaMan

citrixmeta wrote:

well, you wont see any diff yet, until we get some 64 bit apps released.

check out this article.
http://forums.pcper.com/showthread.php?p=2909176#post2909176

hell even better, benchmark it urself

http://www.panoramafactory.com/pfactory64.html

AMD sent me the program for an article. More to follow.

Thrax

XViD and DiVX encoding is showing a 50% gain.

RWB

I still have my XP64 disk, I got it when it was first introduced, has anything changed? Last I installed it was months ago, and I couldn't get any updates from microsoft, nor were there any drivers out for anything... is it worth giving a second try?

Tex

depends on what you need drivers for. It has some things like thrax mentioned that can show serious gains. But in general you will not feel any extra snappiness or speed over 32bit XP. And the lack of drivers still may be enough of a frustration to make you hold off if its your only PC. I have four amd64 systems in my house so I can alwasy balance 32bit versions with some dual booting into 64bit XP for testing. So when I don't have drivers for say my HP psc2210 thats a combo color printer/scanner/copier/fax then it obviously gets hung off a 32bit version. Where as the HP 4 laser can readily move to the 64bit version.

So it depneds on what you do and what your expectations are for the OS as well as what hardware your using.

Tex

lje777

I do have it running on a Gigabyte GA-K8N Pro -- but ITE Raid doesn't work, but I am running SATA raid. It is not very useful yet -- as I have no printer drivers at all at this point. It seems like it will be fine once drivers are produced, released and perfected. Powerquest Drive image 7.0 CONSOLE does not run in WINDOWS -- but you can restore files using the image browser. MS office works fine and haven't tried much else yet.

harmroest

Tex wrote:

You don't see that much real life differance. I have four AMD64 systems. I dual booted a couple of them with 64bit XP.

Tex

How did u get windows xp 64?

Tex

You go to the microsoft site and download it.

harmroest

Tex wrote:

You go to the microsoft site and download it.

but that version suckz big time, not compatable with a lot of drivers and stuff and still a lot of bugs, i hoped somebody would have a official version thats not for the itaniun computers :S

Tex

By the nature of the siimple fact that it requires 64bit drivers other hardware manufacturers will have to create the needed drivers not MS. Its not ever going to get compatible with 32bit drivers. They have maintained its NEVER going to be a retail version. OEM only. So Dell/HP etc... will sell it in a package with a worksattion and they will fill in the needed drivers for their own platforms. Did you try the recently posted 64bit version? They have had several differant versions available. Thats why its a beta. They fix and add things and throw a new version out for download.

Tex

harmroest

Tex wrote:

By the nature of the siimple fact that it requires 64bit drivers other hardware manufacturers will have to create the needed drivers not MS. Its not ever going to get compatible with 32bit drivers. They have maintained its NEVER going to be a retail version. OEM only. So Dell/HP etc... will sell it in a package with a worksattion and they will fill in the needed drivers for their own platforms. Did you try the recently posted 64bit version? They have had several differant versions available. Thats why its a beta. They fix and add things and throw a new version out for download.

Tex

thats true but i also know that u can get this oem version even with only buying a cable so thats not the problem but i cant find any sellers, and i tryed a lot of versions but the dont work with my comp :S

harmroest

btw i bought the 3800+ recently but now i am sorry for my choice because i cant use all my cpu power because imcompatabillty or do u guys think different about that?

Tex

You can't get this oem version period. It had never been released. It's beta.

And no you will not be able to buy it when it is according to MS.

You can get 32bit oem's in goofy deals with a cable. But Microsoft handles the support.

But not 64bit oems including the released itanium. Its not available through the same channels. Everybody and their dog can build a 32bit computer to run XP. So there are tons of OEM versions floating around cheap. MS has mainatained they do not want to provide the support for the 64bit versions and wants the OEM's to do it and only they will have it. And to meet MS's idea of being capable for support only major OEM's will have it and it will be two to three times as expensive.

And you can't call up HP and say you want a printer cable, a box of paper and "Oh Yeah" throw in a 64bit version of win xp for an Itanium either. There will be a few leaked into a grey market but you won't be able to get support either.

Tex

Shorty

harmroest wrote:

btw i bought the 3800+ recently but now i am sorry for my choice because i cant use all my cpu power because imcompatabillty or do u guys think different about that?

Here's where it stacks up

Your 3800+ processor will work VERY well under standard Windows XP 32-bit. It's performance will almost be on par with the FX-53 processor and that can eat even an Intel "extreme edition".

Performance isn't an issue with your setup

The 64-bit version you have tried is buggy, lacks proper optimised driver support. Of course it's going to be nasty, it's a beta for a product that still has some development to do from both microsoft AND manufacturers.

Even when the 64bit OS is ready with optimised solid drivers from all parties, without the apps compiled to work on it, some people may still remain dissapointed..

The 64bit OS isn't all that though. The shear 32bit performance of the 64bit processor family outstrips it's nearest competitor in almost anything. Don't let the 64bit OS argument cloud your mind into thinking that the A64 platform is poor or restrained because of no native 64bit OS. It certainly isn't

Finally.. the itanium version of just for itanium, it's also a real dog. I've seen it running on an itanium system Yuck.

Tex

harmroest wrote:

btw i bought the 3800+ recently but now i am sorry for my choice because i cant use all my cpu power because imcompatabillty or do u guys think different about that?

With out 64bit applications it doesnt matter squat having a 64bit OS. Thats why they didnt intend to release it retail. They envision it for specialized applications like a workstation. Without apps it doesnt matter much in real life.

Tex

lje777

There are or were TWO Xp 64 bit AMD versions. First was "Microsoft Windows XP 64-Bit Edition" and the newest is "Windows XP Professional x64 Edition" -t the pro version is labelled 'pre-release' -- ie: Beta, the older was labelled 'evaluation'

The Pro version (order CD for shipping cost or download as avove) DOES have SOME drivers. It is useful for me as both Ethernet and A printer driver are there that works w/ my system. I print with a Conon i860 using a different Canon driver from the CD.

It is nice -- and I could use it regularly if I just install my other programs tto it since so far -- alll my 32-bit programs run on it.

harmroest

Tex wrote:

With out 64bit applications it doesnt matter squat having a 64bit OS. Thats why they didnt intend to release it retail. They envision it for specialized applications like a workstation. Without apps it doesnt matter much in real life.

Tex

This is what i mean i could have bought a much cheaper pentium and have even more speed with 32 bit os right?

so is spended a lot of money on something that still in developping stage, and whats not really supported yet :bawling:

Shorty

Yep. Tex nailed it there

But if you want proof that the 64bit processor is a monster under 32bit Windows XP...

http://www.short-media.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20941

Check out my unoptimised Athlon 64 3200+ 3dMark2005 score of 4870 .. which crushes a DUAL Xeon 2.8GHZ setup score of 3834 (same graphics card - 6800GT).

harmroest

lje777 wrote:

There are or were TWO Xp 64 bit AMD versions. First was "Microsoft Windows XP 64-Bit Edition" and the newest is "Windows XP Professional x64 Edition" -t the pro version is labelled 'pre-release' -- ie: Beta, the older was labelled 'evaluation'

The Pro version (order CD for shipping cost or download as avove) DOES have SOME drivers. It is useful for me as both Ethernet and A printer driver are there that works w/ my system. I print with a Conon i860 using a different Canon driver from the CD.

It is nice -- and I could use it regularly if I just install my other programs tto it since so far -- alll my 32-bit programs run on it.

yeah oke, but it doesnt all the hardware my comp/mobo has :S so thats why i hoped there would be a solution

Shorty

harmroest wrote:

This is what i mean i could have bought a much cheaper pentium and have even more speed with 32 bit os right?

so is spended a lot of money on something that still in developping stage, and whats not really supported yet :bawling:

No.

A64 is proven to be faster than the Intel equivilant. See my last post above this one for conclusive proof where a 2ghz Athlon 64 single processor slaughtered a dual Intel XEON 2.8ghz.

64-bitter

Runs really fast and well on an old Intel 945 P dual 2.6G board, but finding drivers is really a bear. Been trying to find one for the ethernet interface for about a week now to no avail, am ready to just install a new 64 bit NIC.