DVA4468
Captain, B757-200
Joined on May 19 2007
Cincinnati, OH USA
68 legs, 123.2 hours
28 legs,
64.1 hours online 56 legs,
93.8 hours ACARS
|
Posted onPost created on
May 02 2008 11:14 ET by James Whipple
|
Hey all. sorry if this question has been asked, and i'm sure it has, but I couldn't find it. I'm currently running vista ultimate, but as many of you know there is a slight stability issue with vista. Playing many games, including FSX with active sky and fsinn open I have system crashes on a regular basis. To help you out here are some of my computer specs. amd64 5000+ , 2 gigs corsair ddr2 800 memory, msi k9n sli platinum motherboard, and duel nvidia 8800 gt oc 512 meg video cards in sli mode. Not the best system in the world, but 2 years ago when i put it together it was a screaming beast. anyway, my question is, i'm thinking about going back to win xp and setting up a duel boot system so that I can run my games, mostly fsx, on a more stable platform. i've never had stability issues with xp before, always ran really smooth. What would everyone recommend that I install, xp 32 bit or 64 bit? i'm not very familiar with xp 64bit. is it just as stable as the 32 bit version, am i going to run into driver compatibilty issues? i'm leaning towards just installing the 32 bit version mainly because i dont think i'm going to gain performance with fsx on a 64 bit platform since fsx is written in 32bit code. but that's why i'm looking for some input from some of you computer savy gents if some of you have some strong reasons to go with xp64 bit I may change my mind and install that instead. thanks for any of your answers, I appreciate the input.
James WhippleCaptain, B757-200
|
|
DVA917
Captain, B767-300
Joined on October 20 2002
Century Club
Online Century Club
Western Canada
184 legs, 385.6 hours
155 legs,
325.6 hours online 50 legs,
115.8 hours ACARS
|
Posted onPost created on
May 02 2008 16:55 ET by Glenn Blanco
|
Hi James,
You can only install a 64-bit version of XP/Vista if your processor supports it. If not, you're stuck with the 32-bit version. Now, seeing you're running AMD64, the only issue I'm seeing is what you mentioned - you will never get the full capability of the 64-bit version as FSX is coded in 32 bits. You also mentioned driver compatibility. This is something to check out. If your drivers are 32-bits, then you shouldn't have any problem. It just isn't using the full bit that the 64-bit is offering. The only problem would be if you are using a 64-bit driver on a 32-bit OS. LOL. Otherwise, you're good to go.
Also, before going the dual boot option, have you upgraded to SP1 for Vista? This fixes a lot of issues/bugs that have been reported since its release. AFAIK, FSX is coded to work best with Vista (as long as you disable the UAC).
With all that said, I still think 64 bit is the way to go as long as you can get enough support for it.
|
DVA4468
Captain, B757-200
Joined on May 19 2007
Cincinnati, OH USA
68 legs, 123.2 hours
28 legs,
64.1 hours online 56 legs,
93.8 hours ACARS
|
Posted onPost created on
May 02 2008 18:17 ET by James Whipple
|
Glenn,
Ty for the input. Yes I have upgraded to vist sp1, personally I haven't noticed much improvement. I disabled UAC as soon as I installed vista, what an annoying feature that is. I really like the vista layout, and I think it has the potential to be a great OS, but I haven't had as many crashes as I am now since the days of win 95 and 98. For everday activities such as e-mail, web browsing etc, I really don't have many issues, but when I push the limits of the os so to speak is when I begin to have system hangs, stuttering, blue screen of death and what not. Not really sure what the problem is, maybe an incompatible peice of hardware, or simply a hardware conflict or bios setting that i'm overlooking. I'm thinking of upgrading my motherboard to a newer board with the nvidia 590 chipset, i've been hearing those are a screaming board. My board was bought pre-vista release, it has the nvidea 570 chipset, and although it is "vista capable" i'm wondering if its just a little to outdated to really run vista smoothly. I had xp 32 bit installed on this system before I upgraded to vista, and it ran amazingly smooth and much faster, but as we know vista is a resource hog that will slow down the fastest machine, I personaly think microsoft should have recommended a minimum of 4 megs of ram instead of 2, I think that would speed things up rather nicely. anyway, ty again for your input, every little bit helps.
James WhippleCaptain, B757-200
|
|