Windows 7 64bit or 32bit what ones better

just wondering what ones better for gaming

geek_morganm8656, May 30, 8:35 am

64bit for the simple reason that 32bit is limited to 3GB Ram.and 64bit ISNT'.

geek_drcspy, May 30, 8:38 am

64bit . because it is double 32 bit!

geek_gibler, May 30, 8:39 am

Not for gaming it isn't, very few games that are 64-bit if any, and why would you multi-task them!Wouldn't make a spot of difference I wouldn't have thought.

geek_tillsbury, May 30, 8:46 am

64-bit, unless you have an old device (eg printer) that there are no 64-bit drivers for, or run really old 16-bit software, that won't run on 64-bit. 64-bit can use more RAM too.

geek_ruderger, May 30, 9:15 am

who said anything about multitasking.
anyway virtually all cpu's are multicore now

geek_drcspy, May 30, 9:43 am

ROFL, 64bit handles multithreaded applications (games and 2d software alike) better than 32bit. Whether the games themselves are 64bit is irrelevant, a lot of recently released games are multithreaded, and nearly every new title forthwith will be. Where does multitasking fit into the equation!

geek_lostdude, May 30, 10:02 am

There is no point in getting 32b unless you do not have 64b hardware or you have a specific requirement to run legacy hard/software that absolutely will not run on 64b (x64 is backwards compatible and 99.9% of programs will not have an issue).
Most newer software is written to take advantage (=better performance) of a 64b environment. You can run 32b software in a 64b system but you can't run 64b software in a 32b system.
Chances are you'll never ever notice the difference - but 32b technology is old, 64b is current. Soon it'll probably be 128b then 256b. Why bother sticking with the old!
I never fully understood why 7 was even released in 32b. It just causes confusion. The 16b to 32b changeover was never dragged so far.

geek_oclaf, May 30, 11:32 am

Thanks for he help dudes just wonder if these gaming pc parts fit together nicely

Mobo asrock extreme 3 gen3
Cpu I5 2500k
Hdd 2 tb
Xilence 600w gaming edition psu
16gb ram
Gtx 560ti twin frozr 2
Windows 7 ultimate 64 (the reason i was asking about 64 nd 32
I have these parts at home but havent put together yet
Also need a case

geek_morganm8656, May 30, 8:55 pm

you have 16GB of ram, its a no brainer. 64bit os.

geek_ross1970, May 30, 9:02 pm

Sweet thanks will this build be great for bf3 cod and stuff

geek_morganm8656, May 30, 10:21 pm

SSD!

geek_henry284, May 30, 10:45 pm

Why bother paying all that extra for windows 7 ultimate! Home premium is all you need.
Also Asrocks are not generally known to be good boards.

geek_oclaf, May 30, 10:49 pm

They are generally known to have underwhelming build quality & sometimes performance, as for reliability they are right up there with the top dogs.

geek_lostdude, May 30, 11:08 pm

Ssd what On earth i have a mechanical hardrive

geek_morganm8656, May 30, 11:14 pm

What are you on about asrock mobos are primo as they were apart Of asus

geek_morganm8656, May 30, 11:15 pm

Yes, they are Asus' low budget division.

geek_lostdude, May 30, 11:18 pm

You know, it's kinda hard to determine who you're commenting towards without quoting them.

geek_lostdude, May 30, 11:19 pm

Uh huh well im using my ipod for this so its kinda hard

geek_morganm8656, May 30, 11:20 pm

Pick one. You can't have both.

And again. Why windows 7 ultimate!

geek_oclaf, May 31, 12:54 am

Well why not its my build.

geek_morganm8656, May 31, 7:24 am

good if its free otherwise superfluous

geek_drcspy, May 31, 7:30 am


Because you have no idea why you need it. Ultimate is one of those things the operate on the "if you don't know why you need it, you certainly don't need it" rule. Its a considerably more expensive than home premium and all you really get for that extra money is few extra networking tools and other professional functions that you would never ever need in a consumer home environment. But you're probably pirating it aren't you.

One last thing. I know you have no idea what an SSD is, but Google it. They are that magical part that make sub 20 second boot times possible. They are an absolute prerequisite to any new build, especially gaming. Your build is absolutely wasted without one. Cut off ultimate and put the savings to a 128 or 256 SSD.

geek_oclaf, May 31, 8:17 am

,+1

geek_drcspy, May 31, 9:01 am

I never could quite understand the whole hype about the system booting up ten seconds faster - but as far as gaming goes, loading a map before anyone else. well. most others. well. a few gamers who still don't have SSD does have it's advantages. Along with not waiting in between area changes in other games and so on, so an SSD is a big plus in that respect.

geek_volkier, May 31, 9:08 am

yeh a few seconds faster on boot isn't really the issue it IS indicative of MUCH faster read/write speeds on teh SSD tho and that's good

geek_drcspy, May 31, 9:18 am

I looked into getting an SSD, but the market is so fractured by bull**** and conflicting reviews decided to forgo it.Some struggle to compete with disks and rely on compression to improve the appearance of their speeds.
Don't rush out and buy something just because it says 'SSD' on the box.

geek_cybertao, May 31, 9:25 am

really, my Ivy bridge pc boots under 20 secs without an ssd .
"absolute prereq" = not really, but would be nice to have.

geek_ross1970, May 31, 10:53 am

an ssd is a solid state drive and i know what they are and i have no intention of using one because i dont really care about how fast my op can boot up or how fast my games load

geek_morganm8656, May 31, 11:27 am

This guy:
1. Buying 16gb of ram, an overclockable CPU and a high range GPU to play games

2. Not buying an SSD because he doesn't care how fast his games run.

3.!

4. Profit!

geek_wellystretch, May 31, 11:35 am

Also I can play BF3 on med-high on my $800 laptop, so you kind of went overkill there, not to mention you have absolutely no use for 16gb of RAM if all you will be doing is gaming on it.

geek_wellystretch, May 31, 11:40 am

Load and run are not the same thing.

SSDs aren't really worthwhile for gaming anyway as they're simply too expensive to get in large enough capacities

geek_vtecintegra, May 31, 5:28 pm

Ok true. They do read/write a lot faster though. Why would you need a large capacity SSD for gaming anyway! Don't most people have a small but very fast drive for program files and OS, and put media onto their larger drives!

geek_wellystretch, May 31, 5:59 pm

Because most gamers Steam folders are measured in hundreds of gigabytes. Mine is 200 or and I only have a small fraction of my library installed

Sure you could keep that on a mechanical disk, but it kind of defeats the purpose of installing an SSD

geek_vtecintegra, May 31, 6:01 pm

Because you would get an SSD with the intention of putting the games on the SSD. Most modern games are well over 10Gb in size, BEFORE patches and mods. To be fair though, this is where most gamers compromise and get something like a 128 or a 256Gb SSD, and are simply picky as to what games they would put on the SSD, and what games don't take priority on load-times.

EDIT: Oh and what the above post said - a lot of modern games have jumped onto the 'online manager' bandwagon, meaning that things like all steam content would need to be on a single drive if you want to avoid nuisance errors.

geek_volkier, May 31, 6:34 pm

Oh. Finally somebody who gets me

geek_morganm8656, May 31, 6:35 pm