How can I tell if my OS Vista is 32-bit or 64-bit

Is your PC still under warranty? If it is, then they will send you a copy of 64 for free.

I got it!

I have 32-bit

How can I get 64-bit?

Would DELL give it to me?

 

Thanks

One of the main difference is that 32bit can only recognise 2.8~3.5GB but 64bit can recognise upto 128GB(i believe) of RAM.

Sorry to be the OT douche, but what is the difference between 32-bit and 64-bit??

A description of the differences between 32-bit versions of Windows Vista and 64-bit versions of Windows Vista

 

  One of the greatest advantages of using a 64-bit version of Windows Vista is the ability to access physical memory (RAM) that is above the 4-gigabyte (GB) range. This physical memory is not addressable by 32-bit versions of Windows Vista.

  Depending on the version of Windows Vista that is installed, a 64-bit version of Windows Vista supports from 1 GB of RAM to more than 128 GB of RAM. The ability to address more physical memory lets Windows Vista minimize the time that is required to swap processes in and out of physical memory. Therefore, Windows Vista can manage processes more efficiently. This memory management feature helps improve the overall performance of Windows Vista.

 

 

32 Bit

• All 32-bit versions of Windows Vista can access up to 4 GB of RAM.

 

64 Bit

• Windows Vista Home Basic - 8 GB of RAM
• Windows Vista Home Premium - 16 GB of RAM
• Windows Vista Business - 128 GB of RAM or more
• Windows Vista Enterprise - 128 GB of RAM or more
• Windows Vista Ultimate - 128 GB of RAM or more 

Kernel Patch Protection - 64 Bit Only

 

  This feature is available in 64-bit versions of Windows Vista. Kernel Patch Protection helps prevent a malicious program from updating the Windows Vista kernel. This feature works by helping to prevent a kernel-mode driver from extending or replacing other kernel services. Also, this feature helps prevent third-party programs from updating (patching) any part of the kernel.

 

 

 

The above is excerpts from the above link. I know that my system funtions up to 300% better using Vista x64 than it did with x86; and I'm using the same hardware!

---

Xelkos wrote: I know that my system funtions up to 300% better using Vista x64 than it did with x86; and I'm using the same hardware!

---

I also use x64 bit Vista, and can agree with the performance increase that Xelkos mentioned.

 

While I cannot verify the 300% increase, my system is noticably faster and more responsive.

 

My only issue is that I have OS corruption with the x64 bit version just as I had with the x32 bit version.

 

I have to reinstall the OS every few weeks because of data corruption.

 

This, I believe, is not the fault of the OS, but the fault of the system.

 

If you can update to the x64 bit version, I would highly recommend it.

Hi,

 I have a dim 9200 still under warenty (extended) and phoned 4 different times and even after giving the Dell doc # giving auhorisation to sent the 64 bits disk they would not send it.

 

Claude

---

@beau511 wrote:

Hi,

 I have a dim 9200 still under warenty (extended) and phoned 4 different times and even after giving the Dell doc # giving auhorisation to sent the 64 bits disk they would not send it.

 

Claude

---

If you are in the US and still underwarranty Try a PM to Dell Chris_M 

 

Remember you system must have shipped with a version of Vista on it.

---

@hbk123 wrote:
I just upgraded and do not see a very big difference! I wander why, have i done something wrong??

---

 

Not sure if you did this, but to upgrade to x64 bit, you should do a reformat and a fresh install.

 

Just a thought.

  Personally, I would recommend installing to a new drive; should one not want to use the x64 version.

 

  Install to a new drive, and then copy over what is needed from the x86 install. Or use a program, such as Acronis True Image, and make an image of x86 to a new partition for later recovery if two hard drives is not an option. (There is a 15-day trial too.)

 

  Don't know why you did not notice a big performance change. Perhaps it was cause I was new to Vista x86 and had only used it for two weeks, then going to x64 the next week was a huge improvement. Wished our Inspiron 6000's could run Vista x64 now, but ours are single cores (1.5 GHz & 1.7 GHz).

---

@Xelkos wrote:

  Personally, I would recommend installing to a new drive; should one not want to use the x64 version.

 

  Install to a new drive, and then copy over what is needed from the x86 install. Or use a program, such as Acronis True Image, and make an image of x86 to a new partition for later recovery if two hard drives is not an option. (There is a 15-day trial too.)

 

  Don't know why you did not notice a big performance change. Perhaps it was cause I was new to Vista x86 and had only used it for two weeks, then going to x64 the next week was a huge improvement. Wished our Inspiron 6000's could run Vista x64 now, but ours are single cores (1.5 GHz & 1.7 GHz).

---

 

I agree with Xelkos, I always have a backup drive and format and installed x64 bit with a fresh install, then copy my other files to the x64 bit C: drive.

 

I noticed a marked increase in performance. So much so, that I would never go back to x32 bit.

 

Hope this helps.

---

@Hanspuppa wrote:

---

@Xelkos wrote:

  Personally, I would recommend installing to a new drive; should one not want to use the x64 version.

 

  Install to a new drive, and then copy over what is needed from the x86 install. Or use a program, such as Acronis True Image, and make an image of x86 to a new partition for later recovery if two hard drives is not an option. (There is a 15-day trial too.)

 

  Don't know why you did not notice a big performance change. Perhaps it was cause I was new to Vista x86 and had only used it for two weeks, then going to x64 the next week was a huge improvement. Wished our Inspiron 6000's could run Vista x64 now, but ours are single cores (1.5 GHz & 1.7 GHz).

---

 

I agree with Xelkos, I always have a backup drive and format and installed x64 bit with a fresh install, then copy my other files to the x64 bit C: drive.

 

I noticed a marked increase in performance. So much so, that I would never go back to x32 bit.

 

Hope this helps.

---

 

Yes i have installed 64bit on a seperate drive, what sort of differences so you notice?

hbk132 wrote:Yes i have installed 64bit on a seperate drive, what sort of differences so you notice?

---

 

The differences are, faster boot times, quicker response times when opening programs, NO CRASHES, BSOD, Hangups, faster video editing, DVD creation, overall stability,

 

To be fair, I must mention that the defragment of the hard drives does seem to be somewhat slower.

 

But it also seems that it is not needed as often.

 

If you went from x32 to x64 and did not notice an improvement, there must be an issue that you are not aware of.

 

Nearly everyone on this forum that has switched, has reported improvements in performance.

 

Hope this helps.

<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif] -->
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif] -->
classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif] -->
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif] -->

  The boot process and shutting down hasn't changed in speed; shutting down seems to be the slowest. Once the OS loads after using my password to log in, x64 loads rather quickly.

 

  Every application opens almost instantaneously in x64, where it took more time to load in x86. I play EverQuest 2 (online) and it is more stable. EQ2 always crashes though, always has in WinXP, in Vista x86, but not nearly as much in x64. I should reinstall the game and copy over my customizations some day.

 

  Word & Outlook I noticed right off, they flew open. I'm using Office 2003, Student Edition. Outlook used to load in 20 seconds, and Word was just slow. In x86 I did not see much of an improvement, but in x64 they flew open and were ready to use. Finally the applications are ready before I am, sure is a nice change of pace!

 

  Can run more applications at the same time and not notice that I have many opened, compared to x86 where the more applications loaded shows more system lag. I was not very impressed with x86 at all, and I was wishing I could install WinXP.

  My friend was saying, give it a few weeks, you might like it. I like Vista, although I heard the horror stories and propaganda. I was tolerating x86, and it was slowly growing on me. Went to x64 and it was like an entirely new experience all over again! Faster, Better, like the OS on Bionics! I really appreciated x64 Vista now, and I have only a Virtual PC version of WinXP in case I get need a reminder where I spent that last half a century using.

 

  I have the same equipment, same RAM, same video card, same everything. Vista x86 was okay. X64 is OUTSTANDING! That's the difference I see every day!

  Same gear, different OS, HUGE difference. Leaves me in awe when comparing the two OS’. I so wished I had the income to stick 8 GB of RAM in now.

 

 

 

Edit: Even the best spelling checkers make errors.

 

Question: Is Dell's main site script buggered? I haven't been able to load the main Dell site, and the 10 days of Deals. Tried IE7 and Firefox, and got scripting errors. Installed Opera and it sometimes runs, most the time is buggered too. I think it's Adobe's flash player being the culprit. - Even my WinXP Laptop shows Dell's site s being dysfunctional.- Virtual PC of WinXP shows Dell's site as having script bugs too.- What's going on with Dell?