Windows 8 x86

Discussion in 'Windows 8' started by Nawzil, Jun 18, 2011.

?

Which one do you use?

  1. x86 (32 bit)

    33.8%
  2. x64 (64 bit)

    66.2%
  1. Nawzil

    Nawzil MDL Guru

    Jun 18, 2011
    2,206
    789
    90
    Yes, I agree with you.
     
  2. dummekuehe

    dummekuehe MDL Senior Member

    Jan 11, 2009
    494
    112
    10
    how about the f***ing developers start adjusting
    64bit can be a real pain in the ass
    there isn't even a decent 64bit browser
    or decent flash and that after years of 64bit windows
     
  3. Pegatron

    Pegatron MDL Member

    Jul 5, 2010
    143
    13
    10
    There is 64 bit Mozilla with 64 bit flash. Not as fast as Chromium, but who's benchmarking?
     
  4. Misaki2010

    Misaki2010 MDL Addicted

    Jul 14, 2009
    666
    382
    30
    I don't use it, 3 GB out of 4 GB are more than enough for me, everything works just perfect on my test machine and on my normal PC as well.
     
  5. Nawzil

    Nawzil MDL Guru

    Jun 18, 2011
    2,206
    789
    90
    I just thought of bringing this Poll back.
    Please vote.
     
  6. burfadel

    burfadel MDL EXE>MSP/CAB

    Aug 19, 2009
    2,627
    3,856
    90
    I don't use Windows 8 yet, but I do think its kind of pointless having a 32-bit version of Windows 8. Apart from those on here with old computers that can't run 64-bit, that get Windows for 'free', there really should be no call for it. You could argue that there are some very low end CPU's that aren't x64, but the only reason why they aren't x64 is because they are given the option not be be x64...

    Having an 32-bit version realistically serves no purpose and only results in the following:
    - Extra effort and cost for hardware vendors. They have to provide 32-bit and x64 drivers (they can't just provide 32-bit drivers). Not only extra cost for WHQL of the 32-bit version, but extra cost, time, and effort developing 32-bit drivers.
    - Microsoft has to support both 32-bit and x64 versions. Realistically if a 32-bit version isn't available people go x64, meaning the 'real' 32-bit requirement is extremely low. Takes support effort away for x64.
    - Evolution of programs is greatly hindered. If companies can get away with 32-bit they will, but if Windows is x64 only they are much more likely to make programs 64-bit.
    - Most people will be running a total of more than 4 GB worth of address space. They may have a 1GB video card meaning only 2.5GB for the system (kinda pointless), and since there are now 3GB video cards (Radeon HD7950/HD7970). You can almost guarantee that many that insist on x86 will either be very RAM limited, or complain they can't access their total RAM.
    - Even the most basic of basic low end computers should realistically be 64-bit compatible. RAM is so cheap now they should be running at least 4GB of RAM, any less they are really too crippled to make their cheapness worthwhile. To make use of that RAM, they need x64 Windows!
    - Several other reasons

    Excuses like drivers etc. are not excuses for having 32-bit Windows 8. Besides, you won't be able to use 32-bit XP drivers on it. Drivers that are Windows 8 compatible have to be 64-bit compatible. Any recentish software that isn't x64 compatible isn't worth running. The company that made it has no excuse not to have it x64 compatible, and if this really is a scenario their support sucks, so not worth using. Any ancient software could be run in 'emulation', like XP mode for Windows 7... of course, you can still use 32-bit apps on x64, and 16-bit apps can be run through an emulation layer. Those that say its impossible to run 16-bit dos apps on x64 obviously don't know about things like Dosbox.