Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,799 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Quote:
The multitude of leaked Windows 7 builds have been quite revealing as to Microsoft's intentions with the upcoming OS, but as found out, they also contain info about another major software release, Office 14. Expected to arrive in 2010, the upcoming Office suite is 'exposed' by Windows 7's 'Easy Transfer' tool as having both a 32 and a 64bit version, the latter likely to make for an even speedier adoption of 64bit computing.

Currently, 32bit still rules supreme with both Windows XP and Vista but, with the help of Office 14, Windows 7 may just turn the tides so we'll see 64bit account for the majority of new PC installs.
http://www.tcmagazine.com/comments.php?id=25345&catid=3
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,985 Posts
they should just make win7 x64 only. Come on, it's time. All modern hardware is x64 ready, since athalon x64. If your pc is too old to run x64 u shouldnt be upgrading the os anyways as it will just be slow on any PC thats pre athalon x64 and some Pentium 4s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,686 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by sgdude
View Post

they should just make win7 x64 only. Come on, it's time. All modern hardware is x64 ready, since athalon x64. If your pc is too old to run x64 u shouldnt be upgrading the os anyways as it will just be slow on any PC thats pre athalon x64 and some Pentium 4s.

Whats interesting is that the first "64 bit" athlons are actually only 40 bits wide and not 64. Even the Barcelona's from the PhI lineup are 48bits wide (i think?). I'm not sure any processor has fully implemented 64bit yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
591 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by voice
View Post

Whats interesting is that the first "64 bit" athlons are actually only 40 bits wide and not 64. Even the Barcelona's from the PhI lineup are 48bits wide (i think?). I'm not sure any processor has fully implemented 64bit yet.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,841 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by voice
View Post

Whats interesting is that the first "64 bit" athlons are actually only 40 bits wide and not 64. Even the Barcelona's from the PhI lineup are 48bits wide (i think?). I'm not sure any processor has fully implemented 64bit yet.

I think you are talking about the address bus
I did read somewhere that this is only to save $$$ because 40bit means that up to 1TB of RAM can be used
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: voice

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,174 Posts
Could be because I'm tired and grumpy right now, but I don't see any real benefit of having a 64-bit version of Office 14, other than promoting the shift from x86 to x64.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,667 Posts
Quote:


Whats interesting is that the first "64 bit" athlons are actually only 40 bits wide and not 64. Even the Barcelona's from the PhI lineup are 48bits wide (i think?). I'm not sure any processor has fully implemented 64bit yet.

Not true. The processors are internally fully 64-bit as in they have 64-bit registers and so on; the only thing cut down is the addressable memory (40 or 48 bits), which won't affect us anyways until the day we use 2^40 of RAM, by when those CPUs will be obsolete.

This is somewhat similar to the old 386 (even 486? Don't remember), they were 32-bit internally and could run a 32-bit OS, but they were 16-bit externally and could only adress 16MB of RAM at max.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,045 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by sgdude
View Post

they should just make win7 x64 only. Come on, it's time. All modern hardware is x64 ready, since athalon x64.

Really? Funny how Windows 7 is supposed to run well on netbooks. And guess what? Almost all netbooks are 32-bit only.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
787 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by Licht
View Post

Why, why, why is there an x86 version of 7?

Quite simple really, on systems running less than 2GB of main memory the x86 version of Windows 7 out performs the x64 version, Remember when using x64 it requires more memory than a x32 simply because of the way x64 works with the extra registers and stuff iirc

With Netbooks etc being common and having the Limitation either from Microsoft itself or due to the chipset (Atom can only address 2gb max iirc?) then the relative increase in performance of an x86 windows 7 makes sense. Even if the performance increase is minimal its still very important on something as underpowered as an Atom, so it makes major sense on that front

As for the argument 'Well those people can just use XP' well MS obviously want it gone and this is one way for it to do that, not to mention on the program/driver side its much more simple for the people who write the stuff and for the consumer itself to be able to use the same programs and drivers etc for stuff that they would on their Main OS

It makes sense Economically and in the performance aspect on all fronts if you really think about it, Microsoft would be utterly stupid to drop X86 (as much as we all want it to) at this point in time with the explosion of netbooks etc , its far beter to get its current OS performing great on the underpowered little machines, and even if 1 out of 5 people who get a new netboko and use it like ti and decide to upgrade from Vista or XP, then thats a good thing for their bottom line

Plus do Atoms even have x64 support? i didnt think they did and if they dont have it then there is a major answer as to why its stupid to only have an x64 for now

next OS release should be x64 only IMO cause by then everythign should support x64 and most peopel will be using it
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
15,763 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by Licht
View Post

Why, why, why is there an x86 version of 7?

Simple answer! Maybe, people still have X86 computers and don't want to upgrade to 64bit. Businesses don't really need 64bit. We still see people using those 3.5 inch discs and there is well going support. Windows 7 has got lower requirements than vista, so they have scaled it well! So that it runs on old machines. I don't see a problem with this.

Quote:


Originally Posted by TaNgY
View Post

so true the 32bit world is slowing true progress all the broken hearts crying for 32 bit
are going to slow future progress unless we nip it in the bud and take 64 bit and never look back

just make 64bit program/drivers and grow some nuts and stand up


No its not slowing down progress at all! Its just that its not a necessity that's all. If you are a small business do you really need to be concerned about this sort of things.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,581 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by TaNgY View Post
well we would be at the 64bit / 128bit tier by now if it wasnt for those crying for 32bit now wouldn't we

Who's crying for 32 bit software?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,613 Posts
Quote:
they should just make win7 x64 only. Come on, it's time. All modern hardware is x64 ready, since athalon x64. If your pc is too old to run x64 u shouldnt be upgrading the os anyways as it will just be slow on any PC thats pre athalon x64 and some Pentium 4s.
couldnt disagree more. many businesses still use p4 computers on 32bit processors, all they do is word processing thats fine why would they upgrade ? office is used by more businesses users than home users. If i manage the it i wouldnt want to upgrade all those clients would cost a bomb.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,314 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by HowHardCanItBe View Post
Simple answer! Maybe, people still have X86 computers and don't want to upgrade to 64bit. Businesses don't really need 64bit. We still see people using those 3.5 inch discs and there is well going support. Windows 7 has got lower requirements than vista, so they have scaled it well! So that it runs on old machines. I don't see a problem with this.

No its not slowing down progress at all! Its just that its not a necessity that's all. If you are a small business do you really need to be concerned about this sort of things.

Yes it is slowing down progress. Once 64 bit becomes the standard, software makers can start focusing on 64 bit optimized software and programs. Right now progress is at a crawl because software makers still have to cater to you people still using 32 bit operating systems.

I bet companies like ATI, Nvidia and others who make hardware drivers would be thrilled at having to make only 64 bit drivers instead of having to spend extra time and money on making 32 bit drivers in addition to the 64 bit drivers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,783 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by Squeeky
View Post

couldnt disagree more. many businesses still use p4 computers on 32bit processors, all they do is word processing thats fine why would they upgrade ? office is used by more businesses users than home users. If i manage the it i wouldnt want to upgrade all those clients would cost a bomb.

They would also have no reason to upgrade their OS either. So I'm thinking they wouldn't even really be effected by this.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,202 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Gr3m1in View Post
Quite simple really, on systems running less than 2GB of main memory the x86 version of Windows 7 out performs the x64 version, Remember when using x64 it requires more memory than a x32 simply because of the way x64 works with the extra registers and stuff iirc

With Netbooks etc being common and having the Limitation either from Microsoft itself or due to the chipset (Atom can only address 2gb max iirc?) then the relative increase in performance of an x86 windows 7 makes sense. Even if the performance increase is minimal its still very important on something as underpowered as an Atom, so it makes major sense on that front

As for the argument 'Well those people can just use XP' well MS obviously want it gone and this is one way for it to do that, not to mention on the program/driver side its much more simple for the people who write the stuff and for the consumer itself to be able to use the same programs and drivers etc for stuff that they would on their Main OS

It makes sense Economically and in the performance aspect on all fronts if you really think about it, Microsoft would be utterly stupid to drop X86 (as much as we all want it to) at this point in time with the explosion of netbooks etc , its far beter to get its current OS performing great on the underpowered little machines, and even if 1 out of 5 people who get a new netboko and use it like ti and decide to upgrade from Vista or XP, then thats a good thing for their bottom line

Plus do Atoms even have x64 support? i didnt think they did and if they dont have it then there is a major answer as to why its stupid to only have an x64 for now

next OS release should be x64 only IMO cause by then everythign should support x64 and most peopel will be using it

Quote:

Originally Posted by HowHardCanItBeView Post
Simple answer! Maybe, people still have X86 computers and don't want to upgrade to 64bit. Businesses don't really need 64bit. We still see people using those 3.5 inch discs and there is well going support. Windows 7 has got lower requirements than vista, so they have scaled it well! So that it runs on old machines. I don't see a problem with this.

No its not slowing down progress at all! Its just that its not a necessity that's all. If you are a small business do you really need to be concerned about this sort of things.

Netbooks are a good point. I would suggest offering a x86 version of only basic Windows 7. However x64 instructions are faster. Because all modern CPU emulate x86, as they are truly x86-x64 based.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,260 Posts
Dont forget intel has only recently gone 64. The Core 1 solo and duo came out years after the athlon 64.
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
Top