 |
  |
 |
Thanks useful information: 0
Hi Everyone.
I have searched the thread and can't seem to find an answer.
I will soon be buying a new PC and was wondering which way to go.
Requirements for 64 bit seem to be a lot more expensive than for 32 bit PC.
Is the cost worth going to a 64bit PC?
What are the advantages of 64 bit over 32 bit? Is it only better colour etc?
Carmen
My Stuff:- Canon 50D l EF 28-80 f2.8-4L l EF 100-300 f4-5.6 l Canon 100mm f2.8 macro l Tokina 11-16 f2.8 l Pol. Filter l Flash l Grip l Remote l Tripod l Lightroom 2 l CS3
Constructive Critique of my photos always appreciated
My understanding is that 64bit software runs faster(compared to 32 bit), the main advantage in image editing(or any memory intensive editing like graphics and video) is the larger block of ram available to the software program, as the OS can address 16Tb of ram, 32 bit OS can address only 4Gb of ram, and Windows only allows something like 2Gb(max) to other software.
As file sizes increase, this will make a difference.
Saving a few $ now may ultimately cost more in the long run as you may find that your computing future may indeed be in 64bits, anyhow...
My next PC will be 64bit capable, even though Nikons CaptureNX is only 32bit, and no 64bit version is available yet.
This just means that it runs in 32bit mode(it still runs at least) and I won't fully realise the extra power of the system for that purpose.. which is why I'm in no rush to update my PC hardware yet.
The extra power of 64bit could also be used for more automation in many software applications in the future too, with things like voice commands and better user interface systems(that actually work!).
Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
{Nikon}; -> 50/1.2 : 500/8 : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8 ais : 105mm f/1.8 ais : 24mm/2 ais
{Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
{Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC
{Yongnuo}; -> YN35/2N : YN50/1.8N
The main compelling reason for going 64 bit is to access more RAM. 32bit allows you to see 4Gb of RAM, whereas 64bit allows you to see a LOT more (yeah I could work out how much more, but I'm preparing for a 15yo's party).
So things like big photostitches that chew large amounts of RAM benefit from 64bit operating systems, whereas your day to day word processing won't.
Dave
http://www.degrootphotography.com.au/
Canon EOS 1D MkIV | Canon EOS 5D MkII | Canon EOS 30D | Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM | Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM | Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM | Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM | Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM | Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L & some non-L lenses.
I'm curious as to why you would say a 64bit system costs more than an 32bit.
As AK and Dave mentioned: 64bit = more RAM capability = Good.
In short for SOHO consumers:
- Current MS Operating Systems come in 32bit and 64bit flavours at no cost difference. If someone is charging more for 64bit, then walk away from them, they shouldn't be.
- Third Party Support for 64bit systems has made significant leaps in the last 2 years. (ie: Software and Drivers)
- There are performance benefits in running a 64bit system. Lots of technical reasons can be shown.
- Realistically, How much RAM you can put into the computer will be limited by what the motherboard can handle. (eg: Current high end consumer level X58 chipset motherboards have a capacity of 24GB.)
... I'm getting off track
Example:
If you buy a standard $800 pc tower, you can run 32 bit windows, or 64 bit windows. The cost is the same, the performance difference is going to be negligible.
If you buy a higher capacity and higher performance PC tower, you can run 32 bit windows, or 64 bit windows. The cost is higher because you are building higher performance (ie: faster) components, which will be able to utilize the benefits of a 64bit operating system better than the $800 system.
Bottom line is the cost vs performance of the hardware configuration in the box, rather than whether it is 32/64bit.
Last edited by Invictus; 08-11-2009 at 2:42am.
Matt.
I have just ordered my new system to replace my main editing PC (which is about 5 years old now). New system is coming with Win 7 64 bit installed, so looking forward to giving it a workout. Not looking forward to the hours it takes getting all my software installed on it though.
"It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro
Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
Nikon, etc!
RICK
My Photography
The cost of a machine for 32 bit or 64 bit is the same. It is the same machine.
It is just that the 64 bit operating system can use more ram (ie you can USE, say, 12gig ram instead of about 3gig on 32 bit), and thus they usually spec the machine at higher end components to enable people to take advantage of the the higher end softwares.
Rick, sorry to point folks to a thread on another forum but this thread is a Photoshop Benchmark which has been running for about 2 years (and keeps being updated) and quite clearly shows that any time a 64 bit sysytem is compared to an almost identical 32 bit system the 64 bit system is about twice as fast!
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=170063
I have a minor corruption on my XP 32 bit box and will be upgrading to win 7/64 as well, instead of just reinstalling XP.
JJ
Last edited by jjphoto; 08-11-2009 at 11:09am.
Not an issue at all. It is thread relevant, so I have no issue with it being posted. We just don't allow blatant promotion of other forums.Originally Posted by jjphoto
Threadstarter
So, as I understand, if you want to run 64bit you have to install Win 7(is this Vista?) not XP Pro 64bit. Can you please tell me which is best for color calibration and Lightroom/Photoshop as I have been told by a print shop that uses only Ezio Monitors & XP Pro to stay away from Vista.
I'm getting confused.
I too also found a marginal performance difference between 32 and 64 bit on my Macbook Pro 2.4ghz, 4gb ram, Snow Leopard, using Mac OS-X Xbench 1.3 with the following results:
32bit MacBook Pro 15"... 169.99 score MacBook Pro (Core 2)
64bit MacBook Pro 15"... 173.92 score MacBook Pro (Core 2)
http://xbench.com/
"Knowledge is a single point, but the ignorant have multiplied it."
So it seems for a PC with certain hardware specs, you only really need more ram to see the benefit of 64bit systems, for RAM hungry apps that involve graphics.
So is there any real performance boost in say going from 8G ram to much more, like 24 or 32G(for anyone that has tried it?).
No doubt in the near future we'll see more than 24G ram capable motherboards, and ram modules with 16 or more Gig of the stuff.. and they'll eventually become affordable, so for the sake of future proofing a little bit, on a 64bit system, a major performance boost is simply a matter of adding RAM(up to 16Tb of it), and more and more.......
Threadstarter
After 2 days of reading books and internet I now know the difference.
Thanks to everyone for helping me to understand.
Consider that moving to a 64 bit OS does not mean that it is faster.
In many cases it is slower, as it has to address more memory, but certainly it can handle more.
Technically:
A 32bit OS can address 4Gb Ram
A 64bit OS can address 18Exabytes, that’s a lot, but you would need a beafy system to manage this.
Also... a lot of 'issues' for many people trying to run CS4 under x64
See here:
http://www.google.com/search?q=does+...ient=firefox-a
Regards
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Add To Bookmarks
