Argonath RPG - A World of its own
Argonath RPG Community => Hardware/Software support => Resolved issues => Topic started by: Huntsman on June 01, 2016, 06:53:07 pm
-
Hi guys,
I have a cheap, Packard Bell EasyNote TE laptop which is work orientated. It has 2GB DD3 RAM, Intel 1005M CPU, Intel HD Graphics, 400GB of HDD space. I run Windows 10 on it relatively fine (Windows 7 was terrible on this laptop though, it could hardly run). It works very well when focusing on one task, however, as soon as you start multi-tasking, it starts working slower, but really not as slow as you'd expect from a computer of such price.
I have Windows 10 64bit installed, and I am wondering - would my computer run faster if I had 32 bit OS installed instead? Does it make any difference? I want to squeeze the most out of it :)
-
The main difference in performance when it comes to x86 versus x64 is that x64 supports more than 4GB of RAM.
You will notice even more performance increase when you use programs that are designed to work with x64, such as applications and drivers. You also get stuff like Kernel Patch Protection, support for hardware-backed data execution protection, mandatory driver signing when you use x64.
If you have a x64 processor, I can highly recommend using a x64 Operating System as well, due to faster application performance if the program is designed to work with x64 (most stuff nowadays is).
-
Is this a joke?
-
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/taking-the-mystery-out-of-64-bit-windows
This day in age, everybody should have 4+ GBs of RAM.
-
Is this a joke?
No, I was genuinly puzzled about the entire x86 x64 thing. I know its funny, as I make some side money by fixing computers :D
The main difference in performance when it comes to x86 versus x64 is that x64 supports more than 4GB of RAM.
You will notice even more performance increase when you use programs that are designed to work with x64, such as applications and drivers. You also get stuff like Kernel Patch Protection, support for hardware-backed data execution protection, mandatory driver signing when you use x64.
If you have a x64 processor, I can highly recommend using a x64 Operating System as well, due to faster application performance if the program is designed to work with x64 (most stuff nowadays is).
Thank you for your explanation.
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/taking-the-mystery-out-of-64-bit-windows
This day in age, everybody should have 4+ GBs of RAM.
Well, Windows 10 runs sufficiently well on lower RAM as it's not as resource intensive. Besides, that laptop is not my main computer and is orientated to be able to work on the go, not play games or do resource intensive stuff, so I'm fine :).
-
I know exactly what you're asking, and if I'm honest, it's not a stupid question at all.
The answer is yes, theoretically if you sat two identical laptops together with less than ~3.5GB RAM, one had a 32 bit OS and one had a 64 bit OS, the idle memory usage would be slightly lower, but only slightly...
In terms of WHY you're asking the question (improving the laptop performance):
My open browser of Firefox with 6 tabs open is using 500MB RAM by itself. You're not going to notice any difference between 32 bit and 64 bit, as the memory usage difference between the two is minimal. Programs you open up on your laptop use up far more resources than the different between 32 bit and 64 bit will provide.
You could try disabling some visual themes, this tends to save a fair bit of memory.
If RAM usage is an issue, then upgrading to 4GB will make a world of difference. I'm assuming your laptop has two 1GB sticks at the moment, so in that case you'd need to buy two 2GB sticks and replace the old RAM. If your laptop currently has one 2GB stick, check the model of the RAM and try to match the speed + timings... though I would recommend buying a pair together in any case.
With RAM, you only feel the upgrade if you *need* it, I went from 6GB to 16GB on my personal laptop and day-to-day I feel no difference... but as I develop and test code, it gives me headroom that if I've made a mistake and there's a memory leak, I get more time to shut the program down before it shuts my computer down!
-
My open browser of Firefox with 6 tabs open is using 500MB RAM by itself. You're not going to notice any difference between 32 bit and 64 bit, as the memory usage difference between the two is minimal. Programs you open up on your laptop use up far more resources than the different between 32 bit and 64 bit will provide.
This is not exactly true. Since 64bit is a larger 'space' for memory it can handle multi-tasking far better than 32bit can. If you are running a single application, or just a small few low-resource applications on 32bit you won't notice the difference. However if you try to do a good amount of multi-tasking (you know like most humans) you'll start to get a slower experience as there's not enough 'space' (trying to not be overly technical) to process the data quick enough. However, 64bit has a higher capacity so you'll notice better multitasking performance. 64bit can process bigger chunks of data; thus is quicker in this sense.
-
Sorry, I think my explanation came out wrong.
I meant that, for example, idle RAM usage of 32 bit is 1GB and 64 bit is 1.1GB (this is theoretical, no idea what it actually is). I'm saying that the amount of RAM you'd save at idle, going from 64 bit to 32 bit would be minimal (100MB), so it's not worth doing, even Firefox can use loads more than that (was using 1GB today).
-
I think the better question is why do you use Firefox? Chrome is masterrace.
-
I think the better question is why do you use Firefox? Chrome is masterrace.
Android Flagship, Google Chrome and PC seems like a True PC Master Race member all thats left is a GTX 1080 :jackson:
-
I think the better question is why do you use Firefox? Chrome is masterrace.
Opera here :lol:
-
Hi guys,
I have a cheap, Packard Bell EasyNote TE laptop which is work orientated. It has 2GB DD3 RAM, Intel 1005M CPU, Intel HD Graphics, 400GB of HDD space. I run Windows 10 on it relatively fine (Windows 7 was terrible on this laptop though, it could hardly run). It works very well when focusing on one task, however, as soon as you start multi-tasking, it starts working slower, but really not as slow as you'd expect from a computer of such price.
I have Windows 10 64bit installed, and I am wondering - would my computer run faster if I had 32 bit OS installed instead? Does it make any difference? I want to squeeze the most out of it :)
As your processor is a Celeron I'd suggest you changing the OS to 32 bit. If you Right click on Computer in the start menu > Properties it shows if your hardware is compatible for a 64 bit version of windows.
-
Opera here :lol:
No wonder we don't get along. :)
-
The new versions of Opera are based on the same engine anyway... but with less support than Chrome... so if you're using Opera it makes more sense to switch to the superior browser (Chrome).
-
As your processor is a Celeron I'd suggest you changing the OS to 32 bit. If you Right click on Computer in the start menu > Properties it shows if your hardware is compatible for a 64 bit version of windows.
Hey Jelle cool to see you around again, was wondering what happened to you :P
-
As your processor is a Celeron I'd suggest you changing the OS to 32 bit. If you Right click on Computer in the start menu > Properties it shows if your hardware is compatible for a 64 bit version of windows.
And why is that? Modern Celerons are built with 64-bit instructions.
-
Well, it has a 64 bit OS already installed anyhow, if it wasn't compatible, it wouldn't be working :balance:
-
I think the better question is why do you use Firefox? Chrome is masterrace.
customisability
Chrome is the Windows 10 of browsers, except at least I can make 10 look and work like 7.
-
customisability
Chrome is the Windows 10 of browsers, except at least I can make 10 look and work like 7.
I liked Firefox its customisability as well, lots of great add-ons like Web Developer, but eventually I opted for Chrome for security reasons.
-
No wonder we don't get along. :)
Hahaha no kidding.
I like Opera because of its looks and its interface that's adapted to look nice with Windows 10. I dislike Chrome for visual reasons and due to the fact that it likes to hog on my ram. Opera is just as fast as Chrome, I see no reason not to use it.
-
And why is that? Modern Celerons are built with 64-bit instructions.
Haven't looked at specs recently, but don't Celerons have a much smaller FSB and L2 caches creating a bottleneck (compared to i series)?
-
Opera is just as fast as Chrome
1100% wrong as usual
-
It all pales into insignificance when youre running 20/30 sessions using Selenium and ChromeDriver - fks shit up then!
-
Haven't looked at specs recently, but don't Celerons have a much smaller FSB and L2 caches creating a bottleneck (compared to i series)?
Indeed true, but they're still 64 bit processors and perform as so.
The only tangible difference between the 32 bit and 64 bit in my opinion is the ability of the 64 bit OS to recognise and utilise any more than ~4GB RAM. Whether or not he has a 64 bit Celeron or 64 bit i7 this holds true.
Rytuklis, just try and get your hands on a bit more RAM mate.
-
1100% wrong as usual
I am not speaking of a technical point of view, I am speaking about my own personal expierience, so there is no need to get all smart and "I'll prove ye' wrong" on me. For me, Opera works just as fast and I have no reason to use Chrome.
-
Indeed true, but they're still 64 bit processors and perform as so.
The only tangible difference between the 32 bit and 64 bit in my opinion is the ability of the 64 bit OS to recognise and utilise any more than ~4GB RAM. Whether or not he has a 64 bit Celeron or 64 bit i7 this holds true.
Rytuklis, just try and get your hands on a bit more RAM mate.
I'll agree to that point that in his case, all he would see is a difference in CAPACITY, not PERFORMANCE. I'm reminded of the analogy of bit-width of buses being like that of a highway. Sure, an 8 lane highway can accommodate more traffic, but if traffic is restricted to a maximum speed of 20MPH, in comparison to a 4 lane highway that is able to move over 60MPH, the average end user would perceive that the 4 lane is faster, and that really what the question I asked was in regards to. That with a restricted front side bus (back in the LGA775 days pre-i7 the difference was like 800mhz on P4/ 400mhz on celerons iirc) of half the normal transfer speed that even 64-bit instructions were used as a sales tactic to make systems seem like they would be faster. Same thing is being done with more modern systems, ie: Windows 8/10 laptops without any kind of touch feature looses a sizable chunk of features and usability of the system. Ever tried to navigate W8's Metro interface with a mouse? It's a nightmare.
And with such a restriction, unless he is continuously filling his RAM capacity and the data image becoming fragmented, then he would see no perceivable performance gain or loss from even upgrading his RAM to a higher CAPACITY, and the only ways to get proper performance boost would be CPU-replacement (assuming its not one of those chipset/non-socketed junk logicboards) with a higher FSB speed, and also upgrade RAM speed/latency (if not already maxed out) from say 1066mhz to 1600mhz (for example) to match with whatever FSB the CPU is tuned to. This would yield better that just swapping for "more RAM" as consumers have been lead to believe. More =/= Better when dealing with hardware.
-
More =/= better indeed. But "More == Better" holds true when you currently do not have enough.