On The Insider: Britney's Bikini-Clad Top 10
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet

August 5th, 2008

Why x86 is perfectly fine for now

Posted by Zack Whittaker @ 7:19 am

Categories: Hardware, Major breakthroughs, Microsoft, Money, Skills development, University, Virtualisation

Tags: 32-bit, Intel X86, RAM, X64, 64-Bit, Microsoft Windows, Network Technology, Processors, Semiconductors, Hardware

x86allthewaybaby.pngI, and most people use, a 32-bit (x86) version of Windows. “So what?” you may think, and rightly so. I’ve been looking into 64-bit (x64) Windows for a while now and I cannot see any advantages. Ed can, and his article has certainly made me think twice, but I can’t help think we’re not ready for it yet.

Many have said that Windows 7 will be a 64-bit only operating system, supporting only 64-bit systems. This is untrue, as Microsoft said they’re keeping 32-bit up until 2012 which gives us a while to prepare for these changes (although can’t find where it originally said that luna22, thankyou!). As far as I can tell from research and running a separate x64 system, with Windows XP x64 and Vista x64 in two virtual machines, there is only one advantage. x64 registers more than 4GB of RAM, where x86 doesn’t. That’s it.

Not many people really need more than 4GB of RAM, but if you were to buy a x86 machine, like you normally would, you could plonk in 8GB of RAM but it’d only register half of that, a quarter with 16GB and an eighth if you had 32GB, and so on. If I’m honest, most 32-bit systems don’t even top registering more than 3GB of RAM - the 4GB limit seems to be a technicality rather than anything else.

On the downsides of x64, there isn’t a full set of drivers out for x64 systems yet; you’ll still have a few missing, and if you use x86 drivers, it won’t offer the full 64-bit support, which defeats the point altogether. Not many applications are x64 compatible yet anyway, so why would you want to buy a brand new x64 machine and realise half of your essential applications don’t work?

I have a 64-bit processor on my primary desktop computer, and I chose to run a 32-bit version of Windows Vista Ultimate on it. No driver issues, no compatibility issues, it’s fast, it works, and I don’t have or need more than 4GB of RAM.

Students run many high-end programs and applications; graphics, sound, processor intensive applications and suchlike. There is no doubt in my mind that by the time Microsoft switches over to releasing 64-bit software only, using x64 machines and software will be fine. For a single desktop or laptop computer, x86 is perfectly suitable for the time being.

64-bit machines at this moment in time and the very near future are there for high-end servers and mega-computers (one less than super-computers), and not really designed for home use yet. Once the bugs have been ironed out, such as getting the drivers to the hardware, x64 computing will transform our lives, our work and our computers, without a doubt.

x64 is amazingly powerful, and will make things faster, easier to do, better looking and better sounding. This will be a revolution in computing, similar in scale to “the computer mouse”, but for home/student use, we’re not ready just now.

For the time being, I think x86 is perfectly fine. In comparison, “64-bit” is still in “beta” as far as the hardware manufacturers and driver writers are concerned, and it’s up to them to iron out the bugs with them.

Zack Whittaker, the youngest in the ZDNet network, is a British student at the University of Kent, Canterbury, where he studies BA (Hons) Criminology and Social Policy. His insight into the next-generation is unique and first-hand, sharing his knowledge of the here and now but more so what's next and how to get there.

You can read his public biography and his work disclosures of his current and past industry affiliations.

Fire off an email if you feel like sharing a story or insight, or leave a voicemail. You can also follow him on Twitter to keep up to date with his ramblings.

Subscribe to iGeneration via Email alerts or RSS.

  • Talkback
  • Most Recent of 24 Talkback(s)
RE: Why x86 is perfectly fine for now
Wouldn't it be smarter to put a kernel on each processor when using a multicore system? (Read the rest)
Posted by: stalepie Posted on: 08/31/08 You are currently: a Guest | | Terms of Use
Agreed - But demand drives progress  jpr75_z | 08/05/08
Advantages  t_mohajir | 08/05/08
Just swtiched to x64  bcarpent1228@... | 08/05/08
4GB limit is not a technicality  waylander | 08/05/08
RE: Why x86 is perfectly fine for now  TAPhilo | 08/05/08
Ding!  knowbody | 08/05/08
???  frosteez | 08/05/08
Nothing. It was irrelevant and has been removed...  David GroberZDNet Moderator | 08/05/08
w/ x64 since Ahtlon64 deput  rviktor25 | 08/05/08
source of "32-bit until 2012"  luna 22 | 08/06/08
RE: luna22  zwhittakerZDNet Moderator | 08/06/08
Doesn't support your claim!  bob.kerns2 | 08/09/08
Security  Phostenix | 08/07/08
RE: Why x86 is perfectly fine for now  larchoye | 08/07/08
You can get some great deals for 8GB PCs right now  rogerv | 08/13/08
RE: rogerv  zwhittakerZDNet Moderator | 08/13/08
how about ~ $600  rogerv | 08/14/08
Depends on the application.  HypnoToad | 08/28/08
RE: Why x86 is perfectly fine for now  stalepie | 08/31/08
You gotta shake .that. dirt off your shoulder  stalepie | 08/31/08
RE: Why x86 is perfectly fine for now  stalepie | 08/31/08
RE: Why x86 is perfectly fine for now  stalepie | 08/31/08
RE: Why x86 is perfectly fine for now  stalepie | 08/31/08
RE: Why x86 is perfectly fine for now  stalepie | 08/31/08

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement

Recent Entries

advertisement

Archives

Favorite Links

ZDNet Blogs

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads