wombat Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Hi guys, I have Vista Ultimate 32 bit with 4gb of ram, I have been told that if I get Win 7 Ultimate 64 bit I would need to up my ram to 8 gb, is this correct? What would happen if I had Win 7 Ultimate running only 4 gb of ram? What System are you all running and how much ram? Any suggestions appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Scharnowski Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 I have been told that if I get Win 7 Ultimate 64 bit I would need to up my ram to 8 gb, is this correct? Nope, it is not. I run Win 7 64 bit for 5 months on 4GB of RAM now and there are no problems whatsover. When you have 4GB installed you should definitely go for 64bit because 32bit can only adress about 3.5GB of RAM, the rest is wasted. Of course more RAM always improves things a little, but it's not a necessity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wombat Posted October 20, 2009 Author Share Posted October 20, 2009 thanks Jigsaw, I did order the 32 bit but now have changed that, the reason I went for the 32 bit was because I phoned Dell and asked about another 4 gb of ram and they said $818 please, so I went for the 32 bit, now sent email requesting 64 bit ver of Win 7, thanks for your feedback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skypilot Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 64 bit, 6gigs (for $170) works well for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wombat Posted October 20, 2009 Author Share Posted October 20, 2009 Skypilot, when you say 6gb ($170) do you mean Dell memory? my system can take up to 8gb that is the only reason I am thinking of going that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maurice_King Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 For what you get you pay for the name with Dell and the items most likely come from the exact same source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Venema Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Matt Tomkins is running Win7 64-bit on a Dell M1730 and it can only have 4GB on board. There's zero issues and it absolutely flies like a skun cat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wombat Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share Posted October 21, 2009 Maurice & John, thanks for your feedback, I will get the 64 bit and see how it goes, if I need the extra ram, I will look into that down the track Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skypilot Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Skypilot, when you say 6gb ($170) do you mean Dell memory? my system can take up to 8gb that is the only reason I am thinking of going that way. No, not Dell memory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heiko Glatthorn Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Wish we had 128 bit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maurice_King Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Irrespective of the PC it is running on If W7 is tuned right it is the OS to be aiming for, whether it is 64 or 32 bit it doesn't make a lot of difference under 4Gb RAM as W7 Manages memory in a far superior way to previous platforms. IMHO running more than 4 or purhaps 6 Gb if you really must is a waste of money. Recent benchmark testing with 6 and 12 Gb in a clients PC running Pre-release W7 I could not detect any dicernable difference in the way it ran the benchmark software, FSX (Virgin), MoH Airborne, and his game of choice Crysis. Monitoring memory use remotely whilst playing the MAX memory used was 3.9 Gb except when first starting Crysis when it peaked at 4.2 Gb Speed and fluidity of game play was identical in both configurations. You decide Gent's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Harris Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 +-4gb with Win7-64bit is fine The reason most use 6GB is because of the new X58 boards supporting triple channel DDR3, and with that 3GB, 6GB or 12GB is the number needed I use 12GB myself, for two reasons, it was dirt cheap, and for opening huge TIFs in photoshop, while running FSX and Annotator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wombat Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share Posted October 21, 2009 Maurice, thanks for that, will try the 64bit with my present 4gb and see how it performs, with your info looks like I could be wasteing money going to 6 or 8gb. meatycus thanks also for your feedback Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maurice_King Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Exactly my point Meatycus 4 - 6 Gb is fine for the average user and if you have the need for +6 Gb with certain applications then W7 64 will manage it very well . The general user won't see any significant benefit but you and I will esspecially when we have large images open in PS - funnily enough though I've had huge images open with Photoshop CS3 and it generally wants swap file access rather than load into memory. ( On my system that is - 32 ) But my mem manager program shows that just about all of my 4 Gb is in use. Wombat if you can acquire memory cheaply enough then it may benefit you but based on what I saw with Josh's PC the 6Gb of Gamer memory he wanted works extremely well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wombat Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share Posted October 21, 2009 Maurice_King, I have 2 x 2gb = 4gb, can I revove one of the 2gb and replace it with a 4gb? then I will have 6gb. just had a look at 4bg prices and only place I shopped want $399 for 4 gb. Thanks for your info Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maurice_King Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 No that I could not guarantee, Check with the mainboard manual regarding memory configuration. I'd be more inclined to recommend simply adding another Pair of 2 Gb Sticks making 8 Gb in total at this point due to the cost of single 4Gb modules but if you keep an eye out you can pick up RAM cheaply at times. If you stick within the Main Board Manufacturers spec's you should be fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wombat Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share Posted October 21, 2009 not sure if I have another two slots to put the other 2x2gb, will have to have a look underneath my laptop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maurice_King Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Oh you have a Lappy in that case you might be pushing it as there is most likely only 2 slots and you really should use a pair of Memory modules in that case, ie 2 x 2Gb or 2 X 4Gb. Have a look you might have 4 slots Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Routley Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 My limited experience with Laptop memory is (counter to desktop memory) the best option is the biggest capacity SODIMM that you can fit in there. On most models there are few slots - so getting the biggest capacity stick you can to fully expand it is the go. I think the Win 32 / 64 bit idea got a bit confused. You don't need lots of RAM to run Win 64bit versions ... the thing is that if you are running a 32bit O/S you will get precisely ZERO benefit from any RAM above 3.5Gig. You need a 64bit OS to get any benefit from more than 4gig RAM - but you don;t have to have >4G of RAM to run the O/S. On a 64bit system, FSX will not use all the system RAM per se (said to be limited to 2Gig), but Windows will have more breathing space for cacheing, swapfiles etc - so it will generally run better. I suspect texture loading on scenery (for example) benefits from this, quite considerably. 64bit apps (where they are available are FAST) - a couple of examples: Photoshop CS4, 7Zip 64bit both rip their 32bit executables to shreds when managing large files. Try unzipping a 1.2Gig Zip file, for example or opening a 1.2Gig Photoshop image. Magic! I will never go back to 32 bit install for FS or developing ... but it is what I run on a (predominantly business) laptop - mainly for simplicity's sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wombat Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share Posted October 21, 2009 Thanks guys for all of your help, this has made it a bit clearer for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenicoll Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Wombat, When you get Windows 7...Retail version you should get bot 32 bit and 64 bit discs so you can choose which one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwho Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Wish we had 128 bit... Apparently Microsoft has been thinking about making windows 8 and 9 in 128bit versions http://com.puter.tv/forum/index.php/topic,5702.0.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigge Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 hi Jigsaw, I can see that you run a system like a system i evetual are going to buy the system i thinking of is the one below, how do you think it will work for fsx-ftx? Processor:AMD Phenom II X4 965 3,4GHz AM3 Memory:4GB Corsair XMS3-12800 (KIT) / DDR3 1600MHz / CL9 HD:Raptor 74GB S-ATA 10000RPM + 1000GB S-ATA 7200RPM :Nvidia GTX285 1GB 2xDVI DVD:DVD+-RW 24X Dual Layer Windows7 -64 bit hope you can help me out tigge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregjohnstone Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 G'Day Gents, Hope you don't mind me adding this to this post but... I currently run FS2004 and FSX on my system (Intel Core 2 Duo CPU E8400@3.01GHz, 4 GB RAM, Asus P5KPL Motherboard and a NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GTX) and while I get great FS2004 frame rates even while running the heaviest add ons, I find FSX a bit more difficult to run as smoothly with AI traffic and Active Sky Advanced on and at a realistic setting. My question is, being on a tight budget and realistically only being to affort one upgrade, which option would be the best for unning FSX better on my system, Windows 7 64 bit (currently running XP Pro V3) or purchasing a new graphics card in the order of a GTX 280. Simliar cost for both, but as aI say I can probably only afford one. I also have your FTX DVD scenery in the mail as we speak and wish to get several more of your airports to finally make the move across to FSX. Thanks for any advice you might offer. Cheers, Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Routley Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 7xxxx series graphics cards are not good for FSX - I'd change that. then go to 64bit later. Others may disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skypilot Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 [snip] Others may disagree. surely not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.