64-bit XP OS uses memory more efficiently than 32-bit?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Spin
  • Start date Start date
S

Spin

Guest
Gurus,

Is it true that a 64-bit XP OS will get more out of a 4GB RAM system than a
32-bit XP OS will? In other words, the 64-bit version will use the RAM more
efficiently? I imagine the same efficiencies are true for Windows server?

--
Spin
 
Re: 64-bit XP OS uses memory more efficiently than 32-bit?

yes. For one thing, a 32-bit version of Windows can not use much more than
~3GB of RAM. There simply isn't the address space. And, of course, it has an
absolute top end limit of 4GB of RAM that can be directly addressed.

Whether it uses the RAM more "efficiently" would require one to define what
efficiency means in this context. But as 4 GB and greater machines become
the norm, 64-bit becomes the only real option. If one had a 1 GB XP machine,
however, the answer would be a bit more difficult - I would probably choose
32-bit XP for that scenario.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel


"Spin" <Spin@spin.com> wrote in message
news:639ansF26ff46U1@mid.individual.net...
> Gurus,
>
> Is it true that a 64-bit XP OS will get more out of a 4GB RAM system than
> a 32-bit XP OS will? In other words, the 64-bit version will use the RAM
> more efficiently? I imagine the same efficiencies are true for Windows
> server?
>
> --
> Spin
 
Re: 64-bit XP OS uses memory more efficiently than 32-bit?

See the following KB for a detailed explaination of the "you can't really
get 4 GB on 32-bit OSes" issue:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605/

Note that Windows Vista SP1 32-bit versions will report the amount of memory
INSTALLED not the amount of memory AVAILABLE in the System Control Panel so
it will no longer report "3.33 GB" or something but say "4 GB" or even "8
GB" if that is what you have installed. The amount of actual AVAILALBE
memory will still be limited to some number ~3 GB unless you are running an
x64 version of Windows. In other words, Service Pack 1 doesn't change the
way PC hardware had worked for more than a decade :>

See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946003/.

--
-Chuck Walbourn
SDE, XNA Developer Connection

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warrenties, and confers no rights.
 
Re: 64-bit XP OS uses memory more efficiently than 32-bit?

And winver will show the available amount.

"Chuck Walbourn [MSFT]" <chuckw@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:Op9Nm$$fIHA.5296@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> See the following KB for a detailed explaination of the "you can't really
> get 4 GB on 32-bit OSes" issue:
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605/
>
> Note that Windows Vista SP1 32-bit versions will report the amount of
> memory INSTALLED not the amount of memory AVAILABLE in the System Control
> Panel so it will no longer report "3.33 GB" or something but say "4 GB" or
> even "8 GB" if that is what you have installed. The amount of actual
> AVAILALBE memory will still be limited to some number ~3 GB unless you are
> running an x64 version of Windows. In other words, Service Pack 1 doesn't
> change the way PC hardware had worked for more than a decade :>
>
> See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946003/.
>
> --
> -Chuck Walbourn
> SDE, XNA Developer Connection
>
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warrenties, and confers no
> rights.
 
Back
Top