How important will it be to have a 64-bit CPU?

[MastaRedSnappa]

With the approach of the 64-bit Vista, how important will it be to have a 64-bit CPU? I'm in the market for a desktop replacement laptop but I'm torn over whether to get one with a 64-bit CPU like the AMD Turion/Mobile Athlon 64 or a 32-bit CPU like the Intel Centrino (or possibly the dual-core Centrino Duo). I'd obviously like my laptop's lifespan to last as long as possible so I don't want to get something without much of a future. So is 64-bit that big of a deal? Thanks.

[rustyjaw]

I don't know much about Vista in particular, but in general the main practical benefit of 64-bit CPUs is that they can address a lot more memory than 32-bit CPUs. I believe the 32-bit limit is 4GB, which for a lot of people is more than they need anyway. But in the near future that may become an issue as applications and files balloon in size. The theoretical limit for 64-bit CPUs is 16TB, although it will be a while until you find a computer built to accept anything near that. But even my 2.5 year old dual G5 has room for 8GB of RAM because the G5 is 64-bit.

 

There are speed benefits as well, but they are esoteric and don't generally apply to the kinds of data normal users work on. Massive databases, and scientific number crunching are places where 64-bits come in handy for speed.

[ChrisBardon]

Well, from a gaming perspective you might see a difference for anything that's very CPU intensive (physics etc), but I think it'll be a while before 64 bit CPUs are "required". I'm also sure that vista will come in both 32 and 64 bit versions. If trying to get the vista beta to work on a virtual PC is any indication though, we might indeed need that 4Gb of memory... Either way, you won't NEED 64 bit to run Vista, but I'm sure it'll help.

 

Personally, I'm holding off on any PC hardware upgrades until Vista comes out in the Fall (theoretically).

[GreenMonkey]

What tendril said.

 

That said, I'm not touching Windows Vista for at least a few years if at all possible. As usual for Microsoft betas...err....I mean, new software.

[foogledricks]

What tendril said.

 

That said' date=' I'm not touching Windows Vista for at least a few years if at all possible. As usual for Microsoft betas...err....I mean, new software.[/quote']I have had Windows XP from the beginning, and it has been great. But I build my machines, so maybe that allowed a more successful experience. Perhaps you should stop buying Packard Bells.

[GreenMonkey]

I have had Windows XP from the beginning, and it has been great. But I build my machines, so maybe that allowed a more successful experience. Perhaps you should stop buying Packard Bells.

 

Please read the "Post Your Gaming PC", smart aleck

 

I went XP after SP1.

[Magness]

I would consider a 64bit CPU required to "future proof" you new machine (to make it last as long as possible as you say). 64bit architecture is becoming more and more common now and wether things require it now or not, they more than likely will in the coming years (or will at least benefit from it). At the very least you loose nothing by going to a 64bit CPU and gain the ability to play some killer app or whatever a couple years from now that may require it. Also, the increase in performance specifically in most games alone justifys the chip, addressing greater memory space and other features are just icing on the cake

[Derrik Draven]

I think mine is 64bit. When I purcased this Sager 9880, it was with the latest version of Pentium IV, that supposedly is capable of crunching 64bit code: the Intel 630 64bit.

 

Hope so.