Jeffrey Sparks replied...
I'm surprised XP x64 did that ok with 2 gb. (I will admit I didn't run XP
x64 for very long as I had a B***H of a time trying to find drivers for
everything) I would think with THAT much running at one time though you
would want closer to 4 GB of ram.
--
Jeff
Surprised
(1)
Admit
(1)
Drivers
(1)
Though
(1)
Closer
(1)
Barnes
(1)
Message
(1)
JPHHA
(1)
John Barnes replied...
Interestingly, the memory shows no indication of being stressed. In Vista
the CPU is frequently at or near 100% ( and rarely under 70%) while in XP
X64 it rarely hits 75% (while frequently under 50%) with the same load. Of
course I could probably turn off all the things that make Vista, Vista, but
then why buy it. WDM adds about 10% most of the time.
Jeffrey Sparks replied...
Just for kicks you might try turning Aero off. You said you have a 128 mb
graphics card? I believe that is the minimum to run aero and MIGHT be the
problem. I would bet though that the RTM version would also give you less
headaches in that area as well.
--
Jeff
Windows 7 - You may be right, but my video card has my highest ratings 5.6 and 4.
Asked By John Barnes
22-Jan-07 01:22 PM
You may be right, but my video card has my highest ratings 5.6 and 4.9
while the cpu struggles at my lowest 4.1 If I turn off aero and the other
Vista goodies, I might as well be running XP. I also have about $700 in
programs that won't install or run properly on Vista. I plan to do a major
re-do of the system this summer and hopefully by then they will have the
rumored trial available to try. I do like it, just can't use for work yet.
Dennis Pack replied...
John:
I can't resist being the devils advocate, but I remember when x64
wasn't suitable for you to use for work. There are major changes in
stability and speed between RC1 and RTM. I still have my old FX51 tower and
2 AMD 4400x2 towers running with 2GB ram on each. I've made no hardware
changes since they were setup for x64 two years or more ago. With Vista x64
RTM I can still shrink a DVD movie to an AVI file in the background and have
no effect on music playing or anything else that I'm working on. Have a
great day.
--
Dennis Pack
XP x64, Vista Enterprise x64
Office2007
John Barnes replied...
It did take about 7 months before 3rd party programs were available to work
with X-64 so I could work on it. The OS wasn't the problem, the 3rd party
support was. X-64 was and is very stable (except for the OE problem that
had a workaround)
At this point, Vista stability isn't a problem (though it's version of IE7
frequently crashes and restarts with 'a problem'. It is that the overhead
from Vista is too much for my computer to deal with. Vista RC1 running with
no changes from what is installed, puts approximately 25-30% more of a load
on my CPU making many functions unstable or slow when added to my work load.
When I bought the parts for my computer 2 years 1 month ago, the 3500+ was
the second level down on the AMD availability. I think the 3800+ was the
top.
Even MVP's must admit truth to this one Windows 7 See article in context at: http: / / www.aaxnet.com Northern California and the Bexley, Ohio high school district. Schools making this move have been surprised how easy it is and how much money is saved. (V6, V8) Leading computer maker an exercise in frustration to try to upgrade an XP computer to Vista. Few Vista drivers are available except for new devices designed for Vista, and manufacturers don't plan any. * Even many current printers don't have Vista drivers, and many never will. Developing Vista drivers and getting them approved by Microsoft is just too expensive. * Vista is effectively a Windows cripple your computer if any DRM problems are found with your computer's hardware or drivers - this by Windows Update, of course (V14). * Microsoft president Steve Ballmer said Vista was so to steal, but it also makes it harder to drive! keywords: Even, MVP's, must, admit, truth, to, this, one description: See article in context at: www.aaxnet.com / editor / edit043
about updates, but I suspect it would be a good idea to back up my drivers now and then. I tried downloading two of the programs but without success so far not use any of those sites at all. I'd find out what non-MS drivers you have, and go to the appropriate site and download the latest drivers manually. - - Ken Mac OS X 10.6.8 Firefox 12.0 Thunderbird 12.0.1 If you have a commercial computer, it would have come with a set of usable drivers on a disk, anyway. If not, you can get them from the vendor and burn them to a disk yourself. That's your backup. Using the latest drivers is mostly a good idea in general, but usually not necessary. If they work, there are doing. Thank you, Ken. What I am after, though, is simply backing up the drivers I have, so I can reinstall them if necessary. Jo-Anne Thank you, Bill! I involved with those useless scam services. Several points: 1. There is no need to backup drivers. If you ever need any of them again, just get them again from the web Despite what I say in number 1, if you do want to back up your drivers, you do not need any special program to do it. Simply copy them all to
OK, I admit it, Leopard has more "Wow!" than Vista . in theory anyway Windows 7 OK, I admit it, Leopard has more "Wow!" than Vista . in theory anyway Now that I've given compelling . in theory anyway. Browsing through the 300+ new feature (well, OK, let's first admit that "new features" is marketing hyperbole, some of the features have just been re-tweaked and modified a little) I have to admit that I went "Wow!" more than once. In fact, I might as well come clean and admit that Leopard looks like it beats Vista in the "Wow!" department. In case you missed would appear because otherwise having two OSes was pretty useless.] f. . Microsoft WHCL-Certified Windows Drivers Enjoy the unique hardware features of your Mac including the iSight camera, trackpad scrolling, keyboard backlighting, and volume keys using fully compatible Windows drivers. [When I last used Boot Camp, the Windows drivers for the Mac hardware were, well, putting it kindly, execrable. Also, as ShadeTree points out
1) OS (1) Netgear's refusal to support 64 bits is for things like print drivers for their print servers, USB drivers when needed, and similar things. Otherwise routers are stand-alone devices that only see network related to X64 or the OS unless you have additional features you need like USB drivers to connect it, or print servers. Anything that attaches by ethernet or wireless should work it will work properly. On the 32 bit computer everthing then works as normal. Netgear admit that their routers do not support x64 OS. I want to know of one that t think so! Perhaps do you have a Gigabyte motherboard, or anything with nVidia ethernet drivers or nVidia firewall on X64? If so, THAT is most probably your problem, not the router. Been there. The nVidia drivers are not good, to be polite. There are many cases of this on the NG If this is your situation, then uninstall *all* the nVidia drivers / firewall via Control Panel, reboot, and point the hardware installer at directories with the necessary drivers - not using nVidia's installer. And DO NOT use the nVidia firewall. (Make sure you