Windows 7 64-bit Concern Created 14 years ago2009-09-21 19:27:31 UTC by TawnosPrime

Ok, I've had a concern about Windows 7 64-bit for a couple days now.

I know that it allows for 4GB or more of RAM, but a downside I've heard has to do w/ the CPU. According to my buddy that got the RTM version of Pro through his college, it sees his (the Xeon version of the E8400) as a single core CPU instead of a dual core. He claims it's 'cus of the 64-bit operations seeing the two 32-bit cores as a single 64-bit unit. Think I explained that right.

Anyway, he tried to tell me otherwise, but I can't buy this as a good thing. To me, this seems like one step forward for memory, but a step back for processors, since it doesn't double the speed or allow for multitasking.

Can anyone shed some light on this and explain...preferably with out getting too technical?

Sounds like your friend is an idiot. It doesn't work that way.

I'm with Penguinboy. Misinformation abounds.

Im on 64bit W7 right now with a dual core CPU and 4 gigs of RAM. Your friend shouldn't be talking

Yeah, basically the non-technical explanation is your friend is an ass.

Hey TawnosPrime, please recommend this book to your friend: http://www.amazon.com/Windows-Dummies-Computer-Tech/dp/0470497432/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1253589667&sr=8-1

I thought he was bullshitting me. He claims he got his info from an A+ book. When I asked him to explain it again today, he got right pissy too. He can't stand it when someone questions him. Though he's a perfect fit for his future career choice, which, iirc is Sys Admin.

Hmm...that's a tempting book for myself...

What, because Sys Admins are always BOFH?

I might get that book before i buy windows 7.
I need a hardware update before i get it tho.
Need quad core and DDR3 =]

Your friend should not have been born.

Blame his parents for his existence.

Whoa there...satchmo!

That was a cold hearted comment, never seen that side of you before.

That was a cold hearted comment, never seen that side of you before.

Waaaah.

I hate people who cannot admit to their own mistakes.

I have many sides. You can say that I am multifaceted.

Okay, no problem. I am not judging you, far from it. In fact, I too hate people who cannot admit to their own mistakes.

I know that it allows for 4GB or more of RAM

Up to 128 GB.

why would you need 128?!?!?

I didn't say you had to have that amount of RAM ...

If anyone never knew, especially XP users refusing to update to the latest OS, (like me D:) DirectX 11 is now out but as of now it only works with two ATI cards, I forget which ones. DirectX 11 Does not run on Windows XP, Only Vista, and Windows 7.

Just thought I'd let XP users know.

Horsefeathers. There's no reason anyone would need any more than 640K.

I don't need DirectX 11. Whatever runs on it, my computer doesn't support it anyway.

There's no reason anyone would need any more than 640K.

Welcome back to 1980's.

There's no game that takes advantage of DirectX 11 now anyway.

Being on the cutting edge often means you get slashed first.

There's no game that takes advantage of DirectX 11 now anyway.

True, if you are referring to a full game. Now, there is one or two special game demos out there specifically designed to show off the latest eye candy from DirectX 11. This brings me to the next point: Didn't somebody from Microsoft once mention that the next Xbox's GPU will support DirectX 11? I could swear I heard something like that. If this turns out to be true, I bet the games will look freak'n awesome!

DX10 and 11 haven't added much to the gaming market. Microsoft screwed themselves over by not releasing it for XP, everyone is still using DX9 because of this.

Your friend should not have been born.

Blame his parents for his existence.

I literally laughed out loud. Or at least snickered for a bit.

DX10 was nothing but a marketing gimmick, and one that failed miserably I might add.