 |
 |
64-bit or 32-bit: please explain
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'm getting ready to install Windows 7 on an iMac 2.8GHz i7. I'm going to start with a Bootcamp install and probably run it at least part time using Fusion or Parallels (haven't decided yet.) So next question up is 32-bit or 64-bit. I gather I could do either. The main software I'll be running, 3DStudio Max, has both versions on its install disks.
So I can't seem to get a clear idea of which version of Windows I should be installing and why. If anyone could give me some clues on this front it would be a big help.
Thanks.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status:
Offline
|
|
I think it comes down to RAM. If your iMac comes with 4 GBs or are planning on going to it (or beyond) then 32-bit Windows are not for you, as you would be limited to something like 3.3 GB of RAM, wasting precious amounts of RAM no matter the amount of RAM inside your Mac.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
It's not that simple when it comes to virtualization.
Para-virtualization is not possible with 64 bit guests, AFAIK, and you need a hypervisor that supports Intel VT to run 64 bit guests too. Your CPU and all Intel Mac CPUs should support VT, AFAIK, and Windows does not support para-virt anyway, so you could run the 64 bit version which I would suggest doing if you have the RAM and your app can make use of more than 4 gig of RAM.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Status:
Offline
|
|
AAAaaa!!
I mean thanks!  I think I may be just driving myself crazy with this trying to avoid all possible problems before I even have the software in hand. But as you say, virtualization isn't that simple. Every can of worms seems to have another can of worms in it.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
So wait...are you all saying we should just get 32 bit Windows 7 to be safe?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
Who are you asking, Helmling?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by besson3c 
Who are you asking, Helmling?
Anyone, but mostly you.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
What I would say is that if you want to assign more than 4 GB of RAM to your Windows apps or you feel that a particular app or the OS itself would benefit from running in 64 bit mode, it doesn't hurt to try doing just that. In some cases, and with some virtualization solutions you can't run 64 bit Windows though, such as with Windows guests and processors or virtualization solutions that don't support full virtualization via the Intel VT or AMD XT extensions that are included with your processor.
All Intel based Macs support VT, and I'm not aware of any Mac-centric virtualization solution/hypervisor that does not support full virtualization, as opposed to para-virtualization. There is only one caveat though, and that is migrating your VM images to a machine that doesn't have these extensions though, in which case your VM guests will not run.
Para-virtualization is actually faster, it basically means that not all of the hardware being presented to the guest is being emulated. If you have ever looked into a virtual private server (VPS) with a company like Linode or Slicehost you will notice that Windows and FreeBSD is not available as an OS choice. This is because these companies use Xen as their VM host and the guests that are run are run via para-virt since this scales better. In order for an OS to support para-virtualization its kernel needs to be modified to support this, which is why this is not available under Windows, why there is partial support in the BSDs, and why therefore all of the OS choices are Linux based.
The cliff notes: all of this para vs. full virt is not relevant to Mac users since Fusion/Virtualbox/Parallels do not do para-virt, and the issue of whether Intel VT (which is hardware that makes 64 bit full-virt possible) isn't either since all Intel Macs will support this. The only concern is with possibly migrating your VM images to a different, older non-Mac machine. Otherwise, knock yourself out going with 64 bit guests!
Does this make sense?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by besson3c
Does this make sense?
Actually...no, none at all. You could've been speaking a whole other language.
I just need Windows to play Civilization 5 and my wife needs it to open some peculiar PDF's with internal bookmarks that only open on PC's.
So, 32 bit then, right?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Helmling
Actually...no, none at all. You could've been speaking a whole other language.
I just need Windows to play Civilization 5 and my wife needs it to open some peculiar PDF's with internal bookmarks that only open on PC's.
So, 32 bit then, right?
It really doesn't matter then.
For Civ V I'd suggest going with WINE rather than a virtual machine, we've played all of the Civ IV games up to Colonization via WINE just beautifully, it would run *much* faster that way including with video acceleration which is considered experimental in an VM guest.
I'd love a copy of the Civ V prerelease.. How far along is it?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by besson3c
It really doesn't matter then.
For Civ V I'd suggest going with WINE rather than a virtual machine, we've played all of the Civ IV games up to Colonization via WINE just beautifully, it would run *much* faster that way including with video acceleration which is considered experimental in an VM guest.
I'd love a copy of the Civ V prerelease.. How far along is it?
It comes out on my birthday next month and I must prepare. So you think Wine will work with Civ 5 out of the box? I was actually just trying to get the PC version of Adobe Reader working on my wife's Macbook through an old copy of Crossover, but nothing would happen when I launched Crossover. For the life of me I can't figure out why the links work in the PC version of Reader but not in Preview or the Mac version.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Helmling
It comes out on my birthday next month and I must prepare. So you think Wine will work with Civ 5 out of the box? I was actually just trying to get the PC version of Adobe Reader working on my wife's Macbook through an old copy of Crossover, but nothing would happen when I launched Crossover. For the life of me I can't figure out why the links work in the PC version of Reader but not in Preview or the Mac version.
It looks like it will. It uses Visual C++ 2008 which the WINE app DB says works perfectly, and it will run under Windows XP which I think that WINE is still centered around. Starcraft 2, another very recently released game, works perfectly on WINE right out-of-the-box too.
A lot of apps like Adobe CS, Office, etc. don't work in WINE, but a lot of games run perfectly - no muss, no fuss. Some versions of Acrobat are reported to kind-of-sort-of work: WineHQ - Adobe Acrobat, but Civ IV has been working for years, literally. We've been playing it for years that way  I had to jump through some hoops to get the original Civ IV to work way back when, but the newer versions worked with no extra work necessary at all. That may be because of the work I did way back when, or just the improvement of WINE over the years, I don't know, but even then the extra work I did back then wasn't daunting.
We've been very impressed with how all sorts of games run in WINE.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by besson3c
The cliff notes: all of this para vs. full virt is not relevant to Mac users since Fusion/Virtualbox/Parallels do not do para-virt, and the issue of whether Intel VT (which is hardware that makes 64 bit full-virt possible) isn't either since all Intel Macs will support this.
Why bother mentioning it at all then, when it's obviously neither of relevance nor of interest to the original poster?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot
Why bother mentioning it at all then, when it's obviously neither of relevance nor of interest to the original poster?
I already explained that this would be relevant if the person anticipates transporting their VM images to another machine using a processor not listed on the Wikipedia page.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by besson3c
It looks like it will. It uses Visual C++ 2008 which the WINE app DB says works perfectly, and it will run under Windows XP which I think that WINE is still centered around. Starcraft 2, another very recently released game, works perfectly on WINE right out-of-the-box too.
A lot of apps like Adobe CS, Office, etc. don't work in WINE, but a lot of games run perfectly - no muss, no fuss. Some versions of Acrobat are reported to kind-of-sort-of work: WineHQ - Adobe Acrobat, but Civ IV has been working for years, literally. We've been playing it for years that way I had to jump through some hoops to get the original Civ IV to work way back when, but the newer versions worked with no extra work necessary at all. That may be because of the work I did way back when, or just the improvement of WINE over the years, I don't know, but even then the extra work I did back then wasn't daunting.
We've been very impressed with how all sorts of games run in WINE.
That sounds promising. If it doesn't, I'll be coming to find you to explain these hoops to me because I thoroughly intend on playing the hell out of that game the moment it's available.
Now, if only I could figure out what it up with this PDF issue my wife is having. I got the Windows version of Reader working last night on her Macbook, but still no luck. I guess I'm going to have to get it to open inside IE with the Adobe plug-in, since that's how the links work on the PC side. Very odd.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top