Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Okay folks,

I am curious...how much (if any) performance increase in FSX is there with Win Vista 64 bit? Now, my question is of course assuming a 64 bit capable system...any thoughts welcome... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been a hot topic for some time now. Whilst I don't have Vista-64 bit installed, I don't believe you will see a vast performance increase over 32-bit, if at all. Since FSX caps out at about 900MB of memory usage no matter the OS, there is little benefit in anything over the 3.2GB that XP or Vista 32-bit can address. The key things to add to a 32-bit system are 4GB of RAM, a beefy video card and of course a RAID-0 array with very fast drives. Combine that with the known FSX tweaks and a tuned OS and you can get the best out of your 32-bit system.

Of course Mango and I think Wolter use Vista-64 and they find it very stable and you can see from Mango's screenshots how nicely his setup runs. However, as far as running *faster* than Vista-32 or XP-32, the jury is out on that IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be sure to carefully examine the pros and cons.  My gut feeling is to advise to stick to 32 bit, since a lot of people out there regret going 64 mainly due to some programs not working..

http://www.aussiex.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=111

http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/Previews/236/purchase_236.html

Driver support is getting better, from what I observe - but whether it's up to the same level as 32 bit I'll leave to the pros..

I don't know why a purchase of Vista 64 doesn't give you the option of going back to 32, at most a 30 dollar charge for getting 32bit media posted to you.

Cheers,

Matt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see my name mentioned in here .........lol ;D

maybe my lack of english lenguage knowledge plays tricks on me here :

Of course Mango and I think Wolter use Vista-64 and they find it very stable and you can see from Mango's screenshots how nicely his setup runs. However, as far as running *faster* than Vista-32 or XP-32, the jury is out on that IMHO.

Do I read correct that you assume I have a 64bit OS ?

I use XPpro SP3 UK version and run normal 32bit setup

installed the latest nVidia Beta drivers 177.39

4 Gig RAM DDR3 1600

Q9300 CPU 2,5 still runing bog standard

2 RAID 0 arrays of 1 Terra bite (2x500G HD's) partitioned up:

Posted Image

=> FULL SIZE Screenshot

As you can see I have installed my things as follows :

C:\ XPpro SP3

E:\ Microsoft Flight Simulator X

F:\ FS Global X 2008 world mesh and some other scenery

G:\ my "Beta" stuff

H:\ my backup images of my installs, at least one from every partition

I:\ IL-2 for when I'm fed up and want to shoot at something

J:\ my Documents, this so if the C drive goes tits up I still can retrieve my documents

K:\ is reserved for one of my external harddrives

L:\ is for some linux stuff I'm tinkering with

M:\ is unused at the moment but won't take long to fill it in the future

N:\ is reserved for my other external harddrive

I quite clearly opted for the 32bit and also the "english" version of XPpro for the OS as I didn't feel for having to go through loopholes to get things running and in future "if" things change I can still get myself a 64bit OS,

but honestly, I cannot discover any advantages ................. yet.

At the moment I'm still playing around with various settings to find the "sweetspot" for the stuff .......... :)

but must admit I had a lil chuckle if you guys really think I'm running 64bit here ;D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well guys, thanks for the replies.:) I know this has been a hot topic, and that is why I wanted to hear what folks on here had to say about it. You guys seem to have some good opinion's....more mature if you will;)

As for 32 bit, that is where I am leaning. My setup is not too bad, but you know how us FS peeps are, always trying to get more performance. For the most part, my system runs FSX pretty well, but as the add-ons start to pile on, things run down a bit. I am very religious about taking care of how I install/uninstall software and am moderately tech savy (I used to be tech support guy for Dell once upon a time, and even ran my own custom PC buisness but that was in a different life;).

Anyhow, I am running Vista 32 bit right now without issue, and was just curious what you all thought. Thanks for the input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You must have some nasty hardware if you can't find a 64 bit driver by now...  ;D

Vista 64 handles multitasking, memory, virtual address space, ect better than Vista 32. My 64 bit setup is rock stable - my prior 32 bit setup wasn't without tweaks. I see not one reason why i should use 32 bit. The only program i use which had problems was SbuilderX, but after installing coreflag that one works as well. And the whole system is very 'snappy'...

Btw - you can't upgrade from 32 to 64 bit. This would be a complete reinstall for everything. If you are setting up a brand new high end system with 4 GB RAM now... Well, it's your decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vista 64-bit is extremely good, in terms of product/driver support, application handling, support for large memory address space (ie > 4GB RAM) etc. In fact its better in many other technical aspects to the 32-bit version, as Microsoft decided to design Vista as both a 64- and 32-bit OS, rather than having the 64-bit stuff tacked on (a la Windows XP :D )

As for performance though, you can't expect it to go any faster than a 32-bit version, unfortunately it doesn't work that way. Thats assuming normal use of course - if you have 8GB or RAM, and you are consuming over 4GB before you fire up FSX, then having a 64-bit OS would be priceless :D

Thats not to turn you off getting a 64-bit OS - I use Vista Ultimate 64-bit on my machine, and all my hardware works, all my 32-bit software works fine. In many ways, its no different to a 32-bit version, I just have a few more goodies at my disposal (which the average person would never know existed, what can I say, I'm a nerd :) )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was talked into vista 64 by someone who I respect as a tech. And thanks to Holger I was able to get SBX to work, and at the moment everything is great. It just seems that every so often there are problems installing something. Had probs with photoshop CS3 till searching through the forums turned up a solution.

Bottom line 64 has the potential to be improved , but software developers are slow to catch up. I'm hoping time is on my side and I get the full benefit for putting up with the hassells now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that Vista 64 bit will address more than 4 gig of ram.

I have 8 gig and every ounce of that is addressed.........OK, I know I'm gonna get hammered here about the amount that windows actually uses but for me the difference counts!!

Frank

P.S. I have had no probs with 64 or 32 but I have all new hardware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While Vista-64 works quite nicely, and I run FSX on it (with 4GB RAM) on a laptop, there are some applications that don't work (yet). Examples are Google Earth, officially it is not supported on Vista-64 and when installed the image looks terrible (I removed it again). Another one is my Nikon photo scanner (LS5000ED). Nikon doesn't see the market for 64-bit drivers (yet) so even though it is just a USB device, I can't use it with Vista-64.

Siggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Google Earth Vista 64 thing has been fixed in the latest Beta. I installed it last night and everything is crystal clear again. All I need now is for SBuilder to be able to download from google again and I'll start playing with airfield making!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...