Windows 10 32 or 64 bit?

I have a Dell Lattitude tablet PC which has an i5 dual core CPU
and 4 GB RAM. I have Windows 10 32 bit installed and it works well.*
Would it be worthwhile to install the 64 bit version of Windows 10?


*IMHO

Lucifer Morningstar wrote:
I have a Dell Lattitude tablet PC which has an i5 dual core CPU
and 4 GB RAM. I have Windows 10 32 bit installed and it works well.*
Would it be worthwhile to install the 64 bit version of Windows 10?


*IMHO

You would gain the usage of a little bit more of the
installed RAM. Best case, you get to use 3.2GB of your
4GB installed, with the 32-bit OS, while the 64-bit
will have access to all of it.

If you switch to 64-bit, you can run 64-bit and 32-bit programs.

With the 32-bit OS, you can run 32-bit and 16-bit programs.

Some older 32-bit programs, use a 16-bit installer EXE, which
prevents the installer from running on a 64-bit system.

So the main advantage of a 32-bit install, is "old stuff works".

*******

The processor is likely 64-bit capable, but to verify
that you can try ark.intel.com and look up the specs
for it.

Paul

On 8/6/2017 10:58 PM, Lucifer Morningstar wrote:
I have a Dell Lattitude tablet PC which has an i5 dual core CPU
and 4 GB RAM. I have Windows 10 32 bit installed and it works well.*
Would it be worthwhile to install the 64 bit version of Windows 10?


*IMHO


Make sure you can find all the necessary drivers before you start.
I just put 10-64 on a HP Elitebook. The HP site just said,
"win10 not supported." A scavenger hunt found drivers for most,
but not all the hardware.
For win7, the HP site has a driver rollup that contains all the
drivers in a format that you can just point device manager
to and it just works.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Lucifer Morningstar wrote:

I have a Dell Lattitude tablet PC which has an i5 dual core CPU
and 4 GB RAM. I have Windows 10 32 bit installed and it works well.*
Would it be worthwhile to install the 64 bit version of Windows 10?

In addition to the other, very good, responses, remember that you
cannot *upgrade* the OS to the 64-bit version, it must be installed
from scratch. That means losing installed programs (you'll have to
reinstall them), settings and data.

--
Tim Slattery
tim at risingdove dot com

Tim Slattery wrote:
Lucifer Morningstar wrote:

I have a Dell Lattitude tablet PC which has an i5 dual core CPU
and 4 GB RAM. I have Windows 10 32 bit installed and it works well.*
Would it be worthwhile to install the 64 bit version of Windows 10?

In addition to the other, very good, responses, remember that you
cannot *upgrade* the OS to the 64-bit version, it must be installed
from scratch. That means losing installed programs (you'll have to
reinstall them), settings and data.


Well, now you've taken all the fun out of it :-)

Paul

On 8/7/2017 11:39 AM, Tim Slattery wrote:
I have a Dell Lattitude tablet PC which has an i5 dual core CPU
and 4 GB RAM. I have Windows 10 32 bit installed and it works well.*
Would it be worthwhile to install the 64 bit version of Windows 10?
My question is are you sure you have the 32 bit installed. It was my
understanding that the installer determined whether the computer was 32
or 64 bit and installed the appropriate version.



--
2017: The year we lean to play the great game of Euchre

On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 12:45:31 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

On 8/7/2017 11:39 AM, Tim Slattery wrote:
I have a Dell Lattitude tablet PC which has an i5 dual core CPU
and 4 GB RAM. I have Windows 10 32 bit installed and it works well.*
Would it be worthwhile to install the 64 bit version of Windows 10?
My question is are you sure you have the 32 bit installed. It was my
understanding that the installer determined whether the computer was 32
or 64 bit and installed the appropriate version.

Does this not depend on the circumstances of the initial installation?
When I upgraded I think from XP to Windows 7 the 'upgrade' process
installed the 32 bit program and had I wanted 64 bit a clean install
would have been required.

Keith Nuttle wrote:
On 8/7/2017 11:39 AM, Tim Slattery wrote:
I have a Dell Lattitude tablet PC which has an i5 dual core CPU
and 4 GB RAM. I have Windows 10 32 bit installed and it works well.*
Would it be worthwhile to install the 64 bit version of Windows 10?
My question is are you sure you have the 32 bit installed. It was my
understanding that the installer determined whether the computer was 32
or 64 bit and installed the appropriate version.




I thought there was a 64-bit DVD with Home and Pro on it.

And a 32-bit DVD with Home and Pro on it.

The user downloads the correct one for the job.

If you *boot* either of those DVDs, the interface
will only offer "Clean" install.

If you insert a DVD while the OS is running, and
run "Setup.exe", then there is an opportunity for
a Repair/Upgrade install. But it's not going to be
happy if the OS is 32-bit and the DVD is 64-bit.
The interface might say "reboot using the DVD and
do a clean install" or words to that effect.

There is no migration logic to hop between one
bitness and the other bitness.

It's in your best interest, not to lose focus
while working on this stuff. Or at least to have
a backup before starting.

*******

I had a Win2K installer CD *delete* the partitions
on a hard drive. That's how I learned to back up...

Paul

On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 12:45:31 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

On 8/7/2017 11:39 AM, Tim Slattery wrote:
I have a Dell Lattitude tablet PC which has an i5 dual core CPU
and 4 GB RAM. I have Windows 10 32 bit installed and it works well.*
Would it be worthwhile to install the 64 bit version of Windows 10?
My question is are you sure you have the 32 bit installed. It was my
understanding that the installer determined whether the computer was 32
or 64 bit and installed the appropriate version.

Its actually an HP Elitebook 2740p and I just confirmed the OS is 32
bit. There are separate downloads for 32 and 64 bit.

On Mon, 07 Aug 2017 00:30:57 -0700, mike wrote:

On 8/6/2017 10:58 PM, Lucifer Morningstar wrote:
I have a Dell Lattitude tablet PC which has an i5 dual core CPU
and 4 GB RAM. I have Windows 10 32 bit installed and it works well.*
Would it be worthwhile to install the 64 bit version of Windows 10?


*IMHO

Make sure you can find all the necessary drivers before you start.
I just put 10-64 on a HP Elitebook. The HP site just said,
"win10 not supported." A scavenger hunt found drivers for most,
but not all the hardware.
For win7, the HP site has a driver rollup that contains all the
drivers in a format that you can just point device manager
to and it just works.

I was mistaken when I said my tablet PC is a Dell Lattitude.
It is in fact an HP Elitebook 2740p.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

You make a good point and I think I will take that advice.
Windows 10 about says 2.92 GB usable.

On Mon, 07 Aug 2017 02:17:52 -0400, Paul
wrote:

Lucifer Morningstar wrote:
I have a Dell Lattitude tablet PC which has an i5 dual core CPU
and 4 GB RAM. I have Windows 10 32 bit installed and it works well.*
Would it be worthwhile to install the 64 bit version of Windows 10?


*IMHO

You would gain the usage of a little bit more of the
installed RAM. Best case, you get to use 3.2GB of your
4GB installed, with the 32-bit OS, while the 64-bit
will have access to all of it.

Windows 10 about says 2.92 GB usable so that might be incentive
to switch.

Would PAE have any use here?

If you switch to 64-bit, you can run 64-bit and 32-bit programs.

With the 32-bit OS, you can run 32-bit and 16-bit programs.

Some older 32-bit programs, use a 16-bit installer EXE, which
prevents the installer from running on a 64-bit system.

So the main advantage of a 32-bit install, is "old stuff works".

In your experience how much of an advantage is that given
I sometimes use old programs?

*******

The processor is likely 64-bit capable, but to verify
that you can try ark.intel.com and look up the specs
for it.

Windows 10 about says 32 bit operating system, x64 based processor.
It does have an Intel i5.

Paul

Lucifer Morningstar wrote:
On Mon, 07 Aug 2017 02:17:52 -0400, Paul
wrote:

Lucifer Morningstar wrote:
I have a Dell Lattitude tablet PC which has an i5 dual core CPU
and 4 GB RAM. I have Windows 10 32 bit installed and it works well.*
Would it be worthwhile to install the 64 bit version of Windows 10?


*IMHO
You would gain the usage of a little bit more of the
installed RAM. Best case, you get to use 3.2GB of your
4GB installed, with the 32-bit OS, while the 64-bit
will have access to all of it.

Windows 10 about says 2.92 GB usable so that might be incentive
to switch.

Would PAE have any use here?

If you switch to 64-bit, you can run 64-bit and 32-bit programs.

With the 32-bit OS, you can run 32-bit and 16-bit programs.

Some older 32-bit programs, use a 16-bit installer EXE, which
prevents the installer from running on a 64-bit system.

So the main advantage of a 32-bit install, is "old stuff works".

In your experience how much of an advantage is that given
I sometimes use old programs?

*******

The processor is likely 64-bit capable, but to verify
that you can try ark.intel.com and look up the specs
for it.

Windows 10 about says 32 bit operating system, x64 based processor.
It does have an Intel i5.

Paul

It boils down to "is it worth all that work, to gain
another 800MB of memory" ? That's the basic question.
The more memory your video card has on it, the more
RAM you stand to get back by moving to 64-bit. The memory
on the video card is mapped as well, and every byte
on the video card, means one less byte of system memory
is addressable from your 4GB installed.

*******

As for PAE, PAE actually used to work. There was a time
when a 32 bit OS could access 64GB of memory, but only
in 4GB sized chunks. You would need to run sixteen
4GB programs to use it all. Now, due to the user/kernel
split, it actually takes more than 16 programs, but that's
not important to the concept. The point was, you
couldn't run 32-bit Photoshop and get 63.5GB for it.

The Microsoft memory license limits the address space
available in Ring 3 (the application ring). And that's why
you can only have 3.2GB or so. (You get *less* if you
have a big video card - a 2GB video card would
severely cripple your available address space for
system memory with the MS memory/address license.)

This guy hacked Vista x32 to use 8GB (all Ring3). That
would be done by disabling driver signing checks and hacking
some file with a hex editor. And the OS functioned
normally. And that would be a PAE situation, so
it would take two to four programs to use up all the
RAM available. So this guy knows where the license check
hides.

http://www.geoffchappell.com/notes/w...nse/memory.htm

*******

I'm using 8GB of RAM on WinXP SP3 on this computer.
This is how it's allocated.

3.2GB Ring 3 (normal, used for programs)
A small amount used for Ring 0 kernel (0.3GB).

0.8GB In-accessible area.

4.0GB DataRAM RAMdisk (Ring 0, uses PAE mode)
----- -----
8.0GB Physical RAM installed

The memory license is for Ring 3. The RAMdisk allows
a user to get some value from the extra RAM, and
since it's a "driver", it lives in Ring 0 with
the kernel. Ring 0 is thus, the privileged ring.
And isolation is intended to prevent Ring 3 applications
from messing with the Ring 0 kernel+drivers.

The "PAE Feature" was discontinued by the DataRAM programmer,
with no explanation of "why". If you buy a copy of their
product now, you cannot reproduce my WinXP setup. It
only works with AWE ("low") memory.

The upper graph here, is this machine I'm typing on.
That's my tiny 4GB RAMDisk, with the nice consistent performance.
The bottom graph is the Test Machine, and I put whole
virtual machines into the bottom RAMDisk. And actually,
that was a dumb idea (buying the RAM), as dollar for
dollar, an SSD is 4x more cost effective. The OS and
applications simply cannot use RAMDisks all that
effectively. Even a cheesy SSD (the cheapest you
can find at the computer store), gives 90% of the
benefits, with none of that cost.

https://postimg.org/image/ph1e57vc9/

Paul

Lucifer Morningstar wrote:
On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 12:45:31 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

On 8/7/2017 11:39 AM, Tim Slattery wrote:
I have a Dell Lattitude tablet PC which has an i5 dual core CPU
and 4 GB RAM. I have Windows 10 32 bit installed and it works well.*
Would it be worthwhile to install the 64 bit version of Windows 10?
My question is are you sure you have the 32 bit installed. It was my
understanding that the installer determined whether the computer was 32
or 64 bit and installed the appropriate version.

Its actually an HP Elitebook 2740p and I just confirmed the OS is 32
bit. There are separate downloads for 32 and 64 bit.

Specs for that machine say a max of 8GB ram.
If it were my machine I would max out the ram and install the 64 bit o/s.
The increase in speed will be quite noticible.
"Memory DDR3 SDRAM, 1066/1333 MHz*, two slots supporting dual-channel memory,
1024/2048/4096 MB SODIMMs, up to 8192 MB total " .

On Mon, 07 Aug 2017 19:45:42 -0400, Paul
wrote:

Lucifer Morningstar wrote:
On Mon, 07 Aug 2017 02:17:52 -0400, Paul
wrote:

Lucifer Morningstar wrote:
I have a Dell Lattitude tablet PC which has an i5 dual core CPU
and 4 GB RAM. I have Windows 10 32 bit installed and it works well.*
Would it be worthwhile to install the 64 bit version of Windows 10?


*IMHO
You would gain the usage of a little bit more of the
installed RAM. Best case, you get to use 3.2GB of your
4GB installed, with the 32-bit OS, while the 64-bit
will have access to all of it.

Windows 10 about says 2.92 GB usable so that might be incentive
to switch.

Would PAE have any use here?

If you switch to 64-bit, you can run 64-bit and 32-bit programs.

With the 32-bit OS, you can run 32-bit and 16-bit programs.

Some older 32-bit programs, use a 16-bit installer EXE, which
prevents the installer from running on a 64-bit system.

So the main advantage of a 32-bit install, is "old stuff works".

In your experience how much of an advantage is that given
I sometimes use old programs?

*******

The processor is likely 64-bit capable, but to verify
that you can try ark.intel.com and look up the specs
for it.

Windows 10 about says 32 bit operating system, x64 based processor.
It does have an Intel i5.

Paul

It boils down to "is it worth all that work, to gain
another 800MB of memory" ? That's the basic question.
The more memory your video card has on it, the more
RAM you stand to get back by moving to 64-bit. The memory
on the video card is mapped as well, and every byte
on the video card, means one less byte of system memory
is addressable from your 4GB installed.

Thanks.

*******

As for PAE, PAE actually used to work. There was a time
when a 32 bit OS could access 64GB of memory, but only
in 4GB sized chunks. You would need to run sixteen
4GB programs to use it all. Now, due to the user/kernel
split, it actually takes more than 16 programs, but that's
not important to the concept. The point was, you
couldn't run 32-bit Photoshop and get 63.5GB for it.

The Microsoft memory license limits the address space
available in Ring 3 (the application ring). And that's why
you can only have 3.2GB or so. (You get *less* if you
have a big video card - a 2GB video card would
severely cripple your available address space for
system memory with the MS memory/address license.)

This guy hacked Vista x32 to use 8GB (all Ring3).

You mean x86 right?

That would be done by disabling driver signing checks and hacking
some file with a hex editor. And the OS functioned
normally. And that would be a PAE situation, so
it would take two to four programs to use up all the
RAM available. So this guy knows where the license check
hides.

http://www.geoffchappell.com/notes/w...nse/memory.htm

I only know that Microsoft has set limits in each 32 bit version
of Windows.

Windows Version Memory limit
Windows 2000 Professional, Server 4 GB
Windows 2000 Advanced Server 8 GB
Windows 2000 Datacenter 32 GB
Windows XP Starter 0.5 GB
Windows XP (Other editions) 4 GB
Windows Server 2003 Web SP2 2 GB
Windows Server 2003 Standard SP2 4 GB
Windows Server 2003 Enterprise/Datacenter SP2 64 GB
Windows Storage Server 2003 Enterprise 8 GB
Windows Storage Server 2003 (other editions) 4 GB
Windows Home Server 4 GB
Windows Vista Starter 1 GB
Windows Vista (Other editions) 4 GB
Windows Server 2008 Standard, Web 4 GB
Windows Server 2008 Enterprise, Datacenter 64 GB
Windows 7 Starter 2 GB
Windows 7 (Other editions) 4 GB
Windows 8 (all editions) 4 GB
Windows 10 (all editions) 4 GB



*******

I'm using 8GB of RAM on WinXP SP3 on this computer.
This is how it's allocated.

3.2GB Ring 3 (normal, used for programs)
A small amount used for Ring 0 kernel (0.3GB).

0.8GB In-accessible area.

4.0GB DataRAM RAMdisk (Ring 0, uses PAE mode)
----- -----
8.0GB Physical RAM installed

The memory license is for Ring 3. The RAMdisk allows
a user to get some value from the extra RAM, and
since it's a "driver", it lives in Ring 0 with
the kernel. Ring 0 is thus, the privileged ring.
And isolation is intended to prevent Ring 3 applications
from messing with the Ring 0 kernel+drivers.

The "PAE Feature" was discontinued by the DataRAM programmer,
with no explanation of "why". If you buy a copy of their
product now, you cannot reproduce my WinXP setup. It
only works with AWE ("low") memory.

The upper graph here, is this machine I'm typing on.
That's my tiny 4GB RAMDisk, with the nice consistent performance.
The bottom graph is the Test Machine, and I put whole
virtual machines into the bottom RAMDisk. And actually,
that was a dumb idea (buying the RAM), as dollar for
dollar, an SSD is 4x more cost effective. The OS and
applications simply cannot use RAMDisks all that
effectively. Even a cheesy SSD (the cheapest you
can find at the computer store), gives 90% of the
benefits, with none of that cost.

https://postimg.org/image/ph1e57vc9/

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physic...ress_Extension
32 bit Windows XP starter has an upper limit of 0.5 GB RAM and
other 32 bit XP editions have a 4 GB limit with PAE.
Windows 10 all editions have a limit of 4 GB.

I had a server with 8 Pentium 3 900 Mhz CPUs and 8 GB RAM.
That used PAE to access the full 8 gigs.

I'd still like to know why my desktop computer with 2 x 2 GB
RAM can only use 1.96 GB.


Paul

On Mon, 07 Aug 2017 19:46:40 -0500, Paul in Houston TX
wrote:

Lucifer Morningstar wrote:
On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 12:45:31 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

On 8/7/2017 11:39 AM, Tim Slattery wrote:
I have a Dell Lattitude tablet PC which has an i5 dual core CPU
and 4 GB RAM. I have Windows 10 32 bit installed and it works well.*
Would it be worthwhile to install the 64 bit version of Windows 10?
My question is are you sure you have the 32 bit installed. It was my
understanding that the installer determined whether the computer was 32
or 64 bit and installed the appropriate version.

Its actually an HP Elitebook 2740p and I just confirmed the OS is 32
bit. There are separate downloads for 32 and 64 bit.

Specs for that machine say a max of 8GB ram.
If it were my machine I would max out the ram and install the 64 bit o/s.
The increase in speed will be quite noticible.
"Memory DDR3 SDRAM, 1066/1333 MHz*, two slots supporting dual-channel memory,
1024/2048/4096 MB SODIMMs, up to 8192 MB total " .

I have a Dell laptop which has an i7 quad core processor.
It too has one 4 GB card with two slots so I thought about
buying a second card from Ebay, until I saw the price,
around AU$80.