32 vs. 64: What bit Windows?

Ericuse165 asked the Windows forum which is better: the 32- or 64-bit version of Windows 7

Ericuse165 asked the Windows forum which is better: the 32- or 64-bit version of Windows 7.

You can run today's versions of Windows on 32-bit processors -- a standard that's been around for about 25 years -- and on newer, backward-compatible 64-bit processors. Of course, everything has to have an acronym in this industry, so the Windows-compatible 64-bit standard is also known as x64. That's fine, but the 32-bit standard is abbreviated as x86. If you don't understand the history, that's just plain confusing.

Because x64 processors are backwards-compatible, you can install and run 32-bit as well as 64bit versions of Windows onto them. Of course, if you bought an x64 computer from a major manufacturer, it almost certainly came with 64-bit Windows pre-installed.

You cannot install or run 64-bit Windows on a 32-bit PC.

The 64-bit version of Windows has certain advantages. While the 32-bit version is limited to 4GB of RAM -- and can't really make use of all that -- the 64-bit version can address up to 8TB. While you won't be able to actually install that much RAM (or afford it) for a long time to come, you can buy a 64-bit computer today with 12GB installed.

Speaking of things that aren't quite there yet, 64-bit applications should run faster than their 32-bit equivalents. But as I write this, very few native 64-bit applications exist, and they're not necessarily improvements (most 32-bit applications run just fine in Windows x64). In fact, although Microsoft Office 2010 comes with 32- and 64-bit versions on the same DVD, Microsoft recommends you install only the 32-bit version.

And, of course, 64-bit Windows has its disadvantages:

While most 32-bit applications have no problem in a 64-bit environment, utilities -- which tend to work close to the OS's core -- are seldom as versatile. For instance, a program that inserts itself into Windows Explorer's context menu has to be rewritten to work with the x64 version of Explorer. More and more utilities today are getting rewritten to work properly in Windows x64.

Another problem: Early, 16-bit Windows (and DOS) programs, written to be compatible with pre-Windows 95 Microsoft operating systems, will not work at all in the 64-bit environment. (They will work in a 32-bit version of Windows running on 64-bit hardware.) That's significant from a historical point of view -- for the first time, we have Windows operating systems that won't run the original, IBM-PC version of VisiCalc.

But for most people, that shouldn't be an issue.

Read the original forum discussion.

Add your comments to this article below. If you have other tech questions, email them to me at answer@pcworld.com, or post them to a community of helpful folks on the PCW Answer Line forum.

Join the PC World newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.

Tags MicrosoftWindowsWindows 7softwareoperating systems

Struggling for Christmas presents this year? Check out our Christmas Gift Guide for some top tech suggestions and more.

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

Lincoln Spector

PC World (US online)

Most Popular Reviews

Follow Us

Best Deals on GoodGearGuide

Shopping.com

Latest News Articles

Resources

GGG Evaluation Team

Kathy Cassidy

STYLISTIC Q702

First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.

Anthony Grifoni

STYLISTIC Q572

For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.

Steph Mundell

LIFEBOOK UH574

The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.

Andrew Mitsi

STYLISTIC Q702

The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.

Simon Harriott

STYLISTIC Q702

My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.

Latest Jobs

Shopping.com

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?