what is the performance reduction -32bit old to 64 bit new?

By pisono ·
Folks, I have 2 new-builds:
i7 2600k on gigabyte h67 ud3 board and 2nd i5 2500k on a gigabyte p67 board w vidia gt440 gpu. Changed software to win 7 64bit from xp32 bit and ran passmark test on both. results lower on 64bit: For i7 64bit;1877, 32bit;2085. for i5 64 bit 1706, 32bit 1832. What gives?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Answers

Collapse -

re: "what gives?"

by Who Am I Really In reply to what is the performance r ...

Win7 has a much higher system requirement than that of XP

just the same as 98SE requires way more hardware than win3.10 WFWG

win3.10 will run extremely fast on an 80486 100MHz, 32 MB RAM and a 100MB HDD
good luck getting 98SE to run under that same system
first you'd need to at least install a 1 or 2GB HDD before even starting to install

XP Disc = CD of 583 MB (611,530,726 bytes)

win7 Disc = DVD of 3.47 GB (3,733,776,520 bytes)

it's best to do comparisons in the same version
compare XP 32 and XP x64
compare Vista 32 and Vista x64
compare Win7 32 and Win7 x64

generally you'll find that x64 has slightly higher hardware requirements

add info:

The 2009 version of this unit:

handles XP x64 really well
but cost 5x what an XP-32 system would have at the time

Collapse -

Reponse To Answer

by pisono In reply to re: "what gives?&quo ...

I'll add to my system< 320 gig wd aakx hdd each, 4 gigs corsair xms mem. Are you saying if I go back to a 32bit system , It will improve perfmnc?

Collapse -

No not at all

by OH Smeg Moderator In reply to what is the performance r ...

If you go back to a 32 Bit OS you'll not even use all of the installed RAM. Any 32 Bit OS is only capable of reading about 3.25 GIG of RAM and that is hardware Dependant.

Some M'Boards work better than others and some will allow a 32 Bit OS to recognize & use more RAM than others when you are looking at the 32 Bit OS's upper Limit.

Basically Speed Tests are as useful as -Tits on a Bull they may sound nice but in reality mean -Bugger All.

Way too often people look at Test Results and constantly push things as fast as possible and then wonder why Real World performance is not any better or only slightly different when they have spent thousands of $ to make things faster. Way too much depends on the OS and how well it is optimized for that Hardware and how the other Software that you use is Optimized for the Hardware.

After all it's pointless using a 2 X 8 Core CPU's if all of the software will only use 1 core. You are not going to get any real performance boost.


Collapse -

Reponse To Answer

by pisono In reply to No not at all

Thanks for the visit to the real world. I guess I'm a DAH-ller shot on decision to upgrade OS. Huh

Collapse -


by dogknees In reply to what is the performance r ...

Have you compared the same OS 32 vs 64 on the same hardware? It seems like you're changing too many things to be able to determine the source of the slow down.

Also, agree with Col, benchmarks tell you little about how usable the PC will be.

Collapse -

Reponse To Answer

by pisono In reply to Comparison

Both tests were done separately on both computers i.e. same hardware. I just uograded each to W7 64,

Collapse -


by bigjon-x64 In reply to what is the performance r ...

What's your Windows Experience Index score? It will rate the hardware on a scale of 1 - 7.9. Drivers can impact performance significantly.

Collapse -

Comparing apples to orangutans...

by Charles Bundy In reply to what is the performance r ...

I think [Who am I] hit the nail on the head. WinXP will be faster than Win7 on the same hardware regardless of 32/64 bit addressing. Now if you are comparing 32/64 bit versions of Win7 the 64 bit would be a tad slower, but not to the extent you state and probably only on I/O numbers. [Oh Smeg] and Mark Twain are right. There are lies, damn lies then there are benchmarks/statistics...

Collapse -

Other Factors

by TheChas In reply to what is the performance r ...

To make the comparison fair, you have to take many factors into account.

If the Windows 7 system is running the desktop in Aero mode, turn that off and your performance will improve dramatically.

As 4GB of RAM is the absolute maximum for a 32 bit system, install the maximum amount of RAM that the motherboard will take for the 64 bit comparison. One of the advantages of 64 bit architecture is the ability to use more RAM.

On the flip side, any 32 bit OS will use less power than the 64 bit version. Only 1 core of your multi-core CPU is fully in use with a 32 bit OS. Where a minimum of 2 cores will be in use for a 64 bit OS.


Collapse -

Reponse To Answer

by Charles Bundy In reply to Other Factors

32 bit OS has noting to do with multicore support. 32/64 is more of an data path addressing issue in the OS e.g. if your OS address variables are unsigned 32 bit 2^32 gets you a maximum of 4294967296 unique addresses or 4Gig. 2^64 nets you 18446744073709551616 or 1717986**84 Gig...

I know WinXP supported multicore as did Win2K and NT 4.0 tho they couldn't adapt the kernel on the fly like XP, you had to reinstall the OS .

Related Discussions

Related Forums