1. Post #1
    Fuck You, Laren Faust
    Banshee FrieNd's Avatar
    July 2009
    2,427 Posts
    Hey, I just got x64 version of Windows 7 and I have almost no idea what is different. From what I read before I installed it, It's makes programs written for x64 run more efficiently on the processor and allows 4Gb ram.\

    That is All I know.

    I'm using an Intel Core i7 860 2.80GHz Lynnfield 45nm

    I'd like to know how this will effect x86 Programs and Games like Team fortress and Halo 2 and some advice on what to and not to do.

  2. Post #2
    Mobon1's Avatar
    January 2010
    2,646 Posts
    Holy oldnesss.
    It doesn't affect much (I believe), just faster as it allows more RAM and some 16 bit programs (mainly the ancient ones) can have issues running.

    Like the LEGOLAND installer. I miss it.

    Didn't mean 32 bit, sorry.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply United States Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  3. Post #3
    Fuck You, Laren Faust
    Banshee FrieNd's Avatar
    July 2009
    2,427 Posts
    Oh lord... so my Windows 98 Games are now useless!?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply United States Show Events Disagree Disagree x 2 (list)

  4. Post #4
    Gold Member
    ManningQB18's Avatar
    April 2009
    9,855 Posts
    Shouldn't change x86 programs at all

    You can't run old 16 bit programs though. Virtual Machines would allow it though.

  5. Post #5
    Mobon1's Avatar
    January 2010
    2,646 Posts
    But yeah most games that were made before 64bit run perfectly fine.

    Edited:

    Oh lord... so my Windows 98 Games are now useless!?
    What games might I ask?

  6. Post #6
    Fuck You, Laren Faust
    Banshee FrieNd's Avatar
    July 2009
    2,427 Posts
    I seriously use Windows 98 and Windows 95 Programs...
    What am I going to do..
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply United States Show Events Dumb Dumb x 2 (list)

  7. Post #7
    Played it for the plot
    Dennab
    October 2008
    14,789 Posts
    vmware

  8. Post #8
    Fuck You, Laren Faust
    Banshee FrieNd's Avatar
    July 2009
    2,427 Posts
    The Same vmware that costs $133?

  9. Post #9
    Gold Member
    1/4 Life's Avatar
    July 2005
    2,253 Posts
    The Same vmware that costs $133?
    Oracle VirtualBox.

  10. Post #10
    Gold Member
    Panda X's Avatar
    August 2006
    9,806 Posts
    The Same vmware that costs $133?
    VMWare Player is free. However the program is slow as fuck in my experience (on the latest too), so I use VirtualBox.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply United States Show Events Agree Agree x 7Disagree Disagree x 2 (list)

  11. Post #11
    I TOLD YOU BRO. I TOLD YOU ABOUT THE MOON.
    64fanatic's Avatar
    May 2006
    1,008 Posts
    Most 16bit stuff I have is DOS so I use DOSBox for 16bit stuffs.

  12. Post #12
    Pixel Heart's Avatar
    July 2009
    4,727 Posts
    About the only differences you will be able to notice are you have two sets of Program Files:

    Program Files is where 64-bit programs get installed.

    Program Files (x86) is where 32-bit programs get installed.

    ...and you can use more than 4GB of system memory without resorting to PAE mode.

  13. Post #13
    About the only differences you will be able to notice are you have two sets of Program Files:

    Program Files is where 64-bit programs get installed.

    Program Files (x86) is where 32-bit programs get installed.

    ...and you can use more than 4GB of system memory without resorting to PAE mode.
    I'm pretty sure the folders don't really matter, other than windows making them get installed in those folders.

    Edited:

    I take that back, apparently windows can use it to match up the launched program with the correct version of system .dll's and files it needs.

    I'm not actually sure

  14. Post #14
    ineedateam1's Avatar
    April 2010
    2,543 Posts
    VirtualBox

  15. Post #15
    Internet Detective (HBIED certified)
    leach139's Avatar
    August 2007
    7,215 Posts
    I'm pretty sure the folders don't really matter, other than windows making them get installed in those folders.

    Edited:

    I take that back, apparently windows can use it to match up the launched program with the correct version of system .dll's and files it needs.

    I'm not actually sure
    x64 executables use windows/system32, x86 ones use windows/sysWOW64 (Windows On Windows 64). The Program Files splitting just makes it easier to see which programs are x64 and which are x86.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply United Kingdom Show Events Funny Funny x 3 (list)

  16. Post #16
    I'm dumb! You don't have an excuse!
    MacTrekkie's Avatar
    July 2009
    5,485 Posts
    x64 executables use windows/system32, x86 ones use windows/sysWOW64 (Windows On Windows 64). The Program Files splitting just makes it easier to see which programs are x64 and which are x86.
    Why don't they just rename it to system64?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply United States Show Events Zing Zing x 4Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  17. Post #17
    Gold Member
    Panda X's Avatar
    August 2006
    9,806 Posts
    Why don't they just rename it to system64?
    Renaming System32 would take a lot of changes and end up splitting the two architecture codes further apart. And renaming SysWOW64 would imply that there are 64-bit files in it and calling it WOW64 makes since as Windows (32-bit) on Windows 64-bit makes sense.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply United States Show Events Funny Funny x 3 (list)

  18. Post #18
    thf
    Gold Member
    Dennab
    June 2009
    3,331 Posts
    Renaming System32 would take a lot of changes
    I think that shows how terribly coded some parts of Windows are.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Sweden Show Events Agree Agree x 3Disagree Disagree x 2 (list)

  19. Post #19
    Gold Member
    Zeke129's Avatar
    July 2007
    41,851 Posts
    OP, just do everything exactly the same except for downloading drivers and antivirus software (get the 64-bit versions)
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Canada Show Events Agree Agree x 2 (list)

  20. Post #20
    PiXeN's Avatar
    April 2009
    1,005 Posts
    I think that shows how terribly coded some parts of Windows are.
    Microsoft has been struggling to keep programs compatible from Win95 to Seven, so there's a few things to sacrifice for it to work.

  21. Post #21
    Gold Member
    GoDong-DK's Avatar
    November 2009
    14,678 Posts
    Microsoft has been struggling to keep programs compatible from Win95 to Seven, so there's a few things to sacrifice for it to work.
    I really think Microsoft should just drop the ball on that one.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Denmark Show Events Agree Agree x 2 (list)