Vista 64bit vs. XP 64bit - Is there a winner?

[Bauzi]

Hey there,

I´ll get my new notebook soon and there is one question open: Which editing system should I take? I would take some Linux distribution, but I would like to continue editing the same way I do now, which means: Windows products.

I have a license left for Vista Business 64 and XP Pro 64, but which one uses the power 64 better? Of course it depends on the stuff I want to use: Adobe CS4 products and AMVApp 3 beta. I would like to keep Premiere Pro 1.5 for my older projects.

Can you say in an objective way which OS is better suited for editing? Are there some things that´ll only work on one of those systems?

[Zarxrax]

I use xp64 and aside from installing certain old codecs there hasn't been any trouble at all for me.
Many people have mixed feelings towards vista so I can't really tell you one way or the other. Windows7 is coming fairly soon though and it looks to kick vistas ass all over the place.

[Zarxrax]

By the way as far as "using the 64 bit better"... there are hardly any applications out there that actually take advantage of 64-bit right now. So you are still mostly just going to be running 32bit applications.

[Bauzi]

Oh there are still not alot 64 versions out there? Meh... Hurry up developers!!!

Windows 7 is like a fix or service pack for Vista. They just don´t sell it under the same name because Vista has a bad name. In my opinion Windows 7 looks good so far.

[NeoQuixotic]

By the way as far as "using the 64 bit better"... there are hardly any applications out there that actually take advantage of 64-bit right now. So you are still mostly just going to be running 32bit applications.

And even the 64-bit applications you use have limitations. I was excited when the 64-bit version of Sony Vegas came out. But sadly, I found it to be buggy as all hell (at least with Lagarith and FRAPS files, I should be working with DV, HDV, and AVCHD content). And it can't access 32-bit stuff like filters, codecs, etc. The same goes for 64-bit Photoshop. You get 64-bit, but lose access to some stuff being that everything has to be 64-bit basically. Windows 7 (actually version 6.1, Vista was 6) was initially only going to be 64-bit and I was so happy because it would force the transition much faster. Now it's going to be available in 32-bit also.

As far as XP vs Vista goes, I'm leaning towards Vista if you have 4 Gb of RAM or more. I was using Vista 64-bit for the last 6 months and switched back to XP to try and determine what I like better. The first thing I noticed is how sluggish applications loading and the interface was with XP. Features like SuperFetch actually do work very well in Vista, but do require lots of RAM. For me XP 32-bit idles with about 600 Mb of RAM and Vista 64-bit with 1.2 Gb of RAM, basically double. Now that RAM is so cheap, a Vista 64-bit machine with 6-8 Gb of RAM is totally awesome. The only problems I've had with Vista are minor annoyances, many which aren't Microsoft's fault, but a third party program or driver. My overall experience was much smoother on Vista. From the benchmarks I've looked at for media encoding and gaming, the difference is negligible. Some benchmarks show XP winning slightly, some show Vista winning slightly. At this point in time, it really comes down to personal preference. I'm actually wanting to re-install Vista now.

[ArashiKurobara]

XP 64-bit, from what I know, is pretty universally considered crap. If you're going 64-bit, use Vista, or 7 if you're willing to play with shiny beta things. For 32-bit, it's still pretty much just a matter of personal preference.

[BasharOfTheAges]

By the way as far as "using the 64 bit better"... there are hardly any applications out there that actually take advantage of 64-bit right now. So you are still mostly just going to be running 32bit applications.

There is always the benefit of addressing more than ~3.5GB of RAM and more than 2TB of HDD space though.

[AaronAMV]

I HATE VISTA 64

[Bauzi]

@anu:
Well my notebook has only 4GB DDR2 RAM. I´m not sure if I want to "waste" 1 GB for the OS , but yeah it sounds really cool what you´re saying. I look forward to use Vista or Windows 7 with a 6+GB RAM machine.

So with 32bit application I have 3.5GB RAM and XP might need 500MB. Well that sounds like a good deal. Uhm my 32bit application will still work on 64bit OS?

Adobe CS4 products support Vista 64, but not XP64... decisions, decisions... It´s not that easy though.

This lack of proper 64bit applications bugs me though. I mean when you edit you need a lot of RAM and this is one of the main reasons to get 64bit, right? Especially editors should have tons of RAM in theire machines, because the prices for RAM drop really really fast.
Ok Adobe might not be the pro software like Nuke (I´m excited to test my demo version of Nuke 5 though, because the fullversion would come with x64 too ) or Avid, but it´s still a very popular software.

[Taokato]

Well my notebook has only 4GB DDR2 RAM. I´m not sure if I want to "waste" 1 GB for the OS , but yeah it sounds really cool what you´re saying. I look forward to use Vista or Windows 7 with a 6+GB RAM machine.

i had 3GBs of DDR2 and I hadn't problmes with running programs or games.

I´m not sure if I want to "waste" 1 GB for the OS

thats no problem. all ppl think vista facks RAM but if you run a program and you need the RAM which the OS needs, Vista will clear it up

And a notebook with 4GB RAM is very good O=

IMO