XP pro 32, 64 or Vista 32 or 64?

[ingeborgdot]

How much faster is xp 64 than 32?  Is vista 64 ready for prime time yet?  Will 64 bit make video editing faster?  I have some questions on this and if anyone can answer I would greatly appreciate it.  Thanks.

[Buffalo2102]

Vista x64 is "ready for prime time" in that it is a stable, fully working OS on supported hardware.  You need to check that all of your hardware devices have signed 64-bit drivers available, otherwise it is likely that they won't work under x64.

As far as speed goes, you will see very little if any difference in speed from the x86 version.  The only differences you may see is when running 64-bit, intensive applications.  If you encode large video files using a 64-bit encoding application then you may notice a difference in the encode time but I couldn't quantify it for you.  I have seen examples of a 9-second improvement over a 30-minute encode process.

Other things to consider are that x64 is far more secure than than the x86 version.  Also, x86 only supports up to 4GB RAM so you will need to run x64 if you want ot use more than 4GB RAM.  However, if you want to run a third-party firewall and/or AV product, you will need to find 64-bit versions of these.  A lot of 32-bit (and even some 64-bit) software will not run on Vista x64 and you can't load any device drivers that aren't signed (there are one or two workarounds to load unsigned drivers but I wouldn't recommend them unless you know what you are doing).

I have never done video editing on XP so can't really comment on that.  All I will say is that I moved exclusively to Vista some time ago and couldn't really go back now.  Vista is very quick and stable on my system and there is nothing about XP that I miss.

If it were me (I never really believe anything unless have experienced it), I would get a 32-bit retail version of Vista Home or Premium, then order the x64 version from Microsoft - you only have to pay for postage.  I would then try both versions and see for myself what the differences are.

Buff; Oh wait - I already did.

[ingeborgdot]

I can order the ultimate version of vista that comes with 32 and 64 bit so I don't need to do the other.  I have my ties to microsoft so I can get it for cheap (legal).  My biggest problem is if I go to vista I will lose my main video editing software from Grass Valley (Edius Pro 3.6).  Won't work with vista.  I will need to look at another program to buy which will cost around 600 bucks or more. 

I have installed vista on several computers but don't have it on mine yet becuase of the added cost for me with the software I have now that I would have to replace.  I was just asking what people think to see  if there is a benefit to use 64 bit but as it looks there is not much.  I will probably stay with the 32 bit but just have to decide do I want to spend thousands of dollars more for more software or just maybe stay where I am. 

Thanks for your time.  I will debate the issue for awhile.  If you have any more suggestions I am always willing to listen.

[ingeborgdot]

I think I have decided to do a dual boot and keep my xp pro and add vista on my new machine. I have never done it before. What are the recommendations on doing this?

[pat]

If possible install the older OS first, I have seen directions for installing XP after Vista, but it's easier to install XP first. You need to have either a clean, separate hard drive or a free partition on an existing drive or free space on the existing drive. If you already have an OS on your system it may be easier to just install another drive or you would have to use some type of partitioning tool to make room for the new OS.

After that just install the new OS and choose where to install during install. By default Visa will become your default boot OS, this can be changed in Vista though using, System properties, Advanced tab, Startup and Recovery.

[ingeborgdot]

This will be on a brand new computer with many hard drives.
But now for something else I am debating.  I really have some important things that I can't lose.  I was wondering how many of you feel about raid 1.  I know, I know it is not as fast as raid 0, but I have seen in many reports that it is faster in almost everything else than a single drive. 
So, what do you think if I get 2 320gb hdd and partition them for xp and vista.  I use a raid 1 to make my system a little more fool proof.  Then I add two more 500gb hdd and raid those to use for my videos, pics, docs etc. 
Right now I have a 500gb external hdd that I use as backup with acronis and I would use that with this new system to add another line of backup.
What would be your ideal system?

[Mark H]

I have Vista 64 on my photography PC. The only software that doesn't work is Nikon's, so I will probably add an XP dual boot option.

Mark H

[ingeborgdot]

If I am going to dual boot using xp 64 and vista 64 what things do I really need to know? 
Hardware?
Software?
How do I find out what works?

[Chandler]

I'd recommend against dual booting XP x64 Edition and Vista 64 because there isn't really a benefit to it.  If something fails to work on Vista 64 it'll probably fail on XP x64 Edition too.  I'd install XP 32-bit and Vista 64-bit because in that situation XP will be a fall-back for incompatible applications.  XP x64 Edition never had great support.

[ingeborgdot]

If I would happen to use 32 bit for my os, is 3gb or 4 just wasting money?