will i be able to run windows vista ultimate smoothly ,also tell me does vista support dual core processing .reccomend the version of vista which uses both the cores and tell me the difference between vista 32bit and vista 64bit|||All versions of Vista support dual-core processing.
For your computer, I'd recommend Vista home Premium
I'm sure you could run ultimate smoothly as well, but I just like home premium better for some reason.
On a fresh install, Vista will use around 400-512mb of RAM when fully booted up. So you will have about 512mb mb of RAM to run programs. Although Vista will run pretty fast on 1 gb RAM, I recommend 2 gb so you can run more programs without losing speed
Ignore the people saying you can't run it smoothly. I've run it smoothly on a dual-core 1.9GHz, 1 GB of RAM, and a integrated gpu with shared memory
Vista 64bit is designed for 64bit processors. (like yours)
Vista 32bit is designed for 32 bit processors, but a 64bit processor will run it fine. 64 bit Vista can utilize over 4 gbs of RAM and Vista 32bit can utilize about 3.5. I recommend you go with 32bit, since 64bit OS's can have problems running 32bit programs (most programs are 32bit)|||you will probably want to get more ram|||Yes it will run fine but it would be much better with an extra gig of RAM|||no is the simple answer. you need at least 2gb to get even the basic functions of vista running well and a 256mb graphics card. I have 4gb and 512mb graphics card and it runs well, 1gb and 128mb g card, no chance|||you will don't know why? But if you must you're going to be better of with 2 Gb|||I been using vista for a long time since the first RC version released to the public. So short answer yes it will run fine for you. I defiantly don't recommend vista ultimate if your only going to be doing basic web surfing, word documents, and gaming/media. I do very much recommend a additional gig of memory. Because while it will run fine on a clean install after you start installing programs it will start getting slower and slower and very quickly you will be unsatisfied with it.
People who trash vista are people who never used it for longer then a day (and if they did they don't know much about computers). And yes i do agree Linux is more efficient but the person wasn't asking which other OS to get so stay on track.
Steve explained the 64 bit vs 32 bit very well. Few things to add hardware only now is starting to support the 64 bit OS. It is still near impossible to find device driver software for the more obscure hardware you might get for a 64 bit OS. Even the more common known brand names of computer parts are starting to support downloads for these drivers. One other thing to take into account no software is currently programmed for 64 bit, unless its custom made so your really not gaining any performance. Also support for a 64 bit computer is a lot harder to get from you standard places you might go for computer help.|||Yes all looks OK, however you don't say what your graphics card is.
I know some of the Radeons do not support the AERO interface, for example on my spare PC I have a 128mb 9250 and that doesn't support AERO.
Anyway you've probably got Nvidia.
Good luck.
LUg.
PS.
Don't let anyone tell you that you need 4gb RAM.
I have Vista running sweet on the specs. below :
2.4ghz Pentium 4 CPU
256mb Geforce 6200 graphics card
1gb RAM
Good luck.
LUg.|||32 bit Vista uses 32 bits of the bus width. 64 bit Vista uses 64 bits of the bus width. Not just Vista, all the OSes do the same thing.
Until you have undeniable reasons, I'd recommend you to use the most basic variant of Vista. That should leave a bit more resources free for your applications to use. By running Vista, you intend to run some applications on it, not Vista as the last piece of software. So, smaller the OS, better for the applications.
It is normal for Windows users to run anti-spyware, antivirus and such, all the time. These applications will be happy if the underlying OS lets them use a bit more resources.
No comments:
Post a Comment