I think I'm nearing the point of ordering my new system.But I have a choice of the following OSs:Vista Home premium 32 or 64 bit.Vista Ultimate 32 or 64 bit.Or XP Home (which I have now on this dying system)I'm looking at a fairly high spec machine. Probably a quick quad core with 2 gig of 1066 DDR2. I'm wrestling between a pair of 8800GTXs or 8800Ultras or also very interested in the new 8800GT.I know that to take full advantage of a 64 bit quad core CPU would take a 64 bit OS. But I also catch little blurbs that maybe Vista 64 bit is not all that stable. The only tech info that I have been able to understand is that there are "driver issues" with 64 bit.The 64 bit version only costs $19 more so that is not an issue. Does anybody have experience with 64 bit Vista and can you please tell me about that experience... the good parts and of course the bad parts.FSX being the resource hog that it is I figure that if it will run FSX (plus acc pack?) then my other less demanding games should do fine. But the stories I've heard leave me concerned that I might be stepping from one mess to another.Please tell me how good and/or bad the OS has been for you. ??? :)Any oher comments about how I should configure this new system would be very welcome. :)MODERATORS: I appologize if this post os on the wrong forum and if so where should I place further queston about the OS?

Sounds like hardware forum material to me!Anyway, I just agonised over the same decision for my desktop machine and ended up going Vista 32 as:1. I am not likely to upgrade my hardware on this system any further without building a whole new rig, and it is specced nicely for Vista 32.2. I have Vista 32 on my notebook and I am actually quite fond of it and am pleased I don't have to hunt too hard for DRIVERS - the bane of Vista 64 I am led to believe. One final suggestion is that if you are building a rig primarily for FSX use, don't put dual any video card combination in - it's just a waste. A single 8800GT will provide you all the graphics loving you will need :-)Gary

Hi Tom,the real benefit of Vista 64 is to use more than 2 GB.If you plan too use more RAM than Vista 64 is the only choice.If you stay with 2 GB, I suggest XP or Vista 32 for DX10.I run Vista 64 Bit, with 4 GB, Core Duo 6600@3,42 GHz, a 8800 GTX etc. without problems.The drivers are getting better every day and are now nearly as good as the 32 Bit one. I had a dual boot system with XP as alternative, but didnt booted the XP version since more than 2 month.If you didnt have old hardware, which have no Vista 64 Bit driver, like my old Logitech Wingman Force joystick, there is no reason not to use Vista 64 Bit.I heard that dual monitor configuration with DirectX 10 are a problem, but not sure if this is a Vista 64 or a Vista problem at all.

I've been running VU 64bit for the past 7 months. All of my games and sims work, all of my gear has drivers.I haven't even thought about XP. I suggest that you check your manufacturers sites to ensure drivers are available for all of your hardware.DDR2 prices have really dropped, at least consider 4gb w/ 64bit Vista.I also have 32bit home premium on my inspiron 9300 notebook and I love it, no problems there either.As for a pair of GTX's, I'm not sure if the money could be best spent elsewhere. I have a GTX and the thing is a brute, money spent on a faster cpu and maybe a raptor would do more to improve the FSX experience. Unless your monitor forces you to run at very high resolution, I run at 1600x1200 with 16x aniso/4xSSAA and all driver optimizations disabled with no problems on a single gtx.Several months ago nvidia's GTX drivers were pretty rough. Now they have come a long way, they are much more stable and benchmarks are almost up to xp standards.Personaly I disable UAC because I'm the only user on this system and I want full admin control. Imo it makes life with vista much easier.

Within the last month I built a new system for FSX:Q6600 at 2.87GHz4GB 800MHz RAM4x WD 150GB RaptorsXFX 8800GTX 570MHz 768MB 169.1 driversDell 24" Widescreen64bit Vista Home PremiumHorizon Generation-X 1M/pixel scenery, 5M meshIt was running very well with FSX SP1, but today I installed Acceleration. The increase in performance is astounding, especially when using DX10.George

Is it true that you need the Vista 64 version to see all 8 Gb of ram?

Yes. Any of the 32-bit OSes will cap out at 3.25GB usable RAM, no matter how much you plug in.Gary

You guys have given me a lot to think about. I haven't made a final decision yet but I need to very soon as this system is on it's last legs.:-hmmm I had thought about putting the original post in the hardware thread but figured that would annoy people. I didn't realize that the OS was now considered hardware. :-lol

>Hi Tom,>the real benefit of Vista 64 is to use more than 2 GB.>If you plan too use more RAM than Vista 64 is the only>choice.>If you stay with 2 GB, I suggest XP or Vista 32 for DX10.>Markus,As you seems to be an expert, I have three questions for you. I've followed a lot of threads about Vista. And when it comes down to available memory and FSX, the posts seem fuzzy to me.Q1: FSX is a 32bit application, as far as I understand. Is it possible for FSX to use more than 2GB on Vista 64?Q2: In general, will a 32bit application, like FSX, run faster on a 32bit OS or on a 64bit OS (run on the same hardware with the same Vista config)?Q3: I've installed 4GB on my mobo (see spec in the tag). BIOS allocate about 1GB for the 8800 GTX card, and WinXP reports 3,144,748 KB. Do you say that WinXP can't use these 3GB of available memory?Ulf B :-)Core2Duo X6800 OC 3.3GHz, 4GB RAM8800GTX, dual view 1920x1200 and 1280x1024Creative SB X-Fi (Gamer mode)WinXP Pro SP2, FSX SP1, FS9.1

Just remember, if you select Vista 64 upgrade you will need to have a 64bit OS installed to run the installer. You cant upgrade from a 32bit OS. I found this out the hard way.Ryan

>Yes. Any of the 32-bit OSes will cap out at 3.25GB usable>RAM, no matter how much you plug in.>>GarySo Gary, do you think that is the reason why they included only 2GB of Corsair with this system or do you think it was more of an economic move...? http://h20435.www2.hp.com/#/purchase/(Two items that I initially thought were major omissions in this pre-configured rig were the lack of a sound card and the 2GB of RAM.)-GeorgeM

I see that this system also has the option for 4GB. The average Joe won't even notice that the last 1GB isn't being used and it's kind of a moot point as buy 3GB cost nearly the same as buying 4GB.IMO, 2GB is sufficient for an XP rig and 3GB is the sweet spot for Vista. If you are going to get 4GB, then you may as well go Vista 64 which can at least see / use all the memory.Re onboard versus sound card, I have had both configs on the same rig running FSX and while at first I thought the sound card gave me an edge with less graphics stuttering, that has turned out to be not worth the case now. FPS is no different between the two options, as any extra CPU load from the onboard solution is easily gobbled up by spare CPU core capacity, even on a "lowly" dual core.FWIW, the price of the cheapest rig there at $3500 is very expensive for what you actually get. The following 3.0-3.6GHz OCers rig would kick the snot out of it in FSX peformance, and for only $1300! http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/wishli...tNumber=6548852Gary

Thanks for your comments Gary.1. In the past the common recommendation was to 'get as much RAM as you can afford.' Only recently, on these Forums, did I realize (as you've pointed out) that some RAM can remain dormant if not married to the proper system, i.e. 4GB with Vista 32 rather than 64. I think I'll aim for the 3GB w/Vis32!2. Interesting results you cited on the FSX sound config and I'm appreciating more and more that some of these 'on board' sound systems can often yield good performance.3. For someone willing to assemble their own rig your link to the Egg seems to reveal a really decent system at the right price. I've purchased other items there; they've got a good ecommerce reputation.-G

Alright, I officially hate you guys for making me change my mind ;-). I did a bit of research and found Vista 64 drivers for all my major hardware, so I am now trying to change my OS order to Vista 64. It hasn't shipped yet, so I may get away with it!Gary

Ryan,"Just remember, if you select Vista 64 upgrade you will need to have a 64bit OS installed to run the installer. You cant upgrade from a 32bit OS. I found this out the hard way."That seems very strange to me. How did you overcome it?