x86 vs x64

[AZJIO]

There is a dispute, which executable should be used on Windows-x64 if there are two files x86 and x64?

[Fred]

x64 is better overall as it has much more registers and more recent CPU addition to work with resulting in faster code execution.

[Quin]

x64 is better overall as it has much more registers and more recent CPU addition to work with resulting in faster code execution.

You can also use the computer's entire address space, not just the first 4 gigabytes of it.

[wilbert]

There is a dispute, which executable should be used on Windows-x64 if there are two files x86 and x64?

On x64, a memory pointer is 8 bytes, on x86 it is 4 bytes.
If the software you are running uses a lot of memory pointers like for example it uses a huge linked list, the x64 version of the software will consume significantly more memory.
If the Windows x64 computer you are running it on only has 2GB or 4GB of system memory, it can be wise to run the x86 version.
But for reasons Fred and Quin already mentioned, in general I would choose the x64 version.

[dige]

If speed is not an issue, then I usually prefer the x86 version, as it can happen that both versions do not have the same level of development and range of functions. Especially if the software uses plugins, such as the irfanview image viewer, then there may be more plugins for 32-bit.

[Piero]

From a Mac user:
Are you kidding me?
Fred had to answer that?!?!?
Shouldn't the answer be obvious?

[mk-soft]

From a Mac user:
Are you kidding me?
Fred had to answer that?!?!?
Shouldn't the answer be obvious?

The answer is not suitable ...

There are also cases where X86 is mandatory. For example, if database drivers on the end system are only available as X86.
Or other interfaces are only available as X86.
It is of course recommended to use X64 on new systems. But not always

[Piero]

It is of course recommended to use X64 on new systems. But not always

Dear mk, thanks as always, but my funny answer was based on the original question, also insinuating doubts about Fred's compilers

[Psychophanta]

In my point of view, which is large, to use x64 versions it borders a lot on the stupid, unless there is some really compelling reason, and the difference in execution speed is not a really compelling reason.

[Tenaja]

I ran a test on it when the 64 bit first came out, I think, and was very surprised at the small performance boost. It was only in the 10-20 percent range; barely noticeable. In that particular test, IIRC, the increased memory hit was similar.

I know this is very vague, but just to say... your mileage may vary. It all depends on the app; if you are concerned about memory consumption or performance, do a test to see if you will see any observable difference.

[jacdelad]

It is of course recommended to use X64 on new systems. But not always

Dear mk, thanks as always, but my funny answer was based on the original question, also insinuating doubts about Fred's compilers

Sometimes staying focused on the topic is a better choice then trying to be funny...

[Piero]

Sometimes staying focused on the topic is a better choice then trying to be funny...

Please forgive me: I really cannot understand why this needs to be discussed (if it isn't about shitty compilers)

[DeanH]

I make my software available in both 32 and 64 bit flavours. It is a database system and does not use gobs of memory. (Well, maybe several hundred Mb at times.) There is no difference operationally and any difference in speed is so slight a person with a stopwatch might not even pick it up. Some older DLL's are only available in 32-bit, like LHA32 (a great archiver), so I have a work around with an exe and RunProgram in 64-bit mode.

However, I have found the 32-bit types are far more prone to false positives. It is so dramatic that some users simply cannot use any 32-bit software even if they wanted to. If it was not for this single reason, I would only be using 32-bit as there is no advantage for me with 64-bit. A customer survey last year showed fewer than 5% still had old 32-bit systems. As a result, I stopped supporting and developing the 32-bit type at the start of this year. Only 64-bit now.

[NicTheQuick]

In my point of view, which is large, to use x64 versions it borders a lot on the stupid, unless there is some really compelling reason, and the difference in execution speed is not a really compelling reason.

I don't get it. The only thing that's stupid, is Windows. No other OS allows using 32 Bit stuff easily nowadays. It is common sense to always use x64. That must be some outdated systems after their EOL that still require 32 Bit based libraries to be used.

[Psychophanta]

@NicTheQuick
Agree about windows is stupid, not agree it is the only stupid thing
By the way, i use 32bit linuxes, and it is much better because old stuff compatibility.
I still not found real solid advantages for 64bit, sincerely.