1) Would Windows 7 64-bit work faster, slower or exactly the same compared to 32-bit version on a computer with AMD Quad-Core A6-3420 64-bit CPU and 4 GB RAM (1333 MHz DDR3). I am mostly interested in its performance as an operating system, like opening My Computer, opening folders, staring the Windows, and using just "light" software like internet browsers, audio players? I mean, not playing any games, not using any Photoshops.
I ask this because with only 4 GBs of RAM there is theoretically no need for a 64-bit OS (if not using any 64-bit software), and, in addition, a 64-bit OS uses a little more computer resourses, so less resourses left for other software -- but does that mean that those used up resource are in this case "wasted" (used only to make Windows work), or is it that the resourses 64-bit OS uses are used more efficiently, so that the OS functions more quickly?
In other words, I'll use this analogy: 64-bit Windows 7 is a more powerful engine, which uses up more fuel than 32-bit - but do I get any benefit of that when not having more than 4 GB RAM and not using any specific "heavy" 64-bit software --- like does it load an internet browser faster, does it open My Computer faster?
Why I ask this is because I noticed that as good as WinXP might be, it just never was as quick as Win98 in just using the computer back in the days. I have always been disappointed by WinXP not holding up to my expectations in performance - but that's understandable, because WinXP is much more complicated OS than Win98. And I noticed WinXP is quicker before you install all the drivers. So regarding Windows 7, I wish to know which version with given hardware limitations would be quicker.
2) Also, a little "off-topic" question: is there a difference in efficiency between Win7 Home Premium and Ultimate? I mean, which one would be quicker? In regards to Windows XP, I noticed XP Professional was faster than Home, but of course that could have just been my wrong impression or I could have missed some important factors (like software installed).
I ask this because with only 4 GBs of RAM there is theoretically no need for a 64-bit OS (if not using any 64-bit software), and, in addition, a 64-bit OS uses a little more computer resourses, so less resourses left for other software -- but does that mean that those used up resource are in this case "wasted" (used only to make Windows work), or is it that the resourses 64-bit OS uses are used more efficiently, so that the OS functions more quickly?
In other words, I'll use this analogy: 64-bit Windows 7 is a more powerful engine, which uses up more fuel than 32-bit - but do I get any benefit of that when not having more than 4 GB RAM and not using any specific "heavy" 64-bit software --- like does it load an internet browser faster, does it open My Computer faster?
Why I ask this is because I noticed that as good as WinXP might be, it just never was as quick as Win98 in just using the computer back in the days. I have always been disappointed by WinXP not holding up to my expectations in performance - but that's understandable, because WinXP is much more complicated OS than Win98. And I noticed WinXP is quicker before you install all the drivers. So regarding Windows 7, I wish to know which version with given hardware limitations would be quicker.
2) Also, a little "off-topic" question: is there a difference in efficiency between Win7 Home Premium and Ultimate? I mean, which one would be quicker? In regards to Windows XP, I noticed XP Professional was faster than Home, but of course that could have just been my wrong impression or I could have missed some important factors (like software installed).
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram