Even having 4-8 GB might still not necessitate a move to 64-bit, as you can also make use of a PAE enable Kernel on a 32-bit install, if you want the ability to address more ram.
Yes and no. I cannot speak for other operating systems, but Windows, in particular, and Solaris 8 x86 only supports 4GB on the 32-bit kernels. Sun had a really damned good document (I believe written by Casper Dik) which discussed the 4GB memory hole. Mark Russinovich from SysInternals (now part of Microsoft) discussed this 4GB and PAE issue in a Technet document as well. The short for Windows was that with the release of Windows XP, PAE-capable systems would see 4GB of memory using PAE and the 36-bit address space to remap RAM under the PCI I/O space above the 4GB barrier of 32-bit addressing.
However, the vast majority of BSODs and crash reports sent to Microsoft (that "Send Report" button really does do something, Virginia) were due to piss poor drivers which could not handle living or addressing above the 32-bit range. Thus, with the release of either SP1 or SP2, PAE support in XP was eliminated and the maximum RAM available in any system would be 3.25GB or 3.5GB, depending upon PCI address space required and the AGP aperture. Vista and 7 follow the same rules. 32-bit Server 2003 and 2008 will absolutely support the full 4GB (2008 will actually do more, I believe, in 32-bit
Side Note: To make full use of 64-bit you will need native 64-bit applications, and this is where the problem starts for some users. Some programs a user might make use of may not provide native 64-bit applications (Note there is now a 64-bit version of flash, Java, and there appears to be a 64-bit version of Skype.)
In particular, the Linux 64-bit version of Flash is (at my last check) beta and not officially supported by Adobe. And there is not one for Windows at all. *sigh*
Beginning the move testing, and research to see if 64-bit is the path for you. The tactic suggested is running a dual-boot configuration of 32-bit, and 64-bit. As this will allow you to research, and test your hardware, and software configuration, While maintaining a fall back if 64-bit is not for you, it is also suggested that testing is done for thirty or more days to find out if running 64-bit fits your needs.
This is precisely what I did when moving from XP to XP x64. I have not looked back since, though I did have one crappy old invoicing program which refused to run in 64-bit, so I have to run an instance of XP in VirtualBox. If/when I have to upgrade to Windows 7 I will go 64-bit. As well, I am pushing 64-bit 7 to all of my customers. Microsoft did a smart thing with Windows 7: to obtain WHQL certification you must produce 32- and 64-bit drivers. Thus, a device which says it is Windows 7 ready with the logo and WHQL signing, it will work with your system whether it is 32- or 64-bit.
Irrespective of the operating system, I believe we should have been 64-bit 15 years ago, but Intel was really damned good at flogging their aging 32-bit architecture. Granted, in some cases a good dual-core 32-bit Intel gave faster benchmarks than AMD's 64-bit procs, but that never meant 32-bit was superior.
Anyway when home users start saying things like they need 8 cores and 16 GB ram, the PC industry upgrade con is complete.
OMFG. Yeah, I remember a couple coming in to see me in the retail store in 1997. They were told they needed a 233MMX system (PIIs were either just around the corner or just released, IIRC) with 64MB RAM and what not. At the time to OS of choice was Windows 98 and 166MMX and 200MMX were more than adequate. Thinking about the performance versus what they planned to do, I remarked that the computer would be bored between keystrokes and we could save them a couple hundred bucks going with a 166MMX and 32MB. The machine still purred on a TXPro mobo. Anyway.
Yeah, I use a quad-core system, but I also do a small amount of video encoding and virtualization. I would not mind a dual-quad core, but that will come later. I am building those for customers with CAD or multimedia requirements. Average office user, we are still doing simple dual-core P4s.
Okay, I feel like a twat throwing in my $.02 this late in the thread, but this post just made me think a little bit.
