will 32 bit xp pro run ona 64 bit mchine

was wondering if 32 bit XP Pro will run on a 64 bit system

No. You will need a version of Unix.

But it will run on a 32 bit processor with 64 bit extensions... Which is what intel and amd mostly produce.

It's just an old Sun One with a Sparc IIi. Nothing to be envious of. Went EOL a year or two ago, so went AWOL in my boot when it was replaced. I'd rather have one of the new Niagara 2's, but can't justify 14K USD.

NO if you are talking about RISC systems. (Sun, SGI, etc)
YES if you are talking about x64 based systems (Athlon, C2D, etc)
I hope someone can explain the difference between a CPU with "64 bit extensions" and a TRUE 64 bit CPU (more abstract than RISC vs. CISC). THANKS!

Most XP OS are 64 bit?
I don't think so and doubt you can show thats even close to real life.

All programs written for 32 bit XP run....but they do not all run on 64 bit XP even after all these years of supporters of XP 64 bit trying to get the rest of the world "up to speed".

The point is that 64 bit OS for gamers/home/small office is still a joke that developers are not finding funny or bothering to waste development money on....still.

@ this point in time 64 bit OS for -most of the earth- is about the same as Vista owners....next to nothing.

OK, I'll try for a fairly simple explanation...

A 64 bit CPU has the capability of 64^2 instructions. Obviously, far more instructions than any processor needs, hence the 'reduced instruction set'. Its obvious advantage lies in the flat memory model that a 64 bit memory model allows. A 'complex instruction set' CPU is still limited to a 32 bit instruction set, but with 64 bit extensions that require more CPU cycles to execute - essentially two complete CPU cycles to do what would only take one CPU cycle on the RISC processor. Also, the x86 - 64 CPU will require a 32 bit memory model, plus a 32 bit offset to achieve 64 bit memory access, obviously not a flat memory model. There are differences between various RISC processors, but I said 'fairly simple'.

Yup, every processor since P4 is 64bit. No need to worry, they run a 32bit version of windows just fine.

ZOldDude, you never cease to amaze me with your FUD. So what your saying is that Linux is HORRIBLE because it gobbles up 100% of RAM available? What you WANT is an operating system to use ALL of the RAM, not some of it. It's there, might as well use it!!

Yep, Vista Home Premium 32 is running fine on my Athlon X2 4600+. I do wish I'd gotten the 64 version and worked out the driver and game issues. Some games have arrived that benefit from 4 gigs of RAM and Vista 32's like regular XP in really only benefiting from 3 gigs due to adressing issues.

Still, I have 4 gigs on my wife's XP system (Athlon X2 3800+) but she multitasks more than I do and at least the RAM's getting used by different programs.

awww.... maybe i should have said 64bit COMPLIANT. does that help?

linux is slower than windows... LOL. I'm sure it is in some cases. Not on average.

Emualtion is ALWAYS slower than native... hence why Word "runs like crap" on Linux. Now use a Linux version of the same program and tell me what you notice.

It's an apples to oranges comparison. Windows programs will never run as well on Linux as they do on Windows... your point is moot.

So does that mean that XP will run on my Commadore 64?

Hey ... it's Friday!!!!

Incidentally, the Power PC chips that Apple used in the past were also 32-bit... it was around the time that AMD suggested x86-64 when Apple decided to start using 64-bit PPC chips. Of course, they now use Intel Core2 chips... which are x86-64.

Love the guitar