32-bit or 64-bit versions of Microsoft Vista: Which one should you use?
The retail edition of Vista comes with both 32-bit and 64-bit versions, and it’s up to the user to decide which one to install. So which one should you choose?
Both 64-bit processors and 32-bit processors require a compatible operating system, computer peripheral devices driver support and compatible application software.
Microsoft’s first attempt to mitigate the gap between 32 and 64-bit hardware was to create a “software emulator” which allowed 32-bit code to operate on an IA-64 Itanium CPU. The results were not so good and caused things to run very slowly, which further reduced the interest in the IA-64 Itanium processor for desktop computers and servers.
Microsoft would later rewrite the code so that the Windows operating system would run in either 32-bit or 64-bit code simultaneously, and natively, without any software emulation. The result was increased performance, regardless of which code base was hosted, and later cleared the way for Microsoft to launch Windows Vista in 32/64 bit editions.
Unlike applications, 32-bit and 64-bit drivers are not interchangeable, nor can they run on the same computing environment simultaneously. So to adopt Windows Vista 64, you’d have to make sure you have all the required drivers lined up prior to the installation.
For most consumer and small business situations, it’s simply too early to realistically have a rich set of 64-bit Windows Vista drivers ready to apply. This is also why upgrading to 64-bit Vista is particularly difficult and demands a great deal of research and patience to achieve 100% functionality.
In terms of software applications, the x86 applications (32-bit) are still the mainstream. Unless 64-bit equipment is widely purchased by the mainstream, there will be no compelling reason for developers to create 64-bit applications. If you choose to use the 64-bit Windows Vista, first conduct an application inventory to check whether all of your applications will run in a 64-bit environment.
Right now, mainstream users are still best served with the 32-bit version of Windows Vista and will experience the greatest level of compatibility with peripherals, applications, and improved features.
The decision to use the 64-bit version of Vista should be based on need.
The truth of the matter is that the upper 4GB memory limit of 32-bit hardware was seldom required by anything other than network servers, and almost never needed by regular PC users.
If you have a special application or operational requirement that mandates the use of the  64-bit version of Vista, sure go ahead. Just be sure to research and resolve potential conflicts and problems first.
Related Posts:

March 26th, 2007
It’s kind of funny that you should bring this up, I have a few things to say on the matter. 64-bit driver support is poor, I agree with you on that point. Also, the upper limit of 4GB isn’t entirely accurate. Vista has trouble addressing the whole 4GB in some cases. I have seen computers with 4GB of memory installed see only between 2.8GB to 3.6GB, http://www.vistaclues.com/reader-question-maximum-memory-in-32-bit-windows-vista/
In most cases the upper limit of Vista is 3GB regardless of hardware but of course if the motherboard is limited to 2GB then all you can install is 2GB but most motherboards these days support 4GB to 16GB so in most cases this is not a hardware limitation and is not a problem with the memory.
You really do need a 64-Bit OS if you want to see all your 4GB.
http://www.vistaclues.com/reader-question-maximum-memory-in-32-bit-windows-vista/
March 26th, 2007
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. 32-bit versions of Windows Vista platform can theoretically support the full 4GB but the hardware is going to allocate some to other resources. Still, the statement holds true that “the 32-bit hardware, with an upper limit of 4GB of memory was seldom reached by anything other than network servers and virtually never seen by PC users.”
March 26th, 2007
I wasn’t trying to say the statement wasn’t true. It is still very true, but it just has trouble allocating and addressing that much memory.
October 17th, 2007
Free Software Downloads
I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but it sounds interesting