Do you still use a 32-Bit OS/DAW?

[Music Engineer]

Hi folks,

the poll question already speaks for itself.

background:
i'm trying to figure out, how important support for 32-bit systems is, these days - or if can be phased out by now.

[Kriminal]

i still use a 32bit host in a 64bit OS to test synths that are still only 32bit, but thats getting quite rare.

[whyterabbyt]

Hi folks,

the poll question already speaks for itself.

background:
i'm trying to figure out, how important support for 32-bit systems is, these days - or if can be phased out by now.

Ableton Live, and several of the smaller VST hosts are all still 32-bit. So is ProTools.

[RunBeerRun]

My full projects use about 0.4GB of Ram, so while I will eventually be forced to buy a computer w/64 OS, I'll never use 64 bit plugins.

[Mushy Mushy]

My full projects use about 0.4GB of Ram, so while I will eventually be forced to buy a computer w/64 OS, I'll never use 64 bit plugins.

I too am strictly 32bit with no intention of moving to 64.
I am curious as to the last bit of your comment though

[ariston]

Do you mean "host" or DAW? I use Ableton (32bit) on a Win7 64bit platform.

I don't use tons of samples in a project, and I doubt I ever will, so no need for 64bit here.

Is there any other benefit from switching to 64bit?

[BERFAB]

i still use a 32bit host in a 64bit OS to test synths that are still only 32bit, but thats getting quite rare.

+1

I don't understand how some big-time products are still not available in x64. I'm looking at you FLS.

We're months down the road now since this is possible in Delphi. So where are the 64 bit plugs/DAW (not beta)?

And while I'm at it, it's 2012. Where's the freaking jet pack I was promised in 1969?

Cheers
-B

[jcschild]

this question is not asked correctly..

a 64bit OS is the wise option today however
i still recommend running the daw in 32bit with using a bit bridge (VE PRo/Jbridge) to access past 4 gig ram.
using a 32bit daw allows backward compatibility with older 32 bit plugs/etc.

a 32 bit OS IMHO is dead.

Scott
ADK

[justin3am]

I don't use a 32bit OS but most of the software I use is still 32bit. Ableton Live 8, Pro Tools 10, Numerology 3, Bias Peak 6 are all 32bit apps.

I don't plan on moving to a 64bit DAW until everything I use is 64bit.

[bduffy]

Because a lot of studios tend to be a few versions back, it'll be slow transitioning to 64-bit. Me, I got no need for it or the headaches. I'll go 64-bit when I have money for a new machine, and when it's the rule, not the exception.

I think RS-Met would be premature to discontinue 32-bit support.

[DuX]

I'm absolutely with you bduffy on this.

And I'd like to add a good chunk of what I think, too, as a long time DAWer and a guy who makes a few of the local studios work smoothly. All the way from computers to the OSes. First of all, people are overhyping it, and tend to think lots of snake oil-ish stuff about 64bit OSes and plugins. This thread is very convenient to debunk them. There are three things *everybody* should know before upgrading, or rather "upgrading".

First and most important thing is: 64bit OS and plugins have nothing to do with the quality of sound! *Nothing*!

Second: you only need a 64-bit OS and DAW if your projects use more than 2GB of memory. You can actually get away perfectly well with 3GB on a 32-bit OS and DAW if you use the /3Gb switch in the boot.ini file.

Third: the performance of the plugins is not better but worse in a 64bit OS and DAW! If you experience any performance problems with your 32bit DAW in a 32bit OS, you certainly won't resolve them by going 64bit! Especially 32bit plugins will use more CPU as you have to run them through a bridging app.

So I'm still churning nicely in a 32bit system, using all the available plugins I like. Love it. I would only start thinking about updating to *XPx64* if my plugins suddenly started to be x64 only. That won't happen, I'm sure of it.

So think about it carefully. It's a big decision. I would sum it up like... if you're a newbie to VST and DAWs, go with a 64bit OS and DAW to be future proof, so to speak, but you won't be able to run optimally all the nice 32bit only plugins that were developed over the very rich years and years of 32bit computing. If you're a *very* experienced DAWer like me, and have lots of plugins that are only 32bit, collected and loved over the years, and you have no problems with the 2/3GB limit of RAM, then stay with 32bit OS and DAW.

It's quite simple, actually.

Cheers!

[cryophonik]

My OS is 64-bit and I primarily use 64-bit Studio One v2 and, occasionally, Sonar X1. If it wasn't for Pro Tools, Sound Toys, and a few miscellaneous plugins, I would be entirely 64-bit. Although, I do use VEP as a 64-bit subhost to PT, so that's sorta like being entirely 64-bit, right?

[DuX]

Just a little "supplemental" to my post. Many people tend to think that by *not* going 64bit they are missing out on something, mostly speed or who knows what stupid things people can think because they're ignorant and knowledge is in very limited supply these days, but actually there's not much difference. It's only that I can use all the 32bit plugins with less problems and with optimal performance, but I can't use more than 3GB of RAM per app. The 64bit "party" can use as much RAM as they want, but sacrifice some performance with both 64 and 32bit plugins especially, which is not a big deal these days with multicore processors and stuff. However, 64bit OS is still a bit on the experimental side, if you know what I mean. Not Linux or MacOS, but Windows - yes. And we [should] know how bad at programming Microsoft geeks are. They like to bloat stuff, but they don't like to iron the bugs out. They like to change the GUI, but not iron out the core performance etc... With Windows, if you want to make music without any troubles, it pays off to be really old school and stay with OS that's proved itself throughout the years and have been patched to death, which neither Vista nor W7 can boast with. The more code there is, the more bugs there are. I can guarantee you that. Keep your OS lean, and you're going to avoid lots of headaches - bugs and incompatibility problems.

I simply adore folks who say "It works"! After installing a new OS. No it doesn't. It works after you've made a huge project on it without any showstoppers. Then you can say "it works!". I expect a new "tide" of posts like that after the bloody W8 is out... which is just a toy in my humble opinion. There's absolutely nothing, except the new "chkdsk" to look forward to about it. So I'm skipping that one, too.. I have enough fun with Ubuntu Linux builds and Android. That's where all the fun lies these days plus Mac OS-X, not Windows. Forget about Windows, it's just a pile of garbage, but when it works, just let it work.

...and use CCleaner, some registry and hard disk defragger every now and then, it'll make your Windows last longer without any speed-downs. Some of my clients still use Windows 2000 that works perfectly, after I installed it sometime in 2001 or 2002... and they splashed out loads of projects and music during these years with that particular OS. It just works! [yeah-like that stupid Apple advertisement ] With only occasional maintenance job, and possibly plugins and DAW upgrade [every 4 years or so ]. So yes folks - if you're not able to do good sounding music or great mixes, don't blame it on the OS or 32bit OS especially. It just "might" be that you're incompetent. Face the truth and keep your daytime job.

Cheers!

[Music Engineer]

With Windows, if you want to make music without any troubles, it pays off to be really old school and stay with OS that's proved itself throughout the years and have been patched to death, which neither Vista nor W7 can boast with.

yes. i also have that kind of "never change a running system" attitude which is one of the major reasons why i sticked to windows xp (32 bit) up to now. i feel, that i'm heavily lagging behind with my development setup compared to the majority of users. but this week, i finally made the upgrade to win 7 (64 bit) and i finally also want to jump on the x64 train with my plugins. but there's some overhead in supporting both architectures, so i wanted to find out whether it's really worth the trouble. the results are pretty conclusive so far - and opposite to what i expected. thanks to all who participated or will be participating. yesterday, i also realized that a x64 compiler isn't included in the free version of my development environment (MSVC Express) anyway. at some stage, i'll probably have to buy the pro version (with x64 compiler included) but as it seems, it's not terribly urgent by now.

[Amon1973]

Third: the performance of the plugins is not better but worse in a 64bit OS and DAW! If you experience any performance problems with your 32bit DAW in a 32bit OS, you certainly won't resolve them by going 64bit!

While I agree on most of your points, this is not my experience. I kept Cubase and Reaper in both their x86 and x64 flavours for more than one year, comparing how the same projects run. The CPU hit was slightly lower in 64bit, somewhere around 5-10% on a total load of 85/90% as an average observation, the host's stability was (again, slightly) increased also.

That said, I could mix 90% of the time in a 32bit host without feeling the need for the extra RAM... I actually made the switch to x64 because almost all of my software is, and it made sense to just bridge the few plugins which are still 32bit only (CSR, Kjaerhus, Bootsie's and some free amp sims).