heat sink: pad or AS / windows vista?

[jcnoernberg]

I just got my lga775 socket motherboard, and am about to order my CPU. still undecided, but it will be 64bit. What's going on with Windows Vista (?) that's the 64bit windows? When is it going to be out, I keep hearing different info. I don't want to blow money on XP now if that's going to be available soon.

And

So Intel uses stock thermal pads? I have artic silver, so would it be worth while to remove the pad and use the A.S. That voids the manufacturer's warranty?

[hockey man]

From what I have heard, there is no real reason to even think about Vista. Just get XP. Now, you can use the stock thermal pad; however, the Artic Silvar will be better. I believe it does void the warranty though. . .so you need to make a call on that.

[saphalline]

Like hockey man said, it's your call on the AS vs pad. There are advantages either way, but yes Arctic Silver will technically void your warranty.

Forget Vista. Not even M$ has released any hardware requirements for it, and if you're waiting for Vista you'll be waiting a loooong time. Vista, back when it was known as Longhorn, was supposed to be released in 2005. :p I think we all know how well that one went, eh? Now M$ is saying it will be released this year, but in order to make that deadline they had to cut out a few key things, like WinFS. In addition, Vista will be released in like 7 versions or something like that, covering all sorts of options in terms of 32-bit vs 64-bit code, as well as consumer, business, and server markets. So yeah, until I see an actual retail package of Windows Vista on a store shelf, I'm not going to believe any of the rumours.

[jcnoernberg]

So why is there a push for 64bit processors now???

[saphalline]

You can't release 64-bit software unless there's 64-bit hardware to take advantage of it! There's no money in it otherwise. Hardware always precedes software. This same thing happened when CPU's went from 16-bit to 32-bit - the CPU's existed long before 32-bit software was released. It's just that computers were still a sort of novelty the last time our CPU's increased in "bittage", so only the techies really cared.

Besides that, the latest CPU's are already sporting 64-bit capabilities, because Intel and AMD know that everyone is going to want to be prepared. As a tangent to this, if you're buying new hardware, it doesn't make sense to go out of your way to avoid 64-bit CPU's. The newest ones are 64-bit, so looking for an older 32-bit only CPU is silly. Besides, it's not like 64-bit CPU's perform worse in 32-bit mode, they actually perform the same. So we're not losing any performance right now in being prepared for the future. And I think that's the point that Intel and AMD have been pushing. Not necessarily that we need 64-bit CPU's, but just that it doesn't hurt us now to be prepared for the future.

Same thing goes for dual-core CPU's. It doesn't necessarily help us now, but there won't be any dual-core capable games released until dual-core CPU's are out on the market.