Previous posts by you and others have convinced me that my next computer will run 64-bit.  I'm just holding out for either Windows 7 to be released or if I find a good deal before that happens. 

In the mean time I'm thinking of taking my XP 32-bit system from 2 to 3GB of ram.

agreed..very annoying

I'm waiting until it's closer to Windows 7, and when I do an upgrade I'm going with 64-bit now. 

I   64-Bit with 8gigs of ram.

I think I'll put it off till windows 7 comes out and get my desktop on that (mebbe grab an i7 or 1GB video card too), I've got a perfectly good laptop for normal people things, so I won't even know if my peripherals don't work with it.

Weren't we all.... then we discovered desktop customisation (to replace the Fisher Price look of XP) and this wacky place known as Wincustomize. After that ( and reading numerous pages containing Zubish) one was never to be normal ever again.

On a more serious note, I noticed that my CPU (AMD Athlon 64x2 6400 @.3.4) runs higher on Vista 64 bit than it did on 32 bit, and I'm wondering why that would be.  Whereas 32bit would idle around 1% - 2% and peak around %50% - 70% during heavy usage, x64 idles at around 13% and can peak into the 80's and 90's....

The main culprits seem to be: WinExplorer.exe; svcHost; WsxService and Workshelf, though these did not regularly peak highly in 32bit. I am using the AMD Dual Core Optimizer software to improve CPU performance, but I don't think it's that becuse the CPU was running higher prior to its installation.

Ideas anyone... is there a setting/tweak I need to do to regulate CPU usage in x64?

TIA for any useful information/help.

Mine seems to run high with not a lot going on... as in idling at around 13% - 15% with just background services and the Task Manager open.

No, I didn't know SP2 was available for testing as yet... but like you suggest, it's probably better to wait for the official release if the issue is more of an annoyance.  I was just concerned about wear and tear on my CPU if it were to keep peaking so high, so yeah, I'd like it to be running a bit lower.

Nah, not me.... I like playing with new toys, but I'd rather other people tested them and broke stuff before I come along and manage to break it some more.  Actually, I got in on the first public beta of Vista and found it pretty good, so I well imagine trying out the Windows 7 beta when it becomes publicly available.

Hehe, that's alright... I'll have your address within the hour.  Maybe you can expect a stark raving lunatic photo in the mail to confirm your suspicions. Now that oughta scare the bejesus out of ya.

Seriously though, I liked Vista 32 bit and never had any real issues with it... it's only this annoyance with 64 bit, but it's no worse than than the many annoyances I experienced with XP.  If anything, I find Vista more stable than XP, in several ways, so I'm not complaining, tho an answer to this CPU thing would be nice.

I upgraded to 8gb of RAM a few weeks ago, and wow has there been a huge difference.  I hardly ever hear my drive thrashing (aside from moving around large files or defragging), I haven't had that typical stuttering in games when loading in a new area because it's not having to go to the disk cache for data. 

This was an upgrade from 2GB.  Night and day difference.

Yeah, went in there but the setting was already set for "turn on DEP for essential Windows... DEP for programs was unticked.

*Got a strorm rolling in so I'd best shutdown and unplug my modem/everything PC.*

OK, the storm has passed and I can elaborate some. 

Although the programs DEP was unticked, I ticked it and rebooted... no difference to CPU usage, so I then reticked DEP for Windows, but before I rebooted, I noticed my page file swap was below the reccomended to upped it to the suggested 9211mb and then rebooted, resulting in lower CPU usage... back down to between 2% - 5% on idle.  The program that now seems to have it peaking most is CursotFX Plus, sending it up to 9% - 13%... but I can live with that, as opposed to the much higher peaks of before.

One thing I read a while back somewhere was that moving the page file swap on to another drive and providing the path was one way of improving the performance of the OS drive, memory and etc, but I can not see where to do that in the Advanced System Settings, so a tip/heads up on that one would be appreciated.

Genearally, I am very happy that I made the switch to x64 on my main rig, and while the Start Menu All Programs folder hang can be a bit of an inconvenience at times, clicking the 'back' button/closing and reopening the start menu are workarounds that work for me without too much trouble/delay.  Besides, my most regularly used apps have shortcut in Workshelf, ObjectDock Plus and of the front panel of the Start Menu, so it's no biggie 'til a fix is found.

I also read that Vista Service Pack 2 will include support for new and old hardware that previously was not compatible with Vista, and in particular x64.  That's good news for those considering Vista 64 bit, and with all but the drivers not loading for my new webcam, all my software works seamlessly in x64, so Vista 64 bit has come a long way since x64 in XP and is well worth a try for the additional RAM and system power it utilizes.

*Sorry if I hijacked your thread a little, Brad, but it was all related to Vista x64 and felt it may be useful to those considering the change *

I honestly haven't noticed a difference, I'm mostly just running x64 on principle, I bought a computer with a 64 bit processor damnit, I want to use it. One thing I've been wondering though, I don't know much about programming, but my understanding is that if a program is in 64 bit code, only the .exe and .dll files need to be specifically 64 bit, and that any of the supporting data files that it uses can still be 32 bit. I mention this because of an issue i've been having and a thread I saw on this, that with dual core processors only one core is being used, it occured to me that the same is true for the other 32 bits of the FSB. So, would it be possible to adapt Sins to have a x64 version?

I just meant the game, my system runs on both, I've actually played with processor affinity quite a bit to squeese a tinsy bit more speed out of programs that refuse to use both.  Thanks for the tip, though, I belive what your refering to allows one to limit resources available systemically, by default all the settings are deactivated allowing full access to all resources, so long as they are actually supported.