Author Topic: 64 Bit Pentium 4... any future for gaming? (Read 3408 times)

LePaul · « **Reply #75 on:** May 10, 2005, 12:17:38 AM »

You dove into a deep, structural discussion between Skuzzy & MiniD about microprocessor design. You felt a need to jump in and take it off-topic....which was too bad. Now its yet another AMD vs Intel CPU debate.

For what its worth, I use both...couldnt care less about whose cheaper/better...i was intrigued at the mindsets behind the current designs.

Schutt · « **Reply #76 on:** May 10, 2005, 05:05:16 AM »

Great links whels, thank you thats what i wanted.

Based on that i expect 64bit games based on "x64" run up to 10 percent faster than with 32bit implementation.

For at least some years every game comes out with 32bit implementation with it and soon with an optional 64bit executeable on a few games.

So future in gaming? Sure, in some years all new apps and games come in 64bit. But the increase in speed is no big step, remember you get a 100 percent increase every 2 years. Applications tailored to multi core processors will give a bigger hit than the jump to 64 bit, at least i beleave that.

Kev367th · « **Reply #77 on:** May 10, 2005, 09:04:41 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Schutt
Great links whels, thank you thats what i wanted.

Based on that i expect 64bit games based on "x64" run up to 10 percent faster than with 32bit implementation.

For at least some years every game comes out with 32bit implementation with it and soon with an optional 64bit executeable on a few games.

So future in gaming? Sure, in some years all new apps and games come in 64bit. But the increase in speed is no big step, remember you get a 100 percent increase every 2 years. Applications tailored to multi core processors will give a bigger hit than the jump to 64 bit, at least i beleave that.

I would hope to see a sizeable increase in both 64-bit and multithreaded games by the years end.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #78 on:** May 10, 2005, 09:23:27 AM »

Not going to happen, but I have elaborated on that before and you ignore it.

I really am disappointed this thread got so convoluted. And on a side note, I am not impressed with the AMD64 performance. I am still doing better with an old Northwood than those benchmarks whels pointed to.

MD, you know of a good forum where we can carry on a technical discussion? It is painfully obvious we will not be able to do so here. Drop me an email with a link if you know of one. I would like to pursue the discussion.

Kev367th · « **Reply #79 on:** May 10, 2005, 09:28:23 AM »

Skuzzy - Both chip manufacturers are 'expecting' to see an increase in multithreaded stuff starting at the end of this year. But as you said this remains to be seen.
As for 64-bit games they have been trickling out, so I suppose the swap to 64-bit has started even if it is slowly.

Would you happen to know if DDR2 slots are going to be compatible with DDR3 when it finally arrives?

Overlag · « **Reply #80 on:** May 10, 2005, 09:38:03 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy
Not going to happen, but I have elaborated on that before and you ignore it.

I really am disappointed this thread got so convoluted. And on a side note, I am not impressed with the AMD64 performance. I am still doing better with an old Northwood than those benchmarks whels pointed to.

MD, you know of a good forum where we can carry on a technical discussion? It is painfully obvious we will not be able to do so here. Drop me an email with a link if you know of one. I would like to pursue the discussion.

how does your northwood beat A64s if no one else sees that anymore?

and anyway MD brought it down

Kev367th · « **Reply #81 on:** May 10, 2005, 09:47:42 AM »

Overlag - Check through other threads you'll see why Skuzzy gets the peformance he does.

LePaul · « **Reply #82 on:** May 10, 2005, 09:48:38 AM »

Skuzzy... I know of a place

Skuzzy · « **Reply #83 on:** May 10, 2005, 09:59:42 AM »

I was not saying 64bit games are not coming, but there will not be any measurable performance benefits for games Kev.

Hehe LePaul.

Kev367th · « **Reply #84 on:** May 10, 2005, 10:16:11 AM »

CC- Skuzzy, I think we'll see more benefit from multithreaded games in conjuction with 64-bit though.
I seem to remember that the initial change from 16 to 32 bit yielded no great immediate benefits, and took quite some time before any real benefits did appear.
Think we've kind of hit a plateau at the moment, needs time for both 64 bit and dual/multi core to mature before we can expect to see exactly what advantages can be gained.

On a positive note in now seems XP64 can run 32 bit games with less of a drop in speed than during the betas/RC versions.
I tried AH2 under XP64, took a slight frame rate hit, but the game itself appeared to run a lot smoother.

LePaul · « **Reply #85 on:** May 10, 2005, 11:00:03 AM »

Try us, Skuzzy.

Even our political rants arent so bad.

Come to the dark side! Face MiniD's moderating!

214thCavalier · « **Reply #86 on:** May 10, 2005, 01:23:26 PM »

Well, just to throw Skuzzy a small curve ball

Quote

What CryTek and AMD have managed to do is to give us more content and world quality in the game without losing performance! They are taking the power of the AMD Athlon64 CPU and leveraging that to offset any performance differences and adding more detail in the game.

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NzY3

AMD 64 Bit patch for Farcry on Winxp 64.

My take is if its a 32 bit game running on XP64 it runs basically the same, however if its coded as a 64 bit game on a 64 bit OS its seems they can get better performance or add extra details.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #87 on:** May 10, 2005, 03:32:07 PM »

Not quite right Cav. It is not that it is 64bit compiled. So far, virtually every 32bit game that has been recompiled (no code changes) has run almost exactly the same. Sure, if you optimize the code before compiling it to 64bits, it will probably run better, but compiled as 32bit, it would run about the same.

You guys are really eating up the marketing on this.

There really is no magic in 64bit code which will make it faster. If anything it has the potential to be slower due to the doubling of the data sizes. This digs into your CPU cache in a big way.

Things only really get faster when we no longer have to deal with stupid ways to use big numbers. However, a game's numbers mostly fall between -1 and 1 for the bulk of the code.

But sit tight, I am sure AMD has some more marketing heading your way.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #88 on:** May 10, 2005, 03:48:41 PM »

Ok, I was a bit edgy in that last post. You know what will buy more performance than anything else? The additional registers.

BUT (always seems to be one of those), the MS compiler through 6.0c only makes use of two scratch pad registers. Even though there have been more available for quite some time.

IF (gotta love speculating) MS gets off thier collective tushies and re-writes the compiler (yeah,..that'll happen) so it can actually make use of those registers without having to resort to assembly language programming, then it has the potential of really boosting performance.

Those gains have nothing to do with 64bit CPU's though.

Overlag · « **Reply #89 on:** May 10, 2005, 04:17:58 PM »

well with all these 64bit os tests out you can see that most games perform the same, however some perform much better.

are you against that? was you against 16bit to 32bit? 8bit to 16bit?

we'd still be using 1bit pcs with 2kb ram if it wasnt for progress... 64bit is progress.