Author Topic: AH and WinXPpro64 (Read 1059 times)

jodgi · « **on:** April 26, 2005, 01:05:42 PM »

Do any of you cutting-edge-tech-savvy guys know if AH runs on the newly released MS 64bit OS?

zmeg · « **Reply #1 on:** April 26, 2005, 01:39:21 PM »

Yes it runs fine, the fun part is finding all the right 64 bit drivers.

jodgi · « **Reply #2 on:** April 26, 2005, 04:31:50 PM »

Yes, I'm aware of the driver issue. The only things I know lack 64bit drivers now are my sticks (TM) and TIR.

edit: I just joined the free upgrade offer on the MS page, winxp64 is otw. I'll sit on it until the last driver issues are sorted out though

Edbert1 · « **Reply #3 on:** April 27, 2005, 08:28:41 AM »

I had to drop my SB-Live in favor of an Audigy for sound in RC2 to work. I'm sure things are only better in the RTM version that is shipping now. ANyhow AH played fine in XP-64 for me before, I just didn't get much if any performance boost or FR increase.

Kev367th · « **Reply #4 on:** April 27, 2005, 11:06:02 AM »

I found virtually no difference frame rate ways with XP64, but the game did 'feel' a lot smoother.

jodgi · « **Reply #5 on:** April 27, 2005, 01:52:48 PM »

Isn't it so that AH could get a substantial performance boost if it was rewritten/recompiled for 64bits?

Not that I'm expecting it anytime soon, but 64bit will become mainstream eventually.

Edbert1 · « **Reply #6 on:** April 27, 2005, 02:01:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by jodgi
Isn't it so that AH could get a substantial performance boost if it was rewritten/recompiled for 64bits?

ABSOLUTELY!

That's the whole gotcha, a 64bit OS cannot run a 32 bit app appreciably faster than a 32bit OS can.

jodgi · « **Reply #7 on:** April 27, 2005, 02:05:02 PM »

That's why I trust the old placebo effect to help me, edbert

Skuzzy · « **Reply #8 on:** April 27, 2005, 02:32:22 PM »

No, recompiling to 64bits would slow us down appreciably. Microsoft's 64bit compiler puts all 64bit programs on top of the .NET architecture.
The MS compiler guru has said that in most cases native 64bit applications will run slower than the 32bit counterpart.

jodgi · « **Reply #9 on:** April 27, 2005, 04:57:12 PM »

sigh...

Hard to wade through all the techie stuff for a normal deadly.

Quote

High performance platform for the next generation of applications

Windows XP Professional x64 Edition is a rich platform that enables the next generation of high-performance computing. 64-bit native applications can deliver more data per clock cycle, making them run faster and more efficiently.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #10 on:** April 27, 2005, 05:09:28 PM »

That is the marketing blurb. I got my information from the head compiler guru at Microsoft. He wrote a white paper about it. He did not say all applications would run worse, but *most* would.

I'll believe his white paper over any marketing blurb you can find.

The reason MS is pushing 64bit is it is the way they are going to get people moved to the .NET architecture in preparation for Longhorn.

OOZ662 · « **Reply #11 on:** April 27, 2005, 05:26:53 PM »

I'm not that great at looking this kind of stuff up, but what is Longhorn? Seen a couple Skuzz posts refering to it, but no idea what it is

Edbert1 · « **Reply #12 on:** April 27, 2005, 06:00:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by OOZ662
I'm not that great at looking this kind of stuff up, but what is Longhorn? Seen a couple Skuzz posts refering to it, but no idea what it is

It is the codename for the new version of Windows. For example, XP was codenamed "whistler".

I'm not sure I understand why a 64 bit application running on 64 bit OS and 64 bit CPU would be slower than 32 bit application running on a 32 bit OS with 32 bit CPU. I can see running mismatched components in the chain, for example there needs to be a translation or queueing layer to convert. But native 64 should trash native 32. So I'm guessing XP64 is not really 64 bit and that it is somehow emulating it via the .Net extensions?

Skuzzy · « **Reply #13 on:** April 28, 2005, 07:29:41 AM »

.NET incurs a lot of overhead. In the white paper he also noted the biggest gain in the move to 64bit was to allow the operating system to grow to the 8GB level in a couple of years, which is where MS sees it will be.

Anyone remembering the transition from 16bit to 32bit will also remember 32bit applications ran slower than the 16bit counterparts for quite some time.

Bigger is not always better. The bigger the datum, the larger the application, the more likelihood of a CPU cache miss which is where most performance gains are to be had.

Quite frankly, you would not believe how much 16bit code there still is inside of Windows XP.

Right now, 64bit is enjoying a lot of marketing hype, with some specific benchmarks done to show it is potentially faster, but those benchmarks have been virtually hand coded and do not represent the final product as virtually all developers will see it.

68DevilM · « **Reply #14 on:** May 01, 2005, 02:11:30 PM »

is this os more for use in servers or is there a reason to get it for home?