64 or 32 bit for Games?

What is the general concensus on this? I am building a new machine and
games are the thing on it. 64 bit is rstrictive when it comes to
drivers. 32 bit is supported more easily. 64 bit for the future or
better support now?

Thinking of an OEM version here.


--

Verger

"What are we in time going by"-- Mountain ( For Yasgur's Farm)

"Verger" <nomail@maildump.nl> wrote in message
news:vvs8a31sndlve4k677u6ii6is41vq85rfk@4ax.com...
> What is the general concensus on this? I am building a new machine and
> games are the thing on it. 64 bit is rstrictive when it comes to
> drivers. 32 bit is supported more easily. 64 bit for the future or
> better support now?

Good question, if your hardware is all supported, and you don't mind
tackling compatibility issues when they come up go 64-bit. Some games are
already using more than 2GB of RAM, which on 32-bit Windows has issues
unless you configure Windows to set more memory aside for applications, and
alter the game's executable to be large_address_aware.

In my opinion we'll start seeing games using more than say 3 or 4GB of RAM
within a couple of years, and as such they'll end up being compiled for
64-bit.

--
Paul Smith,
Yeovil, UK.
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
http://www.windowsresource.net/

*Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*

You can run a 32 Bit O/S on a 64 Bit processor. I know Dell is installing
Vista on their 64 bit chip systems that way since a majority of consumers
still use 32 bit applications. But in the future if you want 64 bit, you can
do so.

"Paul Smith" wrote:

> "Verger" <nomail@maildump.nl> wrote in message
> news:vvs8a31sndlve4k677u6ii6is41vq85rfk@4ax.com...
> > What is the general concensus on this? I am building a new machine and
> > games are the thing on it. 64 bit is rstrictive when it comes to
> > drivers. 32 bit is supported more easily. 64 bit for the future or
> > better support now?
>
> Good question, if your hardware is all supported, and you don't mind
> tackling compatibility issues when they come up go 64-bit. Some games are
> already using more than 2GB of RAM, which on 32-bit Windows has issues
> unless you configure Windows to set more memory aside for applications, and
> alter the game's executable to be large_address_aware.
>
> In my opinion we'll start seeing games using more than say 3 or 4GB of RAM
> within a couple of years, and as such they'll end up being compiled for
> 64-bit.
>
> --
> Paul Smith,
> Yeovil, UK.
> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
> http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
> http://www.windowsresource.net/
>
> *Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*
>
>

> "Paul Smith" wrote:
>
>> "Verger" <nomail@maildump.nl> wrote in message
>> news:vvs8a31sndlve4k677u6ii6is41vq85rfk@4ax.com...
>> > What is the general concensus on this? I am building a new machine and
>> > games are the thing on it. 64 bit is rstrictive when it comes to
>> > drivers. 32 bit is supported more easily. 64 bit for the future or
>> > better support now?
>>
>> Good question, if your hardware is all supported, and you don't mind
>> tackling compatibility issues when they come up go 64-bit. Some games
>> are
>> already using more than 2GB of RAM, which on 32-bit Windows has issues
>> unless you configure Windows to set more memory aside for applications,
>> and
>> alter the game's executable to be large_address_aware.
>>
>> In my opinion we'll start seeing games using more than say 3 or 4GB of
>> RAM
>> within a couple of years, and as such they'll end up being compiled for
>> 64-bit.

"IceHockeyJason" <IceHockeyJason@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:F458DF38-BF4E-4568-ADF5-A2E87446807F@microsoft.com...
> You can run a 32 Bit O/S on a 64 Bit processor. I know Dell is installing
> Vista on their 64 bit chip systems that way since a majority of consumers
> still use 32 bit applications. But in the future if you want 64 bit, you
> can
> do so.
>

There are actually a couple notebooks at Best Buy (HPs or Gateways I think)
that come with Vista Premium x64, thought that was kind of cool, but at the
same time a little risky, BUT I'd be curious if you didn't tell a consumer
they were getting the 64-bit OS version, if they'd even notice?

I mean the drivers are obivously supported, wouldn't make much sense to sell
a computer without some of the drivers, so I mean it's not like there are
any programs that come up and say, sorry this won't run in Windows x64, as
far as I know.

I'm still ok with my 32-bit system. Only have 2 gigs of ram anyways. If a
game requires a minimum of 3gigs ram I'm gonna have to question the
programers ability to optimize game and art assets to a more manageable
level.

-a.

> I mean the drivers are obivously supported, wouldn't make much sense to
> sell a computer without some of the drivers, so I mean it's not like there
> are any programs that come up and say, sorry this won't run in Windows
> x64, as far as I know.
>
> I'm still ok with my 32-bit system. Only have 2 gigs of ram anyways. If a
> game requires a minimum of 3gigs ram I'm gonna have to question the
> programers ability to optimize game and art assets to a more manageable
> level.


Well, Command and Conquer 3 had problems with Vista 64 until they released a
patch to fix it. Here is the deceptive error I got when I first try to run
it under Vista 64
http://images.filecloud.com/407563/CnC3_error.jpg
They fixed in a patch about a week or so after launce, but it would be
pretty frustrating for a new user to get hit with that right away.

PCanywhere and my VPN software still doesn't offer a 64bit version for
Vista. PCanywhere should have support very soon (though it's been 7 months)

Outside of that, V64 has been able to do most everything Vista32 does.
Personally, if one is not overly techncial, I'd stick with V32 for another
couple of years. If you like to tinker, then go for it

Just before Vista came out, I built a new machine with Vista 64 in mind all
the way. My own experience has shown that it's older peripherals which
suffer, driver-wise, with 64bit OS but I would have thought in unlikely
anyone building a new machine is going to source older bits and pieces
unless you prefer Bargain Bin components! I checked each
manufacturer/vendors website for 64bit drivers, current or pending, before I
bought vid cards/sound cards etc.
I have had no real problem at all since installing V64, and still have no
major problems at all.

On the subject of games, this is really no different and my current rosta
includes:
Flight SimX
Halo2
SimCity4
Fable
Caesar VI
City Life
Black and White2

But there again, every computer set up is different as we all know. The only
thing that currently annoys me is Dreamweaver quits without warning at least
3 times an hour: but I'll get to the bottom of that one day!
Best of luck with the new PC.
Paul

"Verger" <nomail@maildump.nl> wrote in message
news:vvs8a31sndlve4k677u6ii6is41vq85rfk@4ax.com...
> What is the general concensus on this? I am building a new machine and
> games are the thing on it. 64 bit is rstrictive when it comes to
> drivers. 32 bit is supported more easily. 64 bit for the future or
> better support now?
>
> Thinking of an OEM version here.
>
>
> --
>
> Verger
>
> "What are we in time going by"-- Mountain ( For Yasgur's Farm)
>

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:49:15 +0100, "Paul Graham"
<paulgraham@pobox.com> sang the following hymns:

>Just before Vista came out, I built a new machine with Vista 64 in mind all
>the way. My own experience has shown that it's older peripherals which
>suffer, driver-wise, with 64bit OS but I would have thought in unlikely
>anyone building a new machine is going to source older bits and pieces
>unless you prefer Bargain Bin components! I checked each
>manufacturer/vendors website for 64bit drivers, current or pending, before I
>bought vid cards/sound cards etc.
>I have had no real problem at all since installing V64, and still have no
>major problems at all.
>
>On the subject of games, this is really no different and my current rosta
>includes:
>Flight SimX
>Halo2
>SimCity4
>Fable
>Caesar VI
>City Life
>Black and White2
>
>But there again, every computer set up is different as we all know. The only
>thing that currently annoys me is Dreamweaver quits without warning at least
>3 times an hour: but I'll get to the bottom of that one day!
>Best of luck with the new PC.
>Paul

Thanks to all for the help. since I am a gamer and I am designing my
new PC for games, perhaps 32 bit is the way to go even though it seems
that on 32 bit people experience a lot of problems anyway. I am
planning on buying Crysis and more of these very demanding games.

My system will look like this:

Gigabyte P353-DS3R (can use DDR2 and DDR3 RAM.)
2048 MB RAM, Kit, Crucial, DDR2 800Mhz (can upgrade to DDR3 later when
it becomes affordable and actually faster.)
Intel E6750
Point of View 8800 GTS 640MB
Creative X-Fi Music
Antec P180b case.

But games...apart from RAM hogging will there be other ways
developpers will effectively build for 64bit? And in what way? More
use of the dual cores?

Now, I have old peripherals. Scanner and printer. But I can use those
on my older XP SP2 system just fine. I suppose I could netwrok the two
and print over a network...and/or just use a USB stick of some size to
put docs back and forth. Should not e a big deal.

I suppose the cionfig above would not have trouble with Vista 64
bit... It is all new hardware. But it would be almost a disater when I
cannot play Crysis and Bioshock, Spore and more of these gems that are
released in the next year or so.

--

Verger

"What are we in time going by"-- Mountain ( For Yasgur's Farm)

"But it would be almost a disater when I
> cannot play Crysis and Bioshock, Spore and more of these gems that are
> released in the next year or so."

But why shouldn't they play on V64 though? Especially if you have a brand
new set-up.
Like some of the other posters have commented: 32bit apps will usually run
on a 64bit OS (an oversimplification admittedly...) but in my experience the
over-riding requirement is for the video and audio drivers to be compatible
with the OS. And at least with a 64bit system your future memory expansion
will be alot easier!

Paul - a 64 bit fan :-)



"Verger" <nomail@maildump.nl> wrote in message
news30ea3p8keoe7tshqghg6dgb1dkp6goprs@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:49:15 +0100, "Paul Graham"
> <paulgraham@pobox.com> sang the following hymns:
>
>>Just before Vista came out, I built a new machine with Vista 64 in mind
>>all
>>the way. My own experience has shown that it's older peripherals which
>>suffer, driver-wise, with 64bit OS but I would have thought in unlikely
>>anyone building a new machine is going to source older bits and pieces
>>unless you prefer Bargain Bin components! I checked each
>>manufacturer/vendors website for 64bit drivers, current or pending, before
>>I
>>bought vid cards/sound cards etc.
>>I have had no real problem at all since installing V64, and still have no
>>major problems at all.
>>
>>On the subject of games, this is really no different and my current rosta
>>includes:
>>Flight SimX
>>Halo2
>>SimCity4
>>Fable
>>Caesar VI
>>City Life
>>Black and White2
>>
>>But there again, every computer set up is different as we all know. The
>>only
>>thing that currently annoys me is Dreamweaver quits without warning at
>>least
>>3 times an hour: but I'll get to the bottom of that one day!
>>Best of luck with the new PC.
>>Paul
>
> Thanks to all for the help. since I am a gamer and I am designing my
> new PC for games, perhaps 32 bit is the way to go even though it seems
> that on 32 bit people experience a lot of problems anyway. I am
> planning on buying Crysis and more of these very demanding games.
>
> My system will look like this:
>
> Gigabyte P353-DS3R (can use DDR2 and DDR3 RAM.)
> 2048 MB RAM, Kit, Crucial, DDR2 800Mhz (can upgrade to DDR3 later when
> it becomes affordable and actually faster.)
> Intel E6750
> Point of View 8800 GTS 640MB
> Creative X-Fi Music
> Antec P180b case.
>
> But games...apart from RAM hogging will there be other ways
> developpers will effectively build for 64bit? And in what way? More
> use of the dual cores?
>
> Now, I have old peripherals. Scanner and printer. But I can use those
> on my older XP SP2 system just fine. I suppose I could netwrok the two
> and print over a network...and/or just use a USB stick of some size to
> put docs back and forth. Should not e a big deal.
>
> I suppose the cionfig above would not have trouble with Vista 64
> bit... It is all new hardware. But it would be almost a disater when I
> cannot play Crysis and Bioshock, Spore and more of these gems that are
> released in the next year or so.
>
> --
>
> Verger
>
> "What are we in time going by"-- Mountain ( For Yasgur's Farm)
>

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:13:58 +0100, "Paul Graham"
<paulgraham@pobox.com> sang the following hymns:

>"But it would be almost a disater when I
>> cannot play Crysis and Bioshock, Spore and more of these gems that are
>> released in the next year or so."
>
>But why shouldn't they play on V64 though? Especially if you have a brand
>new set-up.
>Like some of the other posters have commented: 32bit apps will usually run
>on a 64bit OS (an oversimplification admittedly...) but in my experience the
>over-riding requirement is for the video and audio drivers to be compatible
>with the OS. And at least with a 64bit system your future memory expansion
>will be alot easier!
>
>Paul - a 64 bit fan :-)

So I see :-) Well, I am about to click 'order' for 64 bit. I should
just accept that this is it! The transition from old to new, from 32
bit to 64bit. From old hardware to new hardware that from now on will
certainly feature 64 bit drivers. I worry about Total Commander. I am
not sure I can even use a computer without it. It does not support 64
bit. It woks though. DirOpus also works but doesn't support it. I
suppose in time they will.

Click, order placed. It is done. No way back now.


--

Verger

"What are we in time going by"-- Mountain ( For Yasgur's Farm)

"Andy" <android8675@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ADD92A9C-8B27-4009-8202-570C6A76C973@microsoft.com...
> I'm still ok with my 32-bit system. Only have 2 gigs of ram anyways. If a
> game requires a minimum of 3gigs ram I'm gonna have to question the
> programers ability to optimize game and art assets to a more manageable
> level.
>
> -a.
>

Yea, if Xbox 360 can run graphics intensive games with far less ram then
there is definitely something wrong with PC game designers or there is
something fundamentally wrong with the PC architecture as it currently is.
Maybe they need to dump the PC architecture and start from square one and
design it in a smarter way this time so it is more efficient.