Why should gamers go 64bit?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
A 64 bit processor is not more expensive than a 32 bit processor these days, and you can get 64 bits in either Intel or AMD flavors. The big price difference you are seeing is because the X2 is a dual core, which means it has 2 processors on one chip.
So to answer the question should a gamer spend extra money on a 64 bit chip, one doesn't have to spend extra for 64 bit.
 
I'm thinking lots of software will be 64bit and multi-threaded for Windows Vista comes out. I think in the next few years most everything will fit this description.
 
And whatever happens to the cpu that doesn't support 64 bit? I still have an old p3 and AMD chips? But the system's are mainly for internet?

Just like 16bit 286s and 386s, they will slowly fade into the sunset.

No one has addressed my Conroe point yet. Does anyone know if Conroe will be an EM-64T processor or if it has a new 64bit technology for Conroe? Or if Conroe might not be so fast in 64bit mode because if EM-64T.
 
And whatever happens to the cpu that doesn't support 64 bit? I still have an old p3 and AMD chips? But the system's are mainly for internet?

Just like 16bit 286s and 386s, they will slowly fade into the sunset.

No one has addressed my Conroe point yet. Does anyone know if Conroe will be an EM-64T processor or if it has a new 64bit technology for Conroe? Or if Conroe might not be so fast in 64bit mode because if EM-64T.

Yes, it will be 64 bit.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/03/17/intel_plots_4mb_l2_64bit/
 
This issue is quite simple, from the first thread. If you plan on using your computer for a couple of years, you want something that is BACKWARD compatible. There is nothing that is FORWARD compatible. 64 bit processors are BACKWARD compatible. 32 bit processors are not FORWARD compatible. So if you plan on keeping your computer for the next five years and want the capability to run new games and apps (and can afford it), go 64 bit. If not, or you are happy with the current crop of games and apps, get the 32 bit system.

Thread's over.
 
And whatever happens to the cpu that doesn't support 64 bit? I still have an old p3 and AMD chips? But the system's are mainly for internet?

Just like 16bit 286s and 386s, they will slowly fade into the sunset.

No one has addressed my Conroe point yet. Does anyone know if Conroe will be an EM-64T processor or if it has a new 64bit technology for Conroe? Or if Conroe might not be so fast in 64bit mode because if EM-64T.

Yes, it will be 64 bit.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/03/17/intel_plots_4mb_l2_64bit/

I know Conroe is going to be 64bit, the question (that wusy is working on) is, will Intel's version of the 64bit technology hinder it in 64bit mode or have they corrected that yet?
 
And whatever happens to the cpu that doesn't support 64 bit? I still have an old p3 and AMD chips? But the system's are mainly for internet?

Just like 16bit 286s and 386s, they will slowly fade into the sunset.

No one has addressed my Conroe point yet. Does anyone know if Conroe will be an EM-64T processor or if it has a new 64bit technology for Conroe? Or if Conroe might not be so fast in 64bit mode because if EM-64T.

Yes, it will be 64 bit.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/03/17/intel_plots_4mb_l2_64bit/

I know Conroe is going to be 64bit, the question (that wusy is working on) is, will Intel's version of the 64bit technology hinder it in 64bit mode or have they corrected that yet?
That's something nobody can answer until it releases...
 
Virtually no one buys a 64 bit desktop chip to actually run 64 bit operating systems... we buy 64 bit chips because they also happen to be the fastest chips at running 32 bit apps and operating systems. Don't want a fast CPU? Go back to some previous-gen CPU like a Pentium 4 500 series or an Athlon XP.
 
Ok first thread and might as well start a war here.

Why should a gamer go with 64bit? Most games dont support it yet. You have to get a new OS and MoBO. The 32bit chips are faster than the 64bit in 32bit mode. IE get a P4 3.6 for 300 bucks, or get an AMD dualcore 4800 (which only runs at 2.4 in 32bit mode) for 600 bucks.

discuss

Cataclysm

lol... I'm basically repeating what most people are saying, but I just can't help myself. 64 bit or 32 bit AT THE MOMENT isn't very important for games. IMO that will start to change when Vista comes out, but for now, either one will do.

What is getting confused here, are 4 major changes that took place in the processor world over the past year. (Some affect each other, but are fundamentally different)

First was the main stream 64 bit processors (which don't take a performance hit running in 32 bit mode btw... whoever says they are slower is either lying, or is ignorant)

Second, was the Multicore Architecture. One Dye, multiple processors.

Third is what Intel feels proud to label "Performance per Watt" to lower power consumption and make processors more efficient.

And Fourth is Instructions per Clock Cycle, which is I believe is the most important of all...

The last one here is where you’re getting hung up here Cataclysm. Intel and AMD didn’t slow down their processors so they can make them run 64 bit extensions. You’re seeing the 64 bit stuff, and then looking at the processor speeds, and thinking the 32 bit versions are faster, because they have higher MHz. But as the processor generations go on, they become more efficient. It’s like comparing a Harley with a 1000cc motor to a Honda Crotch Rocket with a 750cc motor. I promise you the Honda’s faster, because of the engine, weight, and design of the bike.

Because of More efficiency, processors can be running at slower speeds so they require less power, but have more processing power than their previous generation. I believe AMD picked this time to start releasing their 64 bit technology because of these other fundamental shifts in processor architecture; it’s just easier to design one processor that does them all at once. The 64 bit capability of the newer processors on the market has nothing to do with their performance compared to the previous generation.

If you read these forums, there’s quite a war with the whole Conroe processor. My reason for bringing this up, is that Intel’s Conroe processor running at just over 2 GHz, was beating the 3.6 GHz Pentium 4 over clocked to over 4 GHz!

The reason you’re getting such confusing information here, is because technically 64 bit CAN increase performance a lot; especially in a gamming environment. However, that’s not even the issue right now. 64 bit has nothing to do with the slower clock speeds of the newer processors, its more efficiency. The newer processors are much faster, and more capable, even at slower clock speeds.
 
Ok first thread and might as well start a war here.

Why should a gamer go with 64bit? Most games dont support it yet. You have to get a new OS and MoBO. The 32bit chips are faster than the 64bit in 32bit mode. IE get a P4 3.6 for 300 bucks, or get an AMD dualcore 4800 (which only runs at 2.4 in 32bit mode) for 600 bucks.

discuss

Cataclysm

You seem a little confused.

The latest P4s are also 64bit compatible. The AMD A64 X2 4800 is two 2.4ghz CPUs on one die, certain parts of the chip (extra registers etc) are inactive in 32-bit mode but you seem to think it runs at a slower frequency too (it does not).

The fact is that the A64s 12 stage instruction pipeline is vastly more efficient than the 40? stage pipelines of the latest P4s.

The Athlon 64 is not only the fastest 64 bit processor on the market today (maybe intels Merom - that will run far slower than 3.6ghz will beat it eventually, but it isnt out yet), it is also the fastest 32 bit CPU on the market.

It also comes out top on performance/$ and performance/watt right now.

As such, why should gamers NOT use 64 bit hardware? All Athlon 64 boards support 64bit, so I'm not sure where you get 'need a new mobo' from, and you can happily run Windows32 as long as you like.

The 3.6ghz P4 you mention is not *nearly* as capeable as the 4800 you mention. yes, it has a higher clockrate, but thats like saying:- 'I can take 10000 little steps in a minute if i shuffle my feet really quickly so I am faster than an olympic sprinter because he is taking big strides and only doing 100 steps in a minute'. You are also comparing a Dual core CPU to a single core CPU. The 4800 there is *two* CPUs in one. A fairer comparison would be the 3.6ghz P4 ($300) and a 3500 Athlon64 (2.4Ghz single core, approx $220)

I prefer AMD right now, for games and general personal use (However the last workstation I recommended to someone was an Intel as he was using it for mainly video encoding - what the P4 is good at) but I'm eagerly awaiting Intels new Merom platform.
 
My ONLY beef with 64bit as of now is freakin BF2. I formatted my computer and installed Xp64 with 0 issues, Proceeded to install 64 bit drivers, no issues. Then i figured wth why not fire up some BF2:SF, BAM BOOOM CRASH. I couldn't get it to run for the life of me. I updated everything I had on the computer, and nothing. So I reformatted AGAIN and reverted to XP32 and all was well again.... bastard BF2 is keeing me in 32 bit hehe.
 
Ok so I see that first reply had the more logical version of it, while the rest went for the "Look to the future, young Marty". Yes, in time the 32bit will become boat anchors. No one made a comment on the prices I quoted. If most my games, (I play MMO's) run on 32bit and the upcomming ones still will run on 32bit, why would I spend 600 bucks to down-grade to a 2.4 when I can spend 300 bucks and run my games on a 3.6? Way I see it, why spend extra money for options I cant use, lower my performance (because i'm running in 32bit mode). When 64bit games hit the market then i'll go for the upgrade, by then that 600 dollar chip will be half or less of what it is today.

Cataclysm
A 2.4 Athlon 64 will crush a 3.6 P4 in virtually every test case. In gaming, there will NEVER be a case where the 3.6 P4 wins over a 2.4 Athlon 64.
 
Ok first thread and might as well start a war here.

Why should a gamer go with 64bit? Most games dont support it yet. You have to get a new OS and MoBO. The 32bit chips are faster than the 64bit in 32bit mode. IE get a P4 3.6 for 300 bucks, or get an AMD dualcore 4800 (which only runs at 2.4 in 32bit mode) for 600 bucks.

discuss

Cataclysm


In windows 64bit doesn't make sense yet. Besides 64bit windows OSes have issues ( ranging from minor to very major ).

On Linux 64bit ( x86_64 on AMD64 CPUs ) works 25-70% faster in many benchmarks and a lot better than comparable windoze operating systems 😀 There are some issues but they are usually minor.

P4 EMT64 CPUs actually run slower in 64bit mode because they emulate it using 32bit instructions.

http://www.linuxhardware.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/24/1747228&mode=thread

http://www.anandtech.com/linux/showdoc.aspx?i=2163

http://www.intel.com/performance/desktop/extreme/em64t.htm


Most well-written applications will work faster when recompiled in 64bit mode and quite a bit faster when they are optimized for x86_64.


Gaming on Linux is not always a piece of cake but with the right tools you can have a great gaming experience with certain games. Native Linux games work best but even certain windows games work.
 
And whatever happens to the cpu that doesn't support 64 bit? I still have an old p3 and AMD chips? But the system's are mainly for internet?

Just like 16bit 286s and 386s, they will slowly fade into the sunset.

No one has addressed my Conroe point yet. Does anyone know if Conroe will be an EM-64T processor or if it has a new 64bit technology for Conroe? Or if Conroe might not be so fast in 64bit mode because if EM-64T.

Yes, it will be 64 bit.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/03/17/intel_plots_4mb_l2_64bit/

I know Conroe is going to be 64bit, the question (that wusy is working on) is, will Intel's version of the 64bit technology hinder it in 64bit mode or have they corrected that yet?
That's something nobody can answer until it releases...


Weren't the 386's (not sx) the 1st 32 bit procs?
 
I read somewhere that the amd64/emt64 was stolen from the nintendo64......just goes to show you how far we have come.
what dude thats just bulls**t whoever told you that was a moron geez and btw nintendo meant 64bit gpu not cpu duh and also they are 2 different architectures the n64 chip cpu and gpu were made by sis