Where are 64 bit games?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by demi0227_basic (886 posts) -

Just watched that Rome 2 video today, and thought to myself, are they doing this all on 32 bit?  I imagine this type of game would be greatly beneffited by having more memory to page to.  Even if not, are 64 bit games coming our way in the next few years?  Games are finally starting to give up on XP...will 32 bit games be a thing of the past sometime soon?

#2 Posted by OptiSTR (31 posts) -

Just watched that Rome 2 video today, and thought to myself, are they doing this all on 32 bit?  I imagine this type of game would be greatly beneffited by having more memory to page to.  Even if not, are 64 bit games coming our way in the next few years?  Games are finally starting to give up on XP...will 32 bit games be a thing of the past sometime soon?

demi0227_basic
64Bit platform is more in use for work such as programming and this sort of stuff. games are more dependent on GPU and not CPU so 32Bit is just fine
#3 Posted by Wasdie (49655 posts) -

There are plenty of ways in 32 bit to access more than 4 gigs of memory. It doesn't really add anything to a game. Until they absolutly cannot access the memory they need with 32 bit there is no real point.

#4 Posted by kraken2109 (13010 posts) -

Crysis had a 64-bit exe, it made no difference.

#5 Posted by Lost-to-Apathy (372 posts) -

There are plenty of ways in 32 bit to access more than 4 gigs of memory. It doesn't really add anything to a game. Until they absolutly cannot access the memory they need with 32 bit there is no real point.

Wasdie
I have a feeling that will be relatively soon.
#6 Posted by Baranga (14217 posts) -

Crysis had a 64-bit exe, it made no difference.

kraken2109

It crashed more.

#7 Posted by DanielDust (15402 posts) -

[QUOTE="kraken2109"]

Crysis had a 64-bit exe, it made no difference.

Baranga

It crashed more.

Other way around.
#8 Posted by N30F3N1X (7985 posts) -

[QUOTE="Baranga"]

[QUOTE="kraken2109"]

Crysis had a 64-bit exe, it made no difference.

DanielDust

It crashed more.

Other way around.

Nope, it actually crashed more.

#9 Posted by Wasdie (49655 posts) -

[QUOTE="DanielDust"][QUOTE="Baranga"]

It crashed more.

N30F3N1X

Other way around.

Nope, it actually crashed more.

It actually ran worse too on average. Only by a few frames but it was still worse.

#10 Posted by DanielDust (15402 posts) -

[QUOTE="DanielDust"][QUOTE="Baranga"]

It crashed more.

N30F3N1X

Other way around.

Nope, it actually crashed more.

32 bit was literally unplayable and it ran worse for a reason, 64 bit had no DX 9.
#11 Posted by Marfoo (5993 posts) -
I had worse problems with the 64-bit version of Crysis. But you're right, games can benefit from 64-bit. We live in an age where virtually all x86 processors have been 64-bit capable for years and Microsoft still insists on releasing 32-bit versions of Windows. Simulators, and strategy games, or any game where there are tons of objects to keep track of benefit from 64-bit. The only difference I noticed in 64-bit Crysis was that the draw distance on detail objects (small rocks, foliage etc) was further than 32-bit. Took a trained eye to notice though. Not really the kind of game to take advantage of more memory. Supreme Commander on the other hand, I've had that run out of memory on me. Also other big strategy games like Sins of Solar Empire could potentially get even bigger.
#12 Posted by nameless12345 (15125 posts) -

What does 64-bit processing do for games anyway, btw?

I know there was a lot of hype around consoles like the Atari Jaguar and N64 and their proposed "64-bitness", but I really don't know in what ways that made them better.

Judging by some sources, devs were mostly still using 32-bit code on N64, because it was faster and took less space on the cartridges.

#13 Posted by Baranga (14217 posts) -

Far Cry had a nice 64 bit patch. It added HDR, bigger view distance, better textures, cosmetic stuff like more bird flocks and insects etc.

#14 Posted by ciorlandenis (331 posts) -

Crysis for me ran much better on 64

#15 Posted by Wasdie (49655 posts) -

What does 64-bit processing do for games anyway, btw?

I know there was a lot of hype around consoles like the Atari Jaguar and N64 and their proposed "64-bitness", but I really don't know in what ways that made them better.

Judging by some sources, devs were mostly still using 32-bit code on N64, because it was faster and took less space on the cartridges.

nameless12345

It doesn't do much. It just allows 64 bit long variables which increases the total amount of memory the game can access. It's necessary because 32 big caps out around 3.5 gbs of total use able memory. There are ways to access more, but in general it's just best go with 64 bit.

Graphic cards have been using larger than 64 bits for years. I believe they are up at the 256 bit area. They have to do a lot more number crunching where 256 bits is actually beneficial.

64 bits isn't some magical thing that will make a game look better and run better. 

#16 Posted by demi0227_basic (886 posts) -

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

What does 64-bit processing do for games anyway, btw?

I know there was a lot of hype around consoles like the Atari Jaguar and N64 and their proposed "64-bitness", but I really don't know in what ways that made them better.

Judging by some sources, devs were mostly still using 32-bit code on N64, because it was faster and took less space on the cartridges.

Wasdie

It doesn't do much. It just allows 64 bit long variables which increases the total amount of memory the game can access. It's necessary because 32 big caps out around 3.5 gbs of total use able memory. There are ways to access more, but in general it's just best go with 64 bit.

Graphic cards have been using larger than 64 bits for years. I believe they are up at the 256 bit area. They have to do a lot more number crunching where 256 bits is actually beneficial.

64 bits isn't some magical thing that will make a game look better and run better. 

What this guy said. It's not going to beneficial to all game types at this point, but I've read certain devs would like to have more memory to page info to. Even FPSs could benefit with some insanely huge, real time battles. Anyways...Is the PS4 going to be 32 bit again?
#17 Posted by PublicNuisance (4582 posts) -

We live in an age where virtually all x86 processors have been 64-bit capable for years and Microsoft still insists on releasing 32-bit versions of Windows. Marfoo

The problem is that tablets and netbooks have needed 32 bit because of lack of RAM. A computer will run slower with 64 bit installed with 2 GB or less of RAM. It would take either the death of tablets and netbooks or manufacturers to stop being lazy/cheap and start putting netbooks and tablets out with 4Gb of RAM and 64 bit.

You could also blame the developers though. According to the Steam hardware survey over 67% of Steam users have 64 Bit operating systems installed. Steam has over 30 million accounts which means that over 20 million possible customers have 64 bit capibility. I'd say that's a fiancial motivation to make more games 64 bit.

We can argue as to how much 64 bit helps games but if it even helps a little then I say developers should be pushing ahead and using what advancements they have at their disposal.

#18 Posted by Marfoo (5993 posts) -

[QUOTE="Marfoo"]We live in an age where virtually all x86 processors have been 64-bit capable for years and Microsoft still insists on releasing 32-bit versions of Windows. PublicNuisance

The problem is that tablets and netbooks have needed 32 bit because of lack of RAM. A computer will run slower with 64 bit installed with 2 GB or less of RAM. It would take either the death of tablets and netbooks or manufacturers to stop being lazy/cheap and start putting netbooks and tablets out with 4Gb of RAM and 64 bit.

You could also blame the developers though. According to the Steam hardware survey over 67% of Steam users have 64 Bit operating systems installed. Steam has over 30 million accounts which means that over 20 million possible customers have 64 bit capibility. I'd say that's a fiancial motivation to make more games 64 bit.

We can argue as to how much 64 bit helps games but if it even helps a little then I say developers should be pushing ahead and using what advancements they have at their disposal.

It seems odd to me that a 64-bit system would run slower than a 32-bit system with less RAM at your disposal. I know tablets and netbooks for many reasons are limited to 32-bit in order to save die-space and save power. The original Atom chips were designed this way, cutting corners wherever power could be saved. But I believe the modern Atoms and even AMD's lower power chips are all x64 now.
#19 Posted by PublicNuisance (4582 posts) -

It seems odd to me that a 64-bit system would run slower than a 32-bit system with less RAM at your disposal. I know tablets and netbooks for many reasons are limited to 32-bit in order to save die-space and save power. The original Atom chips were designed this way, cutting corners wherever power could be saved. But I believe the modern Atoms and even AMD's lower power chips are all x64 now.Marfoo

I've tried the 32/64 switch on my laptop a few times and it always felt very sluggish on my laptop which has a 64 bit CPU but only 2GB of RAM. I have also tried it a few times on customers laptops at work. It's why I always stick to 32 bit for low end systems.