Windows XP 64-bit Video Games

[Guest samoukos]

Hello everyone,

i just bought the HP Pavilion dv6000 series laptop with the AMD Turion

X2 processor....And i switched from vista to the xp 32-bit operating

system. My question is ... if i install windows xp the 64-bit will

the video games be installed okay and work using the 64-bit

advantages? Because now with the 32-bit the video games dont play all

that good..

 

Thanks....

 

Sam

[Guest S.SubZero]

Re: Windows XP 64-bit Video Games

 

XP64 will not make your games faster. A slow PC is a slow PC.

[Guest Tony Sperling]

Re: Windows XP 64-bit Video Games

 

XP x64 has noticably better Virtual Memory performance, and it may run heavy

processes more easily. But - I agree, if it is slow it will probably not

help that much.

 

 

Tony. . .

[Guest samoukos]

Re: Windows XP 64-bit Video Games

 

On 14 , 03:02, "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperl...@dbREMOVEmail.dk>

wrote:

> XP x64 has noticably better Virtual Memory performance, and it may run heavy

> processes more easily. But - I agree, if it is slow it will probably not

> help that much.

>

> Tony. . .

 

Yea but my processor is 1.8Ghz each...the XP32 i think only uses the

one processor...wont the XP64 use both properly and make them

faster....i can see a big difference between the Ubuntu Linux 32bit

and the Ubuntu Linux 64bit.....should do the same for windows shouldnt

it????

[Guest samoukos]

Re: Windows XP 64-bit Video Games

 

On 14 , 03:02, "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperl...@dbREMOVEmail.dk>

wrote:

> XP x64 has noticably better Virtual Memory performance, and it may run heavy

> processes more easily. But - I agree, if it is slow it will probably not

> help that much.

>

> Tony. . .

 

Yea but my processor is 1.8Ghz each...the XP32 i think only uses the

one processor...wont the XP64 use both properly and make them

faster....i can see a big difference between the Ubuntu Linux 32bit

and the Ubuntu Linux 64bit.....should do the same for windows shouldnt

it????

[Guest Tony Sperling]

Re: Windows XP 64-bit Video Games

 

Well, there are many misconceptions over CPU speed and 64bit dual-cores -

what you have is exactly the same as if you had a multi processor board with

two separate processors, but your processors are both crammed into one

housing. They each run at their rated speed (1.8, in your case) but this

doesn't mean you'll get 3.6Ghz if they run together sharing a process.

 

This is all about work-load. If you compare with a single processor CPU

running at 1.8, you will only see a performance benefit from a dual-core if

the single is running at full load more than half the time. Have you ever

had a game stop, or halt when some automatic update is kicking in? This

won't be happening with a dual-core with sufficient memory!

 

Same thing with the 64bit v. 32bit issue, this has nothing to do with

processing speed. This is like a highway, if you want to go from point A to

point B at a time when the highway is full, the journey will take a certain

amount of time - extending the highway by doubling the number of lanes will

allow you to travel the distance faster at that specific time. But if you

make the comparison at a time when the highway is not filled up doubling the

lanes will not have any impact at all on your traveling speed.

 

Unless your applications are written and compiled to take advantage of

multiple processors, they are passing on the task of scheduling to the OS.

Primarily for caching reasons, the Windows Scheduler passes jobs on to one

core untill it considers it may run a risk of having to reschedule the jobs

(wich would be an obvious waste).

 

XP x64 is not written on the XP code-base - it is written on the Server

code-base and therefore have a few tricks up it's sleave that XP doesn't.

When I try and figure how things are behaving here, I have a distinct

feeling that the XP x64 system is running faster, but I cannot run any

bechmark to prove the point. If there are any differences, they are small,

what it does is that it maximizes the things that are already good - but

this is precisely what a good product does - it makes you feel good about

it.

 

I am not familiar with the dv6000, I read a review that said it wasn't

breaking any speed records but was good for the desktop, I don't know. For

running games on a notebook, I probably wouldn't go to the expenses of

having a 64bit OS. On the other hand, it really is good and I'm sure you

will like it, if all your hardware has 64bit drivers available, (watch out

for the HP specific keyboard shortcuts, touch-pad and buttons!) but I doubt

it, that you'll think it paid off in the end? If you think the machine is

slow now, you'll probably think it's a little less slow.

 

One other point, most games does direct hardware programming, this requires

them to make function calls that are behaving like a driver would and so,

they have to be compiled for 64bit compatibility. Most games don't do this,

yet. Make sure that the games you are using are compatible, or you'll be

plenty sorry!

 

 

Tony. . .

 

 

"samoukos" <sammojohn@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:1195032437.960063.215880@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

> On 14 , 03:02, "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperl...@dbREMOVEmail.dk>

> wrote:

>> XP x64 has noticably better Virtual Memory performance, and it may run

>> heavy

>> processes more easily. But - I agree, if it is slow it will probably not

>> help that much.

>>

>> Tony. . .

>

> Yea but my processor is 1.8Ghz each...the XP32 i think only uses the

> one processor...wont the XP64 use both properly and make them

> faster....i can see a big difference between the Ubuntu Linux 32bit

> and the Ubuntu Linux 64bit.....should do the same for windows shouldnt

> it????

>

[Guest Chuck Walbourn [MSFT]]

Re: Windows XP 64-bit Video Games

 

> One other point, most games does direct hardware programming, this

> requires them to make function calls that are behaving like a driver would

> and so, they have to be compiled for 64bit compatibility. Most games don't

> do this, yet. Make sure that the games you are using are compatible, or

> you'll be

 

This is a little technically inaccurate. 32-bit applications can and should

run just fine on X64 versions of Windows, but there are things they can do

wrong that break on XP but might break on XP x64 or Windows Vista x64. The

biggest problems have usally been around copy-protection technologies and

very old installers that still have little 16-bit parts that are hold-overs

from the days of Windows 3.1.

 

One of the big pushes we have with the Games for Windows branding program is

to make sure those games work just fine if not better on x64 versions of

Windows, although we generally push Windows Vista x64 more than we do

Windows XP x64 Edition because of the better driver support.

 

In summary: most developers don't really have to do anything special work to

support x64 other than write code using modern best practices, but if they

don't even try to test it at all or if it's an old game that is not really

supported anymore by the publisher, then Your Mileage May Vary.

 

--

Chuck Walbourn

SDE, XNA Developer Connection

 

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

[Guest Tony Sperling]

Re: Windows XP 64-bit Video Games

 

Thanks, these are good points, and I did forget to emphasize the copy

protection as the most likely component to make wrinkles. However (although

not knowing), I have arrived at a private conclusion from pure observation

that tells me that Microsoft games avoid (almost at any cost) to use any

direct hardware programming tricks, since it is considered to be non

conforming to good windows programming practice. Conversely, everybody else

seem to do it all the time without even thinking about it and maybe they are

short of people and resort to 'Drivers' Developers to do it, but I have had

trouble with two games (the only ones I use, beyond Flight Simulator) they

are Colin mcRae Rally 4 & 5 from Codemasters, that installed fine but

wouldn't run initially, nr.5 later had an update, mostly consisting of a few

DLL's, that made it run absolutely fine. Same thing with GTR of SimBin, in

it's first version, after the update it ran fine - while GTR2 was completely

compatible from out of the box. Needless to say, all the FS versions I've

tried has been flying spotless all along. (FS2002 - FSX Demo)

 

Clearly, the copy protection has to be an Achille's heel - but I don't

believe it will be easy to have your code poke around inside the hardware

components via the WoW subsystem.

 

But I may be wrong

 

 

Tony. . .

 

 

"Chuck Walbourn [MSFT]" <chuckw@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:uuNp%23fxJIHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>> One other point, most games does direct hardware programming, this

>> requires them to make function calls that are behaving like a driver

>> would and so, they have to be compiled for 64bit compatibility. Most

>> games don't do this, yet. Make sure that the games you are using are

>> compatible, or you'll be

>

> This is a little technically inaccurate. 32-bit applications can and

> should run just fine on X64 versions of Windows, but there are things they

> can do wrong that break on XP but might break on XP x64 or Windows Vista

> x64. The biggest problems have usally been around copy-protection

> technologies and very old installers that still have little 16-bit parts

> that are hold-overs from the days of Windows 3.1.

>

> One of the big pushes we have with the Games for Windows branding program

> is to make sure those games work just fine if not better on x64 versions

> of Windows, although we generally push Windows Vista x64 more than we do

> Windows XP x64 Edition because of the better driver support.

>

> In summary: most developers don't really have to do anything special work

> to support x64 other than write code using modern best practices, but if

> they don't even try to test it at all or if it's an old game that is not

> really supported anymore by the publisher, then Your Mileage May Vary.

>

> --

> Chuck Walbourn

> SDE, XNA Developer Connection

>

> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no

> rights.

>

[Guest Chuck Walbourn [MSFT]]

Re: Windows XP 64-bit Video Games

 

These games are likely not doing 'direct hardware' access, but relying on

specific driver behavior. Given that Windows XP x64 and Windows Vista x64

drivers are entirely new drivers, they probably are lacking all the specific

hacks the old XP 32 drivers had to make these games work.

 

Certainly it goes back to a lack of testing and problems in the code that

don't cause obvoius problems on XP32 that break on new versions of Windows.

 

--

Chuck Walbourn

SDE, XNA Developer Connection

 

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

[Guest samoukos]

Re: Windows XP 64-bit Video Games

 

On 15 ÍïÝ, 04:01, "Chuck Walbourn [MSFT]"

<chu...@online.microsoft.com> wrote:

> These games are likely not doing 'direct hardware' access, but relying on

> specific driver behavior. Given that Windows XP x64 and Windows Vista x64

> drivers are entirely new drivers, they probably are lacking all the specific

> hacks the old XP 32 drivers had to make these games work.

>

> Certainly it goes back to a lack of testing and problems in the code that

> don't cause obvoius problems on XP32 that break on new versions of Windows..

>

> --

> Chuck Walbourn

> SDE, XNA Developer Connection

>

> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights..

 

Thanks for everyone spending their time for explaining me the pros and

cons of the 64bit and the 32bit....you see i am from greece from a

tiny village in the mid of nowever and news dont travel here so

fast...the fasted internet connection we get is 4kbps....imagine the

conditions....

Thank you again for your time!!!!

 

Sam