64 bit games or 32 bit...what gives?

[balto]

The super mega awesome HOI 4 was recently converted to 64bit. Lots of discussion on that under the HOI 4 forum. I cannot tell the difference because it ran great when it was 32 bit and I have a mack daddy rig. But what I do know based on my extensive knowledge of porno is that bigger is better, so always go with 64 bit. And if 128 bit comes out.., well.., guess what is better (read prior sentence on porno).

[Anonymous]

[Deleted by Admins]

[Gilmer]

It goes to 65 on my computer.

[Zorch]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: Franciscus

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Why would a wargame need 64-bits? What wargame parameter needs more than 2GB of resolution?

Let's put this in perspective:

ZX Spectrum was an 8 bit machine. It had great games when it was around. Even wargames (Desert Rats, for instance). When newer hardware and OS came along, 16 bit and then 32 bit, would you also ask why would a (war)game need 16 or 32 bits ?

8 bits = +/-128. 16 bits = +/-32K. One can certainly imagine a need for numbers higher than those in a wargame. But higher than 2G? Why?

These are addresses in memory where data or executable code resides. Start Task Manager on your computer and look at all the processes that are running.

[Zorch]

ORIGINAL: KurtC

It goes to 65 on my computer.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: Zorch

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: Franciscus



Let's put this in perspective:

ZX Spectrum was an 8 bit machine. It had great games when it was around. Even wargames (Desert Rats, for instance). When newer hardware and OS came along, 16 bit and then 32 bit, would you also ask why would a (war)game need 16 or 32 bits ?

8 bits = +/-128. 16 bits = +/-32K. One can certainly imagine a need for numbers higher than those in a wargame. But higher than 2G? Why?

These are addresses in memory where data or executable code resides. Start Task Manager on your computer and look at all the processes that are running.

Again, that's handled by the operating system. Certainly the OS needs to be 64 bits. But why does a wargame?

[WingCmdr]

So what does WITP use Zorch?

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: Zorch

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay




8 bits = +/-128. 16 bits = +/-32K. One can certainly imagine a need for numbers higher than those in a wargame. But higher than 2G? Why?

These are addresses in memory where data or executable code resides. Start Task Manager on your computer and look at all the processes that are running.

Again, that's handled by the operating system. Certainly the OS needs to be 64 bits. But why does a wargame?

Ask the guys that made these games:

Hell Let Loose
Steel Division II
Victory at Sea: Pacific
Unity of Command II
Post Scriptum
Army General
Tank Warfare: Tunisia 1943

There are lots more than this. The current Battlefront games don't require it but they suggest something more than 4gb ram so that would be 64bit for most people unless they know how to run over 4gb ram on their 32bit set up.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: Lobster

There are lots more than this. The current Battlefront games don't require it but they suggest something more than 4gb ram so that would be 64bit for most people unless they know how to run over 4gb ram on their 32bit set up.

TOAW IV is 32 bits. Yet it can access everything on my 700GB hard drive. Clearly, the OS interfaces the game to the hard drive so that the game doesn't have to deal with those details. I expect the ram can work similarly. I've got 6GB of ram.

[Kuokkanen]

ORIGINAL: Franciscus

Let's put this in perspective:

ZX Spectrum was an 8 bit machine. It had great games when it was around. Even wargames (Desert Rats, for instance). When newer hardware and OS came along, 16 bit and then 32 bit, would you also ask why would a (war)game need 16 or 32 bits ?

Most common ZX Spectrum also has only some 48 kilobytes of RAM. That isn't much to work with, and it showed in the games. Another 8-bit computer, Commodore 64, has 64 kilobytes of RAM, which made it possible to make more detailed (more colourful) games. Spectrum games had to have less colours and less sound in order to fit into the RAM. There are other differences with the hardware, but even if video and audio components would have been closer to equal, # of RAM would still have been limiting factor for Spectrum. Commodore 128 (also 8-bit computer) has whopping 128 kilobytes of RAM. How much more audio, maps, and units that would have meant for war games!!? Its problem is compatibility with Commodore 64, and therefore it didn't get many dedicated games because game developers unanimously decided 128 owners can just play 64's games.

[edit]
Anyway bit # isn't be all, end all. There are many more considerations.

[Franciscus]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: Lobster

There are lots more than this. The current Battlefront games don't require it but they suggest something more than 4gb ram so that would be 64bit for most people unless they know how to run over 4gb ram on their 32bit set up.

TOAW IV is 32 bits. Yet it can access everything on my 700GB hard drive. Clearly, the OS interfaces the game to the hard drive so that the game doesn't have to deal with those details. I expect the ram can work similarly. I've got 6GB of ram.

Bob, I am sorry but you are wrong. Most certainly your Windows can use all your RAM.

But a 32 bit game as TOAW4 is limited and Will not use your 6 Gb RAM.

You can find several sources of info, but you can check this from Microsoft:
https://docs.microsoft.com/pt-pt/window ... s-releases

Regards

[Zorch]

From https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing ... g-systems/
It explains why some 32 bit systems can access more than 4GB.

"32-bit vs. 64-bit"

Here's why 64-bit (not 32-bit) dominates modern computing

You’ve probably seen 32-bit and 64-bit options available whenever you download an app, or install a game. Your PC might even have a sticker that says it has a 64-bit processor. But does it really matter? Most new PCs have a 64-bit processor, but why? Here’s the real difference between 32-bit and 64-bit.

HERE’S WHY IT MATTERS
Simply put, a 64-bit processor is more capable than a 32-bit processor, because it can handle more data at once. A 64-bit processor is capable of storing more computational values, including memory addresses, which means it’s able to access over four billion times the physical memory of a 32-bit processor. That’s just as big as it sounds.

Here’s the key difference: 32-bit processors are perfectly capable of handling a limited amount of RAM (in Windows, 4GB or less), and 64-bit processors are capable of utilizing much more. Of course, in order to achieve this, your operating system also needs to be designed to take advantage of the greater access to memory. This Microsoft page runs down memory limitations for multiple versions of Windows, but if you’re running the latest version of Windows 10, you don’t need to worry about limits. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/window ... s-releases

With an increase in the availability of 64-bit processors and larger capacities of RAM, Microsoft and Apple both have upgraded versions of their operating systems that are designed to take full advantage of the new technology. The first fully 64-bit operating system was Mac OS X Snow Leopard back in 2009. Meanwhile, the first smartphone with a 64-bit chip (Apple A7) was the iPhone 5s.

Almost all modern CPUs from both AMD and Intel are 64-bit. In the case of Microsoft Windows, the basic versions of the operating systems put software limitations on the amount of RAM that can be used by applications, but even in the ultimate and professional version of the operating system, 4GB is the maximum usable memory the 32-bit version can handle. While the latest versions of a 64-bit operating system can increase the capabilities of a processor drastically, the real jump in power comes from software designed with this architecture in mind.

Applications and video games with high performance demands already take advantage of the increase in available memory (there’s a reason we recommend 8GB for almost anyone). This is especially useful in programs that can store a lot of information for immediate access, like image-editing software that opens multiple large files at the same time.

Most software is backwards compatible, allowing you to run applications that are 32-bit in a 64-bit environment without any extra work or issues. Virus protection software (these are our favorites) and drivers tend to be the exception to this rule, with hardware mostly requiring the proper version be installed in order to function correctly.

THE SAME, BUT DIFFERENT
The best example of this difference is right within your file system. If you’re a Windows user, you’ve probably noticed that you have two Program Files folders: One labeled simply Program Files and the other labeled Program Files (x86).

Applications all use shared resources on a Windows system (called DLL files), which are structured differently depending on whether it’s used for 64-bit applications or 32-bit applications. If, for instance, a 32-bit application reaches out for a DLL and finds a 64-bit version, it’s just going to stop working. That’s the problem.

32-bit (x86) architecture has been around for a very long time, and there are still a host of applications that utilize 32-bit architecture — though on some platforms that is changing. Modern 64-bit systems can run 32-bit and 64-bit software because of a very simple and easy solution: Two separate Program Files directories. When 32-bit applications are sequestered to the appropriate x86 folder, Windows knows to serve up the right DLL, aka the 32-bit version. Everything in the regular Program Files directory, on the other hand, can access the other content.

[PipFromSlitherine]

The 32-bit version of Windows cannot utilise more than 4GB of memory*. This is because x86 instructions use 32 bit memory values, which can (obviously) only reference 2^32 addresses. The 64-bit version uses the x64 extensions to the x86 processor which allow for 64 bit address values (among many other enhancements) allowing it to reference 2^64 memory addresses. Windows has used virtualised memory for decades now and so (e.g.) a 32 bit app running on W64 will have it's own virtual 4GB memory space that it can use (this is unlikely to be contiguous in physical memory).

You can of course deal with larger numbers than the [0,2^32-1] range that a pure 32 bit value gives you (hence Windows can access large hard drives) but memory access needs to be CPU native, rather than going through some kind of interface as disk access does, otherwise any program would slow to a crawl.

Cheers

Pip

* Fine - this is not strictly true. W32 running on a 32-bit processor cannot access more than 4GB, but W32 running a 64-bit CPU can access more memory by using special extensions to memory mapping. But why would you do that in the first place when you could run W64 far more efficiently? [:)]

[Edit: Dammit - I could have just let Zorch's post do the work...]

[zakblood]

i stayed out of it tbh, and just sat back and laughed [:D]

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: PipFromSlitherine

* Fine - this is not strictly true. W32 running on a 32-bit processor cannot access more than 4GB, but W32 running a 64-bit CPU can access more memory by using special extensions to memory mapping. But why would you do that in the first place when you could run W64 far more efficiently? [:)]

That kinda sounds like there is a way if you send the addresses in two chunks - which was sort of what I was anticipating. That's probably not practical, as you say - if the OS is not doing it for you.

I'll just revert to my post #11 question as to why one would need more than 4GB of ram for a wargame. Zorch's post mentioned apps with "high performance demands". Wargames are the opposite. And virtual memory is practically unlimited (just slow).

[Zorch]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: PipFromSlitherine

* Fine - this is not strictly true. W32 running on a 32-bit processor cannot access more than 4GB, but W32 running a 64-bit CPU can access more memory by using special extensions to memory mapping. But why would you do that in the first place when you could run W64 far more efficiently? [:)]

That kinda sounds like there is a way if you send the addresses in two chunks - which was sort of what I was anticipating. That's probably not practical, as you say - if the OS is not doing it for you.

I'll just revert to my post #11 question as to why one would need more than 4GB of ram for a wargame. Zorch's post mentioned apps with "high performance demands". Wargames are the opposite. And virtual memory is practically unlimited (just slow).

Think of 64 bit as a bigger faucet. More numbers are crunched in less time, which matters when the AI is thinking about its move. For some games the difference would be tiny; for apps like chess or video processing it would be substantial. Don't know where TOAW fits on that scale.

I would like to see a benchmark of 32 vs 64, on the same PC. You'd have to uninstall one version, install the other, and do exactly the same steps. I bet there's a web site that's done such a benchmark.

[Gilmer]

ORIGINAL: Zorch

ORIGINAL: KurtC

It goes to 65 on my computer.

Eggggzactly......