Stardock: PC Gaming Is About To Break Free of 'Poisonous' Decade-Old Standards - Polidicks

[QUOTE=markg06;40253403]Yeah let's stop selling 32 bit versions of programs it's not like anyone uses computers for anythig but games.[/QUOTE] You can run 32-bit programs on a 64-bit OS. I don't think Microsoft [I]selling[/I] 32-bit OSs is the problem, though. They pretty much only do it because Atom is 32-bit, and even then the editions that run on these CPUs support DirectX 10/11 - even if on-die GPU doesn't. It's not like developers would be targeting the Atom platform anyway. The big problem is Windows XP, that still - 12 years after release - has some 40% of the PC market, and Microsoft should really have ported DX11 to it.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;40253451]You can run 32-bit programs on a 64-bit OS. I don't think Microsoft [I]selling[/I] 32-bit OSs is the problem, though. They pretty much only do it because Atom is 32-bit, and even then the editions that run on these CPUs support DirectX 10/11 - even if on-die GPU doesn't. It's not like developers would be targeting the Atom platform anyway. The big problem is Windows XP, that still - 12 years after release - has some 40% of the PC market, and Microsoft should really have ported DX11 to it.[/QUOTE] Ignoring that an office computer might only have a couple GB of RAM in and a less than stellar CPU so now you're forced to use a 64 bit OS because Microsoft has listened to Stardock it's going to take ages to actually boot up and all your programs are going to take longer to load.

[quote]Next time you’re playing an RPG in first person with no party you can refer to DirectX 9 and 2GB of memory as a big reason for that.[/quote] Oh, ok, sure. Just, excuse me, while I go play any fucking MMORPG made.

[QUOTE=nikomo;40253556]Oh, ok, sure. Just, excuse me, while I go play any fucking MMORPG made.[/QUOTE] I think he means when stuff's optimized to always work well on that kind of hardware. Sure, I could play Age of Conan on my old vacuum cleaner of a PC with similar specs but it was not fun. Average of 12fps when there was something else besides an empty beach on my screen. Now imagine that getting optimized to have 40-60fps constantly on that setup. Horrible.

And that's ignoring that an mmo will pretty much always be fundamentally different from a story-driven singleplayer game.

[QUOTE=markg06;40253482]Ignoring that an office computer might only have a couple GB of RAM in and a less than stellar CPU so now you're forced to use a 64 bit OS because Microsoft has listened to Stardock it's going to [B]take ages to actually boot up and all your programs are going to take longer to load.[/B][/QUOTE] ...what? I think you're truly underestimating the standards of PC's for the past 5 or so years.

[QUOTE=Chronische;40252189]Hey dude, not everyone can afford to upgrade past punchcards, let's keep making punchcard operated computers![/QUOTE] You know if you had a punchcard computer you could probably sell it off for quite a bit of money and buy a decent PC with that. :v:

[QUOTE=The Baconator;40252212]64 bit Windows isn't more demanding than 32 bit, it just requires a 64 bit CPU which have been around since like 2004[/QUOTE] Actually, Win64 does require more resources than Win32, starting with disk space. 64 bit versions of Windows on average use several gigabytes more disk space for a vanilla installation, and updates can be up to 15% bigger in file size. While this is trivial for large mechanical drives, it can be an annoyance on SSDs with limited space. Win64 can also run some tasks much slower than Win32, which is usually attributed to sloppy code, but sometimes is hardware/driver related. And you must remember that not all CPUs are created equally. The same goes for the 64 bit implementation, since it's basically an extension of the x86 arch. A prime example of a bad 64 bit implementation are the later Pentium 4s with the Cedar Mill core (Pentium 4 6x1.) The 64 bit implementation on this line of P4s was particularly bad, partially due to buggy microcode, but mostly due to the overlooking of the cache. The L2 cache on the 6x1 was doubled over the 6xx from 1M to 2M because the cache was only 32 bits wide. And even though the cache was doubled, it was still effectively 1M on the 6x1 due to the 32 bit width of the cache. And due to this, the cache was 50% slower in 64 bit mode.

[QUOTE=Roger Waters;40252054]i don't think microsoft should ever stop selling 32-bit versions of software, considering that the average office PC has the processing power of a ryvita cracker and the 64-bit capabilties of a liverpudlian child choking on his own vomit i'd say discontinuing 32bit support would be economic suicide[/QUOTE] I think you vastly underestimate the average officespace. Most business owners realize the level of importance hardware performance has to the poductivity of their staff. Unless an office is government funded, such as a hospital or firehall, office workers are often given better hardware than their personal computers at home, especially if data entry is involved, such as with ms access,sql, etc. My offices slowest box has a core2duo in it and 3gb ram. Our newest order is 8gb machines with i5-3570's. While I realize these machines are a tad above the average, most companies aren't very far behind.

Is there anyway to upgrade to a 64-bit Windows without losing all my files? EDIT: Would I be able to load Steam from another Hard Drive?

[QUOTE=Durrsly;40255197]Is there anyway to upgrade to a 64-bit Windows without losing all my files? EDIT: Would I be able to load Steam from another Hard Drive?[/QUOTE] Yes and no. You cannot do an upgrade, theres no way to get a wow64 install ontop of existing 32 bit files. However, if you do a clean install but NOT format the hard drive first, windows will backup your users and Program files folder to a folder on the root of c: called Windows.old. From here you can manually move things over. Steam in particular functions very well moved from one directory to another, the only issue you may have is UAC causing you to restart the application a few times as administrator before you can launch it normally

[QUOTE=Durrsly;40255197]Is there anyway to upgrade to a 64-bit Windows without losing all my files? EDIT: Would I be able to load Steam from another Hard Drive?[/QUOTE] For that second part yes, I run steam from an external Hard Drive without a problem.

I think the problem is more related to so many people being so set in their belief that Windows XP is the best and only operating system to be used until 2075. And keep Vista out of this. Windows 7 was released 3 years ago.

[QUOTE=samuel2213;40255294]For that second part yes, I run steam from an external Hard Drive without a problem.[/QUOTE] That will do me, I'll just have the other drive for loading Win64.

Considering that DX9 and x86 are still popular because of Microsoft, I can only guess of one reason why MS does so. Xbox.

[QUOTE=SouthParkMGT;40255323]Considering that DX9 and x86 are still popular because of Microsoft, I can only guess of one reason why MS does so. Xbox.[/QUOTE] But the Xbox 360 runs on PowerPC, not x86.

[quote] Next time you’re playing an RPG in first person with no party you can refer to DirectX 9 and 2GB of memory as a big reason for that.[/quote] I get the party bit but what's bad about a first person RPG?

[QUOTE=Rofl my Waff;40255356]I get the party bit but what's bad about a first person RPG?[/QUOTE] And with the Hilarity mod in Oblivion I had quite the party, and this was while I had a netbook that I used for everything. There was a small hit to the FPS.

I don't know about you guys, but I've been on a 64 bit OS since XP64 came out. Supporting 32 bit architectures is just insane at this point.

[QUOTE=Durrsly;40255335]But the Xbox 360 runs on PowerPC, not x86.[/QUOTE] 360's hardware has nothing to do with it. What I'm saying is for their own gaming platform, MS slows down the PC gaming evolution as platform by making x86 and DX9 still popular.

I use a 64-bit version of Windows 7 and I've never really had a problem with 32-bit programs. Most companies who distribute applications offer a x86 and a x64 bit version. Even then, if there is a problem you can just run it in compatibility mode and it'll usually work fine. There isn't much reason to use a 32-bit OS anymore so I kind of hope the next 'generation' of PC gaming phases it out in general. People running 32-bit OS's are screwed if that happens, yes, but if you have more than 4 GB of RAM then that should be incentive enough to get a x64 OS or processor as soon as you can.

[QUOTE=ArcticRevrus;40255161]I think you vastly underestimate the average officespace. Most business owners realize the level of importance hardware performance has to the poductivity of their staff. Unless an office is government funded, such as a hospital or firehall, office workers are often given better hardware than their personal computers at home, especially if data entry is involved, such as with ms access,sql, etc. My offices slowest box has a core2duo in it and 3gb ram. Our newest order is 8gb machines with i5-3570's. While I realize these machines are a tad above the average, most companies aren't very far behind.[/QUOTE] We use i5s with 8GB RAM and an SSD at work. Where my friend work they even get i7s

[QUOTE=Durrsly;40255197]Is there anyway to upgrade to a 64-bit Windows without losing all my files? EDIT: Would I be able to load Steam from another Hard Drive?[/QUOTE] To the second question, yes. I boot my OS from a SSD and have a second 1tb normal hard drive specifically for steam. I think before the SSD I even had just moved the entire steam folder to my second hard drive and it worked fine.

[QUOTE=Roger Waters;40252054]the 64-bit capabilties of a liverpudlian child choking on his own vomit[/QUOTE] this is quite possibly the strangest metaphor i've ever read i love it

[QUOTE=SouthParkMGT;40255514]360's hardware has nothing to do with it. What I'm saying is for their own gaming platform, MS slows down the PC gaming evolution as platform by making x86 and DX9 still popular.[/QUOTE] I think it would be that not everyone has the hardware to run games as good as I saw in a video of Crysis 2 with DX11.

[QUOTE=markg06;40253482]Ignoring that an office computer might only have a couple GB of RAM in and a less than stellar CPU so now you're forced to use a 64 bit OS because Microsoft has listened to Stardock it's going to take ages to actually boot up and all your programs are going to take longer to load.[/QUOTE] My gf says the average computer at Industry Canada has 4+ gigs of ram and newer Intel chips (you'll have to forgive that she isn't stellar with tech). One of the web developers I was talking to when I visited said IT uses 8gb standard and i5s. Doesn't sound that bad to me, and the advantages of having more ram are immediately noticable: more things open and running at once is great. For programmers, not having to live within 32-bit constrictions opens a lot of doors. Imagine if the first Supreme Commander game had been made for 64-bit? Using more than 2 gigs of ram and 1 core would have made it a lot more playable.

[QUOTE=FlakAttack;40256052]My gf says the average computer at Industry Canada has 4+ gigs of ram and newer Intel chips (you'll have to forgive that she isn't stellar with tech). One of the web developers I was talking to when I visited said IT uses 8gb standard and i5s. Doesn't sound that bad to me, and the advantages of having more ram are immediately noticable: more things open and running at once is great. For programmers, not having to live within 32-bit constrictions opens a lot of doors. Imagine if the first Supreme Commander game had been made for 64-bit? Using more than 2 gigs of ram and 1 core would have made it a lot more playable.[/QUOTE] As someone said, it's usually government funded offices and schools that have sub-par hardware for today. Largely because it's a lot of money to the guys handling the budget, and in the case of schools, the budget doesn't always allow for it. For private and public companies, faster, more up to date computers are a lot more reasonable, they can put money into them with less worry, and the result is usually more productive employees.

[QUOTE=mark6789;40252182]Yeah lets just keep holding technology back.[/QUOTE] it's not exactly holding back if theres no sense for an office to bother upgrading

[QUOTE=markg06;40253403]Yeah let's stop selling 32 bit versions of programs it's not like anyone uses computers for anything but games.[/QUOTE] You realize that most non netbook PC's have been coming with 64 biit for years right? Steam surveys show like 11% 32 bit usage. It's only ancient PC's with it now [editline]12th April 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=markg06;40253482]Ignoring that an office computer might only have a couple GB of RAM in and a less than stellar CPU so now you're forced to use a 64 bit OS because Microsoft has listened to Stardock it's going to take ages to actually boot up and all your programs are going to take longer to load.[/QUOTE] Uh 64 bit Windows runs the same as 32 bit, it's actually more optimized npt that it would matter Man there are so many misinformed people in this thread

[QUOTE=markg06;40253482]Ignoring that an office computer might only have a couple GB of RAM in and a less than stellar CPU so now you're forced to use a 64 bit OS because Microsoft has listened to Stardock it's going to take ages to actually boot up and all your programs are going to take longer to load.[/QUOTE] You don't know much about how Windows handles 32-bit compatibility (the only programs that suffer any kind of performance penalty on 64 bit are 32-bit ones), the performance hit to 32-bit applications is negligible. I like how he's complaining about XP not supporting DX11 holding back the industry, they are free to use DX11 level features in OpenGL on Windows XP.