64 bit client

[Roadhousebum]

Use of cores is not determined by the choice of 32-bit versus 64-bit programs. A 32-bit client *designed* to use as many cores as it can get its hands on will use all eight of your cores, while a 64-bit client that runs only two threads will make effective use of just two cores.

 

That is true if you run the 32-bit client on a 32-bit OS.

 

A 32-bit client running on a 64-bit OS is running in emulated mode and is much slower because of that, running it in multi-core emulation would be even worse.

 

Check out this page, it explains WoW64 (Windows-on-Windows 64-bit).

 

http://www.viva64.com/en/l/0002/

[SteveTheCynic]

That is true if you run the 32-bit client on a 32-bit OS.

 

A 32-bit client running on a 64-bit OS is running in emulated mode and is much slower because of that, running it in multi-core emulation would be even worse.

 

Check out this page, it explains WoW64 (Windows-on-Windows 64-bit).

 

http://www.viva64.com/en/l/0002/

But modern 64-bit Windows systems are not running on Itanium processors. Read the whole article, where he explains that the performance penalty for 32-bit x86 code running on an Intel64 (i3, i5, i7, etc.) or AMD64 processor is about 2%, because the processor runs 32-bit x86 code natively with a sort of bridge layer between the 32-bit code in the program and the 64-bit code in the OS core. (The 2% penalty comes from this bridge layer.) And one thread-per-core works just fine. I've built 32-bit code that will fully load all four cores on my 64-bit PC that runs 64-bit Windows.

 

Itanium and Itanium 2 are like Zed. And Zed's dead, baby.

[MrBorsh]

Supporting this! I want less lag! #SWTOR64bit2016!

[Roadhousebum]

But modern 64-bit Windows systems are not running on Itanium processors.

 

You can come up with all the arguments you want. But, the fact is, 32-bit clients does not preform as good as 64-bit clients. The more the program is doing, the worse it is. and you don't get much bigger than WoW and SWTOR.

 

I run WoW and SWTOR. The 64-bit WoW client runs MUCH smother than the 32-bit SWTOR client or the 32-bit WoW client.

 

When I tried to run the 32-bit client with the same graphic settings I run on the 64-bit one, it is so poor, I can not play it. It effects the 32-bit SWTOR client as well as the 32-bit WoW client. Anyone that runs WoW, give it a shot, switch between the 32-bit and 64-bit clients and see for yourself.

 

Argue all you want, there is still some that still use horses and think cars are not reliable. There are those that refuse to use the internet, and many that refuse to use digital cameras.

[ludoviccb]

The 64 bits client effect wouldn't be as big as a DX11 client. The game right now is on a 32bits DX 9.0c client.

 

DX 9.0c can multithread, but every single thread need to be declared and can't use another thread on the CPU even if it's available. It's limited to 4 GB of ram per process (SWTOR use 2). It result that when one of the game thread block due to CPU or RAM, the entire game start lagging and got to wait for it.

 

DX 11 on the other hand can use all the RAM and all the cores while multithreading on everything available. That's what would make the biggest impact on the performance of the game.

 

Since that would demand a big change of the engine, doing it in 32 and 64 bits would also be a good thing at the same time.

[SteveTheCynic]

When I tried to run the 32-bit client with the same graphic settings I run on the 64-bit one, it is so poor, I can not play it. It effects the 32-bit SWTOR client as well as the 32-bit WoW client. Anyone that runs WoW, give it a shot, switch between the 32-bit and 64-bit clients and see for yourself.

What you say here is largely noise, given that some people describe 45fps as "unplayably poor" because it isn't 60fps or higher. You'll *have* to quantify it.

 

CAVEAT: In my case, the difference between 32-bit and 64-bit for Guild Wars 2 (they just released their 64-bit client) will probably be hard to see because of the relatively weak GPU, meaning that the GPU is limiting performance there, not the bit-ness of the game client.

Argue all you want, there is still some that still use horses and think cars are not reliable. There are those that refuse to use the internet, and many that refuse to use digital cameras.

Are you trying to insult me by implying that I'm some sort of Luddite clinging desperately to the last century? I'm amused rather than insulted.

 

The most important point I want to make is that I'm not advocating clinging Luddishly to 32-bit clients, but equally I'm not advocating a headlong rush to 64-bit ones either. I was just taking issue with the implication in your post that 32-bit x86 programs are emulated on 64-bit x64 machines, and also the secondary assertion that making effective use of multiple cores is a function of bitness of the program, with multi-core multi-threading in 32-bit code obstructed into uselessness by the emulation overhead. The WoW64 stuff is a thunking layer allowing 32-bit code to call into the 64-bit OS code, but the 32-bit code runs natively, not by emulation.

[BlaydeHawke]

Voting for a 64 bit client here also.... not a 64 bit emulation, but an actual 64 bit client. yea i know that's going to require a lot of recoding, but it's not like technology is going to suddenly say *smacks forehead* what were we thinking going to a 64 bit OS.... let's dump that and go back to 32.

[Roadhousebum]

What you say here is largely noise, given that some people describe 45fps as "unplayably poor" because it isn't 60fps or higher. You'll *have* to quantify it.

 

Running with the video settings I use with the 64-bit client I get 40-60 FPS consistently, some times better. With the 32-bit client (WoW or SWTOR) I get 5-15 FPS. When I say unplayable, I am not a FPS freak, I really mean unplayable.

 

BTW, I meant no insult, It is just very frustrating to me when someone tries to defend old tech, it just makes no sense to me. Especially when 2 very like clients, like WoW and SWTOR, can be ran on the same system to prove a point. The 32-bit clients run almost identically to each other, the 64-bit one runs much better.

 

Also, I don't know what happened to the post talking about DX9 vs DX11, but, made some very good points. It was up for 1 day and disappeared.

 

It may be the combination of 64-bit and DX11 is what is making the huge difference in performance, but, either way, there IS a huge performance difference and I would like to see SWTOR move into the 21st century with a better client. that's all.

 

I will none-the-less continue playing with much lower video settings. So, they are not loosing a customer, just pissing one off. All they would have to do is announce a reason that they are not doing it, and if a reasonable reason, I would drop the whole thing.

[Roadhousebum]

The 64 bits client effect wouldn't be as big as a DX11 client. The game right now is on a 32bits DX 9.0c client.

 

DX 9.0c can multithread, but every single thread need to be declared and can't use another thread on the CPU even if it's available. It's limited to 4 GB of ram per process (SWTOR use 2). It result that when one of the game thread block due to CPU or RAM, the entire game start lagging and got to wait for it.

 

DX 11 on the other hand can use all the RAM and all the cores while multithreading on everything available. That's what would make the biggest impact on the performance of the game.

 

Since that would demand a big change of the engine, doing it in 32 and 64 bits would also be a good thing at the same time.

 

Good points all.

 

And, I can not say if it is 64-bit or DX11 that is making the huge difference, it may be a combination of both.

 

Either way, it would just be nice if my SWTOR ran as smooth in higher resolutions like my WoW does.

 

BTW, did you have to re-post this? I swear it disappeared for a few days.

[SteveTheCynic]

Running with the video settings I use with the 64-bit client I get 40-60 FPS consistently, some times better. With the 32-bit client (WoW or SWTOR) I get 5-15 FPS. When I say unplayable, I am not a FPS freak, I really mean unplayable.

 

BTW, I meant no insult, It is just very frustrating to me when someone tries to defend old tech, it just makes no sense to me. Especially when 2 very like clients, like WoW and SWTOR, can be ran on the same system to prove a point. The 32-bit clients run almost identically to each other, the 64-bit one runs much better.

I *WASN'T* defending old technology. I was pointing out an erroneous implication in your description of how 32-bit code runs on x64 machines.

 

Well, except that the fact that a piece of tech is new doesn't automatically make it better than the old tech it is supposed to be replacing. When a piece of software isn't big enough to hit the limits of 32-bit, making it 64-bit just because 32-bit is so 1970s(1) does not make it better.

 

(1) No, I'm not exaggerating. I'm *understating*. The earliest 32-bit machines were available in the 1960s. They wouldn't run x86 code, of course, because x86 itself didn't exist until the early 1980s.

[Roadhousebum]

I *WASN'T* defending old technology. I was pointing out an erroneous implication in your description of how 32-bit code runs on x64 machines.

 

Well, except that the fact that a piece of tech is new doesn't automatically make it better than the old tech it is supposed to be replacing. When a piece of software isn't big enough to hit the limits of 32-bit, making it 64-bit just because 32-bit is so 1970s(1) does not make it better.

 

(1) No, I'm not exaggerating. I'm *understating*. The earliest 32-bit machines were available in the 1960s. They wouldn't run x86 code, of course, because x86 itself didn't exist until the early 1980s.

 

I agree 100%. Using hardware that is more powerful than needed to run the code you are running is a waste.

 

But... SWTOR is not 1970s nor smaller than 32-bit limits. You seem to be talking like we were discussing all code in general terms. I was not, I was talking about SWTOR and how *IT* would be better in 64-bit, just like WoW is better in 64-bit.

 

I am retired now, but, I owned a computer company and ISP. I started in computers when all we had was tape to store our code. I do know a bit about computers. Admittedly I Know much more about older systems because I do not follow things like I used to, but, I still build my own systems and for friends also.

 

I do not say this to brag or anything, I just wanted you to know I wasn't just some troll leaving messages here.

 

BTW, the first fully 32-bit processor was the Bell Labs BELLMAC-32A sold in 1980, the ones before that had 32-bit internal registers, but the memory bus and the external bus were 16--24 bit. Even the Motorola 68k (from 1979) was not really 32-bit, even though the Amiga crowd called it that.

[SteveTheCynic]

I agree 100%. Using hardware that is more powerful than needed to run the code you are running is a waste.

 

But... SWTOR is not 1970s nor smaller than 32-bit limits. You seem to be talking like we were discussing all code in general terms. I was not, I was talking about SWTOR and how *IT* would be better in 64-bit, just like WoW is better in 64-bit.

 

I am retired now, but, I owned a computer company and ISP. I started in computers when all we had was tape to store our code. I do know a bit about computers. Admittedly I Know much more about older systems because I do not follow things like I used to, but, I still build my own systems and for friends also.

 

I do not say this to brag or anything, I just wanted you to know I wasn't just some troll leaving messages here.

 

BTW, the first fully 32-bit processor was the Bell Labs BELLMAC-32A sold in 1980, the ones before that had 32-bit internal registers, but the memory bus and the external bus were 16--24 bit. Even the Motorola 68k (from 1979) was not really 32-bit, even though the Amiga crowd called it that.

By that definition, we don't have fully 64-bit chips right now, since none of them have 64-bit address buses. Sure, the logical addressing is 64-bit, but the physical addresses are not full-width. (My i5-750 quad-core CPU can only access 16GB of memory because it has a 36-bit physical address space.)

 

To be honest, though, the distinction between a 32-bit instruction set architecture (which have existed since the 1960s) and a full 32-bit machine is a bit fussy, as is the same distinction for 64-bit machines. It's more important to concentrate on what the software architecture allows.

 

And yes, a 64-bit-compatible architecture would undoubtedly make SWTOR's client work better. Would it be a good idea for them to do this work now, while there is still a need for them to have a 32-bit client? That's a separate question, and one that's hard to answer.

 

(And the VAX 11-780 from 1977 had 32-bit wide memory with 32-bit-wide physical addressing, although other restrictions - like what would fit in the racks - meant that you could get nowhere near 4GB of physical memory. I suppose it doesn't count as a processor because it wasn't a single chip. )

[Roadhousebum]

I am not sure where you are going with that. Sure, the Physical Address Extensions (PAE) being 36-bit restricts how much total memory can be used in your system, but, for performance, the following is what is important.

 

All CPUs that are Intel® 64 Architecture type support:

64-bit flat virtual address space

64-bit pointers

64-bit wide general-purpose registers

64-bit integer support

From Intel's site at: http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/microarchitecture/intel-64-architecture-general.html

 

All Intel CPUs that include (Core) in it's name supports these, this includes the Core I3, Core I5, and Core I7 CPUs. This includes your Intel® Core™ i5-750 Processor.

 

These are the main registers that 64-bit paths make a big difference in performance over 32-bit registry paths.

 

All that aside, emulation is the true enemy of performance.

 

All 32-bit software running of all 64-bit windows from Windows XP-64 to Windows 10 64-bit all uses WOW64. What is WOW64? From MS's site: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa384249%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

 

Quote> "WOW64 is the x86 emulator that allows 32-bit Windows-based applications to run seamlessly on 64-bit Windows."

 

Every instruction of all 32-bit code running on a 64-bit system is basically executed 2 or more times for every one time if it were compiled 64-bit. This adds up to a huge performance hit.

[SteveTheCynic]

All 32-bit software running of all 64-bit windows from Windows XP-64 to Windows 10 64-bit all uses WOW64. What is WOW64? From MS's site: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa384249%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

 

Quote> "WOW64 is the x86 emulator that allows 32-bit Windows-based applications to run seamlessly on 64-bit Windows."

 

Every instruction of all 32-bit code running on a 64-bit system is basically executed 2 or more times for every one time if it were compiled 64-bit. This adds up to a huge performance hit.

 

Did you actually read the section on performance and memory considerations? I think not. The "emulation" of x86 code on x64 is done in-CPU, leading to this statement in the text; "Therefore, execution speed under WOW64 on x64 is similar to its speed under 32-bit Windows." The 'thick" (slow) emulation happens only on Itanium machines, and Itanium is like Zed. And "Zed's dead, baby."

 

I'll say it again. If the existing client had an architecture that could easily benefit from compiling for x64, then doing so would bring an improvement. Whether changing DX-9 to DX-11 would make more difference is an open question.

 

I would suggest that at this point, the lack of x64 client for SWTOR suggests strongly that they don't think the benefit would be worth the effort and development/QA/etc. cost. If the internal structure of the client isn't well suited to benefiting from the change, making the change becomes change for the sake of change, which is always a bad idea.

[Roadhousebum]

Why do 64-bit applications work faster than 32-bit ones?

http://www.viva64.com/en/k/0003/

 

Quotes>

 

"But in general you may expect a 2-20% performance gain from mere recompilation of a program"

 

"Note also that when you launch 32-bit versions of software on 64-bit systems of the Windows family, old 32-bit applications are executed a bit slower because of the WoW64 subsystem which emulates the 32-bit environment. An average performance loss because of this WoW64 layer is 2-3%, although in some special cases it might be much more."

[Fazrei]

I was hopping this would get a response from a CM but guess not.

 

I seriously hope this is in their minds cause 32bits is a thing of the past.

 

And like i said before, the hardness of doing this greatly depends on how the original code is done, not going to discuss that part here seriously not worth it

 

I agree, 27 pages of comments and not a single Dev response. That is sad.

[Jesira]

I agree, where's the 64-Bit Client? D:

[Roadhousebum]

I agree, where's the 64-Bit Client? D:

 

Maybe they are waiting for 128-bit OSs.

[TX_Angel]

I agree, where's the 64-Bit Client? D:

 

Why does everyone think this will happen?

 

Seriously... what reason do you have to believe this is something that is remotely in the pipeline?

[grandmastermike]

Why does everyone think this will happen?

 

Seriously... what reason do you have to believe this is something that is remotely in the pipeline?

 

Why do people believe in god? People need something to believe in, for some of the SWTOR fans, that's a 64-Bit client.

Edited July 25, 2016 by grandmastermike
Misplaced Comma

[Roadhousebum]

Why do people believe in god? People need something to believe in, for some of the SWTOR, fans that's a 64-Bit client.

 

LOL Good one!

[Cyber-Blade]

MMOs Were created so that many people could play them. I have performance issues in PvP and operations on the LOWEST graphical setting. I'm assuming this is why not many people participate in things like operations and PvP. Many players don't have the rig to support such a demanding MMO. I know people with $1000 rigs, and they still receive lag in war zones and operations. People have infact quit the game due to performance issues, and some people won't play the game because of the performance. This is not acceptable in any MMO.

[Roadhousebum]

I know people with $1000 rigs

 

I do understand and agree with some of your post, but $1000?

 

ONE of my video cards cost almost $1000.

 

If someone *really* wants to play a heavy graphical game, they may want to consider spending at least $4000 - $5000 and buy a gaming system and not a $1000 email/surfing system.

 

A 64-bit client would not make much difference on a system that can't even run the 32-bit system to it's full potential.

[SteveGC]

Why do people believe in god? People need something to believe in, for some of the SWTOR fans, that's a 64-Bit client.

 

Well I didn't believe that they'd take up my suggestion that we should be able to use any companion in any role, but...

 

So clearly sometimes they listen.

[SteveTheCynic]

Well I didn't believe that they'd take up my suggestion that we should be able to use any companion in any role, but...

 

So clearly sometimes they listen.

Well, if you had been the only one suggesting it, they probably wouldn't have listened.