Jump to content

Windows 7 64bit vs 32bit

Disparage

By Disparage
in General Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Psijudge

Psijudge

Posted
Posted

The main advantage of a 64 bit OS, is that it can address more then 4gigs of total of system memory.

System memory includes; on board (ram), motherboard memory, video memory, etc...

So if you have a 32bit system with 4 gigs of ram, and a 1 gig video card, one of the gigs of memory will never be used.

On a 64bit OS, all of your memory is usable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Racquerr

Racquerr

Posted
Posted (edited)
I have a 64 bit processor but I am only running Windows 7 32 bit. Is there a huge difference in performance between running SWTOR on a 32 bit Windows vs a 64 bit Winodws ?

 

If you don't need it, don't.

 

Most games are 32bit and even though will run easily in 64bit Windows, you'll either get no gain or end up with a slight performance hit since it does technically need to use emulation (WOW64 which is more like a compatibility layer for 32bit programs).

 

If SWTOR was available in 64bit, I'd say yeah easily. If not don't bother unless you have other reasons why you would need 64bit (more memory for virtualization, etc).

Edited by Racquerr
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lawrie

Lawrie

Posted
Posted
The main advantage of a 64 bit OS, is that it can address more then 4gigs of total of system memory.

System memory includes; on board (ram), motherboard memory, video memory, etc...

So if you have a 32bit system with 4 gigs of ram, and a 1 gig video card, one of the gigs of memory will never be used.

On a 64bit OS, all of your memory is usable.

 

Exactly this. Unless you have more than 4GB of total system memory (RAM+VRAM) there is no benifit to using a 64bit OS

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Fourdee

Fourdee

Posted
Posted (edited)

For SWTOR (which is a 32bit application - Stupid considering its memory usage), 64bit OS will actually be slower due to WOW64 emulation.

 

The game will only be able to use a 32bit memory pool size, it will not use more than 4gb of your ram.

 

You will get a benefit only by using a 64bit OS if you have more than 4gb of ram. This extra ram will then be used by windows and other apps and reduce overall swapdisk amounts.

Edited by Fourdee
Link to comment
Share on other sites
abishe

abishe

Posted
Posted
It depends on how much RAM you have.

 

4 GB or less, 32 bit is fine.

 

For gaming you want 64 Bit so you can utilize more RAM. 32 Bit can only recognize 4 GB or less.

 

most games, are only writen, in a 32 bit envorment. (kind of logical, they like to sell more then less.)

 

so 64 bit, not gonna help much playing computer games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HELhikari

HELhikari

Posted
Posted (edited)
most games, are only writen, in a 32 bit envorment. (kind of logical, they like to sell more then less.)

 

so 64 bit, not gonna help much playing computer games.

 

Most software that's been properly written will compile cleanly for both 64-bit and 32-bit. Mostly this requires you to be disciplined with pointers and not to make assumptions about big they are. You also need to be aware of the difference in int and long size if you're bit shifting, i.e. not make assumptions about how many bits there are in a long.

 

There are also issues relating to padding in structures with ints and longs in, and other issues on cross-platform code that uses __i386__, __ppc__, etc to create compile time checks for the endianess of the target processor (because it will miss the x64 processors).

 

There is an old (bad) programming habit amongst those who have worked exclusively on 32-bit systems to treat pointers as freely castable to a 32-bit unsigned integer.

Edited by HELhikari
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bmathew

bmathew

Posted
Posted (edited)

There is a big 64-bit misconception that it only relates to RAM. Not true. Bitness is related to how 1 app has memory access, but to get to physical memory, it gets through to the MMU (memory management unit, 1st implemented in 80386) which allows mapping of 32-bit app addresses to physical address lines. Pentium Pro (before P2) could use 36-bit addressing (that is 64GB of RAM) way before 64-bit hype.

So:

1. If a game is compiled with 32-bit, it will never use more than 2 GB of RAM. You could have 32GB of RAM with 64-bit OS, the game cannot use more than 2GB. As for more RAM access, server variants of 2000 and XP could use more than 4GB of RAM ever since Pentium Pro (see above). But because of cheap drivers for cheap hardware (PCI bus is still limited to 32-bit physical adddresses), MS decided it will not allow it for desktop/workstation OS (so that is a software limitation). PS: the app limit could be increased to 3GB provided the OS is booted with a certain switch and the .exe file contains a "large address aware" flag.

2. 64-bit mode allows for more and bigger registers and hence allows more data with less memory delays (even L1 cache has a small penalty). So for heavy number-crunching routines, 64-bit is better. But the program has to be designed and compiled for 64-bit. For games, it allows a faster scene and AI computations. But you can notice this only if you are CPU limited.

 

So usage of more than 4GB of RAM for 32-bit games is irrelevant, since 64-bit OS has advantage of running more 32-bit hungry apps, which is incompatible with all gaming reccomendations. When 64-bit games will get mainstream, then yes, by all means, use 64-bit OS. Until then, it's just an experiment with stability and paving the way. PS: FarCry was (I think) the 1st 64-bit game, in 2004. Ever since, you can still count on two hand (that is up to 10) how many games provide 64-bit executables.

Edited by bmathew
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Sypiner

Sypiner

Posted
Posted
There is a big 64-bit misconception that it only relates to RAM. Not true. Bitness is related to how 1 app has memory access, but to get to physical memory, it gets through to the MMU (memory management unit, 1st implemented in 80386) which allows mapping of 32-bit app addresses to physical address lines. Pentium Pro (before P2) could use 36-bit addressing (that is 64GB of RAM) way before 64-bit hype.

So:

1. If a game is compiled with 32-bit, it will never use more than 2 GB of RAM. You could have 32GB of RAM with 64-bit OS, the game cannot use more than 2GB. As for more RAM access, server variants of 2000 and XP could use more than 4GB of RAM ever since Pentium Pro (see above). But because of cheap drivers for cheap hardware (PCI bus is still limited to 32-bit physical adddresses), MS decided it will not allow it for desktop/workstation OS (so that is a software limitation). PS: the app limit could be increased to 3GB provided the OS is booted with a certain switch and the .exe file contains a "large address aware" flag.

2. 64-bit mode allows for more and bigger registers and hence allows more data with less memory delays (even L1 cache has a small penalty). So for heavy number-crunching routines, 64-bit is better. But the program has to be designed and compiled for 64-bit. For games, it allows a faster scene and AI computations. But you can notice this only if you are CPU limited.

 

So usage of more than 4GB of RAM for 32-bit games is irrelevant, since 64-bit OS has advantage of running more 32-bit hungry apps, which is incompatible with all gaming reccomendations. When 64-bit games will get mainstream, then yes, by all means, use 64-bit OS. Until then, it's just an experiment with stability and paving the way. PS: FarCry was (I think) the 1st 64-bit game, in 2004. Ever since, you can still count on two hand (that is up to 10) how many games provide 64-bit executables.

 

 

Thanks for this. Very useful, even though I admit I don't fully understand some of the nuances. Two questions:

 

1) Since SWTOR exists only as a 32-bit client, nothing can be gained by running it on a machine with a 64-bit system and/or with more than 4 gigs of RAM?

 

2) You mentioned "the app limit could be increased to 3GB provided the OS is booted with a certain switch and the .exe file contains a "large address aware" flag." Can you please elaborate? How to boot Win 7 with this "certain switch" and how to add the flag to the .exe?

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MustrumRidcully

MustrumRidcully

Posted
Posted
Thanks for this. Very useful, even though I admit I don't fully understand some of the nuances. Two questions:

 

1) Since SWTOR exists only as a 32-bit client, nothing can be gained by running it on a machine with a 64-bit system and/or with more than 4 gigs of RAM?

Actually, it may depend on what you are running while you are playing TOR as well. I like having browsers and various other stuff open while playing (every loading screen is an excuse to visit the forums or do whatever else). If that + game can manage to go beyond 4 GB, you may still benefit a bit from 64 Bit. But admittedly, there isn't usually that much going on while you play a game.

 

How to boot Win 7 with this "certain switch" and how to add the flag to the .exe?

 

Thanks

I think the second part is your problem - it is a compiler option, IIRC, which means only the Bioware Devs can do it. Either they have already done so, or or they have not, and there is nothing you can do about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Apax

Apax

Posted
Posted
I have 2 copies where one is on a 64-bit OS and the other a 32-bit. There is no performance difference and if there is it's extremely trivial.

 

I'm going to have to completely disagree with this.

 

I have two systems (4 GB RAM) that are exactly the same (I know this as I built them both) save for the fact that one is still running a 32-bit OS and the other has the 64-bit version. With the 64-bit OS I have control over my system within moments of exiting SWTOR. With the 32-bit OS it takes a ridiculous amount of time for my computer to reclaim resources used by SWTOR and become usable again. Friends of mine who are using a 32-bit OS have the same delay, so I know it's not anything unusual, it's just how it is for 32-bit systems.

 

The same holds true for alt-tabbing.

 

If you have a choice between 32-bit and 64-bit, go with the latter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
ADonna

ADonna

Posted
Posted (edited)

I am running on the lowest settings and still have FPS problems. I know the problem is my RAM not my video card.

 

I have 32bit Windows 7 & 2gb of RAM right now. I am looking to upgrade to either...

-4gb RAM and still use 32 bit Windows 7 or

-6gb RAM and switch to 64 bit Windows 7 (and yes I checked my system can support 64 bit)

 

 

So my question is which should I do? Will I see enough improvement in FPS from the 4gb with 32 bit to the 6gb with 64 bit to spend the time and extra cash?

Edited by ADonna
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lundli

Lundli

Posted
Posted
I am running on the lowest settings and still have FPS problems. I know the problem is my RAM not my video card.

 

I have 32bit Windows 7 & 2gb of RAM right now. I am looking to upgrade to either...

-4gb RAM and still use 32 bit Windows 7 or

-6gb RAM and switch to 64 bit Windows 7 (and yes I checked my system can support 64 bit)

 

 

So my question is which should I do? Will I see enough improvement in FPS from the 4gb with 32 bit to the 6gb with 64 bit to spend the time and extra cash?

 

As someone already said, it's RAM + VRAM + anything else, so if you stay with 32-bit you won't get to use all of those 4GB RAM. So even if you stick with 4GB I would still say go with 64-bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TMar

TMar

Posted
Posted
The main advantage of a 64 bit OS, is that it can address more then 4gigs of total of system memory.

System memory includes; on board (ram), motherboard memory, video memory, etc...

So if you have a 32bit system with 4 gigs of ram, and a 1 gig video card, one of the gigs of memory will never be used.

On a 64bit OS, all of your memory is usable.

 

Not completely accurate. PAE allows for larger addressable address space, I'll have to see if I can dig up the post that explains it perfectly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lundli

Lundli

Posted
Posted
Not completely accurate. PAE allows for larger addressable address space, I'll have to see if I can dig up the post that explains it perfectly.

 

Afaik Windows doesn't allow that, or rather Microsoft doesn't, even though it's possible and the code to do so is already there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BMBender

BMBender

Posted
Posted (edited)
Actually, it may depend on what you are running while you are playing TOR as well. I like having browsers and various other stuff open while playing (every loading screen is an excuse to visit the forums or do whatever else). If that + game can manage to go beyond 4 GB, you may still benefit a bit from 64 Bit. But admittedly, there isn't usually that much going on while you play a game.

 

 

I think the second part is your problem - it is a compiler option, IIRC, which means only the Bioware Devs can do it. Either they have already done so, or or they have not, and there is nothing you can do about it.

 

This I tend to have other apps running vent, IE, fraps.(EDIT I'm also not a gamer type that says turning off viral protection is an intelligent gaming solution so add VP to that..).ect so I've found 64b is good for me. However if all you run is the SWTOR client by itself then I would be surprised if you could tell the difference between 32b/64b

Edited by BMBender
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...