64-bit Processors
<div class="IPBDescription">Why?</div> Alright, next month or so I'm going to be making myself a new computer and this crappy Dell is going to be defenestrated. I've pretty much decided on everything else that I'm going to put into it, but I'm not really sure about the processor. I'm going to go with an AMD proc, but what I don't know is why I would want to get a AMD 64 over a AMD XP processor. They have the same rating, and the 64-bit ones are more expensive. To take advantage of the 64 bit processor's abilities I would need to get WinXP 64 and be running 64 bit applications right? I know there are some hardware buffs here on the boards so I thought I'd throw it out there.
Comments
As far as buying one goes, it might be a solid invesment to go with the 64-bit but if you don't have the cash, an XP is still quite a good CPU.
I suggest you go and read a good review on <a href='http://www.tomshardware.com' target='_blank'>Tom's Hardware</a> or <a href='http://www.anandtech.com' target='_blank'>Anand Tech</a>.
As I said, read those links <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
The AMD FX chips are faster because they have a better architecture than the XP and not because they are 64bit.
What he said. Same goes for PCI express too.
What things to 64 bit progs do?
A 64-bit number is obviously twice as long as a 32-bit number. A 64-bit processor means that it can process numbers this long, meaning greater precision in graphics. It can calculate much finer points in 3D space than a 32-bit processor could. This will mean much more detail in 3D applications. You could have individual beads of sweat running down someones face, or grains of sand...
The other thing a 64-bit processor could do is address more RAM than a 32-bit processor. Each place in the RAM has an address and the 64-bit CPU could crunch a longer address than a 32-bit CPU, meaning you'll be able to have more and more RAM in your computer.
A 64-bit number is obviously twice as long as a 32-bit number. A 64-bit processor means that it can process numbers this long, meaning greater precision in graphics. It can calculate much finer points in 3D space than a 32-bit processor could. This will mean much more detail in 3D applications. You could have individual beads of sweat running down someones face, or grains of sand...
The other thing a 64-bit processor could do is address more RAM than a 32-bit processor. Each place in the RAM has an address and the 64-bit CPU could crunch a longer address than a 32-bit CPU, meaning you'll be able to have more and more RAM in your computer. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
FYI, 64-bit is not 2 x 32-bit.
And uh, generally speaking you don't use your CPU for graphics rendering nowadays. That's what your video card is for, they come with their own FPU.
Here's a better explanation: <a href='http://arstechnica.com/cpu/03q1/x86-64/x86-64-1.html' target='_blank'>http://arstechnica.com/cpu/03q1/x86-64/x86-64-1.html</a>
Basically, 64 bit is doubling pathways, size of registers, maximum counts on addressable memory, etc...
So regardless of what platform you're running on, you're going to find that your processer will be able to x'fer data and instructions to and from memory more efficiently than a 32bit processor will. Take an assembly class and you'll realize the benifits.
I'm not 100% sure, but I'm of the belief that if a 32 bit program is ran on a 32 bit OS, it can still run a mite bit better on a 64 bit platform as your drivers are all going to support the newer hardware and be able to utilize the extra pathways as best as they can.
Regardless if you're running 32 bit windows or not, you'll be more future proof than with a 32 bit chip, and if you have the cohones, you can run linux or other 64 bit OS's with a bit more luck, I imagine.
Reboot or reformat?
A 64-bit number is obviously twice as long as a 32-bit number. A 64-bit processor means that it can process numbers this long, meaning greater precision in graphics. It can calculate much finer points in 3D space than a 32-bit processor could. This will mean much more detail in 3D applications. You could have individual beads of sweat running down someones face, or grains of sand...
The other thing a 64-bit processor could do is address more RAM than a 32-bit processor. Each place in the RAM has an address and the 64-bit CPU could crunch a longer address than a 32-bit CPU, meaning you'll be able to have more and more RAM in your computer. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
FYI, 64-bit is not 2 x 32-bit.
And uh, generally speaking you don't use your CPU for graphics rendering nowadays. That's what your video card is for, they come with their own FPU. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not exactly true for AMD processors. AMD's x86-64 architecture actually uses two 32-bit pipes to get 64-bit. The advantage with using this method also allows for the Athlon 64s/Opteron's spectacular 32-bit performance. The best deal right now would be an Athlon 64 3000+, slap on an aftermarket cooler and clock it to oh, about 2.4 ghz. At this clock speed, it easilly outperforms the 3500+ and nearly gets the 3700+.
A 64-bit number is obviously twice as long as a 32-bit number. A 64-bit processor means that it can process numbers this long, meaning greater precision in graphics. It can calculate much finer points in 3D space than a 32-bit processor could. This will mean much more detail in 3D applications. You could have individual beads of sweat running down someones face, or grains of sand...
The other thing a 64-bit processor could do is address more RAM than a 32-bit processor. Each place in the RAM has an address and the 64-bit CPU could crunch a longer address than a 32-bit CPU, meaning you'll be able to have more and more RAM in your computer. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
FYI, 64-bit is not 2 x 32-bit.
And uh, generally speaking you don't use your CPU for graphics rendering nowadays. That's what your video card is for, they come with their own FPU. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not exactly true for AMD processors. AMD's x86-64 architecture actually uses two 32-bit pipes to get 64-bit. The advantage with using this method also allows for the Athlon 64s/Opteron's spectacular 32-bit performance. The best deal right now would be an Athlon 64 3000+, slap on an aftermarket cooler and clock it to oh, about 2.4 ghz. At this clock speed, it easilly outperforms the 3500+ and nearly gets the 3700+. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
AFAIK, AMD's implementation of x86-64 does not use 2 32-bit pipelines. What it does is it actually extended the number of GPR (General purpose registers) available to programmers so that the CPU can effectively "switch" between 32-bit and 64-bit operation. A 64-bit program will simply make use of the additional 8 GPRs in 64bit mode. The logic is simple, 2 32-bit pipelines will not be able to process 64bit code even if you use them together. (2^64) != (2 * 2^32)
The 2 32bit pipeline analogy is actually a lot more appropriate if you use it to describe Intel's hyperthreading.
but games still use the CPU the more it number crunches the fast it is
far as i know UT2004 use the 64bit
An Ath64 is a behemoth, comparative to the consumer market standard offerings. Running at 2.2GHz, they have outperformed a P4 running at 4GHz, in 32-bit applications. The FX series (FX-51 clocked default at 2.2) does even better, though you'll pay out the nose for it. And they don't use 'two 32-bit pipelines'... the cores are simply incredibly efficient, with good memory transfer band and response time.
Now the down side.
The Ath64, being such a high-grade piece of equipment, at this time cannot withstand some of the heat tolerances that the XPs can. The Ath64s are rated to run up to 65C safely, whereas the XPs (second gen) can handle up to 85C safely. This can be a problem if you're in a hot location with no air conditioning; a problem I've run into in the past.
<b>Summary:</b> If I had the choice, I'd go back and buy an Ath64 again. It's a dynamite processor, that will hand any retail P4 its transistors with ease, for much less cash.
Longer blurb follows, technissen and OS junk.
Currently the only 'official' OSen that support 64-bit processing on the x86-64 architecture are Windows Server 2003, and Linux. Which is fine for me, as I run the latter in a dual-boot with the 32-bit XP.
A beta version of WinXP-64 is available from Microsoft's website, but it is a BETA. Meaning if it screws up and all your data is gone, boo-hoo. Tough luck, you knew it was a beta when you downloaded it.
Now, for other aspects of what you'll need along with it.
<b>-A good motherboard.</b> STAY AWAY from the nForce3 chipset. It's benchmarked as the slowest performer out there. It's a joke. I use an ASUS K8V Deluxe, and couldn't be happier (excepting with the onboard sound... annoying that you can't have front and back speakers, and a mic at the same time).
<b>-Faster RAM.</b> To make this thing REALLY sing, you'll need DDR400. This means PC3200, or PC4000 if you can find it.
<b>-A non Creative Labs SBLive sound card</b> (or audigy, or audigy2, all the same card essentially). Somewhere in the shuffle, Creative and MS screwed up. The XP drivers can't handle ACPI race conditions, and XP doesn't cover for them. This results in SEVERE INSTABILITY. And before you ask, ACPI is automatically installed when Windows detects the CPU during installation. I'd recommend a Turtle Beach Santa Cruz, myself.
You might also think about getting a RAID array started if possible... at the moment, my machine is only limited when it needs to swap to disk. The one remaining major bottleneck. Sadly, if I'd known this I would have followed the advice, as I was wondering if I should do it when I was first setting it all up. The K8V Deluxe comes with an onboard RAID controller, which is handy. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Reboot or reformat? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Haven't shut down and restarted it in over a week. Its been running stable non-stop the entire time. Even with heavy gaming/photoshop work.
but games still use the CPU the more it number crunches the fast it is
far as i know UT2004 use the 64bit <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which will generate more FPS and give better graphics for a 3D game? A 2.4Ghz machine with Radeon 9800XT or a AMD64 FX machine with GForce 4 Mx?
I am not saying the CPU doesn't affect gaming performance, I am saying that if you are purely after 3D gaming performances, you are better off spending on a video card and not on your CPU.
The cash you'd spend today on a top-of-the-line system is about ~4 times more than what you'll spend on the next best thing - and funny thing is, in a year one will be just about as obsolete as the other.
Know that, and you don't need much hardware advice.