Jump to content
Ghost Recon.net Forums

GRAW & hardware (64bit/dual) -softw


Recommended Posts

Hi,

Enybod knows of [GR:AW] wil be able to take advantage of:

* 64bit encoding (amd64)

* dual core processing (using both cores of the cpu to game)

I do hope nvidia or somebody else provides software to use the both cores, it must be duable to do so....

-M-

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Enybod knows of [GR:AW] wil be able to take advantage of:

*  64bit encoding (amd64)

* dual core processing (using both cores of the cpu to game)

I do hope nvidia or somebody else provides software to use the both cores, it must be duable to do so....

You can be pretty certain that GRAW will be 32-bit (since the Xbox 360 is using a 32-bit Custom IBM PowerPC-based CPU) and will not support multithreading (even though the Xbox 360's CPU has 3 cores).

**EDIT: I just read an article in CPU magazine by Anand (of AnandTech) who says the Xbox's 3 cores can run 6 threads simultaneously, but early games like GRAW won't use more than one thread at a time.

Support for multi-core processing lies with the software developer, not with a hardware company like Intel/AMD. So games like Doom 3 and Falcon 4 already support dual-core because it was coded in the game from the beginning.

It's true that Intel did release software to make programs run better with MMX/SSE instructions in the past, but this is a different scenario.

Edited by CR6
Link to post
Share on other sites

"I do hope nvidia or somebody else provides software to use the both cores, it must be duable to do so...."

Depends if there are willing to deal with threading. Most new engines will take advantage of multithreading to some extent.

though having a dual core it really shouldnt matter, if the game is threaded if your running other apps (odd that is is still effecting you). I currently use a simple HT and can run many apps and a game with no issues at all. (FC [windowed] and other things).

you know just to double check with some of you hardware freak's.

Dual cores run off good old threads right? or is there something new in use?

Link to post
Share on other sites

a thread is a sinlge processes running.

thats about the shortest way i can describe it.

when programming a coder can have different functions run on different threads.

so as an example

the sound, physics, renderer, ect.. can all be run on different threads allowing them to do there work with out "waiting" on each other. They will just do there thing seperatly. (at the same time)

or all of that can be run in the same thread where one will have to finish then move onto the next.

this is a bit oversimplifying it but a descent gist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd make an educated guess that GRIN being hardcore developers would tweak the game code for 64 bit processors. 64 bit processors give game developers more possibilities and more headaches at the same time..keep up the good work Grin.. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im more concerend about miminum requirements, my machine is good but not up to scratch for latest - latest games, 4x agp and 333mhz bus speed on motherboard might not be too pretty (ATI 9800pro and all that) ... hmmm. I tried Battflield 2 demo, it crawled and jittered so bad I gave up before playing 1 game (maybe a blessing in disguise mind you LOL) ... nasty.

I would assume this will be a big leap for spec requirements to run it mint.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it would be a shame for u, but i do hope specs will reach the skys, otherwise whats the use of bringing out a new game?

it has to follow the hardware (or better be ahead of it) so we can enjoy more eyecandy and stuff.................otherwise we would still be playing 'pong' on TV screen (2white rectangles with a square white 'ball' ;) )

-M-

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd make an educated guess that GRIN being hardcore developers would tweak the game code for 64 bit processors. 64 bit processors give game developers more possibilities and more headaches at the same time..keep up the good work Grin..  :D

I still think that the devs will want to spend more of their time and resources to get more great features for the game running at 32-bit than spending time writing 64-bit code, but that's just my guess :P

I've made an edit to my above post about Xbox running multi-threaded apps.

I just read an article in CPU magazine by Anand (of AnandTech) who says the Xbox's 3 cores can run 6 threads simultaneously, and the PS3 can run 9 threads simultaneously.

However, Anand went on to say that most early Xbox 360 games (like GRAW) will be unlikely to run more than one thread at a time. There may be an exception where some games might run the game's physics simultaneously on a second thread.

It will still take a few years for devs to fully take advantage of the multi-core/multi-threading power of the new Xbox 360/PS3.

The original Xbox was launched in November, 2001 and its only in the couple years that games have really been squeezing every last bit of juice out of it's graphics hardware. E.g. I believe RSE is using normal mapping more widely in GR2: Summit Strike ... more from NYR soon about this :ph34r:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 6 months later...

I would stick with 32 bit, and wait and see if 1) Vista materializes for real; and 2) if and when it does, what driver support looks like then.

Right now, you are sooooo better off with 32-bit. It's stable, the drivers are good, and you know the software will run well on it.

Save your cash, man, and yourself the aggravation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW, for 2 days now I've been putting of my order for a new system. Mainly the 4800+ X2. I've been looking around and don't see many games that will support dual core( I could be wrong). So here I sit wondering if I should just get a FX 55 or more likely FX 57.Which 4800+X2 or an FX ? I did decide against going 64 till vista comes out, and then wait alittle bit more, to see what is really is/does.

EDIT: probably off the topic sorry. But I'd still take an answer.

Edited by yttocs1966
Link to post
Share on other sites

64bit usually shortens the loadtimes and it can access more memory. It does not necessarly increase framerates. I personally would go with 939 AMD Opteron 170, watercool it and OC it past the 4800. Opterons kick ass, they deliver similar performance at a lower voltage, so they have more OC potential.

At this time I´d also pick dual cores over single cores. More and more programs support them and until the end of the year, I´d say most will have dual core optimizations, especially if you want to use your system for the whole Vista thing as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently biult a new rig for Ghost Recon around a pentium D 830 3ghz dual core. So far I love it, no problem with anything. I even installed old games like Medal of Honor to see how things are going... it screams! It also kicks ass in pro software like the Adobe CS2 suite.

I strongly suggest you to consider Dual Core if you build a new rig. There is simply no reasons to stay with single core.

my 0.02$

Link to post
Share on other sites
So do I.  But most people are still running Winblows 32-bit on them also, because the driver support is better, and so is the software support.

Just because you have a 64-bit CPU doesn't mean you have to run a 64-bit OS on it.

Exactly, exactly, and exactly.

Something I think may have been unclear a few posts ago is there wasn't much differentiation between 64-bit processors and 64-bit operating systems. 95% of the 64-bit AMD procs out there are running on 32-bit operating systems. You should get a 32-bit operating system, but if you're buying AMD, you should be getting an 64-bit processor.

WOW, for 2 days now I've been putting of my order for a new system. Mainly the 4800+ X2. I've been looking around and don't see many games that will support dual core( I could be wrong). So here I sit wondering if I should just get a FX 55 or more likely FX 57.Which 4800+X2 or an FX ? I did decide against going 64 till vista comes out, and then wait alittle bit more, to see what is really is/does.

You "decided against going 64 until Vista" -- I hope that means on the OS and not the proc.

If I were building a system today, I would be tempted to pick single-core, which runs games a little faster than it's same-clocked dual-core counterpart and for much less money. However, here's the deal:

If you're building an AMD system today, the procs you see on the market -- THAT'S THE END, folks. The procs we see today are the end of NEW socket 939 processors. The FX-60 was the last one. If you are using 939, which you almost certainly are if building AMD today, you will not be able to upgrade your system in the future with a proc other than what you see today. Moreover, while AMD will continue to produce these procs for quite some time, they won't indefinitely, and if you try to buy a new S939 proc two years from now, they'll be out of production, and you'll be paying through the nose to get that speedy 939 4800X2 on EBay.

Basically, if you have to build a computer today, you're probably better off getting the proc you want for the future, which is probably dual-core. :thumbsup:

OR, you could just wait a few months and build a system with the AMD's new socket type, and then you would have an upgrade path much further into the future.

--Logos

Link to post
Share on other sites
So do I.  But most people are still running Winblows 32-bit on them also, because the driver support is better, and so is the software support.

Just because you have a 64-bit CPU doesn't mean you have to run a 64-bit OS on it.

Exactly, exactly, and exactly.

Something I think may have been unclear a few posts ago is there wasn't much differentiation between 64-bit processors and 64-bit operating systems. 95% of the 64-bit AMD procs out there are running on 32-bit operating systems. You should get a 32-bit operating system, but if you're buying AMD, you should be getting an 64-bit processor.

WOW, for 2 days now I've been putting of my order for a new system. Mainly the 4800+ X2. I've been looking around and don't see many games that will support dual core( I could be wrong). So here I sit wondering if I should just get a FX 55 or more likely FX 57.Which 4800+X2 or an FX ? I did decide against going 64 till vista comes out, and then wait alittle bit more, to see what is really is/does.

You "decided against going 64 until Vista" -- I hope that means on the OS and not the proc.

If I were building a system today, I would be tempted to pick single-core, which runs games a little faster than it's same-clocked dual-core counterpart and for much less money. However, here's the deal:

If you're building an AMD system today, the procs you see on the market -- THAT'S THE END, folks. The procs we see today are the end of NEW socket 939 processors. The FX-60 was the last one. If you are using 939, which you almost certainly are if building AMD today, you will not be able to upgrade your system in the future with a proc other than what you see today. Moreover, while AMD will continue to produce these procs for quite some time, they won't indefinitely, and if you try to buy a new S939 proc two years from now, they'll be out of production, and you'll be paying through the nose to get that speedy 939 4800X2 on EBay.

Basically, if you have to build a computer today, you're probably better off getting the proc you want for the future, which is probably dual-core. :thumbsup:

OR, you could just wait a few months and build a system with the AMD's new socket type, and then you would have an upgrade path much further into the future.

--Logos

Yes the OS. Would dual core really pay off? In 2 years time I'll build another( I'm at 17 months now with what I have). I'm still AGP, so... Games I see coming out this year really aren't ready for dual, are they?

Yes, AMD is coming out with the AM2 MB it june(ish) with DDR2 and the new FX 62 also. Plus aren't DX10 GPU's coming out at the end of the year also. So if I let all the new stuff come out and wait 8-12 months bugs should be worked out, no? Vista probably will be out in 07 too, so add that the the bug list.

I want the 4800+ X2 but would I be better off with a FX. I only game and surf the net so? ASUS A8N32 SLI Deluxe is the board I have picked. Corsair XMS memory PC3500 2X1gb.Enermax 620 Liberty PSU. Other little things (rom's ect). GPU's is another question. What will the 7900's be ( speeds, pipes,ram?) should I wait for them or go 7800's. Will price drop with the new cards? I just can't "pull the plug" and order. Any help pushing me would be nice.

EDIT: this is what I have

Motherboard: P4P800E-Deluxe

Videocard: MSI 6800GT 256 / 83.40 (@410/1100)

Processor: P4 (540) 3.2 HT @ 3.52

Memory: 2 G CORSAIR TWINX 3200XL 2.2.2.5

Soundcard: SB AUDIGY 2 24 bit/ LOGITECH 5.1 spks

Storage: 74G WD RAPTOR

PSU: ENERMAX 480PSU

Edited by yttocs1966
Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes the OS. Would dual core really pay off? In 2 years time I'll build another( I'm at 17 months now with what I have). I'm still AGP, so...  Games I see coming out this year really aren't ready for dual, are they?

  Yes, AMD is coming out with the AM2  MB it june(ish) with DDR2 and the new FX 62 also. Plus aren't DX10 GPU's coming out at the end of the year also. So if I let all the new stuff come out and wait 8-12 months bugs should be worked out, no?  Vista probably will be out in 07 too, so add that the the bug list.

  I want the 4800+ X2 but would I be better off with a FX. I only game and surf the net so?  ASUS A8N32 SLI Deluxe is the board I have picked. Corsair XMS memory PC3500 2X1gb.Enermax 620 Liberty PSU. Other little things (rom's ect). GPU's is another question. What will the 7900's be ( speeds, pipes,ram?) should I wait for them or go 7800's. Will price drop with the new cards? I just can't "pull the plug" and order. Any help pushing me would be nice.

EDIT: this is what I have

Motherboard: P4P800E-Deluxe

Videocard: MSI 6800GT 256 / 83.40 (@410/1100)

Processor: P4 (540) 3.2 HT @ 3.52

Memory: 2 G CORSAIR TWINX 3200XL  2.2.2.5

Soundcard: SB AUDIGY 2  24 bit/ LOGITECH 5.1 spks

Storage: 74G WD RAPTOR

PSU: ENERMAX 480PSU

It really depends what kind of upgrade you want to make, because IF you really want to keep it for 2 years and assuming you´ll jump on the Vista when its out, you´ll be better of with a dual core CPU for sure. Multithreaded engines and programs are the future and there will be many multithreaded games this year, and even more when Vista arrives.

There are no definate specs on the 7900 series, but it seems like it will be "only" a .90nm shrink, and the GTX will still have 24 pipes at 655mhz (not 32 like many hoped for), but I heard that its supposely not too difficult to clock it to 800mhz. You´re best bet is to wait till March 9 when they will be launched and tons of reviews appear online. Then you´ll can see if the X1900 or 7900 will be worth your money.

I personally plan a huge upgrade late 2006/early 2007, a mid/high-range dual core AMD CPU on the new AM2 socket, 2GB DDR2-800 (hopefully low latencies will be out by that time), and a G80 DX10 GPU most likely. I´m only worried how long it will take for the AM2 chipset to mature and perform nicely, and of course the latencies of the DDR2 ram. Shiny new tech can be one big pain in the ass (and waste of money) if didn´t mature enough yet. A good example are the DDR2-533 chips, they have such high latencies that good DDR-400 memory kicks their ass and that at a lower price.

Edited by agentkay
Link to post
Share on other sites

EDIT: this is what I have

Motherboard: P4P800E-Deluxe

Videocard: MSI 6800GT 256 / 83.40 (@410/1100)

Processor: P4 (540) 3.2 HT @ 3.52

Memory: 2 G CORSAIR TWINX 3200XL  2.2.2.5

Soundcard: SB AUDIGY 2  24 bit/ LOGITECH 5.1 spks

Storage: 74G WD RAPTOR

PSU: ENERMAX 480PSU

Bro, why are you upgrading at all right now? The weakest link there is the 6800GT, which is not what I would call weak. The only things you would improve with an upgrade are the proc and the videocard, and neither of them that much.

You're fine. If you're itching and absolutely must upgrade something, upgrade the 6800GT to a 7800GS, but the whole system? You are DEFINITELY better off waiting until the new socket is out. Your current system will run GR:AW just fine.

--Logos

Link to post
Share on other sites

EDIT: this is what I have

Motherboard: P4P800E-Deluxe

Videocard: MSI 6800GT 256 / 83.40 (@410/1100)

Processor: P4 (540) 3.2 HT @ 3.52

Memory: 2 G CORSAIR TWINX 3200XL  2.2.2.5

Soundcard: SB AUDIGY 2  24 bit/ LOGITECH 5.1 spks

Storage: 74G WD RAPTOR

PSU: ENERMAX 480PSU

Bro, why are you upgrading at all right now? The weakest link there is the 6800GT, which is not what I would call weak. The only things you would improve with an upgrade are the proc and the videocard, and neither of them that much.

You're fine. If you're itching and absolutely must upgrade something, upgrade the 6800GT to a 7800GS, but the whole system? You are DEFINITELY better off waiting until the new socket is out. Your current system will run GR:AW just fine.

--Logos

Agreed, 100%. :thumbsup:

There is absolutely no need to upgrade that system at all for awhile.

Like you said, maybe the video card, but that's it.

Follow Logos' advice, bro. Hold out for the new socket, and upgrade when it will really count. With what you have right now, it really won't.

Edited by Specter
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...