AMD 64Bit CPU's

[capcom_suicide]

This is really dumb of me, but I'm having a brain F**k. Bear with me...

What is the performance improvement of running a 64Bit CPU at the moment? (I am assuming a gamer running XP with the CPU in 32Bit "Compatibility mode")

What games/apps etc can actually use the full power of the 64Bit CPU?

Taking into account how fast CPU speeds increase over time, would it not be better to wait for the software to catch up before buying 64Bit?*

*Am I completely missing that HL2/Doom3 will be utilizing 64Bit? I think ID said something about Dual CPU support, but not on 64Bit....?

Sorry for the very n00b questions, but my googling seemed to show that there wasn't much out there to justify the cost of the 64Bit upgrade.

/C_S

[Montaver]

There are none, unless you want to run linux.
It does however run 32bit natively, no "compatibilty mode" is nescessary.
Windows 64 is due for release Q4 this year.
Basically, look at the 64bit capabilty as added future proofing, as the Pentium 4's arent as fast in most apps, and they lack the 64bit capabilty.
There were rumours of the Presscot containign 64bit registers, however Intel made the mistake of doing it there own way, so now Windows 64bit will NOT be supported on Intel CPu's. (its irrelevant really as all current presscots have it disabled anyway). If you want a parralel, the later Pentium 3's had Hyper Threading built into their design, but it was never activated.

[Super Stu]

OCuk list the a64s (stock speed) as generally being 30% quicker than the 3200 barton. A quick check of prices shows them to be 3-4 times more expensive.

Quite a premium.

[fifty?ballz]

I ran Pentiums and Pentium Pro's on 16 bit software for years with no ill effects,
ran bloody fast as hell too, especially the Pentium Pro it was like having 50
486's linked together.

For the mentally challenged amongst you, (I'm sympathetic), I'm saying
they're likely to offer pretty nice speed, maybe not as much as the step
up from 16 - 32 bit though, but hey, why guess, just look at websites
instead of this moaning saying whatever comes into your head, it's
pretty retarded (you have to admit).

[Super Stu]

I couldn't possibly recommend a64 (or EE for that matter) to anyone unless they had money to burn tbh. Bartons are insane value atm. You might argue that you couldn't upgrade beyond 3200 (obviously), but the a64 is evolving too, and it's unlikely you'll keep your mobo if you upgrade an a64 anyway.

I haven't the faintest idea what speed benefits native 64bit operation will bring, but I would have thought the entire package need take advantage of it - hardware, OS, drivers, games etc. That's surely a way off.

[Shimmyhill]

My A64 3200 out benchmarked my m8's AXP clocked too 2700mhz if our gfx cards where at smae clocks.

Athlon XP's are slow and i wouldnt consider one at all against a A64 or P4.

Ive just gone back too a P4 as they are much faster in windows, photo editing + vid editing. (hyperthreading)

[Super Stu]

I never said it was faster, I said it was 4 times cheaper.

[Shimmyhill]

3200A64 on OCUK = ?190 retail
3200AXP on OCUK = ?140 retail

Hardly 4 times cheaper

And in the same vein i picked up a XP1700 for ?18 quid, yes its cheaper than the A64 but its also hellishly slow commpared to the A64.

A cheaper chip is slower than a more expensive one ? No shocks there.

[Super Stu]

Ah yes, it was the FX I was looking at.

"AMD's new HyperTransport with a massive 1MB L2 cache, the Athlon FX 53 offers an average performance increase of 30% over the AMD Barton XP3200+ CPU"

3200+ oem ?109
a64 FX - ?480-?570

I wasn't commenting on faster cpus being more expensive, I was purporting that they aren't worth it.

[Shimmyhill]

Ahh well FX cpu's i agree are totally overpriced ! (well i guess not overpriced but too expensive for the performance gains)

[replicant]

The A64 is a fantastic cpu and coupled with a quality gphx card it destroys the xp, and P4 in the gaming environment.

Sure the P4 EE can beat it in video encoding, but lets face it who cares about that here.

Ive got a A64 3400 clocked at 2.5 gig, coupled with my new 6800 Ultra Im benching at 13.7k on 3dmarks 03. This gives an indication of the power of a pc based upon this cpu.

[capcom_suicide]

The A64 is a fantastic cpu and coupled with a quality gphx card it destroys the xp, and P4 in the gaming environment.

Sure the P4 EE can beat it in video encoding, but lets face it who cares about that here.

Ive got a A64 3400 clocked at 2.5 gig, coupled with my new 6800 Ultra Im benching at 13.7k on 3dmarks 03. This gives an indication of the power of a pc based upon this cpu.

Thus the 64Bit nature of the chip is not the main point. It's just that even in the 32Bit environment its a faster CPU for gaming.

So in conclusion, a clock speed on the A64 = higher performance than an AXP. Probably due to the amount of cache, number of transistors and newer technology used on the 64Bit die.

So the "64 bit" title is a red herring in a way, as it out performs same speed CPU's on a 32Bit OS anyway!

Cheers

C_S

[Super Stu]

I must admit I didn't realise the non-FX was so cheap now. I guess if you're building a top end rig like Rep's it would be daft not to, but for those on a budget you still get a ninja machine for relatively peanuts.

[replicant]

So the "64 bit" title is a red herring in a way, as it out performs same speed CPU's on a 32Bit OS anyway!

Cheers

C_S

actually it out performs 32bit cpus which have a higher clockspeed. Compare the A64 performances to high end p4 chips e.g. 3.2/3.4 - faster, with the exception of video encoding.

As for the 64 bit being a red herring, who is to say Im not running mine on xp 64 with a full set of whql drivers?

[mid]

There aren't any 64-bit enhancements in Doom 3 at all, according to Carmack. So its just the rather large 32-bit power the A64s run that you'll be using.