[stettybet0]

If I was to install Vista on a computer used solely for gaming, would I be better off with the 32-bit version or the 64-bit version.

Thanks,
stettybet0

[Advertisements]

64bit has a bit more potential than 32, there are a few 64bit games(far cry, hl2, CSS...) so i would go 64 but drivers can be a small problem.

[warriorscot]

64bit has a bit more potential than 32, there are a few 64bit games(far cry, hl2, CSS...) so i would go 64 but drivers can be a small problem.

[admin]

When you purchase Vista you get DVDs for both the 32 and 64 bit versions. However, it's not possible to upgrade from 32-bit to 64-bit (or downgrade from 64-32). You also can't upgrade from 32-bit XP to 64-bit Vista. It has to be a clean install. That alone may influence your decision.

Very little software takes advantage of 64-bit software, but the operating system itself does have some nice added security features, and will be faster at some tasks (encoding, ripping...).

Currently, the biggest problem with 64-bit is the lack of driver support. Combined with 64-bit drivers needing to be digitally signed. Chances are some of your hardware or a peripheral is not going to be supported. Driver support should improve greatly over the next few months.

I installed 64-bit, but the lack of drivers were a major problem for me, and I had issues with some software (mostly games) not working. If you're installing today, I'd recommend 32-bit. If you can wait a few months, 64-bit would be my choice.

[stettybet0]

well, im planning on a clean install... sometime next year in the the february-march timeframe. and im not going to have internet access on this computer, so the security features might not be much of a plus. im looking for this computer to be future proof for at least 3 or 4 years... so is 64-bit the future of gaming?

[SuperSam]

Well 64-bit should be the future to everything - but software developers are stuck in a situation, they have to make thier games cost effective and make profit.

Game software developers are faced with making games 32 or 64 bit. If they make the games 32 bit, the 64 bit users will not get the full potential from thier processors. If the Software developers make the games 64 bit, the 64bit users will be happy with the speed and that they are getting the full potential, but 32 bit users are unable to play these games.

If the software developers make the game both 32 and 64bit they will have to spend a lot more time developing, testing, etc. They will also need to pay the developers more money, making the game industries effectively loose money although it may get gained back in the long run if a lot of users buy the game.

64-bit is the future, not only to gaming but to all software and operating systems, but is it too far ahead?

[warriorscot]

Well youll find that you have a fair few 64bit games already, better games tend to come out in both 32 and 64, the 64 will often come out later and usually for the more used engines, for example pretty much every source engine based game has a 64bit version and all of the valve made ones do this is because valve made a 64bit version of the engine when they made it and it means that other games based on the engine are easier to port. Far cry was one of the original 64bit games and it came later with a rather large patch included a new level and some new weapons as well i think including the improvements when using 64bit. But you can still play almost any game on 64 that you can on 32 problems can happen but its not a big or common problem these days.

Also since new computers are more or less always 64bit now and 64bit computers have sold very well and increased dramatically in number since the athlon 64s came out we should see more hardware support now that a proper 64bit windows OS has been released, XP 64bit wasnt really very good had more of a technology proof feel to it rather than something that was supposed to be a whole new OS.

[SuperSam]

I bought XP x64 and was annoyed with all of the driver incompatibilities, one was simple - my mouse. I use a left hand mouse, but I have always used right handed mice on the right handed settings. This mouse by default is programmed as left click is right click and right is left. The Logitech Setpoint 64bit software doesn't even work with my mouse (although it states clearly it does), on my 32 bit install everything works fine.

Another problem I had found is with Battlefield 2, and 2142. On load up of a map when first joining a server on x64 it lagged a lot and stepped continuously for about the first five minutes of play. Now on 32bit I have not problems with either games and it is very fast.

XP x64 was definitely a faster operating system, but although its incompatibilities were only small scale, they got very irritating, causing me to jump back to 32 bit. Next year when I upgrade my system to a PCI-E x2 board with either SLi or Crossfire I may look into purchasing Vista x64 as then I hope there is more compatability.

Will you make the jump Warriorscot?

Edited by SuperSam, 12 December 2006 - 04:57 PM.

[warriorscot]

Already have. Vista X64 RC2 it has more drivers built in which helps. Ill get the final eventually when i can afford it.

[SuperSam]

My laptop comes with a free upgrade to Vista home premium, I think I'll see what it's like on that first and then decide to upgrade. I'm already trying out RC2 32bit as I had some trouble with the x64 (the same as I did with XP x64).

What are the specs of your pc now??

[warriorscot]

Its in my profile, getting on a bit i need to start thinking of replacing it with something thats got a little more juice, im thinking something DX10 and quad core as treat for the end of my exams next semester.

Ill tell you want CSS on 64bit very smooth.

[SuperSam]

I don't know weather it's just in my head - but I think my FPS have dropped playing CS on 32 bit from 64. I'll see how games are on vista on my laptop, it is a gaming laptop and gets more 3d marks than this pc, so it should be interesting. I have my 64bit windows key and legal cd (hologram) and I might try that on my laptop...

Are you running x64 I take it then??

[warriorscot]

Yeah, seemed the obvious choice if i was going to judge how good vista is 64bit being one of its advantages, it was done properly XP 64 was kinda botched more a technology demonstrator than an OS that is meant to be used.

FPS seem more stable, mind you its been a while since i played and i cant say i like whats happened to the game, variable pricing on EVERYTHING, alot of people using this death match mod with immediate respawn and there are way fewer servers, it was the only online game i really liked, shame, hopefully team deathmatch should be great.

[SuperSam]

Yeah, seemed the obvious choice if i was going to judge how good vista is 64bit being one of its advantages, it was done properly XP 64 was kinda botched more a technology demonstrator than an OS that is meant to be used.

FPS seem more stable, mind you its been a while since i played and i cant say i like whats happened to the game, variable pricing on EVERYTHING, alot of people using this death match mod with immediate respawn and there are way fewer servers, it was the only online game i really liked, shame, hopefully team deathmatch should be great.

Yeah, my friend told me it was based on Windows Server 2003, it is. When you first install windows the first account is "administrator" < like Win 2003. Also, when I was installing both bf2 + bf2142, when I went to register it does a Hardware survey, and gets your system specs. Mine appeared as "Windows 2003 Server Family x64).