64bit processors?

[chuwawa]

Hi,

I will be upgrading my computer 'soon' so I'm wondering what the current situation is. My upgrade cycles are very long, 2+ years, so I woulnd't want to buy a 32bit processor if the market is moving towards 64bits.

One of hte things I'm confused with is...How can people use the processors such as Athlong64s without an operating system that supports 64 bits. Are they just using WIndows XP?

Also, when is windows releasing the 64 bit operating system? And when will Intel release their 64 bit processors?

I'm not in a hurry to upgrade but I do want to do it by November at the latest. So should I go for 64bit? Or should I stick with something like an AthlonXP or a P4?

PS: I primarily play games.

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

The AMD64 is a combination 64bit and 32bit X86 processor that runs all 32 apps at full speed (Often faster than Intel). You don't need a 64bit OS to have the fastest 32bit X86 chip in the world (For any 32bit OS will work on the AMD 64 chips at full speed) but you better have a lot of money (FX-53 939pin). The AMD 64 ranges from the inexpensive 2800+ (even 2600+ in oem's) to the expensive 3800+ to FX's which have no corresponding performance rating but are very fast.

When Windoze 64(excuse me Windows 64) comes out you can/will upgrade and get 64bit performance (provided you get 64bit drivers for all your peripherals and get 64bit compiled programs!. The 64bit part of the AMD64 has double the general purpose registers (16) and the are double the 32bit (64bit) which is what should give you the biggest performance gain but only wth natively compiled 64bit apps! You can also use more than 4gigs of memory because that was the limit on 32bit memory addressable space but Intel already had a workaround (not elegant) but this applies more to servers. I expect Windoze 64 (excuse me Windows 64) should come out in December or January at a guess. Encoding, for example, depending on the program has usually been considered the Intel strongsuit but from the 64bit compiled encoders in beta that I have seen it destroys the Intel PIV's. Intel just released their 32bit/64bit Xeon chips for servers and workstations (the 64bit Intel instruction set is really AMD's but from my research the Intel possibly is a pretty crappy copy and even a lot of emulation but who knows without true benchmarks). GAMES ARE ALMOST UNIVERSALLY FASTER ON THE AMD 64's but if you do a lot of multitasking than Intel does have hyperthreading which can come in handy.

Even on Windows 64 you will still be able to use your 32bit apps through a WOW emulator and from the beta's it looks like it will not cost you any speed but you won't get the advantage of the extra registers!

 

[chuwawa]

Ok so windows64 is to be released at the end of the year and in the meantime I can simply use windows xp....

Once W64 gets released and I switch over to that, the only way I will be able to play current games is through an emulator?? Unless 64bit version of hte games come out? Is that correct?

So I can't really go wrong with buying Athlon64? Is Athlon64 3200+ better, perfomance wise, than an AthlonXP 3200+ using WindowsXP?

Thanks

 

[wseyller]

Right now just look at the amd 64 bit processor as a 32-bit. There are many other important changes that amd made that are much more important currently such as the integrated memory controller and hypertransport. If you are a gamer then go with an AMD64.

There is a beta version of Microsoft Windows XP 64-edition evaluation version that you can download from microsoft. Keep in mind it is beta, all the 64-bit drivers are beta. At the moment the performance is lower especially in gaming with the 64-bit beta OS and in my experience the 64-bit beta ATI catalysts drivers. Benchmark score were very low compared to running on 32bit WinXP. Everything is beta and will take some time for it all to mature. Right now AMD64 is the best you can get for gaming, and once the 64-bit enviroment matures, you could think of it as a free small upgrade.

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

Microsoft used a Window on Windows scheme to use 32bit apps on the 64bit OS and it shows that the 32bit apps are 5-10% faster on the 64bit OS than on the native 32bit OS! Your games will run as fast on Windoze 64 (excuse me Windows 64) as they do on Windows XP, if not faster.

Plus, most of the major games have 64bit additions to them that will come out when Windoze 64 (excuse me Windows 64) comes out

 

[wseyller]

AMD64 processors can run 32-bit and 64-bit processes simultaneously. Windows XP 64-bit OS that support AMD chips can run 32-bit and 64-bit applications simultaneously. Actually the 64-bit OS has 2 - Programs Files folders. One is simply labeled "Program Files" which is where 64-bit applications are installed to and the other is called "Program Files (x86)" which is where 32-bit software is installed. There is one 64-bit application that comes with the beta 64-bit OS which is Internet Explorer. You get a 32-bit and a 64-bit version of Internet Explorer.

 

[wseyller]

Originally posted by: michaelpatrick33
Microsoft used a Window on Windows scheme to use 32bit apps on the 64bit OS and it shows that the 32bit apps are 5-10% faster on the 64bit OS than on the native 32bit OS! Your games will run as fast on Windoze 64 (excuse me Windows 64) as they do on Windows XP, if not faster.

Plus, most of the major games have 64bit additions to them that will come out when Windoze 64 (excuse me Windows 64) comes out

Yes the games should run faster even the 32-bit ones but, currently they run poorly, and more time is need for developers to fix problems areas

 

[wpeng]

So overall it is a good idea to get an Athlon64? What about the socket 939; is it worth waiting for? I am also someone with very long upgrade cycles 3-4 years. Would it at all be worth waiting for a better upgradeable pathway? Or would it just be wiser to get a good socket 754 and change boards in 3 years? I'm planning on going SFF, so I guess that would mean getting a new case too...

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

If you have a such long time cycle I would wait until the 939 PCI-express comes out in a few months because PCI-Express is replacing the AGP/PCI standard and the 939 should give you many upgrades down the road! Even dual core cpus which AMD and Intel for that matter are moving toward as scaling becomes harder and harder as the micron process gets smaller and smaller. Of course the drivers are flaky and slower now because they are beta and there is probably near six months before Windoze 64 (excuse me Windows 64) comes out

 

[wpeng]

Man, I hate getting stuck in these transition periods. The new stuff still sucks and/or is too expensive, but it has a good upgrade path. It seems like it would be better to just get a less upgradeable socket and then get a whole new computer in 3 years.

 

[chuwawa]

It seems that waiting for the 939 processors would be the best idea because they seem to be the future and socket A/754 is getting scrapped. But they're so expensive....Right now the cheapest 939pin processor is nearly 500 dollars.

Are there going to be large price cuts anytime soon? I'm leaning towards buying a top of the line socket A processor with a mobo for $250 rather than dishing out $600+ for the low-end 939pin one.

What do you guys think?

EDIT: Also, with regards to this PCI-express thingy. Wouldn't it take years before the AGP are phased out? I'm very concerned with the price and even though they are coming out soon before the end of this year, they'll be priced higher than gold itself. That's why I think it'd be best to buy an XP and then upgrade to a 939proc with a PCI express mobo next year once the market settles.

 

[Giscardo]

As you said, chuwawa, it is a good idea to upgrade to an XP mobile to tide you over until the 939 market settles. If you are going to go for an AMD solution, I would recommend you buy matching sticks of quality ram, like OCZ3500 or 3700 (from reading reviews, these modules work well with A64 platform) with your socket A upgrade, so that you can move that ram into dual channel mode over to your 939 system, and sell off your socket A mobo and cpu. AMD will stay DDR for at least another year, so you are safe purchasing that stuff right now.

I don't know what to recommend for video card though, because you'll want a PCI-e card when you get that 939 mobo, so you could maybe get a 9800 pro for 200 and sell it for maybe ~$130-150 when you do your 939 upgrade, and get a $300 PCI-e. Just depends on how eager you are for 3d power, and what you have right now.

This way you end up paying 350-380 for video card, and around $400 for your CPU/mobo after selling your socket a cpu+mobo, and 9800pro, and you get to have something newer right now. I would also recommend not reading this board till 2 years is up because it'll just make you want to upgrade constantly.