new tech notes/questions (x86-64, serial ata, etc.)

[SavagePaladin]

I'm curious as to why noone has noted that x86-64 gives us something else important...a completely new baseline to program for, in games and such (there are no 300mhz Hammers)
__
Would 64 bit compression help the web bandwidth problem? Among other things?
__
as to serial ATA, why have few noticed that the existing interface is a pain in the neck?
I'm all for it even if it doesn't end up doing much outside the case at first.
And it probably will, though extra features will require software support.
__
40 bit color is coming. I wonder if patches to upgrade special effects will come? I'm also wondering about patches to x86-64 (the baseline thing) and expanded versions. If games start using 40 bit color, will they finally start using DVDs? I'm betting so.
Game support for new features usually takes a while, unfortunately.
__
What IS the deal with serial ATA? There's absolutely no new info, dates, or anything that I've been able to find. The media black holes on certain things are annoying.

right now i'm proud to be a consumer tech junkie

 

[AndyHui]

Perhaps you might want to read this first:

The Myths and Realities of 64-bit computing

 

[SavagePaladin]

OK then, thanks
The baseline thing still applies, though (as I said, there are no 300mhz x86-64 chips to worry about)
and the other questions

 

[AndyHui]

Why does it provide a new baseline?

Code is essentially fully backwards compatible; the IA-64 extensions themselves would only be used in certain situations that provide minimal benefit towards gaming.

 

[SavagePaladin]

....
because
if you play a game on a 300mhz p2 with a geforce3, and then a 2ghz pentium 4 with a geforce3, there is a large difference. It is still the same game, though, because it is PROGRAMMED for the low end to work.
If your low end spec, in the modified version, was a 2ghz machine, you'd have a lot more you could do with it.
such as more complex AI distributed among more things in the game

 

[Sunner]

I think what Andy meant was that for most intents and purposes, the K8 will be just another, faster, x86 chip, and hence there will be no new baseline, since the developers will treat it like any other x86 chip.

 

[SavagePaladin]

Technically, the gf3 is just a faster 3d chip, but we did see a few games enhanced for it after a bit. (Ballistics, Giants, AquaNox, and now others)
I'm not saying 'immediate' but I think it'll happen
Anyway, yeah I suppose we can end that topic

Have fun peeps

 

[ElFenix]

<< Technically, the gf3 is just a faster 3d chip >>

not really... it feature programmable T&L in a gaming card for the first time... there could be patches applied to some games that use the improved FPU that x86-64 can provide, as well as a couple other features, to help performance. i don't know if it will be a baseline... they can just use it as a minimum spec though "AMD opteron, intel pentium 4, or AMD athlon XP required"

 

[SavagePaladin]

Theres a statement I can agree with.
I would love to see games enhanced for a new baseline instead of the old 'as slow as can possibly run it' route
even, as you say, p4/AthXP/x86-64 stuff (Opteron being the server part...I don't need a server processor really )
but I'm really getting sick of gaming even on my old athlon 600...yet they keep programming for lower, for some reason I can't figure out
and this thing can barely do complex 3D and a lot of (especially controllable) AI at the same time (Hostile Waters and Dungeon Siege being examples) so I can't help but imagine what they could try doing without the old crap

 

[Cosmic_Horror]

Rememeber game developers need to market their games to a wider audience than those people that have p4, athlons XP's, Ge3/4 etc etc. People with the latest hardware are really in the minority....

the average person is still gaiming with with pentium2/3 class processors and voodoo3, early geforece's etc...

Plus game development takes usually between 2 to 3 years and hardware changes far to fast for them to keep up.

 

[imgod2u]

x86-64 will be another x86 processor as far as the game developing community is concerned. Why wouldn't it be? Games hardly benefit at all from 64-bit extensions and there is a very good reason for developers not to use them: Intel doesn't have a chip that uses them. Developers have to aim their products a the main part of the market and if 80% of that market doesn't have processors (well, much more than that since Hammer will be a niche market at first, maybe 2%), why would they write games for it if it means it won't work with current 32-bit x86 processors such as Athlon or P4? It's not so easy to just "patch" use of 64-bit integers into the code. Not in a useful way anyway. You'd have to rewrite your code to use a single 64-bit integer instead of multiple 32-bit integers. Meaning you'd need to have a point where you had an integer value so big that you had to split it into multiple 32-bit integers, which, in games, you almost never run into (I would even say never). So why would there be a new baseline?

 

[SavagePaladin]

imgod2u: I wasn't thinking the whole game, in the original statement, more of a patch/modification type deal.
Cosmic: hardware changes fast indeed....but Deus Ex (in better words, games that required a p2 300) came out a long time ago, and the minimum spec requirement is STILL a bloody p2 300 in general
I think Unreal Tournament 2 is going to start pushing, but I'm not sure

 

[SavagePaladin]

There are a large chunk of gamers who are sick of playing the same old game, bumped up a step...we'd like something completely new

 

[AndyHui]

SavagePaladin: The point imgod2u is making is that a 64-bit patch will not bring any advantage to your games.

Again, please understand what is written in that article that I pointed out to you.

Game programmers write for an entire spectrum of system capabilities. Sure, you can write that minimum requirements are a Pentium II 300MHz, but that won't allow you to enjoy your game at its best potential. Low resolution, low textures, low polygons. It really is a minimum to play the game. If you have a powerful system, sure, go ahead and max out detail, resolution, shadows, polygons and all the stuff that looks great, as well as complex AI.

What's the point of targetting something like performs at Athlon 3200+ levels when less than 5% of the market will have one? If you target that as your baseline, no one is going to buy your game because no one has the ability to run the game at its very best.

 

[SavagePaladin]

Thats the idea with the 'patch' thing. People that don't have it can still enjoy your game fine. But I like the 'higher end' idea presented by ElFenix better

I can tell you now, Doom 3 sure as hell won't run on a p2 300
So if ID can do it, why can't anyone else try?

-btw Andy, I don't just mean 64 bit...I mean SSE2, the enhanced 3dnow, everything the x86-64 processors spec includes.