Vista32- vs. Vista64-bit OS Showdown *Done!*

[apoppin]

2/24/08 ... Done ... stick a fork in me


Part Two was easier than i thought ... much the same problem that HardOCP has with their Real [fake] world testing - no repeatable scientific testing ... so i skipped it ... and all you get are "impressions"

FPS whores will probably want Vista 32 ... there are only 2 games i tested that run faster in Vista 64 and they are FarCry and Hellgate: London ... and IF you play those 2 games a lot, you WILL want Vista 64 ... there is significant improvement over Vista 32 in every way.

IF you have 4+GB of RAM there are also some possible advantages. Huge advantages with 64-bit games but only "possible" minor advantages in "loading/saving", in memory-mismanaged games and also if you are an 'extreme multi-tasker'. None of my "stopwatch" tests were conclusive; since i have an average "cluttered" system with everything enabled [including ReadyBoost and System Restore] sometimes Vista 64 would be quicker and sometimes Vista 32. Even the Witcher showed no consistent differences....

So my own personal "D-day" has arrived ... it is Day 30 of my "trial" ... and MS is giving me the ULTIMATUM - activate or lose it ...
--that's easy, imo - for personal use - i'd rather have the very slight FPS increase and Vista32.
[i am done with FC and Hg:L]

But i DO see where some of you prefer the perceived slightly smoother experience in *some* memory mismanaged games and those who are also extreme maxi-multitasker; not needed for me. As i UNINSTALL Vista 64, i have to say it is "THE FUTURE" . It is just as stable as Vista 32 and you have to 'nitpick' to find flaws as you trade the irritation of 'signed drivers' for slightly better security.
---So ... pick one ... don't feel bad picking either choice as it is not a "marriage". If you want you can be polygamous ... tri- or even quad-boot your OSes if it makes you feel especially "high end"

... so, if there is interest, i can format my results ... but one fact is pretty clear to me at least ... pick Vista ... forget XP
--i look forward to Derek's professional article comparing Vista to XP and it's flavors and a much more detailed analysis then i was able to give you.

i got 11 new games to play, a rejuvenated CrossFire rig that handles anything i toss in at it and my dial-up now allows me to play WoW and NightFall-type games online. i think i will give benchmarking a little rest ... i am playing thru both of FEAR x-packs, right now ... then it's on to Jade Empire, i think ... Jericho just continues to be a pretty tech demo i toy with it is a resource hog and has a lot of flaws.
=============================


2/17/08 ... actually i DO have something to report ... i *finally* got HellGate:London updated on Vista 64 ... and it runs faster and smoother than on Vista 32 .. very noticeable ... i can play with AA/AF on 64-bit that i have to lower on Vista 32 to get comparable frame rates.

So you have a 2nd win for Vista 64 ,,, if i didn't finish Hg:L, i would conside keeping Vista 64 ,,, it IS the future and it make a difference in the very few games that are coded for it.

But not yet ... however, it is an excellent alternative to Vista 64 and i would finally 'recommend' it if you have no issues with HW or SW.

..................................

2/10/08 Update:

i added Crossfire results with my OC'd 2900pro/2900XT you might find interesting. Crossfire scales pretty well but still Vista 32 pulls ahead of Vista 64 in pure FPS.

i am taking a little break ... i have not been getting more then 4-6 hours of sleep over the last 2 weeks and it shows - i am exhausted and my rig is running perfectly. nullponterus also has his results updated and will carry the show for awhile. The we will finalize and compile the results.

From what i can see - so far - booting into Win Vista 64 and then into Vista 32 - every single day ... there is no practical difference in 32-bit games. There are no disadvantages to Vista 32 - it manages its memory very efficiently and there is no extra HD 'thrashing' or slowdowns ... the games that "ate memory" - the Witcher and Hg:L are "tamed" and i can play on either OS for hours without ANY issues. i haven't gone back to Gothic3 in Vista64 which DOES have a memory leak and crap RAM management[period]

i am not terribly anxious to even do part 2. If Vista 64 is slower in games, why do i want to recommend it over Vista 32? - i don't give a crap if a level loads a second or two faster - or not ... but then i have been called both a "graphics whore" and a "FPS whore"

what follows is what has been written earlier ... CrossFire results are the top of the next post.



*Done* ... at least with Part One - FPS comparison - 9/10 benches belong to Vista 32 - 1 bench, FarCry belongs to Vista 64 ... and that one is a blowout!

i set up CrossFire with my 2900xt and brand-new 2900pro ... Damn i had to move *everything* around to keep some airflow [and my HDs were in the way]; WORST of all, if i keep iXfire, i need to reconfigure my ... well, start over again ...
- first of all, the 2900p covers 4 of my SATA ports and i will now have to use the "purple" RAID ones [and reconfigure RAID in the BIOS] so i can use all my drives.
:|

It is SO easy setting it up [assuming you have room and don't have to tear down and rebuild everything like i did this evening] ... stick in the 2nd card, plug in the 2 bridge interconnects [i have only one; Cheap Sapphire doesn't include it and i had to order another from NewEgg, arriving Tuesday] ... and boot up. Windows recognizes crossfire and you have to reboot. That's it .. you're done.

Of course, i only have one interconnect so my bandwidth IS limited ... but CrossFiring with the Pro brings my 3DMark06 score up from 10094 with Vista 64 to 12251 ... and that is the first run ... i am also hoping for *better* when i add the 2nd Bridge Interconnect and OC my CPU back to over 3.15 Ghz ... looks like maybe 25% increase ... and if i OC it, it will blow an Ultra out of the water
... i feel like bush ... "mission accomplished"
:Q

:laugh:

at least it isn't any louder with the 2nd card
:shocked:

here the Lost Planet results ... damn near *identical* in every way ... best 2 of 4 runs each:


Lost Planet: Extreme Conditions full retail game built-in demo. DX10/everything fully maxed in-game/1680x1050/4xAA-16xAF

Snow - Vista 64 - 19.6/19.5 / Cave 28.1/27.0
Snow - Vista 32 - <<<<<19.6/19.4 / Cave 28.0/27.2

both bottomed just over 11.1 FPS and topped at 30.2 FPS in Snow, the more demanding of the two benches.

i'll see you in the AM ..






==========

[earlier]





The *latest* i just got my shiny 2900p to Xfire with my 2900xt [looks like a toy next to my 2900xt - but then i only paid $145 - compared with $330 for my XT in May]. As soon as i am done with *Round One*, i will install it and see what CrossFire in the mix.

STALKER and PREY are next for the benches .... and i updated the 2nd post if you need links to the Vista 32/64 hotfixes ... courtesy of an anonymous PM - thanks. They are applied and another one or two i found and will post when i find them.

-----

Crysis/3DMark06 and HL2's Lost Coast are now compared. ... and frankly i am shocked. imo, something IS wrong. i thought there would be a 1-2% difference at most, but on my rig, Vista 32 is running away with the benches.

Someone else, please confirm or dispute these figures with some testing of your own.

see post No2

============================
[original message]

Nullpointerus and i are beginning our tests. We plan to explore the performance differences between Vista 32-bit and Vista 64-bit in our 4GB gaming rigs. We will try to limit our 'variables' to just the OS. And of course we want to hear from *you* so we can plan and make our testing better - hopefully with ~10 game/benchmark comparisons. It will involve more than FPS analysis - we also plan to time loading/saving and compare "smoothness" of game play while keeping an eye on system resources.

So .. help us out with some good suggestions and try to keep everything constructive as we appear to be the first forum to explore this. Our rigs are each listed in our sigs and testing is at 16x10 resolution.

There is something [positive] to say about just "starting" ... we promised today ... but are still each having some issues. My install DVD may not be a perfect copy and the installations hang. So i am taking the plunge and am ordering a Disk from MS with a definite commitment to 'upgrade' to 64 bit if the performance is significantly better.

in the meantime, this first post will grow a lot - many things will be added as we report our progress ... and it *appears* i am getting a faster connection to the net this week - so that will save many hours of D/l'ing updates

The first 4reserved posts are for Nullpointerus and i to do the benchmarking. This testing is *open* to anyone that wants to join in
:thumbsup:


============

Addendum: We're getting questions about joining in on the benchmarking and what you will need to participate:
----First of all, *anyone*, you don't have to ask about participating ... JUST DO IT!

Step 1) Have 2 clean formatted partitions and two copies of Vista - one 32 bit and the other 64-bit.

remember to set the BIOS for each OS for optimum performance:

[HPET -> 64-bit] (for Vista64 and
[HPET -> 32-bit] for Vista32)

Step 2) Install them identically - with the same programs and games and configure them exactly the same.

Step 3) Run the benchmarks/tests on each OS and give your impressions and results

simple, no ...?
... but a lot of work

==========---------------====================----------------------======

1/25 -Friday Night Update: so ... how is everybody doing?

i have some progress to report ... and it is all really a big surprise to me .... Vista 64 installed just as easily as Vista 32.

So far, there is only one unsigned driver - my bluetooth adapter - but i still cannot get a connection to AT&T wireless on any version of Vista. So it will be slow going d/ling MS updates and a few others that have to go over 56K dialup. i can get a good connection to AT&T wireless only on XP - but it is still pretty slow - like a 224k connection


Anyway, there were 135.6 MB of Vista 64 updates for me to D/L and all of them were ultimately successful. i am not having the problems with CCC that Nullpointerus is having [thankfully, for a change]. Just for 'kicks' i installed MS Word 97 to read Word docs - and it works flawlessly ! [!!]
:Q

i installed, patched and played The Witcher - again with everything in-game totally maxed at 16x10 - and it is as smooth as i remember it in Vista32 [2 weeks ago]; i even loaded the saves from somewhere in Chapter One and continued on. However, i *know* i had some issues with my rig before and there were occasional crashes - not so now; i played for about an hour [for purely "testing" purposes, of course] and it was very smooth and excellent on the load/saves times

i am installing *identical* programs, applications and games on each HD and will compare the Witcher Load/Save times and give general impressions of any differences pretty soon [while checking the system tools]. My installs are going to be pretty bare - more like a "gaming rig". So far, there is my NetZero program, non functional bluetooth connection, Avira AntiVir Personal edition and the Witcher ... the next few days will be spent loading up identical games and benchmarking tools

i expect to install

1. 3DMark05 forget it 'oh - five

2. 3DMark 06 Done
3. HL2 - Lost Coast Done
4. Prey [Done]
5. Lost Planet [Done]
6. FarCry Done
7. Call of Juarez Done
8. Painkiller [Overdose IS current]Done
9. S.T.A.L.K.E.R [Done]
10. Crysis demo Done
11. F.E.A.R. Done

and possibly
12. Hellgate: London [again - i will make a custom bench - or better, Link me to one]
13. The Witcher [i will make a custom bench - or better, Link me to one]

How is that for a dozen? Perhaps it is too ambitious. i can also run Oblivion or BioShock but likely won't unless you can link my lazy ass to a good prepared time-demo - it is pretty time consuming making your own .. and i may not even get to Hg:L or the Witcher - perhaps just concentrating on Load/save times

LMK if there is anything else you want me to compare - please remember that i *still* have a slow connect, so no 1GB d/ls, please.


so there IS progress ... and i have that great feeling that comes with a smoothly functioning rig [again ]





LMK what you want to see and PM me if you want to join in

 

[apoppin]

RESULTS [updated with Xfire results 2-10-08]
[they are coming in piecemeal]

btw, my CPU is at 3.0Ghz and my RAM at stock [as is everything else] ... i am using my rig in my sig - except i am not yet testing with CrossFire just my 2900xt. All the Vista 32/64 "hotfixes" were applied to both OSes ... if you are also doing this test, here are some of them [i got a cool reminder by PM]:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/936710
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/938194
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/938979
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/940105
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/945149

updated^> *start here* http://support.microsoft.com/kb/945149
and look at "what others are D/L'ing" ... i got about 7 of 'em for each OS

Here is the "latest" ... so far Vista32 looks *good*



*3DMark06*

Vista 32 wins - 10442 to
Vista 64 - 10094

here is my first CrossFire score in 3Dmark06 ... i rushed it
-12251 ... solid ... but ... but ... wait till tuesday when i have the other bridge interconnect and maybe the Pro OC'd. We'll kill that GTX ultra yet.

We did it ... Updated 2/10/08 i thought you might like to see Crossfire results ... i got my 2900xt/2900pro working well together ... here are Vista 64 results ... a solid increase over 10094 to 13090:

Main test results
3DMark Score 13090 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score 5824 Marks
SM 3.0 Score 6736 Marks
CPU Score 2697 Marks


Test Results
Graphics Tests
1 - Return to Proxycon 46.72 FPS
2 - Firefly Forest 50.34 FPS
CPU Tests
CPU1 - Red Valley 0.85 FPS
CPU2 - Red Valley 1.36 FPS
HDR Tests
1 - Canyon Flight (SM 3.0) 69.44 FPS
2 - Deep Freeze (SM 3.0) 65.28 FPS

=================


F.E.A.R. built-in Demo

Vista 64 - 16x10 everything maxed 0xAA/16xAF - SS on

2900xt -25 Min/63 Avg/113 Max
Pro/XT --35 Min/70 Avg/115 Max


Vista 32 16x10 everything maxed 0xAA/16xAF - SS on

2900xt -30 Min/59 Avg/112 Max
Pro/Xt - 35 Min/76 Avg/120 Max


With Crossfire Vista 32 is also ahead of 64-bit


===================

Call of Juarez DX10 benchmark

Vista 64 -16x10- High Shadows/Shader Map - 2048x2048

2900xt -15.9 Min/20.7 Avg/49.3 Max
Pro/xt - 15.0 Min/38.5 Avg/82.8 Max

Vista 32 -16x10- High Shadows/Shader Map - 2048x2048

2900xt -- 14.7 Min/24.9 Avg/52.3 Max
Pro/XT - 14.4 Min/38.5 Avg/85.5 Max

Toss a coin



==========================

HL2 Lost Coast built in benchmark

Vista 64 - Min, Max, Avg
2900xt ------- 39, 190, 90.420
Pro/XT ------- 43, 214, 101.218


Vista 32 - Min, Max, Avg
2900xt - -------62, 226, 106.322
Pro/XT ------- 68, 283, 141.051

Vista32 takes it

++++++++++++++++++++++++


Lost Planet: Extreme Conditions- - full retail game built-in demo. DX10/everything fully maxed in-game/1680x1050/4xAA-16xAF

Vista 64 XT/Pro - Snow - 30.0 / Cave 29.0

Vista 32 XT/Pro - Snow - 30.8 / Cave 30.2

again in Xfire ? 32 bit is ahead

============================
CPU Crysis demo 32bit Vista

2900xt -- Average FPS: 11.59, Min FPS: 4.95, Max FPS: 14.62
XT/Pro - Average FPS: 13.89, Min FPS: 4.46, Max FPS: 21.68

CPU Crysis demo 32bit Vista

2900xt - -Average FPS: 10.60, Min FPS: 0.74, Max FPS: 17.16
XT/Pro - Average FPS: 13.96, Min FPS: 1.98, Max FPS: 17.60


no 64-bit Xfire results ? flashing textures





*********************************

On to the *Regular Results*
+++++++++++



*Final* HL2/Lost Coast - Vista 32 wins ... everything Maxed at 16x10 - 4xMSAA/16XAF ... 3 Runs with Fraps


Vista64 ["detected" in the test] .. it stutters in the beginning sometimes
Min, Max, Avg
39, 190, 90.420
28, 191, 89.146
15, 185, 87.749

Vista32
Min, Max, Avg
62, 226, 106.322
62, 220, 105.280
60, 224, 106.179


++++++

Crysis Demo Benchmark

Vista64
[details]

Beginning Run #1 on Map-island, Demo-benchmark_gpu
DX10 1680x1050, AA=No AA, Vsync=Disabled, 64 bit test, FullScreen
Demo Loops=4, Time Of Day= 9
Global Game Quality: VeryHigh
{these 2 runs were *identical* and were the 'best' of 4 - the other two varied by little}
!TimeDemo Run 2 Finished.
Play Time: 172.59s, Average FPS: 11.59
Min FPS: 4.95 at frame 1058, Max FPS: 14.62 at frame 859
Average Tri/Sec: -5027718, Tri/Frame: -433863
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -2.11

Beginning Run #1 on Map-island, Demo-benchmark_cpu
DX10 1680x1050, AA=No AA, Vsync=Disabled, 64 bit test, FullScreen
Demo Loops=4, Time Of Day= 9
Global Game Quality: VeryHigh
!TimeDemo Run 1 Finished.
Play Time: 137.62s, Average FPS: 10.90
Min FPS: 0.74 at frame 196, Max FPS: 13.55 at frame 352
Average Tri/Sec: -13255481, Tri/Frame: -1216117
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -0.59
====

VISTA-32
details

Beginning Run #1 on Map-island, Demo-benchmark_gpu
DX10 1680x1050, AA=No AA, Vsync=Disabled, 32 bit test, FullScreen
Demo Loops=3, Time Of Day= 9
Global Game Quality: VeryHigh
!TimeDemo Run 2 Finished.
Play Time: 172.06s, Average FPS: 11.62
Min FPS: 6.96 at frame 1950, Max FPS: 15.52 at frame 862
Average Tri/Sec: -5042131, Tri/Frame: -433771
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -2.11

Beginning Run #1 on Map-island, Demo-benchmark_cpu
DX10 1680x1050, AA=No AA, Vsync=Disabled, 32 bit test, FullScreen
Demo Loops=4, Time Of Day= 9
Global Game Quality: VeryHigh
!TimeDemo Run 1 Finished.
Play Time: 141.54s, Average FPS: 10.60
Min FPS: 4.62 at frame 1090, Max FPS: 17.16 at frame 109
Average Tri/Sec: -12851979, Tri/Frame: -1212754
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -0.59

*summary* GPU Crysis 64bit Vista - Average FPS: 11.59/Min FPS: 4.95/Max FPS: 14.62
*summary* GPU Crysis 32bit Vista - Average FPS: 11.62Min FPS: 6.96Max FPS: 15.52

*summary* CPU Crysis demo 64bit Vista - Average FPS: 10.90Min FPS: 0.74Max FPS: 13.55
*summary* CPU Crysis demo 32bit Vista - Average FPS: 10.60Min FPS: 4.62Max FPS: 17.16


all the runs that finished - most did - were very close and Vista 32 wins!!!!!!!!!!!!!


------
More ... i think i had a productive night

F.E.A.R. built-in Demo

16x10 everything maxed 4xAA/16xAF - no SS

Vista 64 - 25 Min/63 Avg/113 Max
Vista 32 - 30 Min/64 Avg/119 Max

...

16x10 everything maxed 0xAA/16xAF - SS on

Vista 64 - 30 Min/59 Avg/112 Max
Vista 32 - 31 Min/58 Avg/114 Max

========================

Call of Juarez DX10 benchmark

-16x10- High Shadows/Shader Map - 2048x2048

Vista 64 - 15.9 Min/20.7 Avg/49.3 Max
Vista 32 - 14.7 Min/24.9 Avg/52.3 Max


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


PREY ... *everything maxed* and "boost" plus 4xAA/16xAF

64 bit Vista
Min Max Avg
41 120 77.852

32 bit Vista
Min Max Ave
44 124 80.446


==================


....and STALKER *totally* maxed* in game settings and Full dynamic lighting
{all sliders to the right}


Short Demo

64 bit Vista
Memory > Min Max Avg
262118 K > 15.03 556.01 63.60

32 bit Vista
Memory > Min Max Avg
259620 K > 18.52 636.08 68.88


Buildings Demo
H]
64 bit Vista[/COLOR]
Memory > Min Max Avg
233492 K > 10.83 712.31 70.84

32 bit Vista
Memory > Min Max Avg
226107 K > 11.73 722.00 71.57

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Painkiller v1.5 [everything completely maxed ingame]

c1l1 Benchmark

64 bit Vista
Minimum Average Maximum
31.27, 204.06, 333.37

32 bit Vista
Minimum Average Maximum
33.31, 210.74, 334.37


c1l2 Benchmark

64 bit Vista
Min. Average Maximum
7.24 185.72 512.00

32 bit Vista
Min. Average Maximum
6.95 189.88 512.00



So far there is *nothing* that recommends Vista64 over Vista 32

*EXCEPT:

FarCry - 64-bit

Resolution: 1680 × 1050 (Custom)
Ultra quality option, Direct3D renderer
Level: Pier, demo: 1.tmd
Pixel shader: default model
Antialising: 4×
Anisotropic filtering: 16×
HDR: disabled
Geometry Instancing: enabled
Normal-maps compression: enabled

Score = 101.14 FPS (Run 1)
Score = 100.37 FPS (Run 2)
Score = 100.88 FPS (Run 3)
Score = 101.37 FPS (Run 4)
Average score = 100.93 FPS -64bit

Min, Max, Avg
67, 152, 101.016 -64bit


FarCry - 32-bit

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
42, 92, 60.028 -32-bit

Resolution: 1680 × 1050 (Custom)
Ultra quality option, Direct3D renderer
Level: Pier, demo: 1.tmd
Pixel shader: default model
Antialising: 4×
Anisotropic filtering: 16×
HDR: disabled
Geometry Instancing: enabled
Normal-maps compression: enabled

Score = 60.02 FPS (Run 1)
Score = 59.34 FPS (Run 2)
Score = 59.59 FPS (Run 3)
Score = 59.08 FPS (Run 4)
Average score = 59.50 FPS 32-bit

if all these games played like FC, Vista32 would be SO uninstalled

___________________________________
________________________


Here the Lost Planet results ... damn near *identical* in every way ... best 2 of 4 runs each:


Lost Planet: Extreme Conditions full retail game built-in demo. DX10/everything fully maxed in-game/1680x1050/4xAA-16xAF

Snow - Vista 64 - 19.6/19.5 / Cave 28.1/27.0
Snow - Vista 32 - 19.6/19.4 / Cave 28.0/27.2

both bottomed just over 11.1 FPS and topped at 30.2 FPS in Snow, the more demanding of the two benches.





*********************************
{posted earlier}


[i forgot to update this last night ]

anyway, everything on my end is up and running .. i have the 3Dmark06 comparisons ...

Vista 32 wins 10442 to 10094 Vista 64


The reason it is lower than my score in sig, is that i am running my CPU at 3.0Ghz and my RAM at stock [as is everything else].

and i have now have Crysis benchmarked in Vista 32 enough to get a good picture ... but i am having a big problem with running it in Vista 64 ... more to follow

Everything is *identical* ... the installed programs, the running background processes, the HW including the HDs, the same games, demos and benching tools

i figure i do NOT want a "pure gaming rig" like Derek Wilson uses for AnandTech as a reviewer - i want to have a all-purpose gaming rig that has an internet connection, antiVirus and a working firewall, Defender is ON, i will have my printer installed and the 'basics' to also do day-to-day tasks. i will not be installing everything from an "image" each time i make a change of graphics driver. i will NOT reboot before benching each game - you don't do you - before you play? The only concession i'll make is to defrag fairly often.

 

[nullpointerus]

[ N U L L ' S _ S P E C I F I C A T I O N S ]


Rig specs:

Intel Core 2 Duo e4400 @ 3 GHz (300 x 10)
Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3R rev. 1.0
HP 4 x 1GB DDR2-667
EVGA 8800 GTS 512 MB
Realtek ALC888
Logitech MX518 Gaming Mouse (USB)


Operating Systems:

Vista x86 Home Premium ( 32-bit )
Vista x64 Home Premium ( 64-bit )


Drivers:

Intel INF --> 8.3.1.1009
Intel RAID --> 7.7.8.0.1012
Logitech SetPoint --> 4.40
nVidia Forceware --> 169.25
Realtek HD Audio --> R1.85


BIOS Options:

AHCI, EIST, C1E, TM2, HPET


Installed Software:

3DMark '03
3DMark '05
3DMark '06
7-Zip 4.5.7
Adobe Flash Plugin
Call of Juarez DX10 Benchmark/Demo
DirectX 9.0c (latest)
Futuremark Hardware Detection Update (Oct. 2007)
Lost Planet DX09 Benchmark
Lost Planet DX10 Benchmark
OpenAL
Paint.NET 3.22
Visual C++ Runtime


Services Disabled:

ReadyBoost
Superfetch
Windows Search


Changes

-- finished 64-bit Lost Planet DX09 @ 1600x1000 MAXED
-- finished 64-bit Lost Planet DX09 @ 1600x1000
-- finished 64-bit Lost Planet DX10 @ 1600x1000
-- finished 32-bit Lost Planet DX10 @ 1600x1000
-- finished 32-bit Lost Planet DX09 @ 1600x1000
-- finished 32-bit 3DMark '05
-- finished 32-bit CoJ DX10 @ 1680x1050
-- finished 32-bit CoJ DX10 @ 1680x1050 MAXED
-- finished 64-bit CoJ DX10 @ 1680x1050 MAXED
-- moved benchmark results to (my) second post
-- finished 64-bit CoJ DX10 @ 1680x1050
-- finished 64-bit 3DMark '05
-- finished 32-bit Lost Planet DX10
-- finished 32-bit Lost Planet DX09
-- finished 32-bit Call of Juarez DX10
-- finished 32-bit 3DMark '06
-- updated rig specs
-- added "Disabled Services section"
-- finished 32-bit 3DMark '03
-- finished Updating/Preparing 32-bit Vista
-- finished 64-bit Lost Planet DX10
-- finished 64-bit Lost Planet DX09
-- finished 64-bit Call of Juarez DX10
-- added "Installed Software" section
-- finished 64-bit 3DMark '03
-- finished 64-bit 3DMark '06


What's Next?

-- Lost Planet (high res, and high res maxed)
-- Crysis
-- F.E.A.R.
-- Does anyone have a request?


Next Scheduled Update:

Thursday ( <no specific time -- crazy schedule> ) EST :thumbsup:

 

[nullpointerus]

[ N U L L ' S _ B E N C H M A R K S ]


3DMark:

32-bit -- '03 --> 38079 ( CPU: 2001 ) <-- win! ( + 0.2% )
64-bit -- '03 --> 37989 ( CPU: 2015 )

32-bit -- '05 --> 16841 ( CPU: 14548 ) <-- win! ( + 0.4% )
64-bit -- '05 --> 16766 ( CPU: 14649 )

32-bit -- '06 --> 11607 ( SM 2.0: 5364, SM 3.0: 5484, CPU: 2557 ) <-- win! ( + 3.4% )
64-bit -- '06 --> 11227 ( SM 2.0: 5095, SM 3.0: 5404, CPU: 2468 )


F.E.A.R.

32-bit -->
64-bit -->


Crysis

32-bit -->
64-bit -->


Call of Juarez DX10

1280x1024
32-bit --> 28.5 ( min: 18.2, max: 50.3 ) <-- tie!
64-bit --> 28.5 ( min: 18.2, max: 50.3 ) <-- tie!

1680x1050
32-bit --> 23.6 ( min: 15.6, max: 42.1 )
64-bit --> 23.9 ( min: 15.6, max: 43.5 ) <-- win! ( + 1.2% )

1680x1050 -- MAXED ( 2048, high shadows, 4x SSAA )
32-bit --> 7.0 ( min: 3.4, max: 15.8 ) <-- tie!
64-bit --> 7.0 ( min: 3.9, max: 15.2 ) <-- tie!


Lost Planet

1280x720

32-bit -- DX09 --> Snow: 77, Cave: 51 <-- tie!
64-bit -- DX09 --> Snow: 77, Cave: 51 <-- tie!

32-bit -- DX10 --> Snow: 71, Cave: 50 <-- tie!
64-bit -- DX10 --> Snow: 71, Cave: 50 <-- tie!

1600x1000

32-bit -- DX09 --> Snow: 50, Cave: 51 <-- tie!
64-bit -- DX09 --> Snow: 50, Cave: 51 <-- tie!

32-bit -- DX10 --> Snow: 47, Cave: 50 <-- tie!
64-bit -- DX10 --> Snow: 47, Cave: 50 <-- tie!

1600x1000 -- MAXED ( C16xQ AA, 16xAF, all settings on highest possible )

32-bit -- DX09 -->
64-bit -- DX09 --> Snow: 26, Cave: 28

32-bit -- DX10 -->
64-bit -- DX10 -->

 

[secretanchitman]

i can help you guys with 1920x1080, c2d @ 3.6Ghz, and an 8800GTS 320MB on vista ultimate 32 bit...

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: secretanchitman
i can help you guys with 1920x1080, c2d @ 3.6Ghz, and an 8800GTS 320MB on vista ultimate 32 bit...

We'd love it ... the more the merrier.

The way Nullpointerus and i are testing is to set up two identical partitions with identical programs - the only differences hopefully being the OSes. Fortunately you already have Vista64 with ultimate included; i still need mine.

And we are sort of in semi-charted waters ... there is no "established" way to do it as there is very little available on the subject at all. Also, i will alert Derek Wilson to this thread and see if i can get his input.

 

[Cheex]

I suppose I can help also (if you need me to)

4GB
1280x1024
Core 2 Duo @ 3.0Ghz
8800GTS 320MB
Vista Ultimate 64-Bit

 

[kissthesky]

I can do some testing, my comp is in my sig and i've got vista 32bit, only i'm waiting on my ASUS board, so i've still got to build it. i thought my comp would be a good idea to look at since its SLI, only thoughts though.

Also what kind of software will i need for the tests.

 

[apoppin]

there is no huge hurry ... and thanks for the kind offers. As to SW, you will need a copy of Vista 32 and a copy of Vista 64. Every ultimate owner gets one and every retail buyer gets a free upgrade to 64-bit by asking MS and paying for shipping of the DVD -(except for the most basic copy of Vista). After you install both OSes on separate partitions or HDs and patch and update then fully, you can begin comparing. Of course, the free benchmarks like 3DMarkXX will show some things - especially with the System Resource monitoring tools. You can also use your own games and make custom benchmarks - or you can use the free demo benchmarks that are built into Crysis [for example]. And there are other benchmarking tools freely available off the 'net.

there was also some *question* in a related thread about the 'legality' - staying to the strictest interpretation of MS' EULA - of my installing Vista64 using a copy.
--Well, to be sure that everything is correct, i am going to call MS Tuesday [after AT&T and Pantech Tech Support] and tell them *exactly* what i am planning to do
- at the very "worst", i would need to spend ~ $150 to "upgrade" to Vista Ultimate
--- so my big mouth may well cost me some money this week.

IN THE MEANTIME, i am [right now] backing up crucial files to DVD and am also going to back *everything* up to my 120 GB IDE drive and start over like it was a new rig build ... Clear the CMOS, flash the BIOS and reset to defaults - and install everything at stock CPU/GPU speeds and RAM timings - to be certain.

i just want to go over a couple of settings in BIOS for my rig in sig - the only difference is that i want to use my SATA burner, not my IDE burner ...

SATA RAID/ACHI Mode [Enabled]
SATA Port0-3 Native Mode [Enabled]
Onboard SATA/IDE Device [Enabled]
Onboard SATA/IDE Ctrl Mode [ACHI] <- (Not RAID, right?)

and


[HPET -> 64-bit] (for Vista64 and


[HPET -> 32-bit] for Vista32 and XP)

i will also check to see if my HW requires me to remove 2GB of RAM to complete the Vista64 install ... i would hope a BIOS update fixed that.

Anything else?

*one note* for you guys that use MS' service to upgrade your retail copy of Vista32 to Vista 64 - AFAIK, you can have only *one* of them - either the 32- or 64-bit OS ... so you need to choose within the 30 days required for activation. .... Perhaps someone can add to this or correct me if i am in error
... i am done reading EULAs for today

 

[SilentRunning]

Originally posted by: apoppin

*one note* for you guys that use MS' service to upgrade your retail copy of Vista32 to Vista 64 - AFAIK, you can have only *one* of them - either the 32- or 64-bit OS ... so you need to choose within the 30 days required for activation. .... Perhaps someone can add to this or correct me if i am in error
... i am done reading EULAs for today

Not sure exactly what you mean by "...use MS' service to upgrade..." With retail all you are doing is ording alternate media and paying a S & H charge. You can order either Vista on CD's (if you happen to not have a DVD drive) or a 64 bit DVD. You retail product key works with either 32 bit or 64 bit Vista. So the license restrictions apply to your product key.

 

[Sylvanas]

32bit is no longer valid!

....

on a more serious note goodluck with the testing it looks like its shaping up to be another mammoth review like last time with Keys.

 

[lopri]

Don't forget the SP1 RC. I know it's RC but the performance improvement is pretty big from what I've seen. I can't really say you guys should install the SP1 RC especially if you're using your main rigs.. (Who wants to be MS' beta tester?) But I hear that the final SP1 will be out by next month, and I did try it on my other rig. And I'm afraid that the SP1 for Vista will be a huge turning point for the OS, which will make many current performance/reliability issues somewhat moot..

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: lopri
Don't forget the SP1 RC. I know it's RC but the performance improvement is pretty big from what I've seen. I can't really say you guys should install the SP1 RC especially if you're using your main rigs.. (Who wants to be MS' beta tester?) But I hear that the final SP1 will be out by next month, and I did try it on my other rig. And I'm afraid that the SP1 for Vista will be a huge turning point for the OS, which will make many current performance/reliability issues somewhat moot..

Considering apoppin's internet connection joys, i'd wager SP1 testing won't happen due to download size.

 

[Cabages]

Great idea, been waiting for something like this.

Good news on SP1 too. Last I had heard it wasnt supposed to improve performance much, if at all.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: n7

Originally posted by: lopri
Don't forget the SP1 RC. I know it's RC but the performance improvement is pretty big from what I've seen. I can't really say you guys should install the SP1 RC especially if you're using your main rigs.. (Who wants to be MS' beta tester?) But I hear that the final SP1 will be out by next month, and I did try it on my other rig. And I'm afraid that the SP1 for Vista will be a huge turning point for the OS, which will make many current performance/reliability issues somewhat moot..

Considering apoppin's internet connection joys, i'd wager SP1 testing won't happen due to download size.

my internet connection joys are hanging on just configuring a COM port
- probably on Tuesday i should have a pretty steady 75-125kpbs thru my cell phones DUN

and i do NOT want to test RC1 .... just 'updated' Vista, i certainly doubt that SP1 will be a big d/l - IF you are up-to-date

and it takes an 'overnight' over 56k to D/L everything needed to update Vista ... so it isn't that bad

... and a progress report .. i have my system back to 'normal' with my issues well in hand. My 120GB ide drive is set up and all my RAID HDs [except for STEAM - that is this afternoon's chore] is fully backed up.

So i will blow away my RAID and set it up again without any IDE for the testing tonight ... and call MS for an 'official' disk tomorrow

i am *guessing* that i cannot get ideal ACHI/RAID with my IDE set up
-- here are my current settings:

SATA RAID/ACHI Mode [DISabled] <- would like 'enabled'
SATA Port0-3 Native Mode [Enabled]
Onboard SATA/IDE Device [Enabled]
Onboard SATA/IDE Ctrl Mode [DISabled] <- would like 'ACHI'


^comments?^

we will have *something* this week

 

[Aberforth]

obviously 64 bit is much faster, there is no point in comparing 32 and 64. If 64 bit does seem slower it's because of depressing drivers and inadequate hardware power.

Ofcousre if this is a fun project then carry on...

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Aberforth
obviously 64 bit is much faster, there is no point in comparing 32 and 64.

it IS ? ... *prove it*

we are talking about *games* - 32-bit aps - running on a 4GB PC - not 64-bit applications.
:roll:

yeah ... it is fun ... to blow away FUD and pioneer finding the FAQs.

 

[Aberforth]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Aberforth
obviously 64 bit is much faster, there is no point in comparing 32 and 64.

it IS ? ... *prove it*

I hope you know Vista 64 runs much faster than any 32bit version of Windows. My point is Wow64 applications running in 32bit emulation always run a bit slower, infact it does a very good job performing very close to native 32bit.

And there is memory addressing issue, 32bit apps cannot allocate more than 2 gigs per application even in WOW64 emulation mode so stuff will be dumped to pagefile.

 

[swtethan]

system in sig, vista ultimate 64, need help?

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Aberforth

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Aberforth
obviously 64 bit is much faster, there is no point in comparing 32 and 64.

it IS ? ... *prove it*

I hope you know Vista 64 runs much faster than any 32bit version of Windows. My point is Wow64 applications running in 32bit emulation always run a bit slower, infact it does a very good job performing very close to native 32bit.

And there is memory addressing issue, 32bit apps cannot allocate more than 2 gigs per application even in WOW64 emulation mode so stuff will be dumped to pagefile.

I hope you know you just made a statement you cannot prove
:roll:

this discussion has been going on here forever with no firm conclusions ... and there are NO benchmarks showing the differences [yet ] - that's why WE are testing it
--Devs write with the "2 GB barrier" well in mind

=============

Originally posted by: swtethan
system in sig, vista ultimate 64, need help?

we'd love to have you join in ... but it is something you mostly have to "want" to do ... are you up for it?


[it really is a lot of "work" ]

 

[Aberforth]

I hope you know you just made a statement you cannot prove

this discussion has been going on here forever with no firm conclusions ... and there are NO benchmarks showing the differences [yet ] - that's why WE are testing it
--Devs write with the "2 GB barrier" well in mind

=============

here: http://64-bit-computers.com/windows-vista-32-bit-vs-64-bit-benchmark.html

 

[BlizzardOne]

I wouldn't call 10.9% 'much faster', maybe 'almost noticeably faster'... and those results has nothing to do with gaming, nor 4GB of RAM.

 

[Aberforth]

Originally posted by: BlizzardOne
I wouldn't call 10.9% 'much faster', maybe 'almost noticeably faster'... and those results has nothing to do with gaming, nor 4GB of RAM.

How generic of you...

1. Software has to be optimized to take full advantage of 64bit, any slowdowns are due to 3rd party software not 64bit windows code itself.

2. 32bit OS cannot allocate more than 2 gb per process, there is a feature called video paging in WDD model in vista that does a good job.

3. There is no point in benchmarking 32bit games in Vista 64 mainly because it runs in emulated mode.

4. 64bit cpus have more registers that will allow more information to be processed in a single cycle, so you might see slowdowns if you are running a single threaded application with old EM64T based processors (P4, PD etc).

5. And nvidia drivers are written by janitors who like playing civ4 - incase you dunno.

6. Have fun with this stupid benchmark.

:beer: time to come out of the matrix :beer:

 

[lopri]

10.9% is pretty huge if it's just from switching to 64-bit. We're not talking about hardware difference, but same OS compiled differently.

As for SP1 RC: SP1 is totally different from incremental updates that have happened to Vista so far. There are many noticeable changes and UI speed is almost up there with XP. Defragmenting HDD isn't as frustrating as before. And.. (mmm...) 3DMark06 score went up by almost 1,000 with HD 3850. (Still a few hundred points short of XP) OK so 3DMark is synthetic we all know, but there was no hardware configuration change or driver updates.. Just installing SP1 RC did the magic.

Again, I'm not saying that you guys should install SP1 RC. I myself won't install it on my main rig until the final SP1 comes out. But the performance improvement looks to be undeniable.

 

[Excelsior]

Again, I'm not saying that you guys should install SP1 RC. I myself won't install it on my main rig until the final SP1 comes out. But the performance improvement looks to be undeniable.

Well I've been running SPC RC on my main rig for a few days now with zero issues. I think its an improvement for sure. Can't wait till final comes out.