Why go 64bit for CPU ?

[ssmith]

I am curious to hear people's opinions on going 64bit for the CPU on a desktop.

I can see the advantage for servers, as well as 64bit PCI, etc. But it all has to do with memory usage. I don't see how going 64bit on a CPU is going to give you a benefit on the desktop for Doom3 or WindowsXP, or FarCry, etc, when you aren't running 12 gigs of RAM and have a 4 gig database table loaded into memory. or need to manage a multiple terrabyte RAID5 array on 64bit PCI slots.

Why waste the money on a 64-bit CPU now, when there's almost zero advantage of using it on the desktop? If I'm wrong, point out the advantages. To me I see a lot of posts where people thing 64bit = twice as fast as a 32bit processor. That's just plain wrong.

I'm running a P4 3.0ghz Prescott, 512meg DDR400 CL2, and a NVidia GeForce 6800 GT 256mb, and pushing out a solid 60fps in Doom3 in 1024x1280 running through the levels and avg'ng around 40fps in heavy battles. What, 95% of it is the graphics card. So why go 64bit on a processor?

 

[orangat]

The reason for the AMD A64 CPU is because it is cheaper than an Intel equivalent and performs about 5-7% faster at the same speed rating in many games. Not because it is 64 bit, although it does have have that advantage in the future when there is native 64bit support in OSs and applications.

 

[imported_tss4]

Its certainly not twice as fast. However, it has an integrated memory controller and as a result has better performace when moving large amounts of data. This is a nice advantage in games. Check out some of the benchmarks that compare Doom3 on a P4 vs Doom3 on an Athlon64 and you'll see a nice little speed bump in frame rates. Its not twice as fast, more like 5-10%. The athlon64's will also see a nice ~10% boost when windows64 comes out. You've probably got a year before that's out, though. The basic rule is, if you primarily game, get the athlon64. If you do lots of video encoding or multitasking then the P4 is probably a better choice. Both are excellent computers, though. Judging by your system specs, you have a great system and wouldn't see a big speed boost by upgrading the processor. (At least not enough to justify the money). You'll see a better bump by getting more memory. Nice video card by the way. And yes, once you get a modern cpu, then the gpu becomes by far the system component that affects game play the most.

 

[Vee]

It's not a question of "12 gigs" or "4 gig database table". 32-bit runs out of virtual memory space already at 1.5GB-1.7GB. There will be no more ambitious FPS games in 32-bit fullversion. HL2 is probably the last.
32-bit is also inadequate for a number of engineering apps, as well as for the likes of Maya and Lightwave.
The things that can be done with 32-bit are already done. Anyone that want to go forward, must have 64-bit addressing.

Performance wise, some early ports are showing an enhancement of 40%-50%. That's nice, but not really the point with 64-bit.

My full argument for 64-bit is posted as a sort of FAQ in 'Highly Technical' forum, "64-bit" thread.

As for "wasting" money, 64-bit systems are not more expensive than 32-bit systems with corresponding 32-bit performance. But right, it's quite ok to stick around with a cheaper system than that, until 64-bit Windows and apps are here en masse. I agree with that, so far.

Personally though, I've seen in the past how useful old, but capable systems can be, and how useless 'uncapable' systems becomes very rapidly. To me, 32-bit systems looks a lot like the 640KB barrier 8086, and 16-bit only '286. So my view is that I will not build another 32-bit system. Even if cheap is your game, you can squeeze a A64 2800+ pretty good.

 

[Stormgiant]

True, so very true Vee.

Also, i would like to point that besides all the benefits with the move to 64bits in a long term perspective, hardware has to become available before it's needed so the software has time to be (re)written to take advantage of the new features.

 

[SneakyStuff]

Why not? The chips are cheaper, and perform better than the Intel chips they compete against. I'm sold.

 

[Stormgiant]

You are misreading. It's about 32-bits vs 64-bits, NOT P4 vs AMD64.

 

[Sonic587]

On Newegg, your 3.0E is $209. The AMD64 3000+ is only $175.

Now, check out this Doom 3 bench.

You tell me who's wasting money. 64-bits is almost free really. Even if it's not being used right now.

 

[carlosd]

Yeah that 3.0E is a really waste of money, actually you can get the 64 bit processor and better 32 bit performance for less money.

 

[ssmith]

Great points, all of you guys. Vee, i especially appreciate your response.

I guess the benchmarks so far are in their early stages and looking good, I hadn't seen the Anandtech DOOM3 Benchmark w/ the 64bit AMD's until now.

I guess it still comes down to preference. I am doing a ton of DVD encoding and really wanted this particular new box I built to be for RAID5 (i'm running a Supermicro P4SCT w/ 64bit PCI and 3ware 9500s-4lp RAID card w/ 4x seagate 120gb SATA 150's). I threw in the video card for the hell of it, and figured i could run games on here too, although i do plan to build a striped raid gaming box soon.

I just upgraded from a AMD 3200+ running on an NFORCE2 Shuttle Cube system. Great box, but was dead end as far as upgrading to better video or fitting more drives in it. Cubes are great for servers, you can fit a few on your bookshelves easily, run quiet, cool and pretty quick actually.

I really love the P4 3ghz prescott for the Windows multitasking and DVD stuff. I'm encoding at like ~45 fps most of the time which is great. The AMD64 option still looks pricey. For even a decent 3500+ model, you are looking at over $140 more just for the chip than a P4 3.0ghz prescott. Hopefully prices will drop quickly over the next year though.

Really the only games i'm looking forward to (although i did pre-order HL2 and am almost done with Doom3) are Need for Speed Underground 2 and Battle for Middle Earth.

I still dont get why someone hasnt made an NFSU clone, but it is a large online gaming world (free-roaming city)where you can assume a character and race and compete against everyone else, winning races, maybe doing missions of some kind, who knows?

 

[ssmith]

Any idea what the heat is like on the AMD64's ? I am getting outrageously low heat levels in my system. Something i've never seen before, always being an AMD AthlonXP owner... Something that's made my room a lot cooler, the fans a lot quieter and overall made me a lot happier.

SuperMicro P4SCT
P4 3.0ghz Prescott @ 3.0ghz (not overclocked)
(2) 256mb Crucial Ballistix DDR 400 (PC3200)
CoolerMaster Vortex Dream ACC-U72 CPU Cooler @ 3000rpm (quarter setting)
Enermax Whisper 475w EGVPA PSU (fan on max)
Antec Lanboy Case (newest version) w/ (2) 120mm Fans
3Ware SATA-RAID 9500S-4LP 64bit PCI Card
(4) Seagate ST3120026AS SATA-150 120gb Drives in RAID5 for 360gb usable space
eVGA Nvidia 6800GT 256mb AGP 8x Video
Pioneer 8x DVD+-R/RW Drive (internal)
SB Audigy2 Platinum
Logitech Z-680 Spkrs

My system is awesome, totally quiet, my CPU runs at 29 degrees C under normal load, system temp is around 34 degrees C under normal load.

Previously in my cube, my system temp was around 46 degrees C, and the XP3200+ CPU/heatpipe setup was running around 50degrees C if i am not mistaken. I have it off right now, in the other room.

xp-raid_0001.jpg
xp-raid_0002.jpg
xp-raid_0003.jpg
xp-raid_0004.jpg

 

[Stormgiant]

I wouln't trust much on those temps. Are those with software or with probes on the cpu ?

That is the lowest temp i've seen on any Prescott

 

[Genx87]

If they made a 32bit version of the with on die memory controllers then I wouldnt care. But since only the A64s have that functionality. You have to go with the A64 and would be silly if your didnt.

 

[ssmith]

Or short on cash, not seeing a lot of benefit for the next several months to a year. For an extra 10 FPS in DOOM3 which i will only occasionally play after beating the 1 player version (FarCry has much better replayability), plus i am already pushing out an acceptable Framerate, i dont think it is worth it right now.

Plus i usually only build my systems once the CPU prices are around $200 for an upper mid-range chip, and after it's been out for a long time, with a lot of good motherboard configurations that have what i need, etc.

Patience always pays off.

Originally posted by: Genx87
If they made a 32bit version of the with on die memory controllers then I wouldnt care. But since only the A64s have that functionality. You have to go with the A64 and would be silly if your didnt.

 

[ssmith]

Yeah it's funny man, it's the lowest temp i've seen really.

But it's true, i've done probes with Digital Doc 5 and using the SuperDoc III built-in sensor on my SuperMicro P4SCT+

The interesting thing is that i can run it at low fan speed, under hard usage, open the case, touch the lowest part of my heat sink and cooler, and it is just warm to the touch, not blazing hot like my AMD's always were. Man if you were working in the case and bumped into the heat pipe or HSF, you'd friggen jump!

Originally posted by: Stormgiant
I wouln't trust much on those temps. Are those with software or with probes on the cpu ?

That is the lowest temp i've seen on any Prescott

 

[mjuarez]

Or short on cash, not seeing a lot of benefit for the next several months to a year. For an extra 10 FPS in DOOM3 which i will only occasionally play after beating the 1 player version (FarCry has much better replayability), plus i am already pushing out an acceptable Framerate, i dont think it is worth it right now.

Well, maybe not getting the top-of-the-line Athlon64 is not worth it. However, if you buy a cheap Athlon64 (say, the 2800+ or 3000+), it will currently be even cheaper than the equivalent-performing Pentium4. And, if you decide to sell it used next year to buy your next rig, it will hold it's value much better than a 32-bit only PC. Remember, in 12 months, 64-bits will be the rage, and 32-bits will be completely out of date. Like trying to sell a 286 nowadays.

Just my thoughts.

Marcos

 

[GfW]

Before he became famous (or infamous) Gates said ... who needs more than 64K

Same can be said for CPUs ... 64 bit is the future and the future is on the doorstep. Very soon there will be 64 bit apps available ... so if you're planning on a new PC, it would be a lot smarter to get a 64 bit rather than a 32 bit.

 

[GhandiInstinct]

Besides good for games; what else is the on-die memory controller good for?

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: GhandiInstinct
Besides good for games; what else is the on-die memory controller good for?

Everything. Thats one of the reasons the P4 is not king of encoding anymore.

 

[Sonic587]

Originally posted by: GhandiInstinct
Besides good for games; what else is the on-die memory controller good for?

Memory latency. This plays a part is just about everything.

ssmith, you seem to be trying to justify the 32-bit CPUs as opposed to the 32/64-bit CPUs. There is almost no reason not to get 64-bits right now if you are building a new system. No, AMD does not have a worthy upgrade for you in the ~$200 range. Neither does Intel. Even so, that's beside the point. AMD bests intel in 90% of apps, they are cheaper, run just as cool, and more future proof. That is in 32-bit. Who knows how far ahead they will be when we finally get Win64. You may not care about these avantages since you already have a decent system, but you cannot ignore that almost all new system builders would be far better off with AMD64 as opposed to a Athlon XP/P4.

 

[Marsumane]

First off, you seem quite pleased with your encoding/gaming needs. Why upgrade to something 10% better?
Secondly, that 64 bit argument about it being necessary is about the equivalent of arguing why we shouldnt buy anything w/o pci express slots in them. And for that matter, why we should wait for BTX. Look how AGP is staying around. Look at ATX. Both are looking to stay for quite some time. Also, 64 bit necessity wont come around until most everyone has 64 bit. I really dont see software comming out to the mass market (esp in games) that require 64 bit if most everyone that they code games for now, has a GF4mx card in their system (or there abouts). Think about it. you have to code for the majority of the market. Its also like saying that multithreaded apps (like games for instance) will soon be out and everyone will have to have to have the soon-to-be-released dual core (or more) processors.
How long did windows 98 support last? You think XP support will die the instant a 64 bit mainstream os comes out? I dont think so. By the time 64 bits is necessary, you could buy a new processor that is faster for much cheaper.

 

[eastvillager]

the question is moot.

why? you can't get two processors that are exactly the same, just one is 32-bit and the other 64-bit. Which means you're using more than just the "bittedness" to select the processor.

In the case of the athlon64, it just gives you significantly more bang for the buck compared to other processors in the same price range. People aren't buying these because they're 64-bit, they're buying them in spite of it.

 

[GhandiInstinct]

Marsumane:

I see your point of view on this perfectly. But what we're talking about is the best performer for your dollar. Which is obviously AMD. But, not only is AMD giving us the best performance CPUs they also add on the security of upgrading.

We have a 64-bit cpu which is being used primarily for 32-bit, but when those 64-bit apps and games start coming along, we won't need a new cpu to be compatible.

 

[Grimbones]

i call him ssmith the product pusher, go to hell, i don't believe a word of your story. Seriously a 29C prescott? Isn't this the chip that they were having problems with being too hot, i know i'm ont wrong. Plus for $200 bucks you odn't get a 10% improvement over a 64, have you seen an a64 lately? so sad.

 

[GhandiInstinct]

I don't understand, even if you don't have the highest budget. Why would anyone go for a P4 at this point? The fact higher performance and future compatibility mean anything at all?