Mikee99 Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Show the benchmarks, what kind of tests will they do. http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/amd_nv...pdate/page4.asp Those were done in Sept. of 2007 (that page is for FEAR. Other games are on there as well.) (IDK why, but finding gaming benchmarks on Google is a real pain...) There is more to 64 bit than memory usage. The architecture is improved as well. A better architecture will yield better performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger H. Veteran Posted January 7, 2009 Veteran Share Posted January 7, 2009 Half the new posts lately are all in threads starting with "Windows 7".Madness. Hehe, just like the XP beta days when all you saw were just "Beta xxxx" lol. XP this, XP that... that's how i came to find Neowin all the way back in 2001! I would have signed up earlier but didn't for whatever reason. :) The Vista beta days were quiet in comparison i think. <-- beta addict! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denholm Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Since when have egos ever made sense? Has nothing to do with ego's. Why do Beta testers have to be subjected to the same media circus as the public? Beta testers are already focused Windows geeks that don't need to get enthused by Microsoft marketing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ale0crysis Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Microsoft has understood that next OS will be x64 based because have solved the incompatibility system and next PC will be sold will have from 3 GHZ and more. I'm testing this BETA 1....and it's fantastic...even better, like hope, the previous version of the first beta 7000 x32. i've tested until now : GTA IV, Crysis, Crysis Warhead, Crysis Wars, Steam, Adobe Master CS, IE, Firefox, Chrome, Everest, TAT, Riva Tuner, Snagit,Tune Up Utilities 2009,Hotspot Shield, Flashget, Virtual Box x64, CC Cleaner, Daemon Tools, Ultra Iso, Iso Buster *Works as hell* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atleeit Posted January 7, 2009 Author Share Posted January 7, 2009 Microsoft has understood that next OS will be x64 based because have solved the incompatibility system and next PC will be sold will have from 3 GHZ and more.I'm testing this BETA 1....and it's fantastic...even better, like hope, the previous version of the first beta 7000 x32. i've tested until now : GTA IV, Crysis, Crysis Warhead, Crysis Wars, Steam, Adobe Master CS, IE, Firefox, Chrome, Everest, TAT, Riva Tuner, Snagit,Tune Up Utilities 2009,Hotspot Shield, Flashget, Virtual Box x64, CC Cleaner, Daemon Tools, Ultra Iso, Iso Buster *Works as hell* Daemon tools does not run on Windows 7, You cannot install the SPTD driver, so impossible, They don't even support it :) That's why i am using PowerISO :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scratch42069 Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Daemon Tools won't be supported on 7 until after RTM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notuptome2004 Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Crysis and Crysis Warhead of course, they were the orignal game company to release Farcry 1 on 64bit machine and your point is? How many other games can you name?Steam could be a 64bit application however the games inside of it are 32bit. There is more gamers on 32bit machines then 64bit, 64bit cannot lead yet, not enough made for it. There is still a huge amount of emulation. well if you area gamer then you know that all Games for windows live games tho they may not run in 64bit mode have to be compatible and you would also know that running a 64bit Os would give 32bit programs more room to grow inside the ability to address a full 4gbs of ram to a program 32bit apps can in fact be faster on a 64bit OS namely windows vista 64bit or windows 7 but seem those who are claiming different must be using windows XP 64bit witch has been all but a vapor ware OS from Microsoft with little to hardly any optimized support for it from hardware venders " You can take a good look at a T-bone by sticking you head up a Bulls Ass but i would Rather take the butchers word for it " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob2687 Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Yeah. I don't remember people getting this excited about Vista betas. I wasn't around here for the XP betas though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ale0crysis Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 well if you area gamer then you know that all Games for windows live games tho they may not run in 64bit mode have to be compatible and you would also know that running a 64bit Os would give 32bit programs more room to grow inside the ability to address a full 4gbs of ram to a program32bit apps can in fact be faster on a 64bit OS namely windows vista 64bit or windows 7 but seem those who are claiming different must be using windows XP 64bit witch has been all but a vapor ware OS from Microsoft with little to hardly any optimized support for it from hardware venders " You can take a good look at a T-bone by sticking you head up a Bulls Ass but i would Rather take the butchers word for it " ahahah more facts than words, pls *failed* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scratch42069 Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 I wish the guy who's going on about performance loss from emulation would give it a rest. The performance loss from the WOW64 emulation is very minor and you wouldn't even notice it. That's a fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atleeit Posted January 7, 2009 Author Share Posted January 7, 2009 (edited) I don't even think people should state which is better 32bit or 64bit, because you got no proof :) Just stick to the topic lol All i'm saying WoW64 performance on x64 is similar to that of 32-bit Windows but not the same. Edited January 7, 2009 by atleeit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denholm Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Yeah. I don't remember people getting this excited about Vista betas. I wasn't around here for the XP betas though. Well, Vista took far too long to arrive and while it was arriving, Microsoft were busily cutting features. Both these factors meant that much of the excitement over Vista died off fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wguimb Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 No really? How do you think some of us have been downloading it and posting screenshots already. Getting about 500kB/s over here; another 1.5 hrs at this pace. *sigh* Better start backing up in the meantime. Have you or anyone confirmed the ISO MD5 checksum as to matching a verified value from MS? Maybe a private tester could give us the checksum of the ISO? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomZ Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 I think I've accidentally stumbled into a 32bit vs 63bit thread.... oh wait...back on topic please guys! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atleeit Posted January 7, 2009 Author Share Posted January 7, 2009 The MD5 Checksum is 100% correct for the 64bit release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jorkand Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 X-win32 now works fine without crashing DWM constantly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wguimb Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 The MD5 Checksum is 100% correct for the 64bit release. Thanksfor the reply. 63-bit DomZ, I know a typo. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowl Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 "I have no use for 64-bit because I have a gaming rig."That has to be the silliest supposition I have heard in the past two years. Most games and their expansion packs could care less whether you are running on 32-bit or 64-bit Windows. In fact, if you have a gaming rig, due to the RAM requirements of all too many games as of late, and the RAM shipping on most graphics cards (512 MB is commonplace, and even 1 GB isn't unheard-of) gamers are the second most likely group of folks to run out of RAM real-estate for 32-bit Windows, and thus the second most likely to actually need the additional headroom that 64-bit Windows provides. Crysis and Crysis: Warhead are 64-bit ready. So is (naturally) FarCry 2. Steam? Steam is also 64-bit ready (so that's no excuse, either). So, what's the "real" reason? Must... Resist.. Temptation.. to... prove... wrong.... EDIT: Only SOME x86 applications, have been configured to use WOW64. wow for slow performance on other applications! CES is on in 3 hours :woot: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown_97784568745 Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 But my Sega Dreamcast is 128 bit ... No, the CPU is 32bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inctye Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Quick question... I am currently running the x86 beta right now. In order to upgrade to x64, is it possible to install straight on top of the x86 or do I have to burn a disc and install from boot? Because I am getting an incompat error when trying to launch the x64 iso with poweriso. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snakehn Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Quick question...I am currently running the x86 beta right now. In order to upgrade to x64, is it possible to install straight on top of the x86 or do I have to burn a disc and install from boot? Because I am getting an incompat error when trying to launch the x64 iso with poweriso. install from boot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowl Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Quick question...I am currently running the x86 beta right now. In order to upgrade to x64, is it possible to install straight on top of the x86 or do I have to burn a disc and install from boot? Because I am getting an incompat error when trying to launch the x64 iso with poweriso. The best way is to keep away from x64... joking. Install from boot, but you "can" try installing it on the partition that x86 is on, and hope that it will just install the x64 files instead.. but keep a backup. It has worked once or twice before, as a upgrade, but not sure about x86 to x64, just keep a backup (or two) just incase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMELTN Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 hurry up and release the beta dang it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inctye Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 The best way is to keep away from x64... joking.Install from boot, but you "can" try installing it on the partition that x86 is on, and hope that it will just install the x64 files instead.. but keep a backup. It has worked once or twice before, as a upgrade, but not sure about x86 to x64, just keep a backup (or two) just incase. Guess burning a dvd and booting is the only option. I was getting that incompat error just by trying to launch the iso, so I cannot even try to see what happens if it can install over the x86 correctly or not. Now the sad part, I left all my dvds at my dorm. :angry: Will have wait another week before I get this done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atleeit Posted January 7, 2009 Author Share Posted January 7, 2009 No, the CPU is 32bit. Lol isn't it 16bit CPU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts