Thursday, May 24th 2012

EA-DICE Frostbite Titles in 2013 Will Require 64-bit Windows

While content-creation and media transcoding applications have transitioned to native x86-64 applications that can take advantage of large amounts of system and video memory, a similar transition by game developers has been rather slow. Very few PC games ship with 64-bit executables, as most games are ported from game consoles anyway, which have slim system requirements.

EA-DICE has been behind developing games that take advantage of the latest PC technologies (such as DirectX 11), and according to a lead developer and rendering architect with the studio, Johan Andersson, games that are driven by Frostbite engine, which are slated for 2013, will require 64-bit operating systems, these games will not run on 32-bit Windows, or in 32-bit mode, on 64-bit Windows, but with full-fledged 64-bit executables. The 64-bit address-space would allow games to take advantage of system memory over 4 GB, and more importantly, high amounts of video memory, as 2 GB and 3 GB become standard with performance-segment graphics cards.


Add your own comment

113 Comments on EA-DICE Frostbite Titles in 2013 Will Require 64-bit Windows

#1
eidairaman1
The Push for Windows 64bit begins now!
Posted on Reply
#2
slyfox2151
YEAH!!!!

....


its only taken how many years? :P
Posted on Reply
#3
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
7 years. Windows XP Professional x64 Edition was released in April 2005. I've been running a 64-bit OS since June 2005.
Posted on Reply
#4
seronx
8GB DDR3 Single Channel + Windows 8 Pro + 512-GB/1-TB SSD: 2013 HERE I COME!!!
Posted on Reply
#5
slyfox2151
by: seronx
8GB DDR3 Single Channel + Windows 8 Pro + 512-GB/1-TB SSD: 2013 HERE I COME!!!
i wonder if i will have 64/128GB of ram by then? :P
Posted on Reply
#6
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
I think they should still provide 32-bit executables for those that don't have a 64-bit OS. If you're running in a low resolution, it probably won't move into 64-bit territory in terms of memory usage.

They're going to get a ton of support calls and bad publicity from people that bought these games with a 32-bit computer and no option, whatsoever, to play them.
Posted on Reply
#7
MikeMurphy
I see it as more of an exception than a big trend. When the next-gen consoles are out there will be a much bigger push for 64-bit resources.
Posted on Reply
#8
seronx
by: slyfox2151
i wonder if i will have 64/128GB of ram by then? :P
I don't do CAD workloads and I don't currently need more than 8-GB. Nor, do I need dual/tri/quad channels...my applications show the best scores with single channel.
Posted on Reply
#9
Prima.Vera
by: btarunr
If you are on 32-bit, great opportunity to upgrade to Windows 8
What's wrong with Windows 7 x64 ???!?:shadedshu:shadedshu
Posted on Reply
#10
seronx
by: Prima.Vera
What's wrong with Windows 7 x64 ???!?:shadedshu:shadedshu
Nothing, :toast: but Windows 8 uses less memory than Windows 7. (More memory for 64-bit games!)
Posted on Reply
#11
eidairaman1
by: seronx
Nothing, :toast: but Windows 8 uses less memory than Windows 7. (More memory for 64-bit games!)
we can only hope so, that Metro Interface is annoying as hell
Posted on Reply
#12
Prima.Vera
by: seronx
Nothing, :toast: but Windows 8 uses less memory than Windows 7. (More memory for 64-bit games!)
Any real proof of that??!
Posted on Reply
#13
eidairaman1
by: FordGT90Concept
I think they should still provide 32-bit executables for those that don't have a 64-bit OS. If you're running in a low resolution, it probably won't move into 64-bit territory in terms of memory usage.

They're going to get a ton of support calls and bad publicity from people that bought these games with a 32-bit computer and no option, whatsoever, to play them.
I thought all CPUs had x86-64 anymore
Posted on Reply
#15
ShadowXP
by: FordGT90Concept
I think they should still provide 32-bit executables for those that don't have a 64-bit OS. If you're running in a low resolution, it probably won't move into 64-bit territory in terms of memory usage.

They're going to get a ton of support calls and bad publicity from people that bought these games with a 32-bit computer and no option, whatsoever, to play them.
Got to love it when people get so hyped up about games that they don't read the systems requirements. Besides, any computer old enough to NOT have 64-bit capability won't be able to run the game anyway. :toast:

I think it's good, and about bloody time, that devs are starting to push for 64-bit games now, and start using the computing-power that most people have. It's annoying to be limited by 32-bit architecture.
Posted on Reply
#16
slyfox2151
by: seronx
I don't do CAD workloads and I don't currently need more than 8-GB. Nor, do I need dual/tri/quad channels...my applications show the best scores with single channel.
i don't understand why you needed to say that lol?



by: ShadowXP
Got to love it when people get so hyped up about games that they don't read the systems requirements. Besides, any computer old enough to NOT have 64-bit capability won't be able to run the game anyway. :toast:

I think it's good, and about bloody time, that devs are starting to push for 64-bit games now, and start using the computing-power that most people have. It's annoying to be limited by 32-bit architecture.
This.
Posted on Reply
#18
Prima.Vera
by: seronx
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2...windows-8.aspx
LOL. I don't have 1 or 2GB of RAM not even on my crappy laptop. And besides, until now even if you had 8 or more GB of RAM, the games were not using more than 3GB anyways. Now in the situation of x64 .exe files this will change. Hopefully the loading times will be significantly reduced!
Posted on Reply
#19
Liquid Cool
Windows XP x64 should be good right?

:)

LC
Posted on Reply
#20
Drone
Another marketing bullcrap. How about making applications that utilize all cores/threads first?
Just another brainwashing like Halo 2 working under windows vista.
Posted on Reply
#21
seronx
by: Prima.Vera
LOL. I don't have 1 or 2GB of RAM not even on my crappy laptop. And besides, until now even if you had 8 or more GB of RAM, the games were not using more than 3GB anyways. Now in the situation of x64 .exe files this will change. Hopefully the loading times will be significantly reduced!
32-bit -> 2GB
32-bit ext -> 3GB
32-bit on 64-bit -> 4 GB
64-bit probably user tweakable -> 4 GB -> Infinite GB(Get that game in the RAM!)
Posted on Reply
#22
Perra
by: seronx
Also, got a reason to get two monitors...(No more black screen in the second monitor yay!)
Black screen on second monitor? What? Have I missed something? Been running more than one screen for ages and can't recall ever having that.
Posted on Reply
#23
Lionheart
Command & Conquer : Generals 2 should be well coded then:toast:
Posted on Reply
#24
hellrazor
by: Lionheart
Command & Conquer : Generals 2 should be well coded then:toast:
:laugh:
Posted on Reply
#25
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
by: eidairaman1
I thought all CPUs had x86-64 anymore
VIA C7 isn't. What I was getting at though is that a lot of laptops and even cheap desktops are still selling with 32-bit Windows 7. There's also a ton of people still running Windows XP 32-bit. Even if their computer has otherwise been upgraded to play newer games, the fact they don't include a 32-bit executable will mean they can't run the game at all. For example, Frostbite 2 engine is used on Need for Speed: The Run and I know Need for Speed: Most Wanted 2 is based on Frostbite 2 and scheduled for release in 2013. Those games don't need more than 4 GiB of memory to run. Even BF3 can run within that threshold if the settings are turned down far enough.

What I'm getting at is that it is a mistake for EA to not provide both executables.

by: Liquid Cool
Windows XP x64 should be good right?

:)

LC
No, Frostbite 2 is DirectX 10+. XP supports nothing higher than DirectX 9.0c
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment