crysis X64 any benefit ?

[mullered07]

is there any benefit in running crysis in x64 mode as opposed to 32bit ? i know in theory there should be but whats the difference in real life ? any comparisons etc ?

[Solaris17]

i gained like 2-5fps.

[mullered07]

Originally Posted by Solaris17

i gained like 2-5fps.

that could be cruicial in crysis lol, oh well if theres no downpoint to running x64 then i might aswell cause i can thanks solaris

[Solaris17]

np man go for i also noticed in places were i didnt gain fps they were more stable didnt low-high as much

[mullered07]

is the "Benchmark_GPU" accurate as when i select "optimal settings" it sets everything to medium with those settings i get an average 55-58fps in the benchmark and when i set all settings turned to "high" average was 38fps ? so can i exppect in game reults similar to those fps ? would you reccomend i run it in high ?

[Solaris17]

you can try it the fps will hover around the 38 range but ina fire fight or the end of the game your fps will plummit.

[mullered07]

Originally Posted by Solaris17

you can try it the fps will hover around the 38 range but ina fire fight or the end of the game your fps will plummit.

any idea which things i could turn down but keeping most things on high just to run a bit smoother in heavy fighting etc ? ill probably turn shadows to medium, any others i could without losing much eye candy ?

thanks again solaris btw

[Solaris17]

post processing will give you a jump in FPS and or motion blur (i cant remember if their are 2 diff settings or if motion blur and post processing r the same thing) any way i turn that off. with those and shadows on med you sholdnt notice much of a drop at all and youll be able to keep high settings

[ghost101]

I got a hit of a couple of FPS.

[OzzmanFloyd120]

Originally Posted by Solaris17

you can try it the fps will hover around the 38 range but ina fire fight or the end of the game your fps will plummit.

He's right, at the end of the game I was only getting like 28fps on very high, no aa, 1200*880.
But for the x64 vs x32 I'm sure it's just a different optimization for the game (Granted I've never played it x32) because the way I understand things your os would just be running the game in 32bit mode instead of the native x64... I'm probably wrong though.

[Davidelmo]

I get better FPS with 32bit XP than I did with 64 bit Vista

(specs under my username)

[Darknova]

I got lower max FPS, but they are more stable in x64 than x86.

And if you run x86 on an x64 OS, you are running an emulator underneath it. Granted, the SYSWow64 emulator is invisible, but it's still better to run at the native bits of your OS.

[jonmcc33]

Originally Posted by Darknova

I got lower max FPS, but they are more stable in x64 than x86.

And if you run x86 on an x64 OS, you are running an emulator underneath it. Granted, the SYSWow64 emulator is invisible, but it's still better to run at the native bits of your OS.

Thankfully the x86-64 technology that AMD developed means that you don't lose any performance by running 32-bit applications on a 64-bit OS. In most cases, performance can even increase by a small percentage.

In all, the difference is negligible between the two. You'll be able to take advantage of 4GB RAM or more. You'll be able to use 64-bit applications as they become more available. You will also benefit from lack of fear of most viruses out there as they were encoded in 16 or 32-bit. A 32-bit virus cannot infect a 64-bit OS. A 16-bit virus? Forget about it.

[Davidelmo]

Originally Posted by jonmcc33

Thankfully the x86-64 technology that AMD developed means that you don't lose any performance by running 32-bit applications on a 64-bit OS. In most cases, performance can even increase by a small percentage.

In all, the difference is negligible between the two. You'll be able to take advantage of 4GB RAM or more. You'll be able to use 64-bit applications as they become more available. You will also benefit from lack of fear of most viruses out there as they were encoded in 16 or 32-bit. A 32-bit virus cannot infect a 64-bit OS. A 16-bit virus? Forget about it.

Is this actually true?

Wow.. never heard of that before!

[Darknova]

Originally Posted by Davidelmo

Is this actually true?

Wow.. never heard of that before!

Yup, a 32-bit virus can only affect the 32-bit parts of the Operating system.

32-bit is incompatible with 64-bit, that's why all 64-bit OS's have a 32-bit emulator (SYSWow64 in Windows case), but it's invisible to the user.

[Davidelmo]

Originally Posted by Darknova

Yup, a 32-bit virus can only affect the 32-bit parts of the Operating system.

32-bit is incompatible with 64-bit, that's why all 64-bit OS's have a 32-bit emulator (SYSWow64 in Windows case), but it's invisible to the user.

Cool, thanks

[jonmcc33]

Originally Posted by Davidelmo

Is this actually true?

Wow.. never heard of that before!

Check out the link in my signature (now) for more info.

[Davidelmo]

Originally Posted by jonmcc33

Check out the link in my signature (now) for more info.

hmm.. interesting, thanks.

I had 64 bit Vista but had to leave it behind because of issues with SATA/RAID drivers. Back to 32 bit XP for now

[antzen]

Originally Posted by Davidelmo

I get better FPS with 32bit XP than I did with 64 bit Vista

(specs under my username)

same here. the difference is huge.

edit: the DX9-version under Vista 64 runs fine like under XP 32. but DX10 totally sux ...

[jonmcc33]

Originally Posted by Davidelmo

I had 64 bit Vista but had to leave it behind because of issues with SATA/RAID drivers. Back to 32 bit XP for now

RAID is overrated anyway for onboard. I've never seen a significant performance boost using it at all (past or present).

Originally Posted by antzen

same here. the difference is huge.

edit: the DX9-version under Vista 64 runs fine like under XP 32. but DX10 totally sux ...

DX10 doesn't suck, it's hardware that cannot push it that causes performance drop. Crysis runs as smooth in Vista 32/64 as it did in Windows XP for me.