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
man 16bit apps, livin in the past huh, only thing would be games mainly

FordGT90Concept said:
Simple solution: launcher detects platform and runs 64-bit when available, otherwise runs 32-bit. Virtually every EA games has a launcher now so it would be completely transparent to the user. It can even be handled entirely from the installer (if 64-bit OS, install 64-bit binaries; if 32-bit OS, install 32-bit binaries).



Only software emulation, not driver/hardware. Nothing 16-bit will run on 64-bit and 64-bit OS's are bigger than 32-bit OS's so when space is limited, 32-bit is preferred.
Posted on Reply
#2
Syborfical
Pitty EA games look good but aren't much fun.
Posted on Reply
#3
Syborfical
FordGT90Concept said:
I think DK3 would be blasphemous to what Bullfrog made. Just look what they did to Syndicate. Two words: rape and pillage.

Now, if Lionhead somehow got back the rights to Dungeon Keeper and made #3, that I would be interested in. :D

Wishful thinking. :(
Id love to see DK3 and theme hospital.

I know if EA attempted them I would be utterly disappointed.

But if lion head bought the rights .. well who knows...
You only have to look at diablo 3 sales to figure out if a game franchise is good why change it?
Posted on Reply
#4
Vinska
@eidairaman1

Windows are quite bad when it comes to compatibility in general.
I have encountered many programs (most of those were games) that are [!] less than 5 years old and are 32bit, yet fail on 64bit windows, or on Vista&Win7 in general. From this, quite ironic situations arise: if I want to run there programs/games, if I am on windows at that moment I have to boot into linux and use Wine. I suppose it is pretty ironic when I end up having to use Wine and run those on non-native platforms just because Windows rejects it's own native applications. (Should I remind that in Windows, some parts of it are 32bit exclusive (NOT talking about 16bit program support) - MS has pruned some things in 64bit versions? And that some valid 32bit programs fail to work at all without those? Ba**s.
[That is one of the reasons I love Wine - has much better compatibility with older code. Along with being able to run 16bit code on an 64bit OS. And do that with hardly any emulation involved, IIRC. =d ]
Posted on Reply
#5
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
Clinging to 32-bit is just moronic. It's going to get phased out one way or another like 16-bit did. 32 to 64 bit is no different. Also 64-bit doesn't mean more registers, it just means the registers are wider and the ALU is capable to calculating 64-bit words rather than 32-bit words. It just has to do with the size of addressable memory and the amount of size that memory pointers will take up (since addresses are twice the size.) So one one hand you can do larger integer calculations and have more space of them, but takes up more space for all the extra addresses. All in all, 64-bit is not slower or faster, it's just a difference on how memory and arithmetic operations are handled.

32-bit (4Gb space) 0x00000000 - 0xFFFFFFFF
64-bit (16EB space) 0x0000000000000000 - 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
Posted on Reply
#6
Vinska
Aquinus said:
Also 64-bit doesn't mean more registers, it just means the registers are wider
I did read the x86-64 specification, and it says otherwise. (Has double the registers compared to x86; And IIRC, those extra registers are only accessible when running in 64bit mode)
Posted on Reply
#7
aCeFr3aK
please please please let the game be battlefield 2143, not a less expensive 15 dollar game like battlefield 1943 was but a full fledged game like battlefield 3 is costing 60 dollars. PLEASE DICE! PLEASE EA! Battlefield 2142 was my favorite game in the series!
Posted on Reply
#8
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
Vinska said:
I did read the x86-64 specification, and it says otherwise. (Has double the registers compared to x86; And IIRC, those extra registers are only accessible when running in 64bit mode)
Yes! I'm not sure about the x86_64 spec, but a number of microcontrollers and processors I've used in the past will combine two registers to be able to do double-wide integer operations. Since you said that it has double as many registers, it is very possible that these extra registers are used to make the 32-bit ones double wide (64-bit words.) I know this from programming a couple HCS12 microcontrollers at the assembly level, and it had two 8-bit data registers and two 16-bit address registers, and two data registers have some supported operations that would use both registers as if it were one 16-bit word.

Edit: No, you're right, there are twice as many data registers. It's an optimization thing.
Posted on Reply
#9
WarhammerTX
Drone said:
Another marketing bullcrap. How about making applications that utilize all cores/threads first?
Just another brainwashing like Halo 2 working under windows vista.
I think your right thought I read somewhere that the next consoles were going to be 64-bit anyway and I have news for this douche bag the frostbite engine is still broke. They cant even fix bf3 so who cares about what he has to say EA/Dice = Liar
Posted on Reply
#10
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
WarhammerTX said:
I think your right thought I read somewhere that the next consoles were going to be 64-bit anyway and I have news for this douche bag the frostbite engine is still broke. They cant even fix bf3 so who cares about what he has to say EA/Dice = Liar
64-bit has nothing to do with how buggy software is, it's just a matter of how it works.
Posted on Reply
#11
Filiprino
Aquinus said:
Clinging to 32-bit is just moronic. It's going to get phased out one way or another like 16-bit did. 32 to 64 bit is no different. Also 64-bit doesn't mean more registers, it just means the registers are wider and the ALU is capable to calculating 64-bit words rather than 32-bit words. It just has to do with the size of addressable memory and the amount of size that memory pointers will take up (since addresses are twice the size.) So one one hand you can do larger integer calculations and have more space of them, but takes up more space for all the extra addresses. All in all, 64-bit is not slower or faster, it's just a difference on how memory and arithmetic operations are handled.

32-bit (4Gb space) 0x00000000 - 0xFFFFFFFF
64-bit (16EB space) 0x0000000000000000 - 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
Here we are talking about AMD64 architecture. And that means more registers and double width of course. Also it means faster operations with bigger numbers because you can do quadwords in one row instead of two.
Also if you do a lot of bit manipulation, it means you can take more bits at once without going to SIMD instructions and their registers.

Anyway, the biggest gain is having more memory available, because having twice the registers does not affect a lot with the typical workloads, even in games. Although that was only tested with simple recompiles of 32 bit binaries to 64 bit binaries, both on normal aplications and games.
Posted on Reply
#12
eidairaman1
IDK ive only had issues with anything that is 16bit primarily and that being games. other than that no issues


Vinska said:
@eidairaman1

Windows are quite bad when it comes to compatibility in general.
I have encountered many programs (most of those were games) that are [!] less than 5 years old and are 32bit, yet fail on 64bit windows, or on Vista&Win7 in general. From this, quite ironic situations arise: if I want to run there programs/games, if I am on windows at that moment I have to boot into linux and use Wine. I suppose it is pretty ironic when I end up having to use Wine and run those on non-native platforms just because Windows rejects it's own native applications. (Should I remind that in Windows, some parts of it are 32bit exclusive (NOT talking about 16bit program support) - MS has pruned some things in 64bit versions? And that some valid 32bit programs fail to work at all without those? Ba**s.
[That is one of the reasons I love Wine - has much better compatibility with older code. Along with being able to run 16bit code on an 64bit OS. And do that with hardly any emulation involved, IIRC. =d ]
Posted on Reply
#13
FreedomEclipse
~Technological Technocrat~
Syborfical said:
Pitty EA games look good but aren't much fun.
you must be a CoD player.
Posted on Reply
#15
Makaveli
Drone said:
Another marketing bullcrap. How about making applications that utilize all cores/threads first?
Just another brainwashing like Halo 2 working under windows vista.
maybe you should talk to some programmers about how hard is it to multithread an application.

Then you can also tell all those people on dual core machine to upgrade aswell.
Posted on Reply
#16
Mussels
Moderprator
finally!


I've been the guy pushing on TPU for everyone to go 64 bit for so long now, its time we saw the industry take heed.
Posted on Reply
#17
eidairaman1
Mussels said:
finally!


I've been the guy pushing on TPU for everyone to go 64 bit for so long now, its time we saw the industry take heed.
ive got old hardware so this isnt going to matter, the desktop with a 1950 Pro is just able to Play COD 4 MW at 1280x1024 Monitor.

Im definitely going to run 64bit WIndows next build and probably have a secondary drive for 32 bit OS for games that refuse to run on 64bit
Posted on Reply
#18
Mussels
Moderprator
64 bit + DX11 is the only way to maximise current video cards full potential, so if a game company didnt push it now, next gen GPU's with their 4/6GB of ram would seem quite pointless


eidairaman1: i've never ran into a single game that wont run on a 64 bit OS.
Posted on Reply
#19
slyfox2151
Vinska said:
@eidairaman1

Windows are quite bad when it comes to compatibility in general.
I have encountered many programs (most of those were games) that are [!] less than 5 years old and are 32bit, yet fail on 64bit windows, or on Vista&Win7 in general. From this, quite ironic situations arise: if I want to run there programs/games, if I am on windows at that moment I have to boot into linux and use Wine. I suppose it is pretty ironic when I end up having to use Wine and run those on non-native platforms just because Windows rejects it's own native applications. (Should I remind that in Windows, some parts of it are 32bit exclusive (NOT talking about 16bit program support) - MS has pruned some things in 64bit versions? And that some valid 32bit programs fail to work at all without those? Ba**s.
[That is one of the reasons I love Wine - has much better compatibility with older code. Along with being able to run 16bit code on an 64bit OS. And do that with hardly any emulation involved, IIRC. =d ]
What games? name them.... i have never found one that doesnt work unless it was 16bit.
Posted on Reply
#20
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
Mussels said:

eidairaman1: i've never ran into a single game that wont run on a 64 bit OS.
slyfox2151 said:
What games? name them.... i have never found one that doesnt work unless it was 16bit.
I've found games that didn't work, but I can't recall them atm. :P
Posted on Reply
#21
eidairaman1
slyfox2151 said:
What games? name them.... i have never found one that doesnt work unless it was 16bit.
Ya only game I had trouble with was Sonic CD in Windows XP (Expert Software Edition Disk) It required Dino 2D Libraries (API before Direct X). I Found a Patch for XP and apparently its been updated for Windows Vista/7 n That game runs great anyway

Oddity is it runs at the right frame rate whether fast or smooth compared to the Re Launch of it this Last year (Seemed to have like a PAL frame rate)
Posted on Reply
#22
Syborfical
FreedomEclipse said:
you must be a CoD player.
Not really a anything player.


Although I perfer Cod over anything greater than bF2.....

I prefer counter strike over COD although its looking aged....


I know my passinate hatred for EA has alot to do with not liking BF3.
And BFBC2 left a bad taste in my mouth....

If I wanted to paly a game where you need to lvl up for hours id play wow.
IMO BF 1942 excellent game everything else that followed is almost like a mod...




Mussels said:

eidairaman1: i've never ran into a single game that wont run on a 64 bit OS.
Theme hospital and dungeon keeper the space quest series
There is a huge list of classics that won't run.

Although they are old one good thing is most have fan made 3rd party executables or loaders so they will work :D
Posted on Reply
#23
RejZoR
I've been on 64bit system since the release of Vista. I also had 8GB of RAM back then and now i have 6GB (because it's tri channel). My next build will most likely be with 12GB or 16GB of RAM.
Posted on Reply
#24
Dippyskoodlez
eidairaman1 said:
Last time I seen a non 64bit part was SKT 478/ SKT 462, Excluding Sempron/Celeron/Pentium parts
Core solo.


Mussels said:
finally!


I've been the guy pushing on TPU for everyone to go 64 bit for so long now, its time we saw the industry take heed.
Honestly had no idea people even ran the 32 bit windows 7 still.

Really? /facepalm

Every computer Ive interacted with on a daily basis [that is x86]for the last like... 2 years has been running x64.
Posted on Reply
#25
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey
more than 35% of gamer's computers are running 32-bit Windows. Nevermind all those gamers that never install Steam because they play strictly The Sims (from what I've seen, the majority are 3 GiB equipped laptops running 32-bit Windows).


eidairaman1 said:
IDK ive only had issues with anything that is 16bit primarily and that being games. other than that no issues
Try running a 64-bit application on a 32-bit operating system. EA is going to lose a lot of potential customers by not offering a 32-bit option--a lot more than they'll gain from switching to 64-bit (virtually none--who is going to buy a game just because it is 64-bit?). EA, of all the publishers, should know that people want their purchased software to work above everything else.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment