Can someone post their real-world

[supermortalhuman]

I'm wondering what to expect if I switch to xp 64 bit?

 

Can someone who has tested both 32 bit and 64 bit XP on the same exact hardware tell me the differences they experienced?

 

I have the rare stutter and other than that my game runs great, and this isn't JUST for GTA IV, but if it will run IV better - I'm on board.

 

So can anyone share their experience with XP? I don't think vista or 7 will be relevant (I see others say it's better on those, but it doesn't really give me a clear enough picture to go through with getting 64 bit XP as I will NEVER own Vista or 7 and XP is my last windows until it's more about PC users than casual web surfers (like XP).

[Jigglyass]

No its not going to run better. If you call +2 FPs better then switch.

[supermortalhuman]

nah, that wouldn't do. But I assume it's got to have some benefit? What I am looking for is someone who has run the game on both.

[WTFX]

i have run both, but... i can't really recall if there was a significant difference.. i remember getting rid of the stutter by going to server 2008 (essentially vista, but less bloated and more stable)..

i'm pretty sure there was that small stutter even on xp x64.. otherwise i would've stayed using it at that time..

 

that was all before windows 7 tho which i'm running now.

 

that's all i have atm.. =/

[TruXter]

I have yet to see a difference between vista 32 and vista 64. I did however get crappier frame rates when I tried 7 32 and 7 64.

[Girish]

Switching over to a 64-bit OS will only help if you have more than 3 GB of RAM. Utilizing all of your system RAM would mean a little less texture pop-ups and a lesser 'same car syndrome'. It would also mean that you can try higher values of the -availablevidmem' commandline, although I won't recommend it. Don't expect any substantial gains in frame rates.

[supermortalhuman]

I don't have any of the memory related problems like same cars, and although you can use more ram, I was pretty sure there are a lot more benefits to 64bit than ram, amirite? I mean, I'm asking to understand it better, and I haven't really read too much about it yet because I figured asking here is my best bet since IV is my most taxing application.

 

If anyone else has tried, can you add to/support/give different results to what was shared here? Can anyone comment on the benefits of 64bit os other than the ram stuff? I have 2GB of ram, but either way, my machine should run better at 64 bits than 32, just like my video card is better at 256 than 128, right? You can see I could use a good ol' GTAF rundown on the information, thanks so far, and thanks in advance for more findings.

[Girish]

Quite frankly speaking, the 'Enhanced for 64-bit' part at the back of the game box is kinda misleading. It would make one believe that the game will run better with a 64-bit OS, which is not really the case. There are not many games out there that have been truly coded for 64-bit OSes and I'm pretty certain IV is not one of them. I've read reviews where Crysis (which is said to be truly optimized for 64-bit) was tested on a 32-bit OS and a 64-bit OS. The difference was a maximum of 2-3 fps. That's it. And this was on a system with 4 GB of RAM. And it's not just Crysis, there are a few other games out there that say they are enhanced for 64-bit but apart from the 2-3 fps increase, there is absolutely no other difference.

 

Long story short, based on all the articles that I've read comparing 32-bit and 64-bit OSes, there is really no point in switching over to a 64-bit OS if you have less than 3 GB RAM. The amount of RAM makes a bigger difference to the game than the OS does.

[Extortionate]

The game doesn't even run in a 64bit process, so it's classed as emulation and it can't even run native 32bit on Intel processors. Only AMD processors do native 32bit in a 64bit OS.

 

"Enhanced for 64bit" my arse.

 

 

Long story short, based on all the articles that I've read comparing 32-bit and 64-bit OSes, there is really no point in switching over to a 64-bit OS if you have less than 3 GB RAM. The amount of RAM makes a bigger difference to the game than the OS does

 

It's a common misconception that 64bit OS's don't take advantage of 3Gb or less.

Edited September 27, 2009 by Extortionate

[BundD]

also wondering..............

 

is there less support for 64-bit programs, games, etc vs. 32-bit?

do all games and applications come with a 32-bit and 64-bit version?

[Extortionate]

 

also wondering..............

 

is there less support for 64-bit programs, games, etc vs. 32-bit?

do all games and applications come with a 32-bit and 64-bit version?

All applications now days are 32bit but 64bit on Windows is still pretty poorly supported. Yes there are games that support 64bit(Half-Life2, FarCry, Crysis, ect..) but most are 32bit.

 

Linux on the other hand supports 64bit on all of it's open source applications and pretty much all of it's drivers(some third party closed source stuff may not be 64bit).

[Girish]

Long story short, based on all the articles that I've read comparing 32-bit and 64-bit OSes, there is really no point in switching over to a 64-bit OS if you have less than 3 GB RAM. The amount of RAM makes a bigger difference to the game than the OS does

 

It's a common misconception that 64bit OS's don't take advantage of 3Gb or less.

...

 

Explain to me then as to why someone with 2 GB RAM should switch over to a 64-bit OS?

[Extortionate]

 

Long story short, based on all the articles that I've read comparing 32-bit and 64-bit OSes, there is really no point in switching over to a 64-bit OS if you have less than 3 GB RAM. The amount of RAM makes a bigger difference to the game than the OS does

 

It's a common misconception that 64bit OS's don't take advantage of 3Gb or less.

...

 

Explain to me then as to why someone with 2 GB RAM should switch over to a 64-bit OS?

It's all about the memory address space, which is restricted in a 32bit OS.

 

By the way. 64bit has been around for over forty years, they didn't have 4Gb of ram then so it's not all about having more than 4Gb.

Edited September 27, 2009 by Extortionate

[Girish]

But if a program isn't coded to take advantage of that wide address space offered by a 64-bit OS, then there's really no point switching over to a 64-bit OS if you're doing fine on a 32-bit OS. That's the reason why the performance gains offered by a 64-bit OS is only 2-3 fps for most games that say they're enhanced for 64-bit but aren't truly coded for a 64-bit OS.

[Extortionate]

I agree but whoever said 64bit gives you more FPS?

 

If the game was properly optimized for 64bit, you'd have better draw distance and detail distance for the same frame-rate. This is mainly what 64bit will give you, more game detail for the same frame-rate.

 

 

[Girish]

64-bit OS does provide a boost in performance frame rate wise but it isn't really much. You can say it's almost negligible. The same can be said for draw distance and detail distance. You can only benefit from a 64-bit OS if you have a good system and more importantly, if the game is truly optimised for 64-bit. If either one of those things are lacking, then you won't notice any difference between a 32-bit OS and a 64-bit OS.

[Extortionate]

Well yes, the point is that GTA IV doesn't take advantage of 64bit. If you look at Crysis and FarCry, they do because their 64bit binaries increase the draw distance purely being 64bit.

[BundD]

also wondering..............

 

is there less support for 64-bit programs, games, etc vs. 32-bit?

do all games and applications come with a 32-bit and 64-bit version?

All applications now days are 32bit but 64bit on Windows is still pretty poorly supported. Yes there are games that support 64bit(Half-Life2, FarCry, Crysis, ect..) but most are 32bit.

 

Linux on the other hand supports 64bit on all of it's open source applications and pretty much all of it's drivers(some third party closed source stuff may not be 64bit).

so would i be better off with a 32-bit or 64-bit OS?

[Girish]

so would i be better off with a 32-bit or 64-bit OS?

You have 4 GB RAM, so yeah, 64-bit would be a better choice for you. Just don't expect the game to perform considerably better than what you're seeing right now. You can expect minor gains though as mentioned in some of the above posts.

[BundD]

 

does windows 7 32-bit fix the memory problem or does it still only recognize 3GB max?

[ikt]

does windows 7 32-bit fix the memory problem or does it still only recognize 3GB max?

3 max. Every x32 system recognises 3.2 GB's max

[supermortalhuman]

A 32 bit system can only address that much, regardless.

 

oops didn't see the second page.

[mkey82]

 

does windows 7 32-bit fix the memory problem or does it still only recognize 3GB max?

3 max. Every x32 system recognises 3.2 GB's max

Note that 3.2 is not an absolute value, it depends on things such a VRAM amount and the system itself which allocates some addresses for it's own needs.

 

Also, note that some systems (like Vista SP1) will show you the full amount of RAM on system properties, but that doesn't mean it uses all of it.

[Extortionate]

Just for a bit of extra info. A 32bit OS can use more than 4Gb of ram but you need a PAE enabled kernel(Linux has this option) to be able to.

[WTFX]

i tried enabling PAE on XP (or server 2003 don't remember) and IV ended up crashing.. weird.

[R3nHo3k]

Just for a bit of extra info. A 32bit OS can use more than 4Gb of ram but you need a PAE enabled kernel(Linux has this option) to be able to.

sorry dude that is NOT true!

 

PAE is crap compared to a TRUE 64 bit adress space period!

 

if you dont believe me go to the microsoft site and read a bit in the right section of the site!

 

but it is also true that the ONLY advantage for GTA IV is the RAM, IF you use the exact hardware config.

 

but the advantage of more RAM is obvious in GTA IV.

 

so 64bit only if you have more than 3 GB.

 

[Extortionate]

 

Just for a bit of extra info. A 32bit OS can use more than 4Gb of ram but you need a PAE enabled kernel(Linux has this option) to be able to.

sorry dude that is NOT true!

 

PAE is crap compared to a TRUE 64 bit adress space period!

 

if you dont believe me go to the microsoft site and read a bit in the right section of the site!

 

but it is also true that the ONLY advantage for GTA IV is the RAM, IF you use the exact hardware config.

 

but the advantage of more RAM is obvious in GTA IV.

 

so 64bit only if you have more than 3 GB.

It's not the point that it's crap. PAE enables a 32bit kernel to use more than 4Gb of ram, fact.

[viometrix]

this whole thread is pointless.... fact xp 32 or 64 = outdated. fact gta iv runs best on win 7 x64.

[supermortalhuman]

 

this whole thread is pointless.... fact xp 32 or 64 = outdated. fact gta iv runs best on win 7 x64.

bullsh*t. 100%.

[nixxio]

 

this whole thread is pointless.... fact xp 32 or 64 = outdated. fact gta iv runs best on win 7 x64.

bullsh*t. 100%.

Yes, bullsh*t indeed.

 

I got Windows XP 32 and Win 7 64 bit, and I must say on XP 32 bit it runs much faster, and on Win 7 while actually playing the game I've noticed that there are small stutters, and a big difference in the AVG fps I get in most areas, I even lowered my view distance on Win 7 to 1.

 

Now I only tested it using Win XP 32 and Win 7 64, and my only evidence supporting this was the benchmark, unfortunately, so here goes.

Statistics

Average FPS: 53.05

Duration: 37.01 sec

CPU Usage: 91%

System memory usage: 72%

Video memory usage: 97%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1280 x 1024 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: Medium

Texture Filter Quality: Highest

View Distance: 10

Detail Distance: 10

 

Hardware

Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition

Service Pack 3

Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series

Video Driver version: 6.14.10.6983

Audio Adapter: Realtek HD Audio output

AMD Athlon 7750 Dual-Core Processor

 

File ID: Benchmark.cli

 

Statistics

Average FPS: 48.43

Duration: 37.39 sec

CPU Usage: 93%

System memory usage: 84%

Video memory usage: 96%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1280 x 1024 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: Medium

Texture Filter Quality: Highest

View Distance: 1

Detail Distance: 10

 

Hardware

Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate

Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate

Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series

Video Driver version: 8.14.10.685

Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio)

AMD Athlon 7750 Dual-Core Processor

 

File ID: benchmark.cli

 

Now outside GTA4 though things are a bit different, NFS Shift seems to run much smoother with Physx on Win7, on Assassins Creed I had nearly a 10FPS boost but then again I used the DX10 version and DX9 on XP. Fallout 3 stutters were reduced by a huge amount, etc.

 

Although there's another game that had a slight decrease in performance, which is Prototype, but that game is just broken(well from my experience). GRID also seems to be a bit slower on 7 64 and I actually experience slight stutters, but not much to bother the rest of the smooth gameplay.

 

But overall, Win 7 is just well, so much better, and considerably faster than Vista, heck it boots and shuts down faster than XP, I'm even thinking about using Win7 on my moms sh*ty laptop.