Simviation Forums

Does anyone know if there will be a 64 bit edition to the new

Yes Vista will have 32 and 64 bit versions. Don't know if Fs10 will be or not I hope so.

well with all the new eye-candy they are eludeing to i hope its 64bit enabled.....dont like slideshows

 
 I was reading on microsoft sight that the FS X was designed to work on the new vista program first .and was to use all of its capabilities. and would be able to work on xp and others second.

I suspect it will be patched for 64-bit, but you better make sure you have lots of RAM, atleast twice the recommended!

Thanks for the replies  :)

If it is 64bit you shoudnt need any more ram then a 32 bit version. 64bit is a bit step up from 32bit, it is much faster and handels data much better. If anything you will need less ram.

If it is 64bit you shoudnt need any more ram then a 32 bit version. 64bit is a bit step up from 32bit, it is much faster and handels data much better. If anything you will need less ram.

The processor will be handling twice the data, so you need twice the RAM.

although more ram is better.
the bottleneck in 32bit systems is the bus between the processor and the ram.
the ram has to wait for the last packet to reach the cpu before it can send the next and the cpu has to wait for the complete packet to arrive before it can start processing it.
{edit} and vice-versa

thats a very simplified explanation.

Is a 64 bit system actually passing around larger word lengths?  I thought this had more to do with how the processor did math.  It takes a lot fewer cycles to multiply and divide 32 bit numbers in a processor capable of 64 bits than it does in a pure 32 bit processor.  Although I'm not computer science guy so I could have that wrong...

Bits are the numbers 1 and 0. 32-bit can process 32 of these at once.  64-bit is double that.  That is double the data.

Chris_F you are right, it will take a 64-bit processor half the time to process something, because it can do twice as much.

Delta that is false. Yes the cpu can handle twice the data but your cpu does not dictate how much ram is used. If a cpu becomes faster all it means is it will end up waiting for the ram to give it data or wait for the ram to take the data. I don't know where you get that it will use more ram. The amount of ram used is dictated soley by what the hard disk puts into it. At bootup maybe 2 megs of ram is used, then as you see that Windows splash screen with the little blue bar moving that is where the OS is getting fed into the system ram(XP uses about 256 megs of ram). Then whatever else you want to run, say a game. May use 600 megs of ram. What 64bit means is a cpu can handle much more data faster, a cpu is like a network router it send the data where it needs to go. I would rather have faster ram more than more ram because thwe faster ram can keep up with the cpu's requests. The cpu only puts in what it needs/can put in. The ONLY reason we need more ram is our programs get larger, our game suse better bigger textures and engines. Our OS is filled with new features all this needs to go into the ram, a cpu does not say how much ram is needed. BTW 64bit has ended the 4 gig memory limit and the max amount of memory allowable now is I think unknown. It is a large amount though.

Delta that is false. Yes the cpu can handle twice the data but your cpu does not dictate how much ram is used. If a cpu becomes faster all it means is it will end up waiting for the ram to give it data or wait for the ram to take the data. I don't know where you get that it will use more ram. The amount of ram used is dictated soley by what the hard disk puts into it. At bootup maybe 2 megs of ram is used, then as you see that Windows splash screen with the little blue bar moving that is where the OS is getting fed into the system ram(XP uses about 256 megs of ram). Then whatever else you want to run, say a game. May use 600 megs of ram. What 64bit means is a cpu can handle much more data faster, a cpu is like a network router it send the data where it needs to go. I would rather have faster ram more than more ram because thwe faster ram can keep up with the cpu's requests. The cpu only puts in what it needs/can put in. The ONLY reason we need more ram is our programs get larger, our game suse better bigger textures and engines. Our OS is filled with new features all this needs to go into the ram, a cpu does not say how much ram is needed. BTW 64bit has ended the 4 gig memory limit and the max amount of memory allowable now is I think unknown. It is a large amount though.

Someone's been doing research.

Delta that is false. Yes the cpu can handle twice the data but your cpu does not dictate how much ram is used. If a cpu becomes faster all it means is it will end up waiting for the ram to give it data or wait for the ram to take the data. I don't know where you get that it will use more ram. The amount of ram used is dictated soley by what the hard disk puts into it. At bootup maybe 2 megs of ram is used, then as you see that Windows splash screen with the little blue bar moving that is where the OS is getting fed into the system ram(XP uses about 256 megs of ram). Then whatever else you want to run, say a game. May use 600 megs of ram. What 64bit means is a cpu can handle much more data faster, a cpu is like a network router it send the data where it needs to go. I would rather have faster ram more than more ram because thwe faster ram can keep up with the cpu's requests. The cpu only puts in what it needs/can put in. The ONLY reason we need more ram is our programs get larger, our game suse better bigger textures and engines. Our OS is filled with new features all this needs to go into the ram, a cpu does not say how much ram is needed. BTW 64bit has ended the 4 gig memory limit and the max amount of memory allowable now is I think unknown. It is a large amount though.

The compiled data has to go somewhere.  It is needed for the program so it is loaded into the RAM and virtual memory if there is a lack of RAM.  A 64-bit processor can handle data amounts twice as large as a 32-bit processor.  So yes the processor has to wait for the data.  That is why RAM is getting faster so it can keep up with these new processors.

The limit for the 64-bit processor is 16GB of RAM.  If your processor can compile a program and not fill the memory in a 32-bit environment it will fill the exact same amount in a 64-bit environment, so it will not use twice the memory.

Data is added and erased from memory however the data that could not fit on the RAM is put in a que to go into the RAM, just like normal.  The processor will continue to compile the data and put it back into the RAM for use.  The data chunks are larger in a 64-bit processor, the data is sent back to the RAM for use by the program.  Whilst this is happening it continues to process the data.  Filling the RAM up with twice as much compiled data in a set time.  Then more uncompiled data is sent to the RAM.  In a set amount of time the processor will fill the memory with twice as much compiled data which needs to be used so it can be overwritten by new uncompiled data.  Hence a bottleneck occurs.  Yes faster RAM will help a lot, because it will speed up this process or using and erasing the compiled data.  However RAM is not fast enough yet.  The launch of DDR3 next year will probably clear this problem up.

If you look at how Windows Vista works you will see that it requires twice as much RAM for the 64-bit version than 32-bit.

Edit:  It is assuming that the 64-bit processor is running a 64-bit app, and the 32-bit processor a 32-bit app.

I love reading heated arguments about the inner workings of the computer's brain... ...!

(My brain is amazingly simple in comparison!)...LOL...!

I never had any problems with understanding the inner workings of my dear old 48K Sinclair Spectrum computer, using the lovely Zilog Z80, 8-bit processor.... ...!
In those early days (1980+) I programmed mostly in pure Machine-Code language....
...a lost art nowadays... ...!
(Followed by the Commodore Amiga 500/1200 16-bit computer).

Paul...64-bit....WOW!...what's that?...... ... ...!
LOL...!