View Single Post
Old 06-13-2005, 03:21 PM   #5
Rob Williams
Editor-in-Chief
 
Rob Williams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Atlantic Canada
Posts: 13,353
Default

Hey, thanks for the comments. They are exactly what I am looking for.

Firstly, I do agree with you with synthetic benchmarks. I have seen others using them around the web, so that's why I included them. I didn't expect much of a performance increase, but I stated as such. Some people believe that having a 64-Bit OS improves *everything*, and I am just stating that's not the case.

About FarCry, I do believe I mentioned in there that there wasn't much of a performance increase, because of the 64-Bit advantages. I noticed in some levels, that there is more realistic looking fog, and ground. This is why I figure the FPS is not higher. I do agree with you here.

As it stands right now, I don't see any reason for anyone to go 64-Bit, unless they already have a specific use, or need to buy an OS for a fresh computer. I wouldn't consider the price to be worth an 'upgrade' though. As for Longhorn, I am not sure either. For gamers, I'm sure it will be the WGF 1.0/2.0 that will make them want it, moreso than the 64-Bit support. Even at that time, I would be surprised if there was a good amount of 64-Bit supported software on the market.

Time will tell, I suppose.
__________________
Intel Core i7-3960X, GIGABYTE G1.Assassin 2, Kingston 16GB DDR3-2133, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 2GB
Kingston HyperX 3K 240GB SSD (OS, Apps), WD VR 1TB (Games), Corsair 1000HX, Corsair H70 Cooler
Corsair 800D, Dell 2408WFP 24", ASUS Xonar Essence STX, Gentoo (KDE 4.11. 3.12 Kernel)

"Take care to get what you like, or you will be forced to like what you get!" - H.P. Baxxter
<Toad772> I don't always drink alcohol, but when I do, I take it too far.


Rob Williams is offline   Reply With Quote