Windows 7-64 Dominates Steam

[Guest]

The 64-bit version has conquered a comfortable lead in Steam's hardware charts.

Windows 7-64 Dominates Steam : Read more

 

[adamboy64]

Yes. Go Windows 7 64-bit!!
Mind you, in retail around my area, I don't know anyone who stocks the 32-bit version of Windows 7.

"The average PC gamer runs a resolution of 1920x1080 and has 1 GB of graphics memory available"

This amazed me.. it's a stark reminder that I'm not with the times.

 

[blurr91]

Mac gamer...isn't that an oxymoron?

 

[NapoleonDK]

[citation][nom]adamboy64[/nom]...This amazed me.. it's a stark reminder that I'm not with the times...[/citation]Lol I'm in the same boat! 8800GTS 512MB and 1680x1050! XD *cowers in shame*

 

[CyberAngel]

Their game is to gamble with their money buying niche OS...just kidding, I have a Mac, 2
The Win7 was expected to be 64bit only
Think about Win 8 on ARM and a tablet with max 4GB RAM
Yes, Win 8 will also be 32-bit slim (almost embedded) and full 64-bit Ultimate
Looks the same for NT 6.3...

 

[professorprofessorson]

[citation][nom]NapoleonDK[/nom]Lol I'm in the same boat! 8800GTS 512MB and 1680x1050! XD *cowers in shame*[/citation]

No big deal. A lot of people still game at 1280x720, 1280x1024, 1360x768, 1440x900, and 1680x1050. While those numbers are nice, Steam doesn't account for the entire market out there. Out of everyone I know personally, I only know one person who even uses Steam actively, and that is just to play Half Life 2 Deathmatch. Just keep sticking to what suits you best.

 

[sandivin]

So where are all the 64-bit games?

 

[skaz]

Okay steam, now give me a few bucks towards a game for using my personal information.

 

[dragonsqrrl]

[citation][nom]blurr91[/nom]Mac gamer...isn't that an oxymoron?[/citation]
ya, pretty much.

 

[razor512]

[citation][nom]sandivin[/nom]So where are all the 64-bit games?[/citation]


there are some but they are not popular since it would mean blocking off most gamers,

you can do a 32 bit and 64 bit version of the game but it will cost more to make the game.

But there is still a benefit to 64 bit. you have access to more memory with out having to do the kernel hack, applications can also allocate more than 2 or 3GB of memory

a 64 bit compared to a 32 bit OS will allow you to do things like, install 8 or 16GB of memory, then launch a game that eats up 4GB of memory, then minimize it and open a program like photoshop and maya, do some work, then move the content to adobe aftereffects, and while it is scanning through the content, you can maximize the game and continue playing.

on a 32 bit OS this would work also but it will be really lag as windows starts using virtual memory.

PS 64 bit is needed if you are working with 1080p raw footage with a large number of layers, and it is 100% needed if you are working with RED 4k footage as a program like adobe aftereffects will need to allocate at least 4GB+ of memory just by it's self

 

[erraticfocus]

1366 * 768 - native res with AA on a 32" LCD TV is enough for me, would up the res, as I know my GTX 460 could do it, but I can't see a difference at the distance and this keeps my minimum frames extra high

 

[thegreathuntingdolphin]

Mac gamer...isn't that an oxymoron?

I believe the answer to that question is in the article:

The typical Mac gamer plays with a screen resolution of 1280x800 and uses a GeForce 9400M graphics chip with 256 MB memory.

Ya, so no then.

 

[aznguy0028]

[citation][nom]blurr91[/nom]Mac gamer...isn't that an oxymoron?[/citation]
LOL, i believe so sir.... i believe so. remember, it's all about the "experience". ;D

 

[Guest]

MAC HAS GAMES?WHEN?

 

[palladin9479]

@raxor521,

Actually games right ~now~ are bumping into the 1.8GB wall. 32 bit applications are limited to a 2GB address space, you could theoretically make it 3gb but you need to boot your OS with the /3GB option, and that can cause other issues. Since most people have no idea how to do this the game companies assume that they have a 2GB hard limit. In actuality this limit is more like 1.8GB, you need spare room for the slight expansion / contraction that happens when you load / unload things into and out of main memory. Once you pass the 1.8GB mark your application becomes noticeably unstable and you run the very real risk of trying to allocate more then 2GB of memory while loading a resource and *poof* that will generate an unmask-able exception to the name of "out of system resource". Thus game companies need to design their products to never exceed that memory limit.

This becomes pretty obvious in games like NWN2 where the game is constantly having to reload resources from disk, the game is simply too big and too resource heavy for it all to fit in that 1.8 GB of memory. It keeps the common core resources inside memory and loads / unloads module referenced resources every time you move between zones. This creates an annoying "loading" screen that can take 20~30 seconds if the next zone is rather big. This game could definitely use a 64-bit capable client that can keep multiple gigabytes of resource in memory. Developing a 64-bit executable isn't difficult, I compile 64-bit code all the time. Its just a switch you pass to the compiler. That being said if your going 64-bit you need to redo the memory management techniques of your program, else you get a 64-bit program that is trying to manage its memory footprint like a 32-bit one.

I can only imagine what newer games must be facing these days.

 

[boju]

Thanks raxor and pallandin, you’ve opened a whole new prospective for me. I had no idea games behind the scenes work like this concerning memory.

Could developers create memory setting slider as they do with video cards or is this whole different kettle of fish?

ie; Game installed, game detects bit version, game activates slider for you to adjust and on you go. 32 bit version would have this option blanked out. Possible?

 

[eklipz330]

i think win 7 64 bit is absolutely amazing, and microsoft is going to have a really tough time getting rid of win 7 and getting users to move onto windows 8... im so comfortable with win 7, it works amazingly... theyre gonna have a harder time ripping me off of legitimate win 7 than they did ripping me off of my pirated copy of win xp 32

 

[jkflipflop98]

[citation][nom]eklipz330[/nom]i think win 7 64 bit is absolutely amazing, and microsoft is going to have a really tough time getting rid of win 7 and getting users to move onto windows 8... im so comfortable with win 7, it works amazingly... theyre gonna have a harder time ripping me off of legitimate win 7 than they did ripping me off of my pirated copy of win xp 32[/citation]

Microsoft actually got it right. Win7-64 is the new WinXP.

 

[mister g]

Anybody else surprised that Win 7 topped out here? If you get a 1GB graphics card which 64-bit OS would you choose XP (hah), Vista or 7? Still if Valve has these statistics maybe they can add 64-bit games to their library soon and bring all the other game companies to shame (64-bit HL:E3 that looks and plays awesome anybody?).

 

[JOSHSKORN]

[citation][nom]NapoleonDK[/nom]Lol I'm in the same boat! 8800GTS 512MB and 1680x1050! XD *cowers in shame*[/citation]
I just upgraded last week from an 8800 GTS 320MB. That card was able to run everything, but some games like Black Ops, MW2 and Crysis 2 were choppy. I LOVE my new GTX 460 SE 1 GB. Oh, I guess I just became the 'average' gamer with a 1 GB GPU card.