AMD64 32-bit vs 64-bit Shadow Ops

[cenourattis]

2005???

[adamx20]

The difference is amazing! Now my eyes are bleeding.

[Masterwho10]

Are you ready? Uhhhh no not with this shitty quality!

[xXeMiLlXxPL]

this vid makes a single pixel 10x bigger :D

[matteuklol]

looks like my dieing HD5850

[TheBenjiAk]

fake

[DeadlyInertia]

Which pixels are the shadows at?

[hiphoper19881988]

What a fuck? The count of textures should be choosen by the FSB-bandwidth? That is false! The count of textures is choosen by the graphicsmemory!

[Bublesize]

Yah i cant see shit. Wthf? Couldnt you convert to better one?

[Bublesize]

Yeah quality i awesome. For dumb shit i am ironic

[greatgnomex]

64 bits improve graphics 'cause the amount of transfer , but with this video is difficult to see the diference. Sorry my english

[Aeon333Flux]

it was uploaded in 2005 but made in 1985. he tried to show the difference between atari 32 and comodorre 64.

i always believed comodorre was a way better than atari.

good job man.

did you upgrade your PC yet?? or still using atari ?

[VidForUgUys]

The video quality is bad but is 5 years ago... Wat do u guys expect?

[HappyFoxIsHappy]

I don't see how a larger integer would make better quality.

You can definitely get better performance and stability by utilizing > 3.25gb if it's available. If the game was written to take advantage of of the larger integers, then it'll be more efficient too, but it won't have better detail just because of a larger integer.

[Clankl33t]

2005 ... wow 5 years

[XSpaceStormX]

@Clankl33t AMD64(x2) from 2006 can still run all new games.

[sagat1916120]

2005? fuck this is old

[TikiShootah]

cant see shit with vid quality

[ULT1MATEGAMER]

@TikiShootah this was made i 2005

[k3nzh1n082]

lol are they bluffing us for objects and ambiances comparisons you can see it clearly that 64bit is seems high or maybe full setting to making it look fantastic while 32bit is like low? as i know for bit comparison is for rich in textures,lighting, and shadowing, or they telling us that 64bit can create graphic shaders its own @_@'

[cozymonk]

the video quality is so poor, it's hard to tell the difference. but i can see it.

[Gryzli77]

LOL :)

[MasterDOOM2010]

Nice Video ! AMD - ATI Radeon Best Choice !

[GGigabiteM]

The only thing that compiling an engine against 64 bit libraries is going to do is give you more address space and throughput in data on the CPU, it has nothing to do with graphics. If games look drastically different between 32 and 64 bit executables, the developer purposely crippled the game to make it look like 64 bit is better.

If you compile an unmodified 32 bit engine against 64 bit libraries, you will usually only get a 5-10% gain in performance.

[GlobalMusicStage]

The only difference in any game i see is UT3.

Xp 32, on a i7, the fps isnt as high.

I know, the gpu handles it but the cpu takes some of it too. a tiny tiny bit.

its only a 5-10 gap

[nelizmastr]

why use an i7 and windows xp. xp is for wusses

[Protoking]

Every single difference shown looks like it could be done on 32bit as well.

I LOL'D when they said going to 64BIT would give you better shadows and lighting. That's the GPU.

Atari must have purposely disabled certain effects on 32BIT CPU'S for marketing purposes.

[elitechad255]

shadow ops sucks.

[sergeu78]

I only understand when compare Crysis on settings in this year.

[redrevyol2]

I can see the difference, you can see more detailed textures in the game. And a bit more smoother too, I think about the smoothness.

[AggroHearts]

video and sound quality is too bad to see a difference.

[R4Zy3L]

I know the Amd 64 is not a bad procesor cos i have one too but do u get same features on a Quad Core 64?

[lnitialDrift]

u can hardy tell with video quality, but the 64Bit game detail far better than 32Bit.

btw as of 2008 there are very few game out there that support 64Bit OS...time will just tell...

[gerarman17]

better quality please

[TheSpaceballs]

That is incorrect. All geometry for your textures begins in the CPU with the geometry processing in the FPU. The FPU on x64 has double the registries and functions that the 32-bit has... and therefore can render in ways x32 simply cannot. It's all in the architecture... or don't you forget how the 64-bit Alpha was the CPU of choice for graphic rendering back in the 90's... probably before your noobie time.

[sattanhellsing]

Sorry but .. 32 bit running with a old grafic card VS 64bit running on the latest grafic card ...and you got the latest fakest video ever made !! well done !!!

Detail in game are made only with GPU and not CPU or Windows System (32 or 64) ..so please rename the title of this video with ..OLDER GRAPHIC CARD VS NEWER GRAFIC CARD !.

[sattanhellsing]

and if there is more detail on 64 it must be because they just add them ..but since 64bit game are running as better on 32 bit we can say thats is all bullshit !

[Gryzli77]

gra na 100% wymiata pozdrawiam

[nottafanboy6954]

AMD has the upper hand as far as pipelines but intel has it where it really counts L1 and L2 cache. I am dissapointed with AMD's L1-4 cache in comparison to the MUCH wider 2 cache 2 pipeline Intel quads.

[lnitialDrift]

ya, i have be thinking why don't AMD just increases their L1$2cache if they do that it will dramatically increase their cpu performance. why stuck at 64,265,512

[Karpens16]

What kind of useless video?

If you're going to post a crappy version of a "this one looks better video" it'd be better not to post at all.

[natharuk]

Yeah, of course, as if detailed environments weren't possible with a 32-bit system...

[thesimpsonator64]

all games are mad for 32bit systems arent they?

[mattmonster125]

AMD is way better than intel

[DoYouFeelTheTrance]

What's best, 32 or 64?

[wilsonacerSC]

from a RAM standpoint 64 bit can recongize way more than 4 GB of ram...so if you're in that situation go there.

[Luky1Jay]

32, 64 is buggy. Especially 64bit vista.

[theclaw195]

LOL

Luky1Jay is the smartest....living, or nonliving thing ever.

[Luky1Jay]

....?

[Squirelll]

i've never had AMD. is it better than intel?

[furz1]

yes

[masterchief3k]

If you compare the top classes, such as quad cores, Intel wins. Don't listen to anything but benchmarks. Like furz1 is a fanboy for AMD, i like AMD but still, intel is kicking their ASS.

[theclaw195]

I'm a fanboy for AMD, but I can still admit intel is kicking their ass.

Don't make stereotypes :P

[Jaydrummer92]

i cant tell the diffrent's:\

[DeadFredVideo]

What games are there that are actually 64bit (apart from the one in this video)

I haven't heard much of it in the gaming world?

:)

[croclol]

xD  ,

[jacobc666]

amd has a 4 core for desktops now to

[HKG36E]

could someone help me with a sound problem. it keeps repeating the last sentence @_@

[koconene]

idiot, amd has an 4 core processor, but now is for servers only.

[golem72002]

both companies have not released on die quad core's. YET

that may change soon.

[golem72002]

right thats why it benchmarks in the 11,000+ range with 2900 Xt or a 8800 GTX.

[andrebrait]

A 6600Q alone, and two 6600E in the same mainboard are, teorically, the same thing, in terms of performance.

[andrebrait]

and a single 6600E is...? Maybe a Dual core, am I right?

If it has two cores togheter, in a single die, it's a DUAL CORE

If it has four cores togheter, in a single die, it's a QUAD CORE

If it has four core, in two dies, it's NOT A QUAD CORE, but what I would call "Double Dual Core" or "Dual Dual Core"

[NeOXG64]

thats a OCTA (8) core AMD is relesing it in the new AMD AM2+ socket n L1 (1207)

[andrebrait]

no, man,I think you took me worng.

I mean four core in total, distributed in two dies, each with two cores, not two dies with four cores each.

[NeOXG64]

ok yerp i got u now, yer

thats what Intel has done so.. what i said is what AMD have done the the L1 sok with 2x Phoem CPUS each with 4core n 2 dies each, becuz theres 2 phical CPUs each with 2x die n 4x core thats octo (8) core in total?

[andrebrait]

Well, each Phenom X4 has one die with four cores (that's why AMD call it the 1st native quad core), so you get an eight core machine in a dual socket L1 mobo, but not an Octa Core, because they're not in the same package, but it'll deliver Octa core performance coz HT 3.0 is very, veeeeery fast. With Intel's FSB, it would be useless, since FSB is slow when compared to HT. You would just have another bottleneck.

[andrebrait]

I don't know why, but Intel announced a C2D using FSB1600 just after the launch of FSB1333. They're raising the voltage (from 1.25V to 1.28V) and they'll not be compatible with the currrent X38/P35 chipsets. This sund like madness, doesn't? I think that's coz nobody tested Phenom X4 (wich is known to be slower than Core 2 Quad) using Crossfire or SLI! THG said HT 3.0 would be great for MULTI-CARD GRAPHICS SOLUTION!

[andrebrait]

I think AMD was thinking on it when they created Phenom X4! With Intel's FSB1333, the advantage of using CF or SLI is none. With FSB1600 (very antecipated) Intel will have some chance to keep with HT 3.0 in the Multi GPU arena. Well.... I mean.... Ok, they'll not have any chance.

[andrebrait]

Remember: Spider platform was designed thinking in a Multi GPU solution! Up to Four Cards in CrossFireX and PCI-E 2.0! This, Plus HT 3.0, eliminate the main bottlenecks!

Let's see what happen when they Play with Phenom X4 and R 3870 in CF. =D

[NeOXG64]

mm ok good to know all this, i build PC as a hobby 4 friends n stuff and i always just like AMD, my svr is a Q6600 tho lol.

But yer techno is just moving why 2 fast :S

like 12months ago you say you got 4gig RAM its like WOW n now its like meh i got 8gig thats just 1 exsample.

[andrebrait]

Yeah, man

2 yrs ago, if you got 2Gb of RAM, you had a monster, not a PC. 1Gb was more than recommended for gamers. A dual core CPU was a WOW! (And expensive). Today, that's the acceptable minimum setup for a gamer.

[andrebrait]

Yeah. And Core 2 Quad is quad core since Pentium D is dual core. THEY'RE NOT QUAD CORE. The're simply a crappy Dual-dual-core. So, AMD has Quad cores too: AMD QuadFX platform. AMD will release TRUE quad cores this year .

[ThePope015]

Q6600 FTW

[slayersaves1212]

i had an intel pentium 4 processor for a while on my pc with 2 gb of ram and dual sli video cards i just swaped out the motherboard and bought an amd64 x2 +4600 and it kill's the intel chip as far as speed and performance.

[person12345abcd6789]

AMD is sweet

[VonCarlsson]

Not going back to AMD? AMD rules intel whit the new brisbande core whit 65nm prossesing technoligy and the new K8L architecture Brisbane whill rule Intel like the athlon 64 did whit the pentium 4 in 2002-2005. AMD is always the best choice only becouse intel is 2 months faster then AMD dosent make AMD bad.

[MrHairyNutz]

isnt sony playstations cell processor suppose to be like 3 to 10 times better then any AMD or intel processor?

[JiggaJagga]

May be, but unlike a PC it's stuck with the same (potentially limited) graphics hardware..

[ChunkeyNoodles]

I dont care about marketshare or any of that. I have an x6800 and it pwns faces.. regardless of how intel is doing vs AMD. Also, this vid looks terrible.. hard to notice any difference between the two

[Gokunianon]

+ falso imposible otra cosa es que uno sea de 32 y otro 64 a que en un juego la calidad grafica la bajen y en el de 64 la suban para que se vea mas cosas, el farcry por ejemplo ay un parche para los amds 64 igual que en el cod 2doom 3 quake 4 por ejemplo ay para el HT de Intel pero el juego es el mismo.

[BlackCow99]

They should use a game that has more particle effects like FEAR. Even heavy Battle Field 2 moments bog down slower processers a lot.

[sthersh]

Ran FEAR on Core 2 Duo Extreme with upgraded GeForce graphics cards. Not goin back to AMD.

[BlackCow99]

Thats stupid to say that because you bought an expensive Intel that you will never go to AMD. What if AMD comes out with something way better in the future.

[sthersh]

Yeah it was expensive. It's fast. Really fast. Something's gonna be faster three years from now. I'm not worried about what I'm buying then. I am NOT going to hang onto it forever. You still using three year old stuff? I seriously doubt it.

[BlackCow99]

Yes but what I am saying is that its stupid to say you are never going to go back to AMD. Amd is still decent.

[sthersh]

If Intel wants my business, they need to pay attention to me. There is nothing wrong with AMD. Look at the marketshare they've grabbed. I like the fact there is healthy competition. That means innovation. Right now we have dual core processing. We are still in the stone age! I can't wait for what's coming. You know it is. So do I. Do you think for a moment that if for a moment, there was no real competition either side would be pushing the development envelope?

[JiggaJagga]

Good point, sthersh. Competition is good, and people have very selective memories when covering over the cracks of Intel products with Core 2 Duo.

[JiggaJagga]

sthersh, which Core 2 did you get? I assume you got the graphics at the same time, which could also have a positive impact the top-end AMD rigs.

[GranulatedThingy]

yeh..great way of highlighting a difference in graphics detail...bung a video on YouTube !!

[vbscript16]

yea..graphics might have been optimised..but i tink 64-bit does have an effect..but AMD sure rocks..n Intel sure sucks..

[calvinyuen115]

ya amd pwns.. but intel came out core 2/core2extreme which pwned amd fx ..etc..

[JiggaJagga]

Game doesn't look 64-bit optimised; it looks like they just upped the graphics detail. When 64-bit specific titles come out then the difference will be more dramatic rather than 32-bit apps patched to run on 64-bit CPU's (i.e. Far Cry). The same applies to Intel BTW :)

[zeto007]

they don't need to be patched, they run on WoW64