Sign up for a new account or log in here:
also @ TechSpot: Metro: Last Light Performance, Benchmarked
If you’re a PC gamer and still use a 32-bit processor, now might be a pretty good time to consider planning your next build on a 64-bit platform. Battlefield developer DICE posted a tweet earlier today revealing they will have Frostbite-powered games in 2013 that will only work with a 64-bit operating system.
The tweet comes from DICE rendering architect Johan Andersson, who further suggests that Windows 8 would be a great upgrade later this year for anyone still on a 32-bit version of Windows. That is, of course, if you already have a 32-bit processor. Otherwise that would need to be your first upgrade if you want to play upcoming Frostbite-powered titles.
It’s unclear exactly what titles will require a 64-bit system but it wouldn’t be unheard of to think that Battlefield: Bad Company 3, Battlefield 4 or even Mirror’s Edge 2 could all qualify. Frostbite has already been used on a number of games from EA including Medal of Honor: Warfighter and Need for Speed: The Run. Shack News points out that the only 2013 Frostbite title to be confirmed thus far is Command & Conquer: Generals 2 which could very well be a candidate.
In a related note, Steam’s Hardware & Software Survey shows that 55.87 percent of users are running Windows 7 64-bit while another 6.51 percent still use Vista 64-bit. On the flip side, 15.46 percent of gamers still use Windows XP 32-bit while more than 20 percent of Windows 7 and Vista users have a 32-bit copy of their OS.
User Comments: 32
Got something to say? Post a comment-
I'm glad DICE is pushing progress forward, so little has happend in PC gaming for the last 5 years it makes me sad
.
That's very true. I noticed that the impetus to upgrade my hardware, be it CPU or video card, has always been some game. I remember that Oblivion made me buy essentially a new computer, I upgraded my video card to run Civ V (don't judge me). If one of these "killer" titles requires 64 bits, and the game is a must have, then people will upgrade.
A improvement of 20% in speed is not going to get your average person to spend a few hundred bucks to improve their computer, as its hard to put a price on such a gradual increase for most people "20% for $300...nah, its fine now". But if you present them with a binary option of a) upgrade or b) you can't play it at all, people will probably reconsider plopping down the money and utter the phrase "I needed a new computer anyway..."
-
hold on... didnt they stop making 32 bit processors years ago? I dont even look for this information when purchasing... its just always there...
-
Puiu said:
it's about the OS. Computers with less than 4GB of RAM still sell with a 32bit OS installed because 64bit eats up a bit more ram.
Many people have 2-3 GB of ram and they only need to change the OS to make the game work. (although I'm not sure it will work at max settings)
-
"Business have only just started to move to win7, now theres win8?"
Think of Windows as what Apple and Google already do, offer newer OS for newer technologies, while keeping odler OS for existing and older hardware. Microsoft doesn't have a pure "keep only 1 OS option" on their products, they have kept XP and server 2003 alive for this reason. Likewise Windows 7 (which is now the new "XP"
will be usable and supported for many years to come; While the rest of us that like the latest and greatest Hardware & OS can play with Win8/Win9/etc to take advantage of that new features.Someone with a desktop doesn't "need" windows 8. However someone with a newer x86 slate or convertible tablet/notebook could clearly benefit from windows 8.
It's not so different than Linux, one version is consider LTS stable, other is a brand new distro or alpha quality, another distro for supporting really bleeding edge stuff.
-
<p>Yep.for today's and tomorrow's gaming desktops, we need to dump 32bit OS and also the same tried windows 95 desktop metaphor. It's almost 20yrs and I can't believe people can't evolve beyond the "start" button.</p>
It really is crazy. I guess I'm just backwards preferring to launch my app(lications) without the handholding of a full screen menu built for people too technically illiterate to understand a directory structure or mulitasking.
-
I sold an Athlon 64 3200+ to a friend and installed Windows 7 64bit just for testing, surprisingly it works well with 2Gigs of RAM, could say it was really future proof :P
My brother's PC is also an Athlon 5500+ with win 7 64bit and a 3850 AGP on it and works pretty fine
Only some atoms out there are not 64bit capable nowadays even some pentium D's have EMT64
I find the 64bit build of windows more than stable, even the crappy Vista worked a lot better in 64bit version rather than the 32bit
-
I just need weight on my weapons....just like Killzone 3 for the PS3 console
Most Popular
| Trending | Featured |
Featured on Laptops
Subscribe to TechSpot
Get free exclusive content, learn about new features and breaking tech news.