64bit Client for HL2 = 30% Better Performance?

[ImJacksAmygdala]

Is there going to be a 64bit client for half-life 2?

Gabe Newell: Yes.

Will Half-Life 2 have any special optimizations for 64-bit processors?

Gabe Newell: I would expect we would run about 30% faster clock for clock comparing an Athlon running 32-bit code and an Athlon 64 running 64-bit code. Release of the 64-bit client will be gated on MS releasing 64-bit Windows.

Will Half-Life 2 support Hyper-Threaded CPU's?

Gabe Newell: Hyper threaded CPUs attempt to extract thread-level parallelism, as opposed to traditional pipelined architectures which attempt to take advantage of instruction level parallelism. Hyper threading can be somewhat unpredictable in terms of the performance impact, as you can, in some cases, run slower.

Implementing and maintaining a "deeply" multi-threaded version of Source would be a pain (i.e. multi-threading the renderer). Implementing a hacky version (e.g. having a discreet physics thread or running the client and server in different threads) is something we may do depending upon how much bandwidth we have before we ship. Right now we don't get nearly as much bang for the buck working on hyper threading as we do on other optimizations. That may change as we run out of things to optimize.

64-bits, in contrast, is a one-time cost and is fairly simple to take advantage of. It's a huge win for tools as it not only gets more work done per instruction, but it also gets us past the current memory limitations, which are a problem for us today on tools.

Distributed computing is harder than hyper threading but it has the potential to increase performance by a huge amount (8X on our tools) as opposed to hyper threading (30%). All of our tools are going to a distributed approach.

So the taxonomy looks like this:

- general algorithmic optimization (general good thing to do)
- DX9 optimization (big gains, long term direction)
- 64-bits (not that hard, solves memory problem as well as performance gains)
- hyper threading (hard initial cost, on-going code maintenance cost, limited unpredictable performance gains, benefits in multiprocessor environments as well)
- distributed computing (hardest to do, biggest potential gains, great for tools, may be great for servers, not sure how it works with clients)

This is the second game company I have heard say this about next gen games and 64bit processing. (Epic Games said the same thing) It's too bad Microsoft is dragging their feet on releasing a 64bit OS! I've got $2500 to spend on a system specifically for DX9.0 games and I was waiting for the Alderwood chipset, the Prescott, and the new ATI PCIexpress cards that come out in Q2 of 2004 about the same time HL2 hits the shelves.

Now I'm hearing better and better things about the AMD 64 bit chips and not so good things about the Prescott. I need to do more research into the AMD chipset roadmaps that will have PCIexpress, but I do know I'm waiting untill both AMD and Intel go to their new sockets after Q1 of 2004.

I hope Micro$oft gets their 64bit OS released in time so that Windows 64bitXP and all the DX9.0 games can be properly benchmarked to compare the performance gains between 32bit and 64bit processing. I'm most interested in the benchmarks for HL2. It would be great if M$ got it out in Q1 of 2004 so the 64bit ball ges rolling enough to make a good judgment on performance gains by the time HL2 hits the shelves.

I was set on going Intel Alderwood with the Prescott, but now I'm not to sure....

It's great that Gabe provided this information. We know it's coming, we know Valve is waiting for the M$ 64bit OS to release the 64bit client. Gabe says that the Source engine will benifit from a 64bit archetecture while at the same time Valve will not focus on HT optimizations for Intel processors. The AMD 64bit chips sound like they are more suited for gaming applications when I hear game companies say things like this. I just havn't seen the benchmarks to prove it yet, because of Micro$oft!

What do you guys think? Am I missing something? Which chips archetecture is going to provide the best performance based on what you have heard? Which will run cooler? How will the 64bit OS factor in on performance loss or gains? When will AMD release a 64bit chipset that supports PCIexpress? What are the positves and negatives for having a memory controller on the chip? Will Prescott have 64bit elements? Will the Prescott run with M$64bitXP?

Those are the questions I really need answers too!

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/chipsets/display/20031128185913.html

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/chipsets/display/20031127132219.html

 

[Majestic XII]

Intel is warmer than the AMD, thats what i heard. Intel got some heat problems with the new processors.

I think the athlon64 3000+ is a great processor, its cheap, its 64bits and its almost as fast as 3200+ but for a cheaper price. Can't be better.

I think AMD will be nr 1 for a time now. I think we need some changes, and someone to hold the prices down.

AMD is cheap and good for games, go with amd, thats what im doing.

 

[koopa]

I'm waiting for the 64-bit AMD platforms too (like you, I'm going to sit tight until the new socket format). It's all really dependent on the release of Windows XP though - IMHO, there's really no point buying a 64-bit machine until your chosen OS supports it - and even if it is in beta now, I don't know of any official release date. This year sometime, is that right?

Your questions at the bottom are really good questions that, unfortunately, hardly anyone knows the answer to yet

All I know is that I wouldn't buy a brand new machine right now.

 

[mrchimp]

For that kind of money you could build a athalon FX system, which would be faster than the P4 EE in 32bit never mind 64bit. There are actually some benchmarks that have been taken in 64-bit Linux enviroments that show an increase in performance for the 32-bit version of UT2003.

 

[Sprafa]

What do you mean ?? Hasn't 64-bit Linux come out already!!

 

[Majestic XII]

What do you mean ?? Hasn't 64-bit Linux come out already!!

It been out for a while now... but a lot of people dont use Linux.

 

[mrchimp]

I mean people have compiled the 64-bit version of the Linux kernel and ran UT2003 in it on a athalon64. They have also compiled 64-bit versions of various programs and got some reasonable speed increases.

 

[ImJacksAmygdala]

Will HL2 run natively on Linux?

Gabe Newell: No, not the client.

Are there any plans to add Linux support in the future?

Gabe Newell: No.

So we are stuck waiting on Micro$oft as they blunder their way to longhorn in 2005. I hope they get something out for 64bit in q1 of 2004!

 

[crabcakes66]

just wait.


Dont buy untill the next wave of DX9 games start going gold.

seems alot of people are pissed at valve becuase they upgraded banking on a fall release.

wrong forum btw.

 

[ImJacksAmygdala]

just wait.


Dont buy untill the next wave of DX9 games start going gold.

seems alot of people are pissed at valve becuase they upgraded banking on a fall release.

wrong forum btw.

I don't think its the wrong forum. The point of this thread is not HL2 rumors and speculation. This thread is based on the printed words of Gabe Newell and where technology is today, and whats been posted on where it will be by the time HL2 is released. So people can try to grasp the benifits of one over the other. Gabe's words are a serious shock to anyone that just updated their system based on a fall release.

 

[ray_MAN]

I think he means Hardware forum.

 

[ImJacksAmygdala]

I think he means Hardware forum.

How is the 64bit client hardware? I see what you mean, but I wouldn't have put half as much effort in quoting sources if I was going to put something in that forum. I wanted as many people as possible to read Gabes words all put together relating to the 64bit client to get a discusion going about the 64bit clients performance increases over the 32bit client. It just happens to be full of hardware talk because it relys on new hardware. How would the question "Will it be sold separetly as HL2 64bit Edition?" fit in the hardware forum?

 

[OCybrManO]

How is the 64bit client hardware?

It's not... but it is software.

"Hardware, Software & Troubleshooting
Hardware and Software talk in here."

Honestly, I think it should stay in this forum... since it is directly related to HL2.

 

[ImJacksAmygdala]

This is what I am able to gather so far about what the enthusiast level consumer will be able to get during Q2 of 2004 when HL2 is released.

AMD
Chip-AMD Athlon 64 FX processor, 1MB L2 cache, dual-channel memory controller, Cool’n’Quiet technology, made at 90nm SOI nodes. Registered memory no longer required. Core-clocks 2.60GHz+ 3600+-3800+
Motherboard- ATI IXP400- 4 Serial ATA-150 ports, Parallel ATA-100/133 support, 8 USB 2.0 ports, AC’97 audio .

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20030822080030.html
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20031212131528.html
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/chipsets/display/20031128185913.html
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64-3000_3.html


Intel
Chip- Prescott- http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20031015125924.html
Motherboard- Alderwood
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/chipsets/display/20031217135321.html
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/chipsets/display/20031106124733.html




Its now known that ATI has been working closely with Intel on the PCIexpress standard and I am putting my money on the ATIexpress R423 "LOKI" project.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/display/20030916161930.html


We can only hope that microsoft gets their 64bit OS released by Q2, and the future is starting to look brighter though. AMD is set to announce on the 6th of Jan that it is releasing its 3400+ chip that is supposed to directly compete with Intels Prescott 3.4ghz processor. With AMD pressing forward with good response from the market using 64bit chips, it may spur M$ to respond faster with its 64bit OS. Intel is also set to make an announcement shortly after AMD, but it is yet unclear what it exaclty is. Intel is left with a gap that AMD is ready to fill with the 3400+ and Intels Prescott is nowhere to be found. Intel can only respond with a Northwood 3.4ghz at this time.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=13397

Regardless the clear winners so far are ATI's R423 and Valves HL2 set to be released around the same time. I wouldn't even be the least bit suprised if the R423 comes bundled with HL2 to promote the new PCIexpress standard.

If Gabe is right the 64bit market may come around just in time for HL2 and AMD's SanDiego/ATI IXP400 comb may offer significant gains over Intels Alderwood/Prescott combo. It would also seem that Intels HT isn't all that its cracked up to be in the gaming market causing gaming enthusiast to once again flock to AMD.

It seems more likely that the 64bit market may be ready for the release of HL2. If this is truly the case it would seem that it would be madness for gaming enthusiast not to build a system based on 64bit. Hopefully the benchmarks are out before the release of HL2. I would also recommend those to wait untill HL2 actually hits the shelves before upgrading so we don't have a repeat of the 2.4C/Canterwood fiasco. This is not to say that those systems won't handle HL2, but a 30% performance increase going to 64bit cannot be ignored if that is truly what the benchmarks show. If I'm going to build a system based on DX9.0 games, it is becoming a very real possiblility that the greater performance is on the AMD side of the house. Although don't dismiss Intell yet either because its starting to come to light that they too infact of been dabbling with 64bit projects and have yet to say a word about it. This could be for fear of driving buisness to AMD that already has 64bit solutions on the market ramped to 3400+.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20031027151409.html

Things are definetly heating up folks, stay tuned.

If we assume that 64bit technology will be hear at the HL2 release how will Valve package the 64bit client? Will it be stand alone or will it be in the same bundle as the 32bit client? I hope it isn't a stand alone because that would suck for those that already have Athon64s and are just waiting for Micro$oft so they can update to 64bit processing. They should be able to buy one box and play the 32bit client untill they can fully upgrade and then install the 64bit client.

Is this how you guys see things? Am I missing anything here?

 

[OCybrManO]

If we assume that 64bit technology will be hear at the HL2 release how will Valve package the 64bit client? Will it be stand alone or will it be in the same bundle as the 32bit client? I hope it isn't a stand alone because that would suck for those that already have Athon64s and are just waiting for Micro$oft so they can update to 64bit processing. They should be able to buy one box and play the 32bit client untill they can fully upgrade and then install the 64bit client.

Well, I would imagine that you could download a 64-bit update through Steam somehow if MS's 64-bit OS isn't available when HL2 ships.

 

[ImJacksAmygdala]

Well, I would imagine that you could download a 64-bit update through Steam somehow if MS's 64-bit OS isn't available when HL2 ships.

I'm afraid it doesn't work that way. I don't claim to be an OS coding guru, but I believe it takes a 64bit OS to use 64bit applications including games. That means that AMD64 users will have to wait for Micro$oft to release a 64bit OS to get the 64bit functionality out of their chips for HL2 since Gabe said they won't support Linux clients. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Epsi]

I'm afraid it doesn't work that way. I don't claim to be an OS coding guru, but I believe it takes a 64bit OS to use 64bit applications including games. That means that AMD64 users will have to wait for Micro$oft to release a 64bit OS to get the 64bit functionality out of their chips for HL2 since Gabe said they won't support Linux clients. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I think he meant that once Microsoft get WinXP64 out the door, Valve can use Steam to push a 64-bit HL2 client to everyone who wants it.

 

[ImJacksAmygdala]

Hmm I see your point. I think it would be a great way to distrubute 2 clients of the same game and save a bunch of money getting a 64bit client out the door and to the customer. After all Valve and the customers only care about the CDkey anyway. Valve most likely just wants to ensure that they get X amount of money per CDkey and they could care less which client the customer is using. That makes the most sense.

I'm starting to hear that Windows XP64 is going to be released soon, but that it is horribly stripped down of features and as buggy as Windows Millennium on a bad day. It wouldn't surprise me if Micro$oft screwed the pooch on this one and made another WinME just to get a product out the door. What I might end up doing is making a dual boot configuration to play the HL2 64bit client and a few other games only. And use WinXpPro 32bit for all other current applications. I just don't know if a service pack will come out to accomidate a PCIexpress graphics card...

For all you OS gurus out there is it possible to make a dual boot configuration using the current WinXp Pro 32bit and the WinXP 64bit? The 64bit chips can handle either and I know that the WinXP 64bit beta is supposed to handle both 32 and 64, but if it does truly turn out to be buggy I'd rather just use it for gaming purposes and then switch over to a current build of WinXp pro 32 that I know is fairly stable. What do you recommend?

If this is true I doubt we will see a stable 64bit Windows OS untill Longhorn in 2005.

 

[mrchimp]

You will be able to dual boot them, they shouldn't effect each other.

 

[Asus]

If the support and backing is there, 64bit gaming should be interesting in 2004.
HT does have some problems when both threads do not share resources well or when there is too much overhead for the application. I'd love to see a review, this spring/summer, based on MS OS games 64bit vs 32bit and compared with Intels P4 prescott (HT)...benchmarks and all.
It is sort of surprising that Intel is actually rapidly implementing all of these new technologies in 2004 (PCI Express/DDR2/BTX). This really isn't like them but competition might have something to do with it. BTX will be a global thing, all the platforms should adopt it. DDR2 Intel should catch on first but the rest will later. PCI Express I'm not sure, have not heard much on adoption. The statements coming from most of the manufactures on the adoption of PCI Express somewhat pale compared to the publicity on the statments coming from Intel and ATI.

AMD is ahead right now and all are waiting for Intel to respond if they can. They could get a 3.4ghz P4 out but most likely not a Prescott. They will put out a 3.4ghz prescott sooner or later but they need to still get enough power to the socket before they can clock higher on that core. Heat disapation is a problem but might be solved by putting a big chunk of copper on it. BTX formfactor should help Intels cooling problems.

From the things they changed going to P4 Northwood core to Prescott the performance will be better on some apps and worse on others. The changes that affect performance for the worse (longer pipeline / latencies) are there to allow for higher clock speeds. PCI express and ddr2 are what Intel is really counting on for 2004. Prescott is just the filler before Tejas.

The thing is, if AMD can switch to 90nm smoothly, switch to DDR2 eventually and have enough 64bit support through OS/Drivers/Programs by years end then they will be the more attractive platform. Their hypertransport (up/down) links and low latency onboard memory controller will become even more of a weapon as the core clocks increase.

 

[mrchimp]

http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1941

Thats interesting.

 

[Asus]

Just recently there have been some really good articles and comments on Prescott @ Acehardware.com
Article 1
Article 1's comments page

Article 2
Article 2's comments page

 

[ImJacksAmygdala]

I wish we could see and test the difference between benchmarks of HL2 running in 32bit and 64bit for both the 3000+ and 3400+ AMD chips. If what Gabe says holds water the 3400+ running HL2 in 64bit will outperform a Athlon64 FX and a Intel 3.4ghz running in 32bit. The only difference is that the Intel chip doesn't have the option of which client you can use. I wish we could see those benchmarks. It would be sweet if Valve would release the HL2 benchmark utility and someone with the Windows XP64 beta did some benchamarks using the cheapest 64bit chip (3000+) and the chip that gives you the best performances for your dollar, the 3400+.

I'm going to wait for the new socket 64bit chips (most likely AMD unless Intel has some huge surprise 64bit chip called Yamill coming out soon) and some decent reviews of Windows XP64. By the time that stuff comes around, PCIexpress will be here aswell with dual DDR2 550+. I'll put all that in a Lian Li PC-61 and slap in a pair of Raptors in RAID 0 and a Audigy2 ZS. Yep that is how I want to build a DX9 gaming machine for HL2, DOOM3, and HALO2. Hopefully ATI and Valve bundle HL2 in with PCIexpress graphics cards to advertise and gain exceptance of the new connectiviy. I also like the fact that ATI and Intel worked together to create PCIexpress and ATI has already proven they know how to build a DX9.0 card. I just need to figure out what chipset and what motherboard to get.

I wonder what kind of benchmarks a system like that would score on HL2??? Over 100fps with 4XAA and 1024x768?? Over 100FPS with all the bells and whistles turned up??? I think it might....

 

[The Dark Elf]

Ok this thread has drifted into simply Hardware talk so I'm moving it.

 

[Asus]

What part of HL2 or future DX9 demanding games will benefit from 64bit or HT?
I bet physics would be aided by 64bit. Take less usage from the CPU and depending on the use, improve precision. Larger maps and better multiplayer connections with more players on a server?
Thats right, I sure hope we have better connections and larger multiplayer count and maps with 64bit servers. For the client side, it should beable to keep the detail of some of the higher detailed games out there but expand the environment further.

HT would beable to help with physics and some demanding aspects of gaming but it is extremely tricky to code for the platforms. As gabe said, the performance wouldn't be as great and it doesn't look like it would be worth the trouble.

64bit should help with all of the HL2 creation content as well. Mod creaters probably would get a lot of use out of it.

Spectrum uses WinXP X64 and talks about his experiences @ AMDzone forums

 

[ImJacksAmygdala]

Yep last time I put any effort into generating a discussion on the words of Gabe Newell on this forum. If I wanted to just talk hardware I would have gone to a real hardware site. This thread must cover the bases of future hardware so that the less informed can then talk about what it might mean for a 64bit client to be released, when we can actually run it, and the true impact of what Gabes statment means to the expected performance increase based on the benchmarks that have just been released under 32bit. The fact that you thought this thread was only about hardware confirms in my mind the reality that only a few people here know the true impact of what Gabes statment means for the future of PC gaming. Only a few of us has the foresight to see the significance of Gabes statment of a 30% performance increase.

Sadly I highly doubt that the hardware forum on halflife2.net has the volume of knowledgeable readers to net the few people that have experience enough to talk about how 64bit clients impact PC gaming and more importantly HL2.

Thanks for your lack of foresight, this is the last time I put any effort into a thread on this forum. I'll stick to forums that know what this means, but unfortunately may not have a huge HL2 fanbase. I'm not trying to be rude, but I want you to understand that this is not intended to be hardware specific and putting it there almost surely kills the discussion. Maybe this thread is just too premature for the average HL2 fan and or halflife2.net forum moderator, but mark my words by the end of the year it will be considered the new norm to game under a 64bit client. Both Valve and Epic games have already stated this, and very few people see the implications of it. It's gunna be a collective gasp from the entire gaming community when that 30% performance increase that Gabes talking about shows up on the first benchmark.

Do you think a community member would bring up the idea that the HL2 client might be released through Steam if it were in the hardware forum? I doubt it...

Read Asus's post above if you think this thread only has anything to do with hardware. I'm actually very dissappointed Fenric. Out of all of Gabes statments in halflife2.net's new Valve Speaks section, this statement from Gabe has the most impact on HL2 and the future of PC gaming in general. Epic created a 64bit client for UT2003, but AMD had not yet released any mainstream 64bit chips nor did Windows have a OS ready to go. This year will certaily be a different story for Valve with HL2's 64bit client.

 

[ImJacksAmygdala]

What part of HL2 or future DX9 demanding games will benefit from 64bit or HT?
I bet physics would be aided by 64bit. Take less usage from the CPU and depending on the use, improve precision. Larger maps and better multiplayer connections with more players on a server?
Thats right, I sure hope we have better connections and larger multiplayer count and maps with 64bit servers. For the client side, it should beable to keep the detail of some of the higher detailed games out there but expand the environment further.

HT would beable to help with physics and some demanding aspects of gaming but it is extremely tricky to code for the platforms. As gabe said, the performance wouldn't be as great and it doesn't look like it would be worth the trouble.

64bit should help with all of the HL2 creation content as well. Mod creaters probably would get a lot of use out of it.

Spectrum uses WinXP X64 and talks about his experiences @ AMDzone forums

I guess I will just have to go off topic for the hardware forum Fenric and raise the question of how a 64bit client will affect the Source engines netcode compared to the 32bit client. The decreased memory latency will definatley have an affect on all cpu reliant processes such as AI, but I wonder how WinXp 64 will affect online play...

 

[Asus]

It should have similar netcode with maybe some small improvments in speed. I would think 64bit would just allow for more. More envirionment, more players, more detail without really increasing latency. The actual decreased latency has more to with the design of the Athlon 64/Opteron rather than 64bit I think.

It's interesting that that guy running a version of WinXP X86-64 has it up and running pretty well.
He should grab a Nvidia FX gfx card to see how their 64bit drivers are. It seems that he has it running pretty darn stable even if it is still beta.

acehardware did some pretty good 64bit benchmarks right when the Athlon64 came out.
Link
Here is a quick article on 2004, 64bit performance and the adoption of 64bit.

 

[ImJacksAmygdala]

It should have similar netcode with maybe some small improvments in speed. I would think 64bit would just allow for more. More envirionment, more players, more detail without really increasing latency. The actual decreased latency has more to with the design of the Athlon 64/Opteron rather than 64bit I think.

It's interesting that that guy running a version of WinXP X86-64 has it up and running pretty well.
He should grab a Nvidia FX gfx card to see how their 64bit drivers are. It seems that he has it running pretty darn stable even if it is still beta.

acehardware did some pretty good 64bit benchmarks right when the Athlon64 came out.
Link
Here is a quick article on 2004, 64bit performance and the adoption of 64bit.

Thanks for linking that AMD forum Asus! I think I will post this over there. I think the audience there is more suited to this kind of information.

 

[Antigo]

There is even a 64-bit gaming test before Half-life2 releases. Far Cry, also a next-gen shooter also has a 64-bit client. Chris Natsuume, CEO, even claims that the 64-bit client will look a little bit better than the 32-bit client. The scheduled release is 26 March. Ok, i know there will not be a WinXP 64-bit by that time, but the developer might release benches that will show the difference between the 32-bit client and the 64-bit client. I also have a little question, is it possible to run 32 applications on WinXP 64? Or is it only 64 bit on that OS. Because i don't like dual boots...

 

[Arno]

Larger maps and better multiplayer connections with more players on a server?

I fail to see how a 64bit CPU/software can improve multiplayer connections. I understand that you can use larger maps and more accurate player positions in 64bit. But the data still has to be transported over the same network channel. A 64bit integer takes twice as long to transmit then a 32bit integer.

64bit should help with all of the HL2 creation content as well. Mod creaters probably would get a lot of use out of it.

Uhm... no. All the HL2 content has to be compatible with the 32bit-client as well, so that won't make any difference.

With that said, I do believe a 64bit-client can run the game a significant bit faster, but I'm not expecting any miracles.

 

[LiBAD]

What little I've read so far about the 64bit OS would indicate that running 32bit software would not be a problem. I think the dual boot was brought up because of the high chance of the first 64bit OS from MS to be kicked out a tad on the buggy side, which is good thinking on the poster's part IMHO.

Probably a stupid question but... Was Gabe's comment based on his expectations of the 64bit tech or have they actually run HL2 on a 64bit setup?

Edit: Oooooops first question was answered! lol

 

[Asus]

I fail to see how a 64bit CPU/software can improve multiplayer connections.

I was thinking more along the lines of with the involement with a 64bit server and how it manages data/. I wasn't thinking about communication over the network or client side.

Uhm... no. All the HL2 content has to be compatible with the 32bit-client as well, so that won't make any difference.

They should beable to use a creation/render program that is 64bit or uses 64bit plugins to create 32bit content.

And I don't think 64bit will present any miracles either but I'm listing possible improvements. How great of improvements we will just have to wait and find out.

 

[mrchimp]

I fail to see how a 64bit CPU/software can improve multiplayer connections. I understand that you can use larger maps and more accurate player positions in 64bit. But the data still has to be transported over the same network channel. A 64bit integer takes twice as long to transmit then a 32bit integer.

I would expect a game to use floating point numbers more than integers but I suppose thats besides the point.

Correct me if I'm wrong but when talking about 64-bit CPU's I think people are reffering to the WORD size of the CPU which is the size of the instruction's it can process at once. Now you can run a 64-bit instruction on a 32-bit CPU but it has to do it in two halves, so I suppose you could have a 64-bit integer on a 32-bit CPU but you would have to cut it in half.

if there is a point to this post it is there isn't much need for 64-bit integers considering that a 32-bit integer would be reasonably large anyway, I can't think of many situations where you would need a 10 digit number.

 

[Arno]

I was thinking more along the lines of with the involement with a 64bit server and how it manages data/. I wasn't thinking about communication over the network or client side.

True, a 64-bit server could run more efficiently then a 32-bit server. But that's not really necessary as most gaming servers nowadays only need to use a part of the CPU's power.
The reason why there aren't any 128-players servers is because the available bandwidth becomes a bottleneck with so many clients.

I would expect a game to use floating point numbers more than integers

Yeah, it uses both. Integers are handy for storing index values that relate to sounds, playerID's, etc.

 

[ferd]

Intel is warmer than the AMD, thats what i heard. Intel got some heat problems with the new processors.

Intel does have heat problems, yes. But if you have enough money and you want pure performance then you really should go with Intel, cuz they really are the fastest atm. I dont really know how the HT and 64bit chipsets perform, but if I were you I would wait a little while before i buy a completely new system. Especially since you wont gain "rea"l performance in HL2 or other upcoming DX9 games atm with that kinda hardware.