Where is the 64 bit software?

[David M]

Its been almost 2 years now since we saw the FX-51 available to consumers for home PC's. We have a 64 bit OS from Microsoft which has been around in beta for over a year. We now have a 64 bit OS in final form from Microsoft.

So where is the 64 bit software? I see very little. Does it really take two years to write software?...I don't believe so.

Whats the delay? I think I can count all the 64 bit consumer applications on two hands. There is still not much incentive for the typical computer consumer to go out and buy a 64 bit capable machine. I saw Far Cry in 64 bit and it rocked...yeah okay...thats one game...zzzzzzz

Are the software companies dragging their feet for some reason? Are they waiting for others to write their 64 bit apps first?

Nobody wants to be the first to jump in the pool?...everyone is waiting for someone else to figure out the temperature (sales)? Is this it?

I understand you need 64 bit drivers to run 64 bit software, but doesn't Microsoft include those drivers in X64?...just like Windows provides the 32 bit drivers.

Not whining...just wondering

[Mac Medic]

I think they're just going to wait until every body has 4+gig of ram standard, without that 64bit is a bit pointless. Photoshop on the Mac is 64bit but only a benifit with gobs and gobs of ram.

[ric449]

Because nobody has a 64 bit processor. Not enough people anyway. AMD may have come up with 64 bit first, but I remember reading that the 64 bit Xeon was selling more than AMD's 64 bit processors before the 64 bit P4 arrived. A server chip.

Also, remember that most people don't know about computers. A lot of people don't even know what a 64 bit processor is. Whats the point in writing 64 bit software if nobody can run it/nobody knows what it is?

[TennBikeBerk]

Why the need for so much RAM with 64-bit processing?

[Amazin Caucasian]

and why did they bother to release it if it requires so much RAM and there are few applications??

[HAL9000]

I'll just say "I told you so" to all of those that jumped on the 64 bit bandwagon for no other reason than to upgrade to a 64 bit CPU.... 32 bit and an old northwood on a 400Mhz still do the trick for me. When software is commonplace at 64 bit, THEN I will consider upgrading at not only a reduced pricing compared to when 64 bit first came out, but more than likely with proven 2nd or 3rd generation hardware.

[Stryker]

Originally Posted by HAL9000 I'll just say "I told you so" to all of those that jumped on the 64 bit bandwagon for no other reason than to upgrade to a 64 bit CPU.... 32 bit and an old northwood on a 400Mhz still do the trick for me. When software is commonplace at 64 bit, THEN I will consider upgrading at not only a reduced pricing compared to when 64 bit first came out, but more than likely with proven 2nd or 3rd generation hardware.

You said it HAL!

3 of my buddies have built 64 bit systems and are all saying the same thing... "why did I bother with 64 bit so prematurely?".

"Why are you still using that old Athlon XP" they would say... "it's such old technology" they would say... OK, I'll stop now.

[Hi Ho]

I still don't see what's wrong with using an Athlon 64 or any other 64 bit CPU. They perform well all around with 32 bit programs. The reason to go with something like an Athlon 64 is not for the 64 bit capabilities, but for the performance. Why go with an obsolete AthlonXP that doesn't perform as well?

[David M]

Hmm...I bet we dont see the first dual core software for another two years. I think I will buy that FX-57 when the price drops. No sense in buying dual core just yet.

So does anyone know of any software company writing 64 bit software yet?

[glc]

Excuse me? Obsolete? Hardly. If it does what you need, it's not obsolete. I JUST upgraded to a 1.6 GHz Northwood from a 800 MHz P3, and that's only because I got the mobo, cpu, and ram for a labor tradeoff. You still think an Athlon XP is "obsolete"?

I just read your sig - I think we have the pot calling the kettle black here.

[Cricket]

Originally Posted by glc If it does what you need, it's not obsolete.

That's exactly how I feel (as I type this on my HP Vectra PIII 500MHz computer at work). I use a PIII 600MHz at home most of the time and it does what I want it to do just fine. Sure, my 2.8C P4 is much faster, but the work gets done on either computer...one is just slower than the other.

Cricket

[David M]

Good points...obsolete is in the eye of the beholder and not determined by the latest technology.

[Cricket]

Originally Posted by David M Good points...obsolete is in the eye of the beholder and not determined by the latest technology.

Exactly. I know there are 64 bit processors and dual core processors and all that other new stuff but I don't get excited about them at all. My old PCs still works and the kind of stuff I do doesn't require me to get a newer, faster computer anytime soon. I'll just bide my time and upgrade when I need to.

Cricket

[Hi Ho]

I guess obsolete is the wrong word. Of course it isn't useless. I still have an AthlonXP and it does everything I want it to. I will be upgrading soon, however. What I meant is that they aren't making them anymore (I don't believe). If I had to choose between an AthlonXP and Athlon64 I would go with an Athlon64 even if there was a small price difference. Am I alone in thinking that?

[spyder003]

As far as the AMD line goes, it's not about the 64 bit capability. If you want something faster than a 3200+, you don't have a choice. It's more about the integrated memory controller and the chipset features that are available with the 64 bit line. I don't think the XP line is obselete by any means, but if you're building a new high end system, why go with Socket A and AGP when that stuff is on it's way out the door?

I know this thread isn't particularly about hardware, but I just hate to see people bashing others who upgrade to a 64 bit system, and accusing them of doing so in vain. Just my $0.02

[HAL9000]

In my eyes, it WAS done in vain. If a persons current system was serving the needs just fine, and they upgraded to a 64bit CPU... it was all in vain... what advantage was there if it were already serving the need. I have a 2.4Ghz on a 400Mhz FSB... obsolete as far as newer technology goes... obsolete to me.. far from.

[spyder003]

Yup, I know that's the way you see it, and that's why I said what I said. I'll agree with you, if someone upgraded for the sole purpose of having a 64 bit system, then that's a move by someone with more money than brains. My only point is, if someone is building a new high end AMD system, then they don't have much of a choice. And why not have 64 bit capability on top of a nice system?

At any rate, I'm not going to debate with someone that has.... what? 5000+ builds under their belt? If I had half the knowledge of hardware you had, I'd be a happy guy. I don't wanna burn any bridges here, I might need your help one day! While I'm on it, I know you say you're burned out on PC's... but you should start posting on some hardware threads more. I'm sure there are a ton of guys around here that could use your help.

[Hi Ho]

if someone upgraded for the sole purpose of having a 64 bit system, then that's a move by someone with more money than brains. My only point is, if someone is building a new high end AMD system, then they don't have much of a choice. And why not have 64 bit capability on top of a nice system?

I agree with that. That is the point I attempted to make but obviously didn't make it very clear.

[Cricket]

I feel it all depends on the needs of a given individual. If this is going to be his first good computer and he's a gamer, by all means get the best and fastest stuff he can because he'll benefit from it. But if he already has a fairly potent system (built in the last year) and is already talking about building another monster system and he doesn't game or do anything demanding with his computer now, then I have to say what's the point? If the person just wants to have the very best, fine...more power to 'em. I just don't see the point if he's not going to make use of all that power.

Some will say "Well, it's his money...he should be allowed to do what he wants with it..." Sure, I don't see any problem in spending (or not spending) his money the way he wants to...it's just that I like to understand the why part.

I'm very practical and don't buy anything unless I really need it (hence the lack of a up to date computer) and just have a hard time understanding how people can just replace a perfectly good thing just to have something newer.

It's like the bike thread where Sauron asks me why I don't sell my older bikes and get something newer...it's because all my old bikes still work fine and I won't ride any better if I had a newer bike. And they all used to be high end bikes when I bought them all those years ago...they're just not up to date anymore. But they still ride fine.

Cricket

[Hi Ho]

When I build my new PC my current one will still be used. I'll put it in place of my other one and move the other one to another room as an internet only box. That way I will have two game worthy PC's for LAN games. I don't buy new things untill the old thing doesn't do what I want.

That goes for more than PC's. Just look at my vehicles. A 77 F-250, 90 Civic, 95 Civic, and 87 Voyager. Other than the Voyager they all look at run like new. Why buy a new one? Sure I'd love a new car and truck but I have other priorities.

[Amazin Caucasian]

will the FarCry 64 bit edition run on the 32 bit XP Pro??

[rspassey]

i understand that ppl are holding off on goign to the 64 bit, but if you are building a new system for gaming and you have a decent budget by all means go for the 64 bit, before my newest build i used a p4 that would lock up ever 10 seconds playing doom3 single player, online wasnt even worth it, i put in an fx55 on my new build, i still use the 32 bit os, but i dont even lag online, there is a difference, and for me it paid off to go with the newest and best technology, same with sli, most games support it, and there is a major difference that i can see with two asus 6800s than just one, im not saying to put out thousands to make your computer just so it has the newest compnents, but i also dont think it is fair to say a person has more money than brains if they have a 64 bit, the preformance in better, and im certain that lots 64 bit software will be out shortly once dell and hp start to put out 64 systems with xp pro64 on them for under 2000$ 64 bit software will be available for everything

[HAL9000]

I don't think the point is that somebody is a fool to build 64 bit new... I mean why not? Where I was saying "I told you so" were to those that had systems that were more than sufficient for thier needs that upgraded just for the sake of going to 64 bit... of which I think many were just to promote a bragging right over an Intel user. Since their old machine was still good, it was a waste to upgrade as nothing was really gained other than the bragging right of a CPU that didn't have any supporting software... not sure if that was really a bragging right.

[ric449]

What I used to say to people who thought they were futureproofing themselves by buying a Athlon64 is how old their processor will be by the time 64 bit well and truely takes over. By the time 64 bit takes over their "futureproof" processors will be very old.

Also, Cricket, does bike technology really move that fast?

[David M]

Probably for someone like Lance Armstrong who races and NEEDS the latest technology to win. But for us mortals who ride bikes for fun, exercise and to get around...bikes are pretty much the same as ever...two wheels, a frame and handlebars. Not many need a bike that weighs less than a toy poodle.

ric! You got rid of that guy with the pipe! What gives? I thought he looked cool. VERY British looking

[HAL9000]

LOL... totally agree on the bike thing... mine is no lightweight by a long shot... but it's a nice ride and has the best shifters I've ever had on a bike without costing me a fortune.. yes, bragging rights on a $5000 bike would be nice... but I think too many people would think I was an idiot for spending that kinda money.

[ric449]

He's John McCririck, hers some info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCririck

He's a bit strange, as you can see by doing a google image search on him.

[Floppyman]

Here's another guy who is still using a pair of Northwood P4's and is perfectly content. I honestly don't see the point to upgrading to 64bit or dual core at this point, and as a college student I really can't afford it anyway. As it has been said in this thread before, if it gets the job done for the timebeing there is no need to upgrade.

[Cricket]

Originally Posted by ric449 Also, Cricket, does bike technology really move that fast?

Nah, no where near as fast as computer tech moves. Basic design of the bicycle hasn't changed in over a hundred years. Pnuematic tired "safety bicycles" have been around since the 1890's...two wheels, two tires, handle bars, saddle, cranks, pedals, etc...basically the same as we use now. And it still takes muscle power to get around on a bike.

Cricket

[glc]

Originally Posted by Amazin Caucasian will the FarCry 64 bit edition run on the 32 bit XP Pro??

Start your own thread. I've warned you once already about thread crapping.

- Moderator -