News on AMD64 Port - Page 3

ThantiK · 06-01-2004 , 01:24

Not me. ;)

I use linux too, remember bailo? -- I dont run a server under it tho. I even have gentoo running =)

But, I had been watching, and AMX tends to be fairly compatible with windows moreso. Because there are so many developers that make it windows compatible...module authors and the like.

That was my point...most of amx is windows-based. Thats because HLDS started out as a windows only program. I've seen the point MANY times where everythings released for windows and even the module author, etc does not know how to make a linux module for amx.

Windows has no 64 bit support, and HLDS for windows isn't natively 64 bit, so I started getting a little baffled. Because it will cause confusion, and problems.

I know that was twords me bailo...but No, I pretty much use linux every day and I was just arguing for arguements sake. You have to look @ all points.

ThantiK · 06-01-2004 , 04:59

Well guys...I've been reading up...

It seems as if 64 bit processes actually run slower than 32 bit processes, and HLDS_AMD64 is just a recompiled HLDS on a 64 bit compiler.

Would there be any way of benchmarking these 2 HLDS processes?

I have read THEORETICAL articles which say blabla, 64 bit has a 30% or higher increase in speed, bla...

But then I read an article on an actual test.

64 Bit Binaries are typically 20-50% larger than their 32-bit counterparts.
64 bit Binaries actually run SLOWER than 32 bit counterparts

http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=5768&page=2

There is a link to the article I read.

Secondly, I gave a link to bailopan...on the Windows XP 64 bit release...
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d...a_fea_tfiu.asp

Soooo...again, the 64 bit AMX doesn't seem a reasonable option...other than for making AMX stable on 64 bit platforms.

BAILOPAN · 06-01-2004 , 05:05

You're still missing the point, which is that AMD64 needs to be supported.

The advantage with 64bit processors is being able to handle 64bit data types in one cycle rather than two (or 128bit in two rather than 4)... therefore it will be superior with floating point operations.

ThantiK · 06-01-2004 , 05:24

Gotcha...

I'm also arguing these points because I'm deciding on going dual opteron processors, and I'm trying to figure out if I'm going to be wasting my money.

I'm sorry if I'm coming off as an arse. Just my way of learning. To deduct what information I have, and argue it, and be corrected.

I'm REALLY HOPING Valve makes a Linux executable for HL2...that would SO ROCK! -- because then my 64 bit concerns would all be solved.

If anyone reads the 2nd link in my above post...you'll see Windows XP 64 bit...and what it wont do......which is nearly everything. lol!

PM · 06-01-2004 , 05:38

We don't want to ignore AMD64.
1) I think that 32 bit processors for PCs don't have a good future. Running on emulated 32 bit is crappy, too
2) Many people would take AMXX if they read: "AMXX comes with AMD64 support!"

PS:
I don't think Valve will make a Linux executable for the game. They use DirectX. But I guess (and hope) they will make a server for linux, because many server providers use linux.

ThantiK · 06-01-2004 , 11:23

I actually read that running 32 bit on a 64 bit processor was slower than normal. =/

This 64 bit "revolution" is getting confusing. -- But I do agree w/ ya PM...it will all go 64 bit eventually. -- the terabyte memory limits are very nice indeed. (Realistic 3D environments anybody?.......MATRIX ANYBODY?!)