Benchmarking Games using Windows XP 64-bit
The folks over at HardOCP decided to find out the hard way if upgrading to Windows XP Professional x64 Edition would offer an ehanced gaming experience. Armed with an Athlon 64 FX-55 and testing with both the GeForce 6800 Ultra and an ATI Radeon X850 XT-PE, author Brent Justice tallied the results from eight high-profile games. The results were only slightly unexpected.
What we found isn't too shocking really, but rather reassuring. In all the 32-bit games tested, we saw overall static performance using Windows XP Pro x64 Edition. The only game in our lineup that had a specific Win64 AMD64 instruction path, The Chronicles of Riddick, actually performed worse in 64-bit than it did in 32-bit Windows.So pretty much across the board there is a neglible difference, if any at all, so if you want to dive into the 64-bit era, knock yourself out. However, there are still a few kinks. Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory refused to work and Steam had a rather minor installation issue, so it's apparent some work still needs to be done.
-
Visceral Monkey
replyInteresting. I was going to install it this week but I think I'll pass for now.
-
What a useless article.
For the folks who don't want to read through a few pages I'll post a brief transcript of that article.
*insert useless non readable graph*
We noticed no difference...
*insert useless non readable graph*
We noticed no difference...
*insert useless non readable graph*
We noticed no difference...
*insert useless non readable graph*
We noticed no difference...
*insert useless non readable graph*
Conclusion : They noticed no difference.-
so why is it useless again?
-
They could've just posted:
We compared 64bit to 32bit and "Program Files" is changed to "Program Files (x86)", Steam doesn't install and SCCT won't run.
Our conclusion for the test is "There is no difference"
Instead they make you read through 11 pages full of useless graphs and benchmarks with numbers all within 1% before telling you, "There is no difference"
-
-
-
