djwilko6 Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 Somewhere in the region of 3.6/3.7 of that the limit is a little bit under 4GB if memory serves right. The reduction in available system memory depends on the devices that are installed in the computer. However, to avoid potential driver compatibility issues, the 32-bit versions of Windows Vista limit the total available memory to 3.12 GB. If a computer has many installed devices, the available memory may be reduced to 3 GB or less. However, the maximum memory available in 32-bit versions of Windows Vista is typically 3.12 GB. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAT Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 For once I'll have to disagree, I'd say only people with more than 3GB will have 64-bit, which is the only time you really need it. I'm talking about 64-bit processor. I have 64-bit capable processor and 2 GB RAM, something very wrong? Another machine is behind me, 64-bit capable processor, 1 GB RAM! Problem? No. Simple matter of fact is pretty much at the moment, from a financial position it's not justified right now. SI could have been releasing a 64 bit version as soon as 64 bit computers were available at a rather substantial cost. When the cost isn't as much, and it makes sense on the balance sheets and serves the majority of the gaming community. I have 4GB of RAM, my PC isn't 64 bit compatable though - in fact, out of the 15/16 people I know who play FM. Only 1 has a 64 bit computer right now... won't be the same for all people but it shows that right now if the game went 64 bit that only 1 out of 16 would buy that version that I know of. If it went 64 bit only, well then £450 wouldn't be spent on the game. 4 GB RAM and no 64-bit capable processor? Well, you just bought poor processor, absolutely no excuses here. And yes, I'm talking about processor, not OS. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeadZone Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 32-bit Windows 7 was only needed for older processors, all of which are many years old, which would mean the computers with them in would probably struggle to run the OS without tweaking anyway - unless PC in question is owned by someone who has had other parts of the machine upgraded (since some old 32-bit processors themselves are still powerful enough, and its really other hardware from the same time that would cause issues) However, as long as your processor is x64, there is no real reason not to use a 64-bit OS Hell, using a 32-bit os over the x64 processor may cause the processor itself to be throttled, and you actually loosing performance As typical with anything on the internet, people focus too much on one thing (in this case ram), which causes people to have incorrect perceptions of the facts, as stated, 64-bit is more than being able to use more ram, or all new software would automatically be able to switch between the two. Its a new way of doing other things as well Most people on the internet wont remember pre-32bit days, but most of the same arguments existed back then as well (as with pre-16 I would image, however thats before my time), yet 16-bit was dropped, and 32-bit become standard The same will happen with 64-bit in time Also, I am personally curious on what processors people have (especially those who say they must use 32-bit OS), because I have a feeling alot of people can use 64-bit OS'es without realizing @santy, Im pretty sure you're processor would be x64 unless you've added the ram long after the computer was brought Concerning the RAM limit The actual limit a x86 (aka 32-bit) processor can handle is by default 4GB, HOWEVER, windows forces an artificial limit that is lower There are technical reasons for this happening, which would long and boring (for some) to go into, but for those interested, just google it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
djwilko6 Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 Agree with DeadZone's post above. I would say the main reason why the RAM arguement is the main reason you see, is because many of the other reasons would be lost on alot of people. Regarding the limit of x86 processors being able to only handle 3GB (this is set by Windows) put as simply as possible, is that Windows uses the space between 3.1GB-4GB as a dumping ground for I/O devices and other system devices. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAT Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 32-bit Windows 7 was only needed for older processors, all of which are many years old, which would mean the computers with them in would probably struggle to run the OS without tweaking anyway - unless PC in question is owned by someone who has had other parts of the machine upgraded (since some old 32-bit processors themselves are still powerful enough, and its really other hardware from the same time that would cause issues)However, as long as your processor is x64, there is no real reason not to use a 64-bit OS Hell, using a 32-bit os over the x64 processor may cause the processor itself to be throttled, and you actually loosing performance As typical with anything on the internet, people focus too much on one thing (in this case ram), which causes people to have incorrect perceptions of the facts, as stated, 64-bit is more than being able to use more ram, or all new software would automatically be able to switch between the two. Its a new way of doing other things as well Most people on the internet wont remember pre-32bit days, but most of the same arguments existed back then as well (as with pre-16 I would image, however thats before my time), yet 16-bit was dropped, and 32-bit become standard The same will happen with 64-bit in time Also, I am personally curious on what processors people have (especially those who say they must use 32-bit OS), because I have a feeling alot of people can use 64-bit OS'es without realizing @santy, Im pretty sure you're processor would be x64 unless you've added the ram long after the computer was brought Concerning the RAM limit The actual limit a x86 (aka 32-bit) processor can handle is by default 4GB, HOWEVER, windows forces an artificial limit that is lower There are technical reasons for this happening, which would long and boring (for some) to go into, but for those interested, just google it Actually no. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
santy001 Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 I'm talking about 64-bit processor. I have 64-bit capable processor and 2 GB RAM, something very wrong?Another machine is behind me, 64-bit capable processor, 1 GB RAM! Problem? No. 4 GB RAM and no 64-bit capable processor? Well, you just bought poor processor, absolutely no excuses here. And yes, I'm talking about processor, not OS. The computer isn't 6 months old or even 1 year old, the processors and motherboard are about 4/5 years old, sound card, gfx card, RAM and hard drive have all been upgraded around it. Was never much point in buying a new PC when I had good processors back then, and they're still good enough now I can't say for certain whether they're 64bit capable but I wouldn't imagine so given their age. Overall though, its cost me about £150 to keep my PC up to standard with what would cost several times more to buy new from the shop. I still don't see any real need for 64 bit to be enforced when it isn't needed, its a bit like IP v6 it'll all be the norm one day but its not needed just yet and the benefits aren't fully there to make it worthwhile. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAT Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 The computer isn't 6 months old or even 1 year old, the processors and motherboard are about 4/5 years old, sound card, gfx card, RAM and hard drive have all been upgraded around it. Was never much point in buying a new PC when I had good processors back then, and they're still good enough now I can't say for certain whether they're 64bit capable but I wouldn't imagine so given their age. Overall though, its cost me about £150 to keep my PC up to standard with what would cost several times more to buy new from the shop. I still don't see any real need for 64 bit to be enforced when it isn't needed, its a bit like IP v6 it'll all be the norm one day but its not needed just yet and the benefits aren't fully there to make it worthwhile. Strange upgrade. Whatever, with CPU-Z you can easilly check if your processor is 64 bit capable. As already said, 64-bit processors were available as early as 2003, over six years ago. So there was plenty of time to get into 64 bit world. And with 64 bits, we are talking at least 2X speed up, with proper coding, even 5X is very possible for this type of game. Even if we forget memory issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottey_swe Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 Its a shame there's no 64bit version of a game like this, which is really cpu & ram intensive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bradmonk Posted January 8, 2010 Author Share Posted January 8, 2010 bloody hell, this thread is still going?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
djwilko6 Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 bloody hell, this thread is still going?? Not really, just resurrected Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottey_swe Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 Not really, just resurrected so what do you think of FM turning into a 64bit application? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ensar13 Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 Sorry, I found this thread now, and would ask you: If I buy a new notebook with Windows7 64-bit on it, will FM 10.2 work on it? Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
djwilko6 Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 so what do you think of FM turning into a 64bit application? This discussion has been had before, like I said then, it's not really worth it just now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spart Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 My system is in no way ready for 64bit football manager but I think if SI started working on the idea now and implemented it sooner rather than later, by the time the concept has been rolled out to the masses, most of the creases should be ironed out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NVS_Gooner4life Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 It's still way to early, i deliberatly choosed 32bit system for my new computer (vista) because 64bit is still too new and so is W7, better to wait with a 64bit FM until 64bit is standard which will take 2-3 years yet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bradmonk Posted January 9, 2010 Author Share Posted January 9, 2010 It's still way to early, i deliberatly choosed 32bit system for my new computer (vista) because 64bit is still too new and so is W7, better to wait with a 64bit FM until 64bit is standard which will take 2-3 years yet. Im suprised you bought a 32bit system. I went immediately for 64bit, keeping in mind that nerds reckon that we'll be seeing 128bit achitecture within the next 4 years and they'll be pretty much spot on if you're working along Moore's Law. Managed to squeeze 6 years out of my last laptop, so decided to upgrade with a close to 'future proof' model as I could get to squeeze every last minute out of this one before having to upgrade. would suggent that you get a 64bit processor at the very least! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NVS_Gooner4life Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 I do got a 64bit CPU but i wont make the move yet for a another 2-3 years i bet, of course today the technological development is going faster and faster and as you mentioned the 128bit will be on the way with Windows 8 for sure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeadZone Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 You realize 64-bit and 32-bit Vista/7 were developed at the same time, therefore neither is "technically" older or newer than the other But on a serious note, 64-bit technology isnt as new as you think, it's been around in the commercial sectors long before AMD64 was released (and that was over 6 years ago) The thing is, it only become viable as a consumer product in PCs once AMD64 came about as it was backward compatible with 32-bit processes out of the box, unlike most previous attempts by CPU vendors, which usually relied on 32-bit emulation for older programs (Intel also being one of these vendors) But in reality, 32-bit will stay around for a while longer, simply because enough people will stick to 32-bit OS'es when they no longer need to, either through choice, the "if it isnt broken, dont fix it" ethos or lack of education I also blame PC/Laptop vendors for being lazy since I feel they should be installing 64-bit OS by default on newer machines now XP64 was more stable than XP32, the problems arose from it being so new, that proper driver support was the major problem (which has since subsided somewhat) With Vista/7 64-bit, that is only an issue with older hardware, but at the same time, 32-bit drivers should work in the event of 64-bit not being available I use Vista-64, I have zero problems at all (infact, I find it to be faster than the 32-bit version), in reality I see there being zero reason to go back to 32-bit OS, as it'll do nothing but limit me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bradmonk Posted April 25, 2011 Author Share Posted April 25, 2011 I wonder if there have been any advancements on this since it was started a few years back. Would be grateful for information please Brad Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bradmonk Posted June 1, 2013 Author Share Posted June 1, 2013 Lol, bugger what I said in my other post. I'm doing it anyway... BUMP!! EDIT: Gif makes me giggle every time, sat here giggling at it for a solid five miutes now. I think i need to stop drinking and go to bed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.