http://firingsquad.gamers.com/news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=4877
I miss the days when Tim and John talked trash about each other’s games. Too bad Intel is too big to afford a personality, otherwise this might be a good flamewar.
Go Tim!
Tim Sweeney isn’t very credible. I do think 64-bit will benefit gamers, however.
Not now, but in the future.
P.S. - I’d say he’s as credible as any programmer out there.
[Smartass edit]
Yeah, this is almost the same as wumpus whining about Gamecube every chance he gets.
Nothing to see here, move along.
–Dave
Developers need 64bit capability, but users??
I dunno…I have the same problem with my own PhD research work, running out of the 2Gb limits but I don’t see the average desktop user needinf a 64bit machine anytime soon…
However, the previous paragraph reminds me of a famous quote made by a filthy rich dude, about 640Kb memory being enough and stuff…
:lol:
You never know huh…
We can switch now, so why not? The sooner we do the smoother things will be when we do need 64 bits. There will be more, mature 64 bit software and a more capable, stable hardware platform. Intel’s stance is so much PR hogwash. I mean, we won’t need 64 bits in the consumer market space til the end of the decade? That couldn’t have anything to do with their major competitor launching consumer 64 bit CPUs this year, could it? From the 386 to the Pentium 4/Athlon XP seems like a pretty good run for 32 bit. Hell, if I had any say I’d want to skip 64 and go strait to 128.
What 2GB limit are you talking about?
Considering Gothic 2 runs best with a gigabyte I’d say were getting close to the limitations of 32 bit.
I’ve had a gigabyte installed in my machine for, umm, about two years or so. Not that I’ve run out of space yet, but it’s not as if the 2 GB limit of 32-bit Windows were laughably fantastically out of reach or something.
I agree with Brad, Intel is just embarrassed because their 64-bit CPU performs so poorly compared to existing 32-bit CPUs, and probably also compared to AMD’s upcoming 64-bit chip. Intel needs a lot more time before they can offer a 64-bit alternative that wouldn’t be a downgrade for people with fast Pentium 4s or Athlons. That’s why they’re dragging their feet.
Is Gothic 2 really going to require 1 gig of RAM? That’s ridiculous! I only hav e 384 MB right now and games like Morrowind and IL-2 run just fine. What they hell are they doing in that game?
Yep. 100% correct. Intel is so full of shit, they’re getting to be just as bad as nVidia’s FX backpedal…oh wait, Intel already has enough experience in the PR bullshit.
Whatever it is they’re doing, it had better arouse my loins when I play it. Nothing justifies that ludicrous memory requirement. I wonder how they got that one past the suits. :roll:
On xp with higher res textures gothic 2 loves the 512-1 gig range. It loads nearly all of the map at once (which gives you great viewing range) unlike Morrowind which segments it into much smaller sectors. Another reason for the memory footprint is that each npc in the game is doing something even if your not there. They have a routine eg, get up, wash face, eat, work till evening, go to tavern, go back home, sleep.
You can play it with 384 memory but things are smoother better prettier on the upper edge.
I don’t think anyone strictly needs to go past the 2 GB level yet. However, any project manager worth his or her weight in Cyrix CPUs, when faced with the choice of spending 6-12 months compacting a project down to fit into that space or spending a couple grand to get everyone megamachines is going to choose the latter.
I once worked at an outfit that chose the former path (though it was a question of 4K or 8K at the time), and before their amazingly cool but overhyped videogame hardware idea was 3 years late and then faded away into well-deserved obscurity as they docked their loyal employees 6-8 months of pay on the way down, by golly they fit it all in 4K. Pyrrhic victories R00L!