32 bit and 64 bit??

[madcrow]

I think the leading 64-bit system is currently Gamecube games. Despite the marketing, the GC CPU is just a 64-bit CPU (actually a sort of low-speed "beta" of the G5). But that beats the Xbox which just has a 32-bit CPU...

[Rufus]

But that beats the Xbox which just has a 32-bit CPU...

I believe that is the same for the PS2, is it not?

Does DS use 64 also? Since it has more capabilities than the N64 it seems fair...

[Soeru]

EDITE

32 or 64 bit CPU... it doesn't really matter when you're talking about graphics. GPU's -graphic accelerators- are what make the difference in visual quality.

The more memory a GPU has(be it internal or the system's RAM) = the more nifty graphics/polygons it can render on-screen(big-ass landscapes, detailed character models, tons of effects/sprites/colors on-screen).

The faster the clocking(processing) speed a GPU has(measured in mhz) = smoother gameplay.

A fast BUS speed(measured also in mhz) = quicker loading times(excluding the loading from a disk).

So yeah, the CPU doesn't do all that much with graphics nowadays, it would be too much of a strain to run everything on a single CPU. That's why we have sound and graphic cards/chipsets to do all of the video and audio processing seperately, while the CPU can handle in-game physics, variables, and other stuff that doesn't fall under the audio/video category...

This should be pretty clear. Someone already said that the Gamecube uses a 64-bit CPU, while the Dreamcast has a 128 bit CPU... and we all know that the GCN is capable of much better graphics than the Dreamcast. Doesn't change the fact that the DC was a much better platform, though.

[Rufus]

Yea, it's all intigrated into what we call a 'computer'.



RAM, CPU, Video, Sound, HDD Size, BIOS, everything in a computer can be upgraded, it's just what you have is often, but not always, what you get...

[Soeru]

Yea, it's all intigrated into what we call a 'computer'.



RAM, CPU, Video, Sound, HDD Size, BIOS, everything in a computer can be upgraded, it's just what you have is often, but not always, what you get...

Did you even read my last post? I'm just claiming that for games it doesn't matter at how many bits a processor operates at, only the clocking speed. The only thing that will drastically affect graphical performance is a GPU(Graphics Processing Unit), otherwise referred to as a graphical accelerator. If you were to run a modern 3-D game on just a CPU with some RAM and no graphical accelerator, it would run like crap(or not even run for that matter), because CPU's aren't designed to handle fancy graphical operations like Z-Buffering, anti-aliasing, etc. Think of the CPU as a guy that is a wizard with mathematics, and the GPU as a genius artist. A stupid allegory, but I think it gets the point across.

Back on topic, clocking speed is what matters when it comes down to CPU's... you can have a 1024-bit CPU and it can still run slower than a 32-bit Pentium 4 @ 2.53Ghz, unless the clocking speed is faster than 2.53Ghz(or the software is specifically designed to be used with 1024-bit CPU's). Think of bits as you would think of voltage. It's just a different kind of operating method, like European electrical devices use 220V while American wall outlets only support up to 120 V(approx), it doesn't indicate that it's a faster device. A 64-bit CPU can work more efficiently than a 32-bit CPU, if software for it is programmed properly, though... so less CPU time would be consumed, even though the two processors could be operating at the same clock speed.

[Rufus]

Did you even read my last post? I'm just claiming that for games it doesn't matter at how many bits a processor operates at, only the clocking speed.

Actually, the way i see it, it does. because the speed that the CPU 'reads' effects how fast the graphics can be processed, affects the speed of the game...

Sorry, I just don't see your way. try playing WC III on a simple PCI Video card...

[edit] or an onboard one... on a p3 computer, doesnt work, does it? it has everything to do with the bits...

like I said, everything in integrated, If one thing goes, the computer will tell you... in one way or another...

[Soeru]

Actually, the way i see it, it does. because the speed that the CPU 'reads' effects how fast the graphics can be processed, affects the speed of the game...

Sorry, I just don't see your way. try playing WC III on a simple PCI Video card...

[edit] or an onboard one... on a p3 computer, doesnt work, does it? it has everything to do with the bits...

like I said, everything in integrated, If one thing goes, the computer will tell you... in one way or another...

Your post makes no sense...

Simple PCI video card? Dude, modern cards come designed to be used with PCI slots, and if it's an old/crappy card you're talking about, you're proving my point. I'm talking about a good vcard, that is what will give you all the nifty graphics. Old games didn't take much advantage of having a GPU, so they didn't use any extra hardware acceleration.

In modern 3-D games, the CPU does almost absolutely nothing with graphics. Take a look at all the graphics settings you can change on a game like Max Payne 2 for example, almost everything is affected by the quality of your video card, not your CPU's capacity.

Play a game on a P4 @ 2.54Ghz and a really great video card, then play the same game with the same video card on a rig with a Pentium 3 @ 1.3Ghz, you can't notice any difference, fact. Change the video card, and your gameplay experience changes noticeably. Video cards nowadays are the only thing that determine if you can run a game on your comp or not, assuming your CPU and RAM meet the requirements. You can have the fastest CPU on the market with 4 Gb of RAM, and you still won't be able to run Unreal Tournament 2003 if you have a cruddy 8mb video card, because you need the extra capabilities of a GPU to get great visuals, fact.

How hardware works is not a matter of opinion, mate.

[GODJonez]

Play a game on a P4 @ 2.54Ghz and a really great video card, then play the same game with the same video card on a rig with a Pentium 3 @ 1.3Ghz, you can't notice any difference. Change the video card, and your gameplay experience changes noticeably.

That isn't 100 % true, as the requests to the video card are handled by the CPU. The most high-end cards can't use their full potential on otherwise poor system, because the CPU and other things can't provide the vcard as much data as it could process. But video card is the one that mainly affects the 3D-performance, but of course the other components also have their part in it.

[micral]

uhm the bits still matter... a 64-bit processor in a GPU is certainly better than a 32-bit one ey? and unless they make 64-bit CPUs, there wouldnt be any 64-bit GPU because their architectures just wouldnt be compatible would they?

[Soeru]

That isn't 100 % true, as the requests to the video card are handled by the CPU. The most high-end cards can't use their full potential on otherwise poor system, because the CPU and other things can't provide the vcard as much data as it could process. But video card is the one that mainly affects the 3D-performance, but of course the other components also have their part in it.

I did mention somewhere that the CPU makes no difference as long as it's above the minimum requirements, otherwise the game will run like a slideshow. Your motherboard's BUS speed affects the the time that data takes to get across to your vcard. Correct me if I'm wrong, in OpenGL games the CPU is in charge of "pre-processing"? Something to do with breaking down packets before being allocated to physical memory, where the GPU does its thing...

Edit: ... and of course the other devices in your comp play a role in graphics, but your GPU is like your eyes and paintbrush, the CPU and motherboard could be the guys supplying the GPU with "paint" in a big "RAM bucket". Hooray for ridiculous allegories.