PC Gaming & Dual Core Processors?

[Redrobes]

No your quite right. Any memory pointer in 32 bits has a max addressable space of 2^32 which is exactly 4Gb but windows must reserve some of this for the kernel and it uses 1Gb leaving 3Gb of user space for your programs. Therefore you cant allocate more than 3Gb in any one lump. Also a 32 bit program running in a 64 bit windows also has the same limitation. Only a 64 bit app running in a 64 bit OS can do more.

 

[Rl'Halsinor]

No your quite right. Any memory pointer in 32 bits has a max addressable space of 2^32 which is exactly 4Gb but windows must reserve some of this for the kernel and it uses 1Gb leaving 3Gb of user space for your programs. Therefore you cant allocate more than 3Gb in any one lump. Also a 32 bit program running in a 64 bit windows also has the same limitation. Only a 64 bit app running in a 64 bit OS can do more.

Now that is interesting. It makes sense about 32 bit program's limitation under a 64 bit OS. So if I am reading you correctly, Redrobes, the Vista 64 is backwards compatible but limited to running a 32 bit app to 32 bit parameters. Right?

Also, I will be upgrading from an Athlon 64 3200+ Venice to an X2 3800+ Manchester. I am trying to get something cleared up before I do so because I have heard conflicting reports.

1. I run XP Pro with SP2. Some are saying that after I install said X2 and reboot that I need to apply the MS dual core patch to reconfigure the HAL and the AMD optimizer patch and reboot again.

2. However, others are saying that if I have the BIOS already installed that can handle dual cores then the MS patch is not needed; only install the AMD optomizer.

Which is correct here? I already do have the latest BIOS and it supports dual cores up to 4800+.

If I do have to do both patches should I first do the MS one and reboot and then do the AMD and reboot? Thanks.

 

[XCorvis]

After you mentioned the patches, I found a HardOCP thread about it. It really looked like you only want to run the various patches if you're having performance problems. It also sounded like the patches tend to affect different games in different ways - some improve and some worsen. My advice is to wait and see what your system runs like before you try to patch anything. It simply may not be necessary.

 

[Rl'Halsinor]

After you mentioned the patches, I found a HardOCP thread about it. It really looked like you only want to run the various patches if you're having performance problems. It also sounded like the patches tend to affect different games in different ways - some improve and some worsen. My advice is to wait and see what your system runs like before you try to patch anything. It simply may not be necessary.

Thanks, XCorvis, nice info there. It is amazing how many different points of view there are about this subject and what is the wisest course. Some didn't even know about either patch and they upgraded from a single core to a dual core without a "burp."

I just want to make sure i do the right thing without causing a mess. I need my PC for many things -- some of them down right important.

 

[drothgery]

Now that is interesting. It makes sense about 32 bit program's limitation under a 64 bit OS. So if I am reading you correctly, Redrobes, the Vista 64 is backwards compatible but limited to running a 32 bit app to 32 bit parameters. Right?

Pretty much; a 32-bit app on x64 Windows (whether it's Vista, Win2K3, or XP) runs in a 'virtual 32-bit' environment. 16-bit Windows apps don't work on 64-bit Windows at all.