http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/...5E11074,00.htm

'nuff said.

cool, I assume that you need to have XP-64 installed to use it... so once I try 64 I'll have to give this patch a try.

I don't see the big deal about it, seems like another computer game to me.

...

Gangrell, you seam to miss the point..

It's a computer game patch to take advantage of 64 bit computing.

...

I honestly don't see a big enough difference to justify me getting a monster system. It looks to me like they just used sharper texture maps with a few my polygons. Whoopidy-doo....

Doesn't mean anything to me, looks no different except for having sharper images from every other pc game I've ever played.

Doesn't mean anything to me, looks no different except for having sharper images from every other pc game I've ever played. </font>[/QUOTE]that being the primary point.

Doesn't mean anything to me, looks no different except for having sharper images from every other pc game I've ever played. </font>[/QUOTE]that being the primary point. </font>[/QUOTE]Sorry, but that isn't a big deal IMO, show me something different from the norm then I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Diffrent from the norm..

Did you read the assosiated text, this is basicaly 64 bit processors getting it's first gaming teeth.

Can't be done of a 32 bit processor, diffrent enough?

Since I see no real difference, no.

Are you daft?

a processor can only do so much at one one given time, a 64 bit processor can potentialy do twice the number of operations as a 32 bit processor.

It might not sound interesting right now, but think on it before you say "nothing new"

think of it another way, double the clock speed of your processor. That's what we're talking about, now only games that are designed to take advangtage of this technoliogy can use this speed boost.

So does that wet your appitite, this game is designed to take advantage of that speed boost.


It's not what acutaly happens but it's the train of thought to be working along.


So while it might not seam like a big deal, but when you think about what this means in terms of game design.


It's a patch to bring a 32 bit game into the 64 bit era.

Get it now, this not done before, this new, this important step towards more advanced games.

One tough customer. :D

Will you please cease with this argument? Allow me to speak where you can hear me clearly.

Yes, I've read the site, I know the potential, key word there buddy, it has the potential to make games ascend, it doesn't mean it's going to.

When I see greater speed, new advanced graphics, then I'll kiss the creater's ass for it, worship the ground it was designed on and go "ohh and ahh" over it, but until it actually happens, my opinion will not change, alright?

DONT CALL ME BUDDY!

You have been warned.

Wow...I'd have expected more of a difference out of the 64-bit version of this game. Of course, it's SLIGHTLY prettier...but I'd like to see what it looks like when there's a REAL difference.

Why are people arguing over this stupid "advance" in gaming? :D

Mellow out people.

And I'm with Ilander, the examples they provided weren't that impressive.

*sighs* Thank you.

Don't annoy me.

You have been warned.

I see no difference. Except the graphic is a bit prettier.

Those pebbles on the beach are darn ugly...

lol, I agree ;)
Then again, Farcry never looked all that amazing, sure it looked ok, but it wasn't anything to wet your pants over.....Not that i wet my pants over video games that look good [img]graemlins/hidesbehindsofa.gif[/img]

Nice, but BIG DEAL! [img]smile.gif[/img] I'm sure if Intel made an "Intel version" it would look just as nice. It's all code, and all they did was tweak stuff, and insert higher res textures.. hell, I'm doing that to Neverwinter Nights, and my new changes look SO much better.

But IMO, Farcry isn't that hot via graphics.. now Prince of Persia, Sands of Time for the PC is a MEGA hog amazing game and the graphics are jaw dropping, and have the most taxing two effects on video--Bloom effect and realtime shadowing. (And a third, if you choose to turn on anti-aliasing) :D

But when I got my Geforce 6800GT, Farcry looked like shit, then I learned they had a patch that fixes the shader 3 things. Looks just as sweet as that.


BTW, anyone here have using an Nforce board with an AMD 5500FX? pair that with a 6800, some raptors and some cas 2.5-3-4-5 ram... WOW! [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 05-02-2005, 09:35 PM: Message edited by: Ziroc ]

I thought those donations were to go towards Iron Works? ;)

I thought those donations were to go towards Iron Works? ;) </font>[/QUOTE]Ouch [img]tongue.gif[/img]

And btw, while this is a big step in gaming, I don't think it's worth starting a fight over. Argueing is fine, but nothing to strife over ;)

Hey, one of my computer science major friends told me of something relevant a couple of weeks ago...Did you all know that video card manufacturers actually release the exact same video card multiple times as a different model? It seems that they can selectively turn certain features off, and they do, at least until its time to release the next greatest vidcard.

All the video-card manufacturers do it... :(

Honestly, I believe that the key to better graphics is better programming...

I'm half way there. Just swap the FX55 with an AMD 3500 (clocked to 2700mhz, which is FX 55 speed) and you've got me.

I agree that Far Cry doesn't look that great, but it has a sense of realism about it I always think, compared with a lot of games. For me I think it is worth installing XP64 (as a second OS) to try this out, because those images do look ince.