64bit processors a problem?

i run the linux client and it runs great. even though theres no sound, i just open up xmms and im set for now.

i am building a windows box and i was leaning towards a 64bit mobo & proc. someone told me you guys had issues with 64bit and i was wondering if thats true

i was looking at the MSI RX480 Neo2-F MB,(Athlon64 3200+,939pin 90nm Venice) for $226
if there are no issues with 64bit procs thats great.. also maybe if theres a better/faster deal out there you know about itd be great.. right now im just looking on pricewatch

-feek nabob

I use an AMD 64-bit system and SL works fine.

<- several 64bit cpu machines, but no 64bit operating systems on any yet.

Nah dont worry about it, it work easy, 64b cpu's are pretty low on temp, price nice to.

The fact is the AMD 64bit processors are an order of magnitude faster than their 32 bit counterparts. This NOT because they are 64 bit, but because as the newest generation of chips, their architecture, in particular the onboard memory controller, is such an improvement over the last generation. There are NO problems with 64bit chips, and at least as far as AMD are concerned you would be foolish to even consider a 32bit chip as somebody suggested in another thread.

YMMV, but my experience has been that AMD processors with nVidia chipset motherboards and nVidia graphics cards play nice with SL.

Personaly I would go Dual Core CPU (I perfer Intel Personaly so my sugestion below shows that).

I would get the Intel D 820 (Dual 2.8GHz Cores) Boxed Version (Includes Heatsink Fan & 3 Year Warranty) $219
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116213

And the Intel BOXD101GGCL Motherboard (Retail Box, 3 year warranty) $68.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813121308

Total 287.99

You could cut that price down by going with the Pentium D 805 (Dual 2.66GHz Cores) which is $138
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?N=2010340343+1051707842+1050716915&Submit=ENE&SubCategory=343

That would bring your price to $206.99

You could go a Athlon X2 as well, I just don't like AMD as much persoanly, either way the Dual Core will be a big benefit for doing any multi tasking.

(As a Side Note the Pentium D's are also 64Bit CPU's)

The athlon64 X2 still beats the Pentium D's in performance. And at lowere clock speeds even.
More bang for the watt.

Wasn't talking performance was talking prefrence. I have found the Intel CPU's run more stable with less random lockups and crashes then the AMD. To me that is more important the performance. Might not be to some one else but for me I will take stability over performance all day long Probaly a reason I run a Mac at home and have to fix PC's all day at work.

On a side note, I have seen time and time again PC users care more about peormance then anything else, I watch people O/C thier systems to where they are lucky to run 30 mins before a crash, push every piece of hardware for that extra MHz even if it means dealing with more crashes. I honestly do not understand the mentality. I want a Computer to run stable period no issues. The only time I have had to reboot one of my Macs was when I update the system software. My iMac has been running without a reboot other then that 24/7 since the day it arrived.

Most stability issues have nothing to do with the CPU, and more with outlying hardware drivers. I have an AMD Athlon 64 4000+ Laptop that runs for days with out any issues, even running buggy Second Life clients. And no stability issues, but I keep the drivers up to date.

Oh and one added note, I bet my AMD based Linux server has been up longer than your Imac. Again it's not the CPU but the software running on it.

For years, AMD-based systems were handicapped by the fact that the only chipsets available were from VIA, and many of those had stability problems. Some of the motherboard drivers, especially the ones for AGP, were really problematic.

Fortunately, things have gotten much better. Other chipsets for AMD have become available, notably the NVidia NForce series -- they are both good performers and very stable. Perhaps in response, VIA also cleaned up its act; their recent drivers have been much more stable.

At the present time, both Intel and AMD-based hardware is very stable. AMD has the edge in performance per MHz and per watt. Intel's dual-core processors, however, are the equal of AMD's in performance per dollar when running 32-bit software since the recent price cuts by Intel, and AMD has no dual-core offerings that directly compete with the Pentium D 805 or 820 in price.

Athlon 64 still appears to have the edge over Pentium D when running 64-bit software. With most Linux distributions, for instance, you get a 20% performance gain when you switch from the 32-bit version to the 64-bit version on the same Atllon 64 or 64x2 box, but not on a Pentium 4 or Pentium D. The Intel design appears to be memory-starved, and bottlenecks on the instruction fetches. Intel's new Core microarchitecture processors, coming later this year, may be another story. But most people won't be doing that for another year or two.

I'd avoid the Pentium D 805 unless you're REALLY strapped for cash; the slow FSB makes it a dog. The extra $75 to move up to the 820 is well worth it.

Overclocking will make any system less stable. I don't recommend it for Second Life; it's not a competitive game! If you speed up your system for Doom by 10%, you might win a bit more often. If you speed up your SL system by 10%, and it crashes in the middle of a hot cyber session, everybody loses.

I'll take that bet (Specialy since we are both running Unix Cores, Linux of some variety for you and Darwin (OS X) for me). Now mind you mine has only been running since I got it in Feb. Not one OS Crash never had a lock up with the OS at all. However I still have a Blue & White G3 that has been running as a file server since 1999 24/7 that has never had an OS crash since moving to OS X.

Never had XP Pro crash on me. Had programs crash, but never a BSOD. I've had XP Home give me a BSOD though. My system is on 24/7. I give it a restart on weekends just so I can blow out any dust that accumulates. Even servers get rebooted every so often.

NOW- if they get the Linux version of SL working properly, or as properly as one can expect, I'll stick SL on my Linux machine.

As for the OP = See my tag below? I have no problems with SL running. Going to 32-bit CPU's nowadays would be like buying a Ferrari with a Moped's engine.

almost everyone with an AMD64 or EM64T CPUs are running fully in 32bit mode... a 32bit processor isnt any type of hold back at all, and will not be for a few years to come.

I have the Athlon64 3200+,939pin 90nm Venice and i run great!....very little problems with this cpu. Infact i think i can live with it for another 6 month. I was planning on upgrading to a 64x2 dual but at the current time i so pleases with this cpu i staying with it.

I am on a 64-bit Opteron 170. The only major problem I've had seems to be the fact SL has some odd behavior due to the dual cores. So, I set affinity to only one of the cores, and that--along with several other things like downloading the newest processor drivers--has made it better for me. (I used to have odd stuttering.)

This is so true, if you get good hardware then you shouldn't have any stability issues, its not just the CPU.

so i was lookin around (and saving money) and i think i'm getting a Gigabyte GA-K8U-939 MB,(Athlon64 X2 3800+,939pin) CPU,FAN for $348 .. gotta love pricewatch.. tho i bookmarked that like a week ago so i still have to look to see if theres a better deal..

thanks you all

-feek

I think the problem with using a 64bit CPU with SL is only an issue if you're using a 64bit operating system. If you're using the 64bit version of Windows XP you are likely to run into problems since the lack of stable drivers. Plus don't even think the client runs with a 64bit Windows anyway.

However running regular Windows XP/2000 doesn't have that problems, since it just doesn't use the 64bit extensions. So no worries.

I have a Dell Dimension XPS Gen 5 with a Pentium D 840 that triple boots Windows XP Media Center Edition, Windows XP Professional x64, and Windows Vista (x86). I have played SL under XP 64 with no problems. I have a Nvidia Geforce 6800. All the drivers for my hardware seem very stable. The only problem I wonder about is if they are as optimized as their 32-bit counterparts.

I don't think it really matters since the SL client is still complied for 32bit CPUs. There's nothing to optimize really. I would think it would run slower on a 64bit OS acctually.