Do I have a 64bit processor or what?

Luke7777 said:
It sure does, you should've gone nVidia :D
Click to expand...

yes i sould of...i kick myself to this day for not doing so. i blame it on my friend that told me R300 more is not worth the exta f/s. is should of followed my "heart;)". but ag it ok know. i hopefully gonna get a 7900gt(this will be my first top range card:eek: ).:D
 
graviti said:
OK, this don't make sense. You buy a mobo with a Nvidia chipset, but get an ATI graphics card. You do realise that with the Nvidia chipset that the board is optimised to understand nVidia driver code, and can be used to optimise reaction time in getting the stuff to the card, in order to ensure that the bandwidth etc is properly used. Put an ATI card in there and you're back to standard generic capability of the board, and the throughput on the bus is wasted. But not to worry dude. You'd only really notice those optimizations if you were running Nvidia SLI. However, with ATI, you're not going to see that. And I'm sure you're aware that ATI's Crossfire won't work on that board. Early SLI boards it would, but Nvidia hardcode that the board doesn't support it now. You may be lucky, but I suggest that if you do go dual graphics card, move back to NVidia, or try find a board with an ATI Crossfire chipset. (Good luck). Those are usually going to be Intel boards.
Click to expand...
okie dokie... interesting... is that why Toms hardware never benchmarks ATI cards using nforce motherboards?
 
graviti said:
OK, this don't make sense. You buy a mobo with a Nvidia chipset, but get an ATI graphics card. You do realise that with the Nvidia chipset that the board is optimised to understand nVidia driver code, and can be used to optimise reaction time in getting the stuff to the card, in order to ensure that the bandwidth etc is properly used. Put an ATI card in there and you're back to standard generic capability of the board, and the throughput on the bus is wasted. But not to worry dude. You'd only really notice those optimizations if you were running Nvidia SLI. However, with ATI, you're not going to see that. And I'm sure you're aware that ATI's Crossfire won't work on that board. Early SLI boards it would, but Nvidia hardcode that the board doesn't support it now. You may be lucky, but I suggest that if you do go dual graphics card, move back to NVidia, or try find a board with an ATI Crossfire chipset. (Good luck). Those are usually going to be Intel boards.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what I said :D
It sure does, you should've gone nVidia
Click to expand...
 
graviti said:
OK, this don't make sense. You buy a mobo with a Nvidia chipset, but get an ATI graphics card. You do realise that with the Nvidia chipset that the board is optimised to understand nVidia driver code, and can be used to optimise reaction time in getting the stuff to the card, in order to ensure that the bandwidth etc is properly used. Put an ATI card in there and you're back to standard generic capability of the board, and the throughput on the bus is wasted. But not to worry dude. You'd only really notice those optimizations if you were running Nvidia SLI. However, with ATI, you're not going to see that. And I'm sure you're aware that ATI's Crossfire won't work on that board. Early SLI boards it would, but Nvidia hardcode that the board doesn't support it now. You may be lucky, but I suggest that if you do go dual graphics card, move back to NVidia, or try find a board with an ATI Crossfire chipset. (Good luck). Those are usually going to be Intel boards.
Click to expand...

not to warry my board dont have sli(sorry i see i wrote sli insted of pci-e my bad). the x700 cant go crossfire(i think). and in any case im going nvidia next. ati is not gonna see me again soon. not even if i had the money for both the 7900gtx and the x1900xt. :mad: ATI:mad:
 
graviti said:
OK, this don't make sense. You buy a mobo with a Nvidia chipset, but get an ATI graphics card. You do realise that with the Nvidia chipset that the board is optimised to understand nVidia driver code, and can be used to optimise reaction time in getting the stuff to the card, in order to ensure that the bandwidth etc is properly used. Put an ATI card in there and you're back to standard generic capability of the board, and the throughput on the bus is wasted. But not to worry dude. You'd only really notice those optimizations if you were running Nvidia SLI. However, with ATI, you're not going to see that. And I'm sure you're aware that ATI's Crossfire won't work on that board. Early SLI boards it would, but Nvidia hardcode that the board doesn't support it now. You may be lucky, but I suggest that if you do go dual graphics card, move back to NVidia, or try find a board with an ATI Crossfire chipset. (Good luck). Those are usually going to be Intel boards.
Click to expand...
this is quite interesting... would you be so kind as to provide links to substantiate this? i would like to read more about this, with actual benchmarks illustrating the differences in performance
 
lol...
ok, wait, so the em64t isnt a "64bit" cpu acc. to graviti. Not gonna argue that point, dont have the time,
however, the impact with relation to this thread is zero...a big fat zero

em64t can run xp64bit, em64t can run vista 64bit. So to all intents and purposes, who cares?
 
The confusing bit for me is that when I put in my fancy MSDN disk with all the windows operating systems on it, it does not give me the option to install winXP64. Which makes me think it is detecting that the chip is not 64bit.
Click to expand...
This, from the OP, made it relevant I think
 
I used to work with HP, and we had internal links to ATI's private net, NVidia's private net, Intel's private net, and yes AMD as well. We had access to certain benches and stuff that would never make it to the net. We could see all the failed tests and stuff. Stuff they don't really want the public to see. We needed the info for decision making on unit building. I would suggest google for some of the stuff because certain things, such as nForce boards disabling the basic function of Crossfire I'm sure would be pretty public. It's basically because the Crossfire tech conflicts with SLI, and could cause hardware crashes, so instead of finding a fix for it, they merely disable certain code calls, which killed the Crossfire functionality. We're talking minor optimizations here, and when we ran some of our own tests, we didn't see any differences that warranted any worries. A few FPU's here, a few there. Basically the Nvidia chipset ran a little more efficiently than say Intel based SLI, because Intel have to make sure that ATI can run as well. Nvidia don't.

But for a lot of info, don't be afraid to ask the manufacturers. Make contacts. Get on there website, and find a contact person. You'll get shuffled about plenty, until someone is able to help you. Then remain in contact with that person and you're sorted. Can get almost anything you want that is publicly allowable. Try Intel for starters. Intel often have roadshows, called the ICC or Intel Channel Conference. It is for the resellers. They often give a lot of details at these events, but it is very brief. Take a little time after the show to hijack the speaker, and next thing you know you've got contact details, and a good connection to getting the details you want.

I think it was a Tom's hardware article that led Nvidia to admit that their early SLI boards that advertised Dual core functionality didn't pick up the second core unless the cards were in SLI. All boards required BIOS upgrades.

A final point. One thing I've learn't is that 90% of articles on the net are summarised. They don't give enough details. So I follow up and get the raw data as often as is possible, if I'm interested. Don't necessarily keep it, but I get it if I can.
 
Luke7777 said:
This, from the OP, made it relevant I think
Click to expand...

yes, partly. However, the cpu is not the cause of the OP's problems.

Thread title: Do I have a 64bit processor? (because I am having trouble installing msdn stuff etc etc and I think rectron shafted me)
Simple answer: You have a 64bit capable cpu, as per the specs, which can run xp64bit.

So, maybe now the OP can go find out where the real problem is, ja?

Graviti, ...erm..INTEL SLi? unless you are talking about the hacked Uli stuff I assume you made a typo.
 
well, SLI is nvidia only, right? and Crossfire is ATI only... DUH

you cant crossfire nvidia cards, and you cant SLI ATI cards... thus to use crossfire you need a crossfire motherboard... but running single boards on nforce motherboards? is there a difference, i cant find the proof.

sorry for a slight derailment, maybe you can start a new thread about this
 
Ever since the P5 Classic Pentuim series has it been technically a 64 bit processor since it's data bus is 64 bits wide.

The correct question to ask would have been does this CPU support AMD64 or EM64T instruction set ???.
 
graviti said:
EM64T Stands for Extended memory 64 bit Technology. However, Intel state that it is not true 64 bit. The cache has the ability to understand 64 bit addressing, but not 64 bit commands.
Click to expand...

EM64T is Intel's implementation of AMD64 instruction set ... it has nothing to do with memory except making it 64 bit capable.
 
killadoob said:
well if your gonna buy a gaming board

why would u use onboard vga?
Click to expand...

if your were talking to me......

i had just R2000 so i need the best for my money. i wanted to buy a vga card later on when i had the money to buy a good one. but then this happened so that is way:D
 
uuum, a lot of the information in this thread is incorrect. XP-64bit and all other 64bit OS'es do run on both Intel Pentium D 9xx and AMD Athlon64 CPU's.

Also according to Graviti, there is a difference between an opteron and an athlon: The chips are identical. The only difference is that the opteron's undergo much stricter testing procedures, than Athlon. The same applies to Intel. the Pentium D and Xeon are identical, except in cases where the Xeon has more cache. The actual execution cores are no different.

On the whole topic of nForce with ATI GFX, there is no difference. I remember reading an article on Anandtech, which did comparisons of nForce 4 and ATI card, and ATI chipset, with nVidia card. They compared the results when running the same system nForce+GeForce, and ATI+Radeon... The difference in performance was at most 1%.

Please research your info before you post Graviti...
 
graviti said:
AMD have proper 64 bit processors, in that the actual commands are 64 bit, running through a 64 bit bus. They are cut back in a lot of features, in comparison to say the 64 bit Opteron, or Intels 64 bit Itanium, but they are a true 64 bit processor. I suppose you could say that the AMD 64 bit Athlon's are to the Opteron what Intel's Celeron was to the Pentium. Although both work, the Opteron has a more complex instruction set, which means that it gets more done in a single pass than the Athlons do. But there is definitely nothing wrong with the Athlon.
Click to expand...

Have you got a reference for that? As far as I understand, the Opterons are internally identical to the equivalent Athlon 64s. The only major differences are cache size (on some), that the Opterons are multiplier unlocked, and on some the package varies (940-pin vs 939-pin).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X