Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
64 bits version
#1
I've search on the forum, and I didn't found any thread abou this, I just wan't to know one think:
Why not compile PCSX2 in 64bits?

On dolphin, the performance diference if like 10 to 20 frames!

(sorry about my poor english)
Reply

Sponsored links

#2
Sigh, read the faq..
Reply
#3
(03-15-2009, 06:58 PM)rama Wrote: Sigh, read the faq..

I've read the FAQ, but it dosen't say's nothing about 64 bits version (for windows), only talks about a ubunto 64 bits
Reply
#4
(03-15-2009, 06:52 PM)Palito Wrote: Why not compile PCSX2 in 64bits?
On dolphin, the performance diference if like 10 to 20 frames!


The only reason it differs so much is that devs of Dolphin give much more attention to 64-bit version than to 32-bit. It's just that most of them use 64-bit OSes I think, that's all.
Reply
#5
there WAS a 64-bit version of pcsx2 (but the pcsx2 team dropped it since the 64bit OSes support 32bit apps Smile)
Windows 7 64bit
Intel Pentium Dual-Core E5200 OC to 3.6GHz, Intel GMA x4500, 1GB DDR2

NinjaMight just work on next guideNinja
Reply
#6
(03-16-2009, 12:40 AM)LuisR14 Wrote: there WAS a 64-bit version of pcsx2 (but the pcsx2 team dropped it since the 64bit OSes support 32bit apps Smile)
And since no one wants to rewrite half of the code for x64 platform.
Reply
#7
(03-16-2009, 12:45 AM)tenow Wrote: And since no one wants to rewrite half of the code for x64 platform.
I believe they said they removed the 64-bit version because they don't want to bother working with two versions because most people are still running a 32-bit OS and the speed gains from it aren't enough to warrant maintaining two versions.
Reply
#8
(03-16-2009, 08:36 AM)Mystiq Wrote:
(03-16-2009, 12:45 AM)tenow Wrote: And since no one wants to rewrite half of the code for x64 platform.
I believe they said they removed the 64-bit version because they don't want to bother working with two versions because most people are still running a 32-bit OS and the speed gains from it aren't enough to warrant maintaining two versions.

yeah that about sums it up Laugh
(additionally, the old x64 code was crap + slower than the 32bit version, so it needed a rewrite to have any benefit.)
Reply
#9
The Linux 64 version wasn't really that bad, IMO. Though I won't argue the Windows 64 bit port, which I don't think was even runable.

But at the time, it would have been cottonvibes, air, rama, drkIIRaziel, and possibly gigahertz working on rewriting the 32 bit code, and me doing the 64 bit code if we'd kept it. While keeping Linux working. And, heaven forbid, the occassional project, or adding new features.

It wouldn't have worked. Yes, zerofrog appeared to have been doing all that, but I'm not zerofrog, and that was with a much slower development rate.

And I suppose we should probably add a link to the original thread discussing this to the faq...
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)