64 bit and 32 bit question

[Babadook.9027]

I have a 64 bit computer and when i click on download 32 bit client it installs 64 bit client other then 32 bit , so i was wondering how to change from 64 bit to 32 bit .

[Babadook.9027]

the reason i want to change to 32 bit because my laptop sucks and 64 bit draws more cpu then 32 bit

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

The game now requires the 64-bit client, at least for expansion+ maps. Otherwise, it crashes due to memory requirements.

[Healix.5819]

If you want to use the 32-bit client, you need to use the -32 option with the 32-bit client, as in:Gw2.exe -32

Keep in mind it's no longer officially supported and playing for extended periods will cause the game to hit the 32-bit limitation and crash, especially in HoT+. For best results, set the model quality/limit to lowest, restart the game before and after playing with larger groups of people, after roughly every hour and after entering a map you plan to stay in. (the more objects that are loaded, the more likely you are to crash)

[SlippyCheeze.5483]

@"kenlanoette.3904" said:the reason i want to change to 32 bit because my laptop sucks and 64 bit draws more cpu then 32 bit

A 64-bit application is not more CPU-hungry than a 32-bit application: in general there is no significant difference, but where there is it would actually favor the 64-bit version. Cases where the 32-bit version is better are extremely rare. This is definitely not the case with GW2.

[Steve The Cynic.3217]

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

@"kenlanoette.3904" said:the reason i want to change to 32 bit because my laptop sucks and 64 bit draws more cpu then 32 bit

A 64-bit application is not more CPU-hungry than a 32-bit application: in general there is no significant difference, but where there is it would actually favor the 64-bit version. Cases where the 32-bit version is better are extremely rare. This is definitely not the case with GW2.

The obvious limit case for the OP is if his laptop's specific mode of sucking (he said it sucks) is "insufficient memory". The 32-bit client uses less memory, therefore the 64-bit client hits that particular wall sooner. (Even with exactly the same data loaded, the 64-bit client will use more memory because e.g. pointers are bigger.)

@"kenlanoette.3904" : how much memory does your laptop have?

[Ok I Did It.2854]

I would not recommend running the 32 bit client, running the 32bit client now will make you run into the Out of Memory error, and id say it would happen rather fast now,

OP: what are you computer specs, I would recommend turning down the settings ingame first and see if that helps at all.

[SlippyCheeze.5483]

@Steve The Cynic.3217 said:

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

@"kenlanoette.3904" said:the reason i want to change to 32 bit because my laptop sucks and 64 bit draws more cpu then 32 bit

A 64-bit application is not more CPU-hungry than a 32-bit application: in general there is no significant difference, but where there is it would actually favor the 64-bit version. Cases where the 32-bit version is better are extremely rare. This is definitely not the case with GW2.

The obvious limit case for the OP is if his laptop's specific mode of sucking (he said it sucks) is "insufficient memory".

Sorry, I don't see where they said that. As in the quoted text in my response, I only saw them saying that the 64-bit version uses more CPU. If I missed it somewhere, though, I'm sorry.

The 32-bit client uses less memory, therefore the 64-bit client hits that particular wall sooner. (Even with exactly the same data loaded, the 64-bit client will use more memory because e.g. pointers are bigger.)

...kinda? It probably isn't a wildly significant difference, and the 32-bit client memory limits will lead to regular crashes, so I'm not sure this is a good deal, but ... I guess they can try it?

[Steve The Cynic.3217]

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

@Steve The Cynic.3217 said:

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

@"kenlanoette.3904" said:the reason i want to change to 32 bit because my laptop sucks and 64 bit draws more cpu then 32 bit

A 64-bit application is not more CPU-hungry than a 32-bit application: in general there is no significant difference, but where there is it would actually favor the 64-bit version. Cases where the 32-bit version is better are extremely rare. This is definitely not the case with GW2.

The obvious limit case for the OP is if his laptop's specific mode of sucking (he said it sucks) is "insufficient memory".

Sorry, I don't see where they said that. As in the quoted text in my response, I only saw them saying that the 64-bit version uses more

CPU

. If I missed it somewhere, though, I'm sorry.

OP didn't say how big the memory in the laptop is, but he did say that the laptop sucks. Given that the 64-bit client must use more memory, it will, for example, have to load more data from memory, and although the performance bottleneck is in fact a memory bandwidth limit, it will show up in e.g. Task Manager as if it is a CPU-usage increase. Instructions and data take longer to load because there are more cache misses, therefore the CPU gets less done in the same amount of time and/or takes longer to do the same things. You can also end up facing another caching limit called TLB misses, where the CPU has to keep fetching page table entries from memory rather than from the "Translation Lookaside Buffer". Like the main memory cache, the TLB is of limited size, and the more pages you touch, the more TLB entries you need, and the more likely you are to not have enough room for them.

That sort of consideration is why memory frequency is an important parameter in the construction of gaming rigs. There isn't enough cache in the CPU for all of a game's state, so the CPU must go back and forth to memory for it, and if the memory frequency is slow, that will wreck performance. The bigger the game state (because of client bitness, say), the more the memory frequency will bite you. (And laptops, historically, have been built for longer battery life and lower weight rather than higher performance.)

I'm also mildly intrigued by the contrast with SWTOR. SWTOR has only a 32-bit client, and the history of the game's development basically makes a 64-bit client project a non-starter. GW2 has a 64-bit client and appears to be trying desperately to get rid of the 32-bit client.

[SlippyCheeze.5483]

@Steve The Cynic.3217 said:

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

@Steve The Cynic.3217 said:

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

@"kenlanoette.3904" said:the reason i want to change to 32 bit because my laptop sucks and 64 bit draws more cpu then 32 bit

A 64-bit application is not more CPU-hungry than a 32-bit application: in general there is no significant difference, but where there is it would actually favor the 64-bit version. Cases where the 32-bit version is better are extremely rare. This is definitely not the case with GW2.

The obvious limit case for the OP is if his laptop's specific mode of sucking (he said it sucks) is "insufficient memory".

Sorry, I don't see where they said that. As in the quoted text in my response, I only saw them saying that the 64-bit version uses more

CPU

. If I missed it somewhere, though, I'm sorry.

OP

didn't

say how big the memory in the laptop is, but he

did

say that the laptop sucks. Given that the 64-bit client

must

use more memory, it will, for example, have to load more data from memory, and although the performance bottleneck is in fact a memory bandwidth limit, it will show up in e.g. Task Manager as if it is a CPU-usage increase.

Yeah, OTOH, how much memory use is pointer-containing code and data, vs how much is textures and other 3D assets? I submit that, relatively speaking, the difference is small, given we are talking a ~ 2.5GB process either 32-bit or 64-bit, once a zone is loaded.

You are not wrong in what you say. I just don't think it matters as much as you do. Neither of us has asked for tests to determine the bottleneck, though, so I'm not gonna argue any further on speculation. (and I don't expect to convince you on that basis either, just explaining my thinking, y'know? thanks for explaining yours, too!)

I'm also mildly intrigued by the contrast with SWTOR. SWTOR has only a 32-bit client, and the history of the game's development basically makes a 64-bit client project a non-starter. GW2 has a 64-bit client and appears to be trying desperately to get rid of the 32-bit client.

Well, a 32-bit client is -- because of the address space limitation -- vastly more painful due to fragmentation. That is the root cause of most of the client crashes people experience using the more limited version. Game doesn't run out of memory, but it does run out of contiguous chunks of memory to satisfy allocation requests.

At the end of the day, that all comes down to, more or less, the choice of language, internal architecture, and memory management techniques in the engine. If you are stuck with a 32-bit client, and willing to make the investment, you can definitely make it work. It is absolutely more costly than just going to 64-bit, though, and the performance delta is approximately zero for most real world games. (The performance enhancing benefits of the 64-bit architecture balance out the performance reducing aspects of it, basically, so you come out roughly equal. ...or, at least, you did last time I checked, and I can only imagine 64-bit processors being more optimized over the last couple years than they were at the time. I definitely don't expect regressions on that front.)

[Steve The Cynic.3217]

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:You are not wrong in what you say. I just don't think it matters as much as you do. Neither of us has asked for tests to determine the bottleneck, though, so I'm not gonna argue any further on speculation. (and I don't expect to convince you on that basis either, just explaining my thinking, y'know? thanks for explaining yours, too!)

My best guess is that the difference is not zero, but it is not much either. It's a possible explanation for CPU percent-usage being higher in the 64-bit client. Depends on how much the difference is. But I'm inclined to suspect there's something else going on as well.

I'm also mildly intrigued by the contrast with SWTOR. SWTOR has only a 32-bit client, and the history of the game's development basically makes a 64-bit client project a non-starter. GW2 has a 64-bit client and appears to be trying desperately to get

rid

of the 32-bit client.

Well, a 32-bit client is -- because of the address space limitation -- vastly more painful due to fragmentation. That is the root cause of most of the client crashes people experience using the more limited version. Game doesn't run out of memory, but it does run out of contiguous chunks of memory to satisfy allocation requests.

Ugh. Fragmentation. Still, that got me a two-hour visit to Zurich in 1996. (That's two hours from then the plane's wheels touched the runway on the way in to when they left the runway on the way out, so it included time in the airport and in traffic. The bug turned out to be the memory allocator making the worst possible decision in a particular case, so there was 2MB free on a machine with 8MB RAM and the memory was so fragmented that we couldn't allocate 48 bytes of memory.)

[Laila Lightness.8742]

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

@Steve The Cynic.3217 said:

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

@Steve The Cynic.3217 said:

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

@"kenlanoette.3904" said:the reason i want to change to 32 bit because my laptop sucks and 64 bit draws more cpu then 32 bit

A 64-bit application is not more CPU-hungry than a 32-bit application: in general there is no significant difference, but where there is it would actually favor the 64-bit version. Cases where the 32-bit version is better are extremely rare. This is definitely not the case with GW2.

The obvious limit case for the OP is if his laptop's specific mode of sucking (he said it sucks) is "insufficient memory".

Sorry, I don't see where they said that. As in the quoted text in my response, I only saw them saying that the 64-bit version uses more

CPU

. If I missed it somewhere, though, I'm sorry.

OP

didn't

say how big the memory in the laptop is, but he

did

say that the laptop sucks. Given that the 64-bit client

must

use more memory, it will, for example, have to load more data from memory, and although the performance bottleneck is in fact a memory bandwidth limit, it will show up in e.g. Task Manager as if it is a CPU-usage increase.

Yeah, OTOH, how much memory use is pointer-containing code and data, vs how much is textures and other 3D assets? I submit that, relatively speaking, the difference is small, given we are talking a ~ 2.5GB process either 32-bit or 64-bit, once a zone is loaded.

You are not wrong in what you say. I just don't think it matters as much as you do. Neither of us has asked for tests to determine the bottleneck, though, so I'm not gonna argue any further on speculation. (and I don't expect to convince you on that basis either, just explaining my thinking, y'know? thanks for explaining yours, too!)

I'm also mildly intrigued by the contrast with SWTOR. SWTOR has only a 32-bit client, and the history of the game's development basically makes a 64-bit client project a non-starter. GW2 has a 64-bit client and appears to be trying desperately to get

rid

of the 32-bit client.

Well, a 32-bit client is -- because of the address space limitation -- vastly more painful due to fragmentation. That is the root cause of most of the client crashes people experience using the more limited version. Game doesn't run out of memory, but it does run out of contiguous chunks of memory to satisfy allocation requests.

At the end of the day, that all comes down to, more or less, the choice of language, internal architecture, and memory management techniques in the engine. If you are stuck with a 32-bit client, and willing to make the investment, you can definitely make it work. It is absolutely more costly than just going to 64-bit, though, and the performance delta is approximately zero for most real world games. (The performance enhancing benefits of the 64-bit architecture balance out the performance reducing aspects of it, basically, so you come out roughly equal. ...or, at least, you did last time I checked, and I can only imagine 64-bit processors being more optimized over the last couple years than they were at the time. I definitely don't expect regressions on that front.)

32bit client crashed alrot i did not notice that then i used it. But 64bit is not very much better either its no diffrence between them performance wise

[SlippyCheeze.5483]

@Steve The Cynic.3217 said:

@SlippyCheeze.5483 said:Well, a 32-bit client is -- because of the address space limitation -- vastly more painful due to fragmentation. That is the root cause of most of the client crashes people experience using the more limited version. Game doesn't run out of memory, but it does run out of contiguous chunks of memory to satisfy allocation requests.

Ugh. Fragmentation. Still, that got me a two-hour visit to Zurich in 1996. (That's two hours from then the plane's wheels touched the runway on the way in to when they left the runway on the way out, so it included time in the airport and in traffic. The bug turned out to be the memory allocator making the worst possible decision in a particular case, so there was 2MB free on a machine with 8MB RAM and the memory was so fragmented that we couldn't allocate 48 bytes of memory.)

Oh, man, I'm so glad to have left those days behind. That sort of annoying low level debugging is the worst. Also the best, because it feels so good when you solve it, yo, but such a pain. :)

[Ray Koopa.2354]

Question is why the OP runs a 64bit system when it sucks so much that he wants apps to run in 32bit.

[SlippyCheeze.5483]

@Ray Koopa.2354 said:Question is why the OP runs a 64bit system when it sucks so much that he wants apps to run in 32bit.

Odds are that the OEM sold it that way, and paying an extra $120 for a worse OS off the shelf isn't much fun. I wouldn't blame them for that.

[Ray Koopa.2354]

Time to get the key and install the 32-bit version, as they work for both architectures. :)

[Babadook.9027]

https://www.cnet.com/products/dell-inspiron-17r-special-edition/specs/ , without the gpu because it broke im using the cpu gpu now Intel hd 4000