PDA

View Full Version : to 64-bit or not to 64-bit



sadkkf
04-22-2008, 08:36 PM
Hi--

I'm building a new box for LW and VT5 and wonder if I should go with XP 64 or not. This will hopefully be a long-term commitment so it seems right to go 64-bit, but I wonder about the immediate future and compatibility.

What kinds of problems can I expect right now by running 64-bit?

If anyone's aware of issues with other apps, I also use Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, Sound Forge and Acid among a handful of shareware apps.

Any input is greatly appreciated.

I should also add I'm not a big fan of Vista and prefer not use that so I need to jump on XP quickly as MS is planning to stop selling it soon.

MikeUnderwood
04-22-2008, 09:27 PM
I don't see any reason not to go 64 bit. Many programs support it already, and those that don't, such as Adobe products, will support it very soon. 32 bit programs generally run faster on in a 64 bit OS, since they can have more memory allocated to them. It really just comes down to how much memory you plan on putting in your new machine. If you plan on keeping the machine at less than 2GB, 32 bit is fine. Anything over 3-4 GB of ram, and you are justing wasting the extra performance on a 32 bit OS.

RTSchramm
04-22-2008, 09:39 PM
If you plan on using a lot of plugins you most likely should go with windows XP 32 bit. Some of the major plugin do have a 64 bit version, but not many.

I know of a lot of LW users who can create extremely complex scene using less than 4 GB of memory which is the limitation of XP 32 bit.

The only advantage of using a 64 bit OS like windows Xp64 is if you plan to exceed the 4 GB memory limitation, other than that, there is no reason to go 64 bit.

On the other hand, if you are not sure and can't make a decision (like me) go with a 64 bit OS and then install both the 32 bit and 64 bit version of LW. This is the configuration that I use and I believe the most flexible because you can get best of both worlds so to speak.

I would stay away from Vista at this time, it has a lot of issues which still hasn't been resolve with the current release of Vista Service Pack 1. Except for Autodesk 2008 products and Truespace, I haven't heard of any other products that have been specifically written to run on Vista. I don't know anyone personally who uses intensive graphic applications who is happy the Vista at this time, when compared to the either XP 32 or 64 bit.

I would also note that, I'm not a Max OS fan as I think the OS is highly over hyped in the media and on this forum, but I will state that LW does run extremely quick on a MAC than on an equally configured XP or Vista computer.

Before you decide to build or buy a system, I would go to tomshardware.com and read some of their hardware reviews they are usually very detailed and unbias.

RIch

RTSchramm
04-22-2008, 09:45 PM
I am running all of the applications you referenced in your first post, except VT5, with no problems on a XP Pro 64 bit computer. The only application that I have issue with is the Quick time piugin for both Firefox and Internet Explorer 7. Quicktime does work fine as a stand alone application, but doesn't work as a plugin and crashes all the time. I'm force to use the VLC replacement for Quicktime.

I haven't ran VT5, so I can't comment on that.

RIch

safetyman
04-23-2008, 05:49 AM
I currently run Illustrator and Photoshop CS3 on Vista Home Premium 64 and have no problems whatsoever. The beauty of going 64-bit for me, is that it's there when you need it. I have the best of both worlds -- for when 64-bit apps become more common-place and I can run all my 32-bit apps on the same box.

clagman
04-23-2008, 07:03 AM
I'd say go for 64 bit all the way. I set up my entire studio with xp64 and it has really worked out great, especially if you like to use the cs3 suite to do things like dynamically link AE projects in Premiere. Like RTSchramm said, you will occasionally run into problems with plugins not being compiled for 64 bit use. 64 bit lightwave doesn't have a Quicktime export for that reason. I can't remember the last time I actually saved something out of LW as an anim.

Jim M
04-23-2008, 08:16 AM
If you plan on using a lot of plugins you most likely should go with windows XP 32 bit. Some of the major plugin do have a 64 bit version, but not many.

errr... you do know you can run 32bit apps in a 64bit OS dont you?
LW32 + LW64 both run fine on xp64.... its a nobrainer imo

sadkkf
04-23-2008, 09:01 AM
Hey--

Thanks thanks for all the replies! I will be running at least 4GB RAM. Depending on the mobo I go with, it may be 8GB. I'm reading conflicting reports on the benefits of the X48 northbridge. A lot of tests say the benefits aren't worth the costs and there are still some stability issues using all the mem slots in those boards.

It looks like 64-bit is the road I'll take based on all the feedback here. I know I need a different license for LW, but are there costs associated with it?

I don't use many plugs right now, either. I'm still pretty much a noobie with LW and like to see what I do with it right out of the box. I have a few plugs for Photoshop and some extensions for Flash, but if they don't work, no problem.

H_Molla
04-23-2008, 09:09 AM
as far as i know & all people know..u don't pay extra license for 64 version !!!!
i am sure..but people correct me..

danielkaiser
04-23-2008, 09:28 AM
Plugins for x32 aps. run fine in an x64 environment, the problem comes with plugins for Lightwave x64, not all coders have the x64 systems to compile and test their code.

Another problem is x64 system level drivers allot of older hardware won't support it, so if your planing on building a box yourself take care in the components you choose.

Andyjaggy
04-23-2008, 09:33 AM
there really isn't a reason not to go with 64bit.

Elmar Moelzer
04-23-2008, 12:48 PM
64 bit all the way!
You can usually install 32 bit apps quite fine on a 64 bit machine.
There are some that wont work though. Notably those that get deeper into the OS.
Exceptions that I have seen so far are:
Video Codecs
Shell based apps (apps that dock themselves into the Windows Explorer Shell).
Drivers
If you are planning on running some older printers, scanners, or other hardware without 64 bit driver support, make sure to check the availability of drivers first.
You said you want to run the VT5? I am not sure right now, does the VT- hardware have 64 bit drivers yet?
Otherwise, I am running both the 32 bit and the 64 bit versions of LW on my 64 bit XP machine just fine. There are no problems with that as long as you make sure you separate your configs for both...
CU
Elmar

BeeVee
04-23-2008, 02:24 PM
Just clarifying a few things in the thread:

1. Any app on a 32-bit system only has access to 2GB memory, no matter how much you have. You can bump that up to 3GB by using the 3GB switch in your boot.ini

2. LightWave comes with a licence for Windows 32-bit, Windows 64-bit and Mac OS X out of the box. To get a license.key for a different platform than the one you initially registered with follow these instructions (http://www.lightwiki.com/Registering_another_platform_on_the_same_LightWave _v9_licence)

3. Although 32-bit apps usually run fine on a 64-bit OS, LightWave plugins need to be compiled as 64-bit versions to work in a 64-bit LightWave. You can use 32-bit plugins in a 32-bit version of LightWave on a 64-bit system (with a 64-bit OS).

Hope this helps,

B

sadkkf
04-23-2008, 02:39 PM
Great info. Thanks, Ben.

That said, is the 64-bit version of LW the same as the 32-bit version? All the same built-in plug-ins are included?

BeeVee
04-23-2008, 02:55 PM
All the same plug-ins with the exception of one I can think of immediately. SASlite has never received a recompile for 64-bit. I think the QuickTime issue lies elsewhere in that I don't believe there has ever been a 64-bit version of the QuickTime codecs and that's the reason LightWave can't use it (but I may be completely wrong).

B

sadkkf
04-23-2008, 02:57 PM
Cool!

Now if I get verification VT5 works in 64-bit, I'm on my way!:thumbsup:

RTSchramm
04-23-2008, 05:01 PM
Jim M, didn't you read my entire post:

"On the other hand, if you are not sure and can't make a decision (like me) go with a 64 bit OS and then install both the 32 bit and 64 bit version of LW. This is the configuration that I use and I believe the most flexible because you can get best of both worlds so to speak."

We all know you can run most 32 bit applications on a 64 bit windows. But as several user already pointed out most is NOT 100%. There will be some issues like with the Quicktime plugin.

Also I said that there is a 4GB memory limit, NOT how the memory is used by the windows OS. A prior post is correct that normally the 32 bit windows will only use 2 GBs for the application unless the /3GB is appended to the boot.ini file.

And as stated correctly, if you are running LW 32bit on a 64bit XP pro, the 32 bit plugins will still work with the 32 bit version of LW.

One other point: is that if you install WIndows XP Pro 64, install the 64 bit version of LW first using the 64bit dongle driver and then install the 32bit version of LW, but do not install the 32 bit dongle driver. You only need the 64 bit dongle driver.

Rich

extrabyte
04-24-2008, 01:23 PM
Hello folks.

To chime in,

I had originally tried running both XP 64 and Server 2003 64(which is XP64 for servers and actually further developed than plain XP 64). Lightwave was fine on both but there were so many other programs that either wouldn't install or run or both. So when Vista 64 came out, I heard that it was actually more compatible with more programs. Well, they were right. It is. It's not perfect by any means and there are still things that won't install/run, but far fewer than XP/Server 2003 64. But yeah, just install LW 32 and 64 and go.

Hopper
04-24-2008, 06:49 PM
Not sure I understand what you mean by "4GB memory limit." Can you explain?
On a Win32 platform using the "/3GB" switch in the boot.ini file, applications "can" access a maximum of 3GB of memory, while the OS can access 1GB memory - at the same time.

If you want more detail stuff, do some research on 32bit Windows development and stack/heap memory limitations. You will indeed find more explanations then you will ever need.

If you install 8GB of RAM on a 32bit version of Windows (any flavor), you will only see a maximum of 4GB used at any given time using this configuration.

Titus
04-25-2008, 08:42 AM
. I've heard (can't recall where) that Win64 can only handle 16GB of Ram at the moment. Is this correct? ;)

It isn't, memory limit is 128 GB.

sadkkf
04-25-2008, 08:55 AM
According to Zane Condren on the Yahoo VT list:

"Yes, VT5 is fully compatible with Windows XP 64bit and Vista 64Bit"

Looks like you're good to go.

Thanks. I did get one reply from a user who says he's had problems with sound, but those weren't VT related.

Just bought by copy of XP 64 and look forward to the availability of the proc so can I start building!

Speedmonk42
04-25-2008, 11:34 AM
Can I get some clarification on the Win32 and 4GB thing?

I thought it was 2GB per application and 3GB total, not 3 and 4.

...

Cageman
04-25-2008, 12:04 PM
Hi--

I'm building a new box for LW and VT5 and wonder if I should go with XP 64 or not. This will hopefully be a long-term commitment so it seems right to go 64-bit, but I wonder about the immediate future and compatibility.

What kinds of problems can I expect right now by running 64-bit?


If you use alot of third party tools, many of them doesn't have an 64-bit version. However, I've been running LW32-bit on Vista x64 and so far, none of the plugins I use have failed. But you can't use LW32-bit plugins with LW64-bit.

I don't have any experience with VTs, but LW and most other 32 and/or 64-bit apps will run very well under Vista.




If anyone's aware of issues with other apps, I also use Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, Sound Forge and Acid among a handful of shareware apps.



I know Photoshop works, and I'm pretty sure Sound Forge and Acid works under Vista x64 (even if they still are 32-bit apps, just like LW32-bit). I know people that use both WaveLab and CoolEdit (really old versions) successfully under Vista x64.




Any input is greatly appreciated.

I should also add I'm not a big fan of Vista and prefer not use that so I need to jump on XP quickly as MS is planning to stop selling it soon.

Get yourself a dualboot then. I have Windows XP (32-bit) and Vista x64 running on this machine (not at the same time though). But when I coldstart or reboot my computer I can choose wether to boot into Vista or XP. Best of both worlds, imho.

Cageman
04-25-2008, 12:09 PM
Can I get some clarification on the Win32 and 4GB thing?

I thought it was 2GB per application and 3GB total, not 3 and 4.

...

Yep... that's what I've heard as well. Even though I have 4GB ram in this machine, XP32 only shows 3.25GB. With a hack you can throw 3GB / task in XP32 but I'm not sure about stability. 2GB/task is the normal.

tyrot
04-25-2008, 01:36 PM
dear cage

in other thread we were discussing about 9.3.1's memory issues over 400 MB scene files...is this happening also in 64bit OS ?

BEST

Hopper
04-25-2008, 05:13 PM
Yep... that's what I've heard as well. Even though I have 4GB ram in this machine, XP32 only shows 3.25GB. With a hack you can throw 3GB / task in XP32 but I'm not sure about stability. 2GB/task is the normal.
For what it's worth... We are using a calculation engine at the office that sucks RAM out of boxes like nobody's business. Our limit so far on the 32bit boxes has been 3.85GB in use (total - not by the single app). The app didn't have any specific compiler options when we built it, but by the output of our profiler, the app itself was using 3.3GB of the total mem used.

We use the /3GB switch on all the old 32bit boxes we haven't replaced yet.