HL2:LC 64 and Vista64 Slower than 32bit ?

Anyone else running the Vista 64 with Half-life 2. I had the 32 bit version
and when I logged in to Steam, it updated the Lost Coast demo to 64bit. I
then ran the benchmarks and it's around 40 fps slower (85-91 vs. 127-131)
than the 32bit version under 32bit Vista and 50fps slower under 32bit XP
(142fps).

I'm thinking, just leave it 32bit then. Other games like FEAR, DOOM3 report
equal to or better than performance under Vista32 (still not faster than
XP). 3dMark06 was about 100 points slower under Vista64 than Vista32.

Anyways, just wondered if anyone else saw a performance dropped with the new
HL2:LC64 update.

i cannot repro that... it runs supersmooth, but HL2 loads slow...

f r e e


"Dale White" <dale.white@NOinsightbb.NOcom> escribió en el mensaje de
noticias news:Tb-dnaHWS7INRkvYnZ2dnUVZ_oGlnZ2d@insightbb.com...
> Anyone else running the Vista 64 with Half-life 2. I had the 32 bit
> version and when I logged in to Steam, it updated the Lost Coast demo to
> 64bit. I then ran the benchmarks and it's around 40 fps slower (85-91 vs.
> 127-131) than the 32bit version under 32bit Vista and 50fps slower under
> 32bit XP (142fps).
>
> I'm thinking, just leave it 32bit then. Other games like FEAR, DOOM3
> report equal to or better than performance under Vista32 (still not faster
> than XP). 3dMark06 was about 100 points slower under Vista64 than Vista32.
>
> Anyways, just wondered if anyone else saw a performance dropped with the
> new HL2:LC64 update.
>
>
>

Did you run the benchmark ? The game overall runs smooth (what little I
played it), it's one of those things, where you wouldn't know it's running
slower (or faster) if you didn't benchmark it. Could be the 64 ATI drivers
are a little less tweaked than the 32 bit ones.

But thanks for the reply, back to the drawing board I reckon

"F r e e" <spam@no.thanx> wrote in message
news:34BD3DF3-9421-4ECF-ADBB-1735DE83FF3B@microsoft.com...
>i cannot repro that... it runs supersmooth, but HL2 loads slow...
>
> f r e e
>
>
> "Dale White" <dale.white@NOinsightbb.NOcom> escribió en el mensaje de
> noticias news:Tb-dnaHWS7INRkvYnZ2dnUVZ_oGlnZ2d@insightbb.com...
>> Anyone else running the Vista 64 with Half-life 2. I had the 32 bit
>> version and when I logged in to Steam, it updated the Lost Coast demo to
>> 64bit. I then ran the benchmarks and it's around 40 fps slower (85-91 vs.
>> 127-131) than the 32bit version under 32bit Vista and 50fps slower under
>> 32bit XP (142fps).
>>
>> I'm thinking, just leave it 32bit then. Other games like FEAR, DOOM3
>> report equal to or better than performance under Vista32 (still not
>> faster than XP). 3dMark06 was about 100 points slower under Vista64 than
>> Vista32.
>>
>> Anyways, just wondered if anyone else saw a performance dropped with the
>> new HL2:LC64 update.
>>
>>
>>
>

wait... so im confused a little bit. so u installed Vista 64 and steam
downloaded the 32-bit version then patched it to a 64-bit? Shouldnt it just
download the 64-bit install in the first place? I'm just a little curious
about that. As far as FPS goes.. this is probably not an CPU issue but rather
a driver issue. go to Guru3d.com see if they have any ATI 64-bit vista
drivers, some of the modified drivers on there are pretty good. With my old
system I bcame really dependent upon good drivers and overclocking because
my PC hardware was so old that upgrading was so limited. Because the game
should run better, I mean one of the advantages with 64-bit computing is that
it will perform better in games and you can take the extra performance and
use it with things like better physics etc.
"Dale White" wrote:

> Anyone else running the Vista 64 with Half-life 2. I had the 32 bit version
> and when I logged in to Steam, it updated the Lost Coast demo to 64bit. I
> then ran the benchmarks and it's around 40 fps slower (85-91 vs. 127-131)
> than the 32bit version under 32bit Vista and 50fps slower under 32bit XP
> (142fps).
>
> I'm thinking, just leave it 32bit then. Other games like FEAR, DOOM3 report
> equal to or better than performance under Vista32 (still not faster than
> XP). 3dMark06 was about 100 points slower under Vista64 than Vista32.
>
> Anyways, just wondered if anyone else saw a performance dropped with the new
> HL2:LC64 update.
>
>
>
>

No I had the 32bit version already installed. I keep all my games installed
on a dedicated Games drive. When I install Steam I just point it to the
Steam folder on my hard drive. It sees what I have and downloads any updates
as needed. In retrospect, I'm thinking I should have pointed it to a
different folder, only because once it loaded the 64bit version of lost
coast, the 32bit Vista can't run it. Funny enough it just seems to be for
the demo, The actual games like Episode 1 and Counter-Strike still play
under Vista 32

Valve just recently announced their official support for Vista. So when I
loaded Steam, it updated the Lost Coast demo to 64bit edition. Best I can
tell the actually game is still 32bit, as it doesn't say 64bit mode, when I
run it.

I'm running the AMD\ATI official Vista 7.1 64 bit drivers. I could play with
some of the others, but I never saw much improvement by way of the Omegas
and DNA drivers. Also, I'd like to note that, Doom3, FEAR play fine with
those drivers, of course, they are playing in 32bit mode. Wish I had some
other 64 bit game to play with.

But you're probably right, it will probably boil down to drivers, though it
could be something with the way Valve did their code.

"Sep" <Sep@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:243FD45F-CBE7-40DE-80D2-7C03E0C51F01@microsoft.com...
> wait... so im confused a little bit. so u installed Vista 64 and steam
> downloaded the 32-bit version then patched it to a 64-bit? Shouldnt it
> just
> download the 64-bit install in the first place? I'm just a little curious
> about that. As far as FPS goes.. this is probably not an CPU issue but
> rather
> a driver issue. go to Guru3d.com see if they have any ATI 64-bit vista
> drivers, some of the modified drivers on there are pretty good. With my
> old
> system I bcame really dependent upon good drivers and overclocking
> because
> my PC hardware was so old that upgrading was so limited. Because the game
> should run better, I mean one of the advantages with 64-bit computing is
> that
> it will perform better in games and you can take the extra performance and
> use it with things like better physics etc.
> "Dale White" wrote:
>
>> Anyone else running the Vista 64 with Half-life 2. I had the 32 bit
>> version
>> and when I logged in to Steam, it updated the Lost Coast demo to 64bit. I
>> then ran the benchmarks and it's around 40 fps slower (85-91 vs. 127-131)
>> than the 32bit version under 32bit Vista and 50fps slower under 32bit XP
>> (142fps).
>>
>> I'm thinking, just leave it 32bit then. Other games like FEAR, DOOM3
>> report
>> equal to or better than performance under Vista32 (still not faster than
>> XP). 3dMark06 was about 100 points slower under Vista64 than Vista32.
>>
>> Anyways, just wondered if anyone else saw a performance dropped with the
>> new
>> HL2:LC64 update.
>>
>>
>>
>>